Remove Jetpack abilities from all eldar jetbikes
Remove Wriathknights, "Jump" profile
Change Warp Jump Generator back to Any Double rather than double 1's.
Make Flicker Jump a once per game ability.
I think that the 3 units in question are generally viewed as the most broken in the Eldar dex. I think what makes them so powerful is that they are undercosted because GW doesn't really factor movement into unit cost. So if you nerf their movement, but still allow them to keep their weapons and current points, are they now more fairly costed? I think these changes could be made with no effect. The Wraithknight has those intakes on its shoulders but they sort of curl into its body. There are no definitive boosters, so the rule change wouldn't require a model resculpt.
If these changes we're made would that be enough to make Eldar less powerful? Is this too much? Would they drop to a mid-tier codex?
The thing about the Eldar codex, holistically, is it's better / more efficient / superior to other codices, in basically every way. Some units are whole bodies taller, while some are just head and shoulders. Honestly, the only thing that's not playable, compared to other codices, is the Rangers / Pathfinders. I mean, Guardians are pretty meh, but nobody plays them anyhow when "really good" Avengers are available.
Because you can still play insanely good Wraith Lists. They're less insanely good, but they're still better than basically anything else. And if you take that away, you still have really amazing Aspect Hosts. And if you take that away Wraithknights are still insanely good, since jump just lets them ignore terrain... they still move a long distance. And Scatterbikes are still amazing because of their firepower at incredible range... and if someone gets close enough you can move 4 or 5 feet in a turn to get away.
Without picking individual units apart, you could instead apply a wholesale +10 % points hike on every unit. Or whatever seems fair in your metagame, because they're simply better than most if not all other codices.
If a scatterbike loses the ability to hide after launching it's volley, how much does that weaken them?
If a wraithknight has to move around terrain instead of leap over it, how much does that weaken them?
If a warp spider warp jumps with higher probability of failure and can only flick jump once per game, how much does that weaken them?
The answer to all 3 questions is a lot.
The wraithknight is probably the least affected. The Bikes and Spiders would probably no longer be spammed on the tournament scene as those movement changes also reduce their survivability.
None of those suggestions either make sense, or are enough (and I am an Eldar player). Honestly all jetbikes should have the "jet" pack move, but that is for another discussion.
If you really want to address Scatterbikes, Spiders and WKs, do the following: -Scatter lasers are 20ppm for Windriders. They get so much out of the Scatter laser that no other unit does, they should pay for it.
-Remove ALL special snowflake Aspect warrior rules, this includes Flicker Jump, Assured Destruction, etc. Aspect warriors are special because of their wargear. Only Exarchs should be bringing other special abilities and Exarch should be a 20pt upgrade for that, not just 10
-Make the WK have only 5 wounds, have the secondary weapons built in, and cost 350pts. Now it costs more and is 17% easier to kill. More than reasonable
The Jetbike change I oppose because while it's reasonable for Windriders, Shining Spears and DE Reavers don't need the nerf. I also think that Necron Tomb Blades and Ork Deffcoptas probably should have the same jet pack move option, but that's getting off into the weeds.
I'd agree with Galef in most respects, here. Lose the special-snowflake rules on the base guys, make the Exarch do more, make the Exarch more expensive. Warp Spiders, as Fleet Jet Pack Infantry with Battle Focus, would still be stupidly zoomy. If they really need something extra, have the Exarch confer Jink to the unit while it's alive.
Other things I might change: Bladestorm is AP3 instead of AP2. Makes Terminators, Tyrannofexes and other 2+ armor units less irrelevant, and still does a job on Marines, Immortals, Crisis Suits and other sorts of things where it's relied on.
Improve internal balance on heavy weapons:
Scatter Laser: Change to R36 S5 AP- Heavy 4
Starcannon: Change to R36 S7 AP2 Heavy 2
Brightlance: Change to R36 S8 AP1 Heavy 1, Lance
Naaris wrote: If a scatterbike loses the ability to hide after launching it's volley, how much does that weaken them?
If a wraithknight has to move around terrain instead of leap over it, how much does that weaken them?
If a warp spider warp jumps with higher probability of failure and can only flick jump once per game, how much does that weaken them?
The answer to all 3 questions is a lot.
The wraithknight is probably the least affected. The Bikes and Spiders would probably no longer be spammed on the tournament scene as those movement changes also reduce their survivability.
The answer to all 3 questions is "barely". 27pts/model for four BS4/S6 shots, with zero squad size tax, in Troops, that have a 36" turbo-boost for last-turn objective grabbing, and can Jink, is stupidly good with or without an assault-phase move. A Wraithknight that moves (3d6 pick highest)x2" (average 10") a turn through terrain instead of 12" through terrain is still a ridiculously cheap T8 GMC with a D-strength melee weapon, or a low-AP poisoned Hellstorm template, or 36" range D-strength guns. A Warp Spider is still a 19pt model with two S6 Monofilament shots.
Speed is relevant. Speed isn't the start and the end of the problem. In this case it isn't even the start of the problem.
Martel732 wrote: The scatterlaser is a 20 pt gun. It kills goddamn IKs. Update the weapon cost, and it all falls into place for scatbikes.
WK is a 400-450 pt model. Fixed.
Charge warp spiders 10 pts for a flickerjump generator. Fixed.
Pretty much this.
The other option to bumping up the price on Scatterlasers would be to limit them to 1 for every 3 Jetbikes.
Still powerful, but increases the chaff for how much wheat you can get (which I think is one of the main reasons Eldar are so dominant).
There's no reason to nerf them to a 3rd tier codex. That doesn't solve any problems. What needs to happen is the Eldar (and other 1st tier codices) get a couple of nerfs to bring them down to mid-tier, then the lowest tier codices get buffs til they're mid-tier as well.
Martel732 wrote: You can't go 1 per 3 because of the model kits.
Just make models cost what they are worth.
...What.
Does that mean Space Marine Devastators all need to be able to take heavy weapons because the kit comes with enough guns to? Can I have more than one gun per five GK Terminators? The kit has more guns than that. Why can't I put four guns on a War Walker? They ship it with ten gun models, why would they do that if I wasn't supposed to use them?
Scatter Lasers should be 5pts more expensive and reduced to S5, Windriders upped to 20ppm and moved to Fast Attack, they shouldn't be Troops.
Wraithknights stay at 300pts base but now have to buy each arm indavidually, with the Wraithcannons and Ghostglaive at 50pts each and the Suncannon (changed to S7, AP2 Heavy 2, Large Blast) and Scattershield being 20pts each.
Warp Spiders are boosted to 25pts each base with the Exarch (or all Exarchs given what they get) now a 15pt add on.
Whilst we're at it, Farseer's are increased to 130pts base.
That should balance out the 4 most powerful units in the codex better.
I actually like the special snowflake rules on most aspect warriors. Things like the scorpions' "stealth mode" or the hawks' sky leap are a big part of what drew me to the army. You could tie all those special rules to an exarch, but then you risk turning him into a challenge/barrage/sniper magnet that becomes something of an expensive liability. And then people just spam more strength 6 instead of cool stuff like reapers and scorpions because some of the flavor of the fluffy units got removed.
With exceptions (warp spiders, for instance), I think most of our units would be fine with a modest price increase. A lot of our stuff got better in the most recent book wtihout a price increase. I for one rather like the idea of eldar being a cut above most enemies while also having a relatively low model count. It seems fluff for them.
Other changes I'd like to see:
Warp Spiders:
Keep flicker jump, but get rid of the exarch's pseudo-fearless. It keeps the "night crawler" angle, but it also makes it much easier to simply melee them to death and then sweep them after you win combat. They're less durable than sisters of battle or marines once you're in melee, so choppy units can deal with them that way. Flickerjump averages a 7" jump meaning that most shooty armies will still be in range of them if they do jump away. It doesn't fix the "jump behind a wall" issue, but I kind of feel like that's a big part of the spiders' gimmick.
Oh! I'd also kind of like to see death spinners become strength 4. Possibly S5 against models without an initiative value (vehicles) and possibly using initiative instead of Toughness to determine instand death. Monofilament is a cool rule that almost never matters except against MCs. Making spider guns strength 4 means they'll be one of our best shooty options for tackling things like necrons, orks, or Tau, but it makes them shuriken catapult equivalents against marines, guardsmen, etc.
So they'd keep the cool, fluffy rules that define their gimmick, but they'd be more specialized and have a clear weakness in the form of close combat. Very fitting for eldar in my opinion.
Scatbikes:
Just make the heavy weapons 1 in 3 again. It was perfectly fine in 5th edition. In 6th edition, we got a bunch of new advantages (hammer of wrath, jink, bladestorm), but their price went down despite this. In 7th, we got the 1 to 1 big gun to bike ratio, and that's when they went from a cool, quirky unit to a devastatingly powerful meta shaper.
At 1 heavy weapon per 3 bodies, you're looking at 61(?) points per scatter laser or shuriken cannon. This makes it much pricier to spam strength 6 on jetbike platforms and encourages people to consider getting in close to use their shuriken catapults or even charge(!). This in turn means that you might actually see some use out of the windrider host's special rules. Flexible enough to keep your distance, encouraged to get in close to shuriken things to death, and much easier to deal with in general. Reasonable, no?
Wraith Knights
These just need a price increase. Simple as that. They're actually a pretty big investment if you up their cost by 100 or 150 points. They'd still be strong enough to be worth taking, but they wouldn't be embarassingly similar in cost to a land raider.
Guardians
I... kind of want these guys to go back down to ws/bs 3. I know! I know! They're not OP, but hear me out! I'd like guardians to be a place where the tech of the eldar can be shown off a bit more. So lower their base BS to 3, but give them an option for an "Eye of Kurnous" or whatever that ups it back to 4. Give them a guy who can deploy a Dawn of War style energy shield. Give them a piece of gear that can act sort of like a servo skull. Improving their statline has done wonders for their utility, but I kind of want a corsairs-esque glimpse into the kind of technology the eldar can field when they aren't obsessed with a specific path of war.
Rangers:
Are actually pretty solid as back field objective holders and monster/bike hunters, but I wouldn't mind seeing their ranger rifles get a 24" assault 1 profile so they can opt to battle focus in and out of cover. Very elf-ranger-y.
Shining Spears:
Would actually be really solid right now if they just had hit & run back!
And we could probably stand to lose some of our formations too. The aspect host is a "free bonuses with no drawback" formation. The seer council makes an already good combo (farseers with warlocks) that much better. The spirit host is mostly fine, but I'd like to see the wraith knight requirement dropped.
Wyldhunt wrote: I actually like the special snowflake rules on most aspect warriors. Things like the scorpions' "stealth mode" or the hawks' sky leap are a big part of what drew me to the army. You could tie all those special rules to an exarch, but then you risk turning him into a challenge/barrage/sniper magnet that becomes something of an expensive liability. And then people just spam more strength 6 instead of cool stuff like reapers and scorpions because some of the flavor of the fluffy units got removed.
With exceptions (warp spiders, for instance), I think most of our units would be fine with a modest price increase. A lot of our stuff got better in the most recent book wtihout a price increase. I for one rather like the idea of eldar being a cut above most enemies while also having a relatively low model count. It seems fluff for them.
Other changes I'd like to see:
Warp Spiders:
Keep flicker jump, but get rid of the exarch's pseudo-fearless. It keeps the "night crawler" angle, but it also makes it much easier to simply melee them to death and then sweep them after you win combat. They're less durable than sisters of battle or marines once you're in melee, so choppy units can deal with them that way. Flickerjump averages a 7" jump meaning that most shooty armies will still be in range of them if they do jump away. It doesn't fix the "jump behind a wall" issue, but I kind of feel like that's a big part of the spiders' gimmick.
Oh! I'd also kind of like to see death spinners become strength 4. Possibly S5 against models without an initiative value (vehicles) and possibly using initiative instead of Toughness to determine instand death. Monofilament is a cool rule that almost never matters except against MCs. Making spider guns strength 4 means they'll be one of our best shooty options for tackling things like necrons, orks, or Tau, but it makes them shuriken catapult equivalents against marines, guardsmen, etc.
So they'd keep the cool, fluffy rules that define their gimmick, but they'd be more specialized and have a clear weakness in the form of close combat. Very fitting for eldar in my opinion.
Scatbikes:
Just make the heavy weapons 1 in 3 again. It was perfectly fine in 5th edition. In 6th edition, we got a bunch of new advantages (hammer of wrath, jink, bladestorm), but their price went down despite this. In 7th, we got the 1 to 1 big gun to bike ratio, and that's when they went from a cool, quirky unit to a devastatingly powerful meta shaper.
At 1 heavy weapon per 3 bodies, you're looking at 61(?) points per scatter laser or shuriken cannon. This makes it much pricier to spam strength 6 on jetbike platforms and encourages people to consider getting in close to use their shuriken catapults or even charge(!). This in turn means that you might actually see some use out of the windrider host's special rules. Flexible enough to keep your distance, encouraged to get in close to shuriken things to death, and much easier to deal with in general. Reasonable, no?
Wraith Knights
These just need a price increase. Simple as that. They're actually a pretty big investment if you up their cost by 100 or 150 points. They'd still be strong enough to be worth taking, but they wouldn't be embarassingly similar in cost to a land raider.
Guardians
I... kind of want these guys to go back down to ws/bs 3. I know! I know! They're not OP, but hear me out! I'd like guardians to be a place where the tech of the eldar can be shown off a bit more. So lower their base BS to 3, but give them an option for an "Eye of Kurnous" or whatever that ups it back to 4. Give them a guy who can deploy a Dawn of War style energy shield. Give them a piece of gear that can act sort of like a servo skull. Improving their statline has done wonders for their utility, but I kind of want a corsairs-esque glimpse into the kind of technology the eldar can field when they aren't obsessed with a specific path of war.
Rangers:
Are actually pretty solid as back field objective holders and monster/bike hunters, but I wouldn't mind seeing their ranger rifles get a 24" assault 1 profile so they can opt to battle focus in and out of cover. Very elf-ranger-y.
Shining Spears:
Would actually be really solid right now if they just had hit & run back!
And we could probably stand to lose some of our formations too. The aspect host is a "free bonuses with no drawback" formation. The seer council makes an already good combo (farseers with warlocks) that much better. The spirit host is mostly fine, but I'd like to see the wraith knight requirement dropped.
All of these are really solid suggestions. I they do these, I would be really pleased (and that's coming from a hardcore eldar chap).
One tiny little change, I don't think Deathspinners should be able to wound vehicles (or at least heavy ones). Doesn't seem to me like an armour-piercing weapon. Keeping them at S4 would make sense, given that they might just be able to damage a light vehicle.
lord_blackfang wrote: The last edition in which mobility mattered was 4th. If you want to balance anything, nerf firepower.
Lol, no. Mobility matters more now than it ever has done before due to the need to grab objectives, why do you think units that only move 6" are never taken in a competitive setting?
Martel732 wrote: You can't go 1 per 3 because of the model kits.
Just make models cost what they are worth.
...What.
Does that mean Space Marine Devastators all need to be able to take heavy weapons because the kit comes with enough guns to? Can I have more than one gun per five GK Terminators? The kit has more guns than that. Why can't I put four guns on a War Walker? They ship it with ten gun models, why would they do that if I wasn't supposed to use them?
Well the kit is the reason they wrote the rules the way they did, so I'm assuming they're unwilling to change that.
Martel732 wrote: You can't go 1 per 3 because of the model kits.
Just make models cost what they are worth.
...What.
Does that mean Space Marine Devastators all need to be able to take heavy weapons because the kit comes with enough guns to? Can I have more than one gun per five GK Terminators? The kit has more guns than that. Why can't I put four guns on a War Walker? They ship it with ten gun models, why would they do that if I wasn't supposed to use them?
One of the complaints about Terminators IS the one-in-five heavy weapon restriction. So actually yes they should.
Also I know SM and CSM players would love the Heresy Era Devastators configuration where even the Sergeant has a Heavy Weapon. So yeah they should.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galef wrote: None of those suggestions either make sense, or are enough (and I am an Eldar player).
Honestly all jetbikes should have the "jet" pack move, but that is for another discussion.
If you really want to address Scatterbikes, Spiders and WKs, do the following:
-Scatter lasers are 20ppm for Windriders. They get so much out of the Scatter laser that no other unit does, they should pay for it.
-Remove ALL special snowflake Aspect warrior rules, this includes Flicker Jump, Assured Destruction, etc.
Aspect warriors are special because of their wargear. Only Exarchs should be bringing other special abilities and Exarch should be a 20pt upgrade for that, not just 10
-Make the WK have only 5 wounds, have the secondary weapons built in, and cost 350pts. Now it costs more and is 17% easier to kill. More than reasonable
-
The rules is what makes the Aspect Warriors special. Removing the rules gives you no reason to use Avengers over Guardians or Dragons over Wraithguard for example, and no reason to ever use the Reaper.
1. Make the Warp Spiders weapon S5
2. Scatterlasers are 15 points on a Windrider.
3. Wraithknights and the FW variants are 350 stock.
Then someone else can readjust HQ pricing and bam. We didn't have bloody massacre the codex like some of you want to.
Martel732 wrote: You can't go 1 per 3 because of the model kits.
Just make models cost what they are worth.
...What.
Does that mean Space Marine Devastators all need to be able to take heavy weapons because the kit comes with enough guns to? Can I have more than one gun per five GK Terminators? The kit has more guns than that. Why can't I put four guns on a War Walker? They ship it with ten gun models, why would they do that if I wasn't supposed to use them?
Well the kit is the reason they wrote the rules the way they did, so I'm assuming they're unwilling to change that.
This is Proposed Rules. What GW is or isn't willing to change has no bearing here.
Martel732 wrote: You can't go 1 per 3 because of the model kits.
Just make models cost what they are worth.
...What.
Does that mean Space Marine Devastators all need to be able to take heavy weapons because the kit comes with enough guns to? Can I have more than one gun per five GK Terminators? The kit has more guns than that. Why can't I put four guns on a War Walker? They ship it with ten gun models, why would they do that if I wasn't supposed to use them?
Well the kit is the reason they wrote the rules the way they did, so I'm assuming they're unwilling to change that.
Not a reason to ignore one of the easiest ways to balance them though.
definitely not a fan of boosting stuff to keep up with the Eldar.
'One of the complaints about Terminators IS the one-in-five heavy weapon restriction. So actually yes they should.
Also I know SM and CSM players would love the Heresy Era Devastators configuration where even the Sergeant has a Heavy Weapon. So yeah they should.'
Index Astartes says otherwise heretic! lol
No, I feel the proliference of heavy weapons and special uber units everywhere just makes things feel less special and more of an arms race. 1 in 3 for scatbikes is fair (as an older eldar player) and a number of other things said here seem like decent balancing points
No reason the scatterlasers on bikes can't be nerfed while leaving the version on other models intact.
Give them a version that's only S5, or has fewer shots, or short range. However you feel like balancing it.
Fluff justification is that it's a lightweight variant, used on bikes to let them maintain their speed.
Eldar players can continue to use the 3 guns on the sprue.
There's precedent for GW splitting up the same gun into 2 profiles depending on the model taking it. It's how we ended up with 'Devourers' vs 'Devourers With Brainleech Worms'. 'Stranglethorn Cannons' vs 'Barbed Stranglers', etc.
Martel732 wrote: Except the scatterlaser is broken on all platforms.
Guardians? Falcons? Vypers?
Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon. Vypers are roughly on par with non-deepstriking land speeders. Guardians are... guardians. It's 100ish points for a non-rending assault cannon and some guardsmen to shoot it. Scatbikes and maybe war walkers are the real culprits. The scatter laser would still be good with a modest price increase, but it would also be fine at its current price if you just made it harder to spam.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
I think rules wise the only Aspect Warriors that need much changing are the Howling Banshees and the Shining Spears, neither of which are much good. As for the others, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, Swooping Hawks and Dark Reapers are fine as is, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders though need a notable points increase.
Martel732 wrote: Except the scatterlaser is broken on all platforms.
Guardians? Falcons? Vypers?
Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon. Vypers are roughly on par with non-deepstriking land speeders. Guardians are... guardians. It's 100ish points for a non-rending assault cannon and some guardsmen to shoot it. Scatbikes and maybe war walkers are the real culprits. The scatter laser would still be good with a modest price increase, but it would also be fine at its current price if you just made it harder to spam.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
You have to remember that Martel is working from an imaginary world where AP is irrelevant and the yardstick against which heavy weapons are judged is the Terminator assault cannon.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
I think rules wise the only Aspect Warriors that need much changing are the Howling Banshees and the Shining Spears, neither of which are much good. As for the others, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, Swooping Hawks and Dark Reapers are fine as is, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders though need a notable points increase.
I think it's better to change the rules than just add more points. They're still just T3 3+ so you don't want them to be too expensive.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
I think rules wise the only Aspect Warriors that need much changing are the Howling Banshees and the Shining Spears, neither of which are much good. As for the others, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, Swooping Hawks and Dark Reapers are fine as is, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders though need a notable points increase.
I say Shining Spears get Hit And Run instead of Warp Spiders. Warp Spiders are already stupid mobile as is. They don't need to be able to get out of combat too.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
I think rules wise the only Aspect Warriors that need much changing are the Howling Banshees and the Shining Spears, neither of which are much good. As for the others, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, Swooping Hawks and Dark Reapers are fine as is, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders though need a notable points increase.
I say Shining Spears get Hit And Run instead of Warp Spiders. Warp Spiders are already stupid mobile as is. They don't need to be able to get out of combat too.
I think it's one of those rules that's good for showing fluff but nobody remembered balance is a thing.
Aspect Warriors:
I'd much rather see aspect warriors have less impressive raw firepower or a higher price tag and keep their special rules. The special rules are what give most units their unique play style and personality.
I think rules wise the only Aspect Warriors that need much changing are the Howling Banshees and the Shining Spears, neither of which are much good. As for the others, Dire Avengers, Striking Scorpions, Swooping Hawks and Dark Reapers are fine as is, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders though need a notable points increase.
I say Shining Spears get Hit And Run instead of Warp Spiders. Warp Spiders are already stupid mobile as is. They don't need to be able to get out of combat too.
I think it's one of those rules that's good for showing fluff but nobody remembered balance is a thing.
I think it also might have been for simplicity's sake. Rather than adding a "new" rule that behaved kinda/sorta like Hit and Run...they just threw H&R on there and called it a day.
Personally, if it were me?
I would add the following to Flickerjump:
Also when the target of a declared Charge, a Warp Spider unit can opt to Flickerjump away if they have not done so against shooting attacks that round.
Gives a bit more utility to Flickerjump, but makes it so that the controlling player has to pick and choose when to Flickerjump.
Additionally for the "1 in 3" versus "It's all in the kits" debate:
Windriders can be upgraded to Zephyrborne for an additional "X points per model". Units of Zephyrborne remove the restriction of one in every three models bearing a weapon from the Eldar Heavy Weapons list and gain additional <Ballistic Skill/Initiative/whatever>.
Change their type to Infantry, and remove Hit & Run and reword Flickerjump as follows:
"Once per full game turn (meaning you must wait for every player to have a turn before you can use it again), a unit of Warp Spiders may Flickerjump. To do this, nominate a single direction and move 2d6" in that direction, ignoring any intervening models or terrain. Any models that end up in impassible terrain or within 1" of an enemy unit must instantly take a Dangerous Terrain test or take a wound with no Armor Save allowed; move any such models the minimum distance needed to clear any such obstructions."
It would allow for some tricky stuff (using Flickerjump to avoid being hit by a Mawloc, or to jump in front of a unit just as it's about to be assaulted), but it would ultimately reduce their overall mobility as they're jumping once per turn rather than potentially 2-3 times. It also means they're an "aggressive defense" line infantry unit, rather than a DS alphastrike unit of doom.
Beyond that, I'm a fan of giving Dire Avengers a 3+ save (they *are* the Aspect Temple dedicated to the balanced art of attack and defense), and giving Guardian Jetbikes a 4+ save. It would be fitting with the "fragile Jetbike" trope in turn.
While not the easiest and quickest thing to do, IMHO the best imaginable thing GW could make to ballance Eldar while keeping all the flavour is to actually... expand them. Make different craftworlds unique again, let only Saim Hann take 1-in-3 bikes as troops and only Saim Hann 3-in-3 bikes as FA or HS, but at the same time disallow Wraithknights and few other choices in Saim Hann armies. Put similiar restrictions and unique playstyles on all described Craftworlds and establish some nice rules (improved and rebalanced Pale Courts) for creating your own...
As to quick solutions: Warp Spiders with s5 and scatterlasers remaining 4 shots but 24" s5 weapons on bikes is what works best in my games and makes shuricanons relevant option again.
Wyldhunt wrote: Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon.
True, but don't forget that assault cannons are 20 points on all platforms. They also don't have the range that scatter laser have which is easily equivalent to the loss of rending points-wise. Especially when you consider that all scatter lasers come with BS 4 now. Back when guardians, jetbikes and war walkers all had BS3, the 5 point tag made more sense.
Wyldhunt wrote: Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon.
True, but don't forget that assault cannons are 20 points on all platforms. They also don't have the range that scatter laser have which is easily equivalent to the loss of rending points-wise. Especially when you consider that all scatter lasers come with BS 4 now. Back when guardians, jetbikes and war walkers all had BS3, the 5 point tag made more sense.
Wyldhunt wrote: Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon.
True, but don't forget that assault cannons are 20 points on all platforms. They also don't have the range that scatter laser have which is easily equivalent to the loss of rending points-wise. Especially when you consider that all scatter lasers come with BS 4 now. Back when guardians, jetbikes and war walkers all had BS3, the 5 point tag made more sense.
Assault Cannons also have much better AP.
Which doesn't matter in cover, as the Scatterlasers don't care.
Wyldhunt wrote: Honestly, scatter lasers are good, but they're only really OP when you can spam a ton of them cheaply. On things like falcons and serpents, you're basically paying over 100 points for a durable, non-rending assault cannon.
True, but don't forget that assault cannons are 20 points on all platforms. They also don't have the range that scatter laser have which is easily equivalent to the loss of rending points-wise. Especially when you consider that all scatter lasers come with BS 4 now. Back when guardians, jetbikes and war walkers all had BS3, the 5 point tag made more sense.
Assault Cannons also have much better AP.
Which doesn't matter in cover, as the Scatterlasers don't care.
Don't know about you but the boards I play on include things like cover that isn't as good as your armour. In fact some parts aren't even cover.
Maybe make Windriders as they were in 6e but reducing their save to 4+ (1 heavy weapon in 3, and then only shuriken cannons), but then allow, for 10ppm, an upgrade to be Zephyrborne Jetbikes, changing their battlefield role to Fast Attack, gaining A2, Sv 3+ and having the ability to take a heavy weapon on each model.
Of course, that should go along with scatter lasers changing to S5 AP-, and going up to 15 points. So, now "scatpacks" are 42ppm instead of 27 and take a Fast Attack slot.
Maybe make Windriders as they were in 6e but reducing their save to 4+ (1 heavy weapon in 3, and then only shuriken cannons), but then allow, for 10ppm, an upgrade to be Zephyrborne Jetbikes, changing their battlefield role to Fast Attack, gaining A2, Sv 3+ and having the ability to take a heavy weapon on each model.
Of course, that should go along with scatter lasers changing to S5 AP-, and going up to 15 points. So, now "scatpacks" are 42ppm instead of 27 and take a Fast Attack slot.
You don't need to do all that, actually. Proper pricing of the scatterlaser makes it so it doesn't matter how many they take. 4+ armor instead of 3+ changes their dynamic a LOT as well. Making the scatterlaser Str 5 also completely changes the dynamic as well.
Maybe make Windriders as they were in 6e but reducing their save to 4+ (1 heavy weapon in 3, and then only shuriken cannons), but then allow, for 10ppm, an upgrade to be Zephyrborne Jetbikes, changing their battlefield role to Fast Attack, gaining A2, Sv 3+ and having the ability to take a heavy weapon on each model.
Of course, that should go along with scatter lasers changing to S5 AP-, and going up to 15 points. So, now "scatpacks" are 42ppm instead of 27 and take a Fast Attack slot.
You don't need to do all that, actually. Proper pricing of the scatterlaser makes it so it doesn't matter how many they take. 4+ armor instead of 3+ changes their dynamic a LOT as well. Making the scatterlaser Str 5 also completely changes the dynamic as well.
That's a good point. That's actually why I suggested making the scatter laser S5 and the starcannon S7 earlier, simply to fix the weird internal balance.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I don't see why we have to kill the Scatterlaser profile. Make them 15 points and make Windriders 4+.
There's always spite. Also, 15 pts is still too cheap for 4 36" S6 shots in 7th ed. S6 is simply far too valuable. 80% of vehicles just crumble. As for the 4+, that would have to be playtested as AP 4 is very much an Imperial thing.
Robin5t wrote: I don't see why Windriders should get a better save out of their bikes than Reavers or Skyweavers, to be honest. Make them all 4+.
The reasoning was that Windriders are actually armored, with Guardians having a 5+ save versus Wyches[the unit that got mounted on Reavers] having a lesser save, same with the Harlequins only having an Invuln on Skyweavers.
Maybe make Windriders as they were in 6e but reducing their save to 4+ (1 heavy weapon in 3, and then only shuriken cannons), but then allow, for 10ppm, an upgrade to be Zephyrborne Jetbikes, changing their battlefield role to Fast Attack, gaining A2, Sv 3+ and having the ability to take a heavy weapon on each model.
Of course, that should go along with scatter lasers changing to S5 AP-, and going up to 15 points. So, now "scatpacks" are 42ppm instead of 27 and take a Fast Attack slot.
Ehhh...I'd keep them as a Troops slot. Rangers to Pathfinders doesn't change their Battlefield Role.
And while we're at it, Pathfinders need to make a comeback.
Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome, with the most AP4 weapon profiles of any Codex in Warhammer 40k to date, the newest members of the Imperium!
*drumroll*
The Tau!
Okay, them too. When I think Tau, I think ion accelerator. My apologies.
Just because the Blood Angels are third behind Tau and Tyranids (Who have been summarily disqualified for inflating their count with a fake weapon. I mean, "flamespurt cannon"? Imaginary. And named by someone even worse than GW's naming team.) (/kidding) doesn't mean the rest of the Imperium is overloaded with AP4 weaponry.
Martel732 wrote: Heavy bolter. Assault cannon. Auto cannon. Heavy flamer.
Heavy bolters are especially common as hull weapons and sponson weapons.
And ion weapons/missile pods (in Tau)/Spore Mines and venom cannons (Tyranids) aren't common?
Strictly speaking, the Imperial equivalents are far more common simply because of the number of armies contained within them that have access to those weapons.
Basically every Imperial army(and Chaos Marines and now even Genestealer Cultists) have access to Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, and Heavy Flamers in one form or another. Whether it's a vehicle mounted version or an infantry version, I can field far more Heavy Bolters or Autocannons than I can Ion Weapons or Missile Pods in a Tau list.
Ion Rifles are AP4 and are on Pathfinders only, Interceptor Drones(on the Sun Shark Bombers) have twin-linked Ion Rifles. Cyclic Ion Blasters are AP4 as well and are only available to Crisis Suits/Commanders. Quad Ion Turrets are AP4 and only available on the Razorshark Strike Fighter. The Cyclic Ion Raker is AP4 and only available to Ghostkeels.
Ion Cannons are AP3(only available to Hammerheads) and Ion Accelerators are AP2(on all variable fire modes) are only available to Riptides.
Missile Pods are similarly restrictive, only recently becoming available to Fire Warriors with the turrets added in the Strike and Breacher Teams. Otherwise, they're strictly on Crisis Suits. Broadsides, Hammerheads, Riptides, Devilfish, and Stormsurges get Smart Missile Systems rather than Missile Pods. Strike and Breacher Teams can also take SMS for their turret options.
The SMS are AP5 rather than AP4 as well.
I can't comment on Tyranids as I don't have to deal with them much.
Martel732 wrote: Heavy bolter. Assault cannon. Auto cannon. Heavy flamer.
Heavy bolters are especially common as hull weapons and sponson weapons.
And ion weapons/missile pods (in Tau)/Spore Mines and venom cannons (Tyranids) aren't common?
Strictly speaking, the Imperial equivalents are far more common simply because of the number of armies contained within them that have access to those weapons.
Basically every Imperial army(and Chaos Marines and now even Genestealer Cultists) have access to Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, and Heavy Flamers in one form or another. Whether it's a vehicle mounted version or an infantry version, I can field far more Heavy Bolters or Autocannons than I can Ion Weapons or Missile Pods in a Tau list.
Ion Rifles are AP4 and are on Pathfinders only, Interceptor Drones(on the Sun Shark Bombers) have twin-linked Ion Rifles. Cyclic Ion Blasters are AP4 as well and are only available to Crisis Suits/Commanders. Quad Ion Turrets are AP4 and only available on the Razorshark Strike Fighter. The Cyclic Ion Raker is AP4 and only available to Ghostkeels.
Ion Cannons are AP3(only available to Hammerheads) and Ion Accelerators are AP2(on all variable fire modes) are only available to Riptides.
Missile Pods are similarly restrictive, only recently becoming available to Fire Warriors with the turrets added in the Strike and Breacher Teams. Otherwise, they're strictly on Crisis Suits. Broadsides, Hammerheads, Riptides, Devilfish, and Stormsurges get Smart Missile Systems rather than Missile Pods. Strike and Breacher Teams can also take SMS for their turret options.
The SMS are AP5 rather than AP4 as well.
I can't comment on Tyranids as I don't have to deal with them much.
This was my point. I've seen IG lists with 40 heavy bolters.
Martel732 wrote: Heavy bolter. Assault cannon. Auto cannon. Heavy flamer.
Heavy bolters are especially common as hull weapons and sponson weapons.
And ion weapons/missile pods (in Tau)/Spore Mines and venom cannons (Tyranids) aren't common?
Strictly speaking, the Imperial equivalents are far more common simply because of the number of armies contained within them that have access to those weapons.
Basically every Imperial army(and Chaos Marines and now even Genestealer Cultists) have access to Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, and Heavy Flamers in one form or another. Whether it's a vehicle mounted version or an infantry version, I can field far more Heavy Bolters or Autocannons than I can Ion Weapons or Missile Pods in a Tau list.
Ion Rifles are AP4 and are on Pathfinders only, Interceptor Drones(on the Sun Shark Bombers) have twin-linked Ion Rifles. Cyclic Ion Blasters are AP4 as well and are only available to Crisis Suits/Commanders. Quad Ion Turrets are AP4 and only available on the Razorshark Strike Fighter. The Cyclic Ion Raker is AP4 and only available to Ghostkeels.
Ion Cannons are AP3(only available to Hammerheads) and Ion Accelerators are AP2(on all variable fire modes) are only available to Riptides.
Missile Pods are similarly restrictive, only recently becoming available to Fire Warriors with the turrets added in the Strike and Breacher Teams. Otherwise, they're strictly on Crisis Suits. Broadsides, Hammerheads, Riptides, Devilfish, and Stormsurges get Smart Missile Systems rather than Missile Pods. Strike and Breacher Teams can also take SMS for their turret options.
The SMS are AP5 rather than AP4 as well.
I can't comment on Tyranids as I don't have to deal with them much.
The stock Eldar vehicle armament has pseudo-Rending, but I wouldn't call Rending an 'Eldar thing'. Similarly the stock Tau vehicle armament is AP5, that doesn't make AP5 a 'Tau thing' (that said S5/AP5 might as well be).
I thought I was pointing out the silliness of Martel's initial statement that AP4 is 'an Imperial thing', but we've actually come across a deeper point here, that Imperial stock vehicle armament has better AP than its xeno equivalents. Take that, 'Xeno shooting beats Imperial shooting' thesis!
But said AP is largely worthless because of cover and the low quality of armor being negated.
Xeno shooting is much better than Imperial shooting because of specific mathematical phenomena that GW has put into the game. And the platforms. The difference in platforms is enormous.
Heavy bolters are vastly inferior to scatterlasers because of the loss of strength and a shot. The step from S5 to S6 is enormous in 7th. Much more important than AP 6 to AP 4.
The stock Eldar vehicle armament has pseudo-Rending, but I wouldn't call Rending an 'Eldar thing'.
I would. Bladestorm is a defining trait of Eldar weaponry at this juncture.
Similarly the stock Tau vehicle armament is AP5, that doesn't make AP5 a 'Tau thing' (that said S5/AP5 might as well be).
Ehh...the "stock" Tau vehicle armament is Gun Drones with Pulse Carbines and Burst Cannons if we want to get technical...
I thought I was pointing out the silliness of Martel's initial statement that AP4 is 'an Imperial thing', but we've actually come across a deeper point here, that Imperial stock vehicle armament has better AP than its xeno equivalents. Take that, 'Xeno shooting beats Imperial shooting' thesis!
Imperial vehicles basically have no survival thanks to lacking Jink.
In any regards, I would consider AP4 more of an Imperial thing than I would a Tau thing by the metrics you attempted to get snarky with. Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, etc are so widely spread across the various Imperial factions(Guard, Marines of all flavor, Skitarii, and Cult Mechanicus) that it's hard to make an Imperial list that doesn't somehow have AP4 present.
Martel732 wrote: But said AP is largely worthless because of cover and the low quality of armor being negated...
(deep sigh)
I'm sorry that your guns being 1.5-2x as effective as the competition isn't good enough for you. I'm sorry that the circular problem (namely that 4+ armour is 'low quality' exactly because there are so many AP4 weapons) hasn't sunk in yet. And I'm sorry that your play environment is one where all vehicles are exactly AV11 (also known as the only target against which S5 to S6 is a massive jump instead of a sort of meh one).
The stock Eldar vehicle armament has pseudo-Rending, but I wouldn't call Rending an 'Eldar thing'.
I would. Bladestorm is a defining trait of Eldar weaponry at this juncture.
Similarly the stock Tau vehicle armament is AP5, that doesn't make AP5 a 'Tau thing' (that said S5/AP5 might as well be).
Ehh...the "stock" Tau vehicle armament is Gun Drones with Pulse Carbines and Burst Cannons if we want to get technical...
I thought I was pointing out the silliness of Martel's initial statement that AP4 is 'an Imperial thing', but we've actually come across a deeper point here, that Imperial stock vehicle armament has better AP than its xeno equivalents. Take that, 'Xeno shooting beats Imperial shooting' thesis!
Imperial vehicles basically have no survival thanks to lacking Jink.
In any regards, I would consider AP4 more of an Imperial thing than I would a Tau thing by the metrics you attempted to get snarky with. Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, etc are so widely spread across the various Imperial factions(Guard, Marines of all flavor, Skitarii, and Cult Mechanicus) that it's hard to make an Imperial list that doesn't somehow have AP4 present.
It'd be much easier for me to build a viable Eldar list with no Bladestorm (...almost no, I think I am still stuck with shuriken pistols on my HQs) than a viable Tau list with no AP4.
Martel732 wrote: But said AP is largely worthless because of cover and the low quality of armor being negated...
(deep sigh)
I'm sorry that your guns being 1.5-2x as effective as the competition isn't good enough for you. I'm sorry that the circular problem (namely that 4+ armour is 'low quality' exactly because there are so many AP4 weapons) hasn't sunk in yet. And I'm sorry that your play environment is one where all vehicles are exactly AV11 (also known as the only target against which S5 to S6 is a massive jump instead of a sort of meh one).
The stock Eldar vehicle armament has pseudo-Rending, but I wouldn't call Rending an 'Eldar thing'.
I would. Bladestorm is a defining trait of Eldar weaponry at this juncture.
Similarly the stock Tau vehicle armament is AP5, that doesn't make AP5 a 'Tau thing' (that said S5/AP5 might as well be).
Ehh...the "stock" Tau vehicle armament is Gun Drones with Pulse Carbines and Burst Cannons if we want to get technical...
I thought I was pointing out the silliness of Martel's initial statement that AP4 is 'an Imperial thing', but we've actually come across a deeper point here, that Imperial stock vehicle armament has better AP than its xeno equivalents. Take that, 'Xeno shooting beats Imperial shooting' thesis!
Imperial vehicles basically have no survival thanks to lacking Jink.
In any regards, I would consider AP4 more of an Imperial thing than I would a Tau thing by the metrics you attempted to get snarky with. Heavy Bolters, Autocannons, etc are so widely spread across the various Imperial factions(Guard, Marines of all flavor, Skitarii, and Cult Mechanicus) that it's hard to make an Imperial list that doesn't somehow have AP4 present.
It'd be much easier for me to build a viable Eldar list with no Bladestorm (...almost no, I think I am still stuck with shuriken pistols on my HQs) than a viable Tau list with no AP4.
That's not why it's low quality. It only works half the time. Or less, for armor worse than 4+. AP4 is negating stuff that can be brute-forced through very easily. It doesn't help that 3+ armor is by far the most common armor.
Did you mean AV 12? Or did you intentionally leave that out. Because 16% chance to 0% chance is pretty huge.
Bladestorm should be AP3 on a '6'. Otherwise it's just Rending without the bonus to AV. Eldar do not hurt for other AP2 options, so making Bladestorm only AP3 on a 6 will not hurt them too much. And that leads me to point out a key factor in this thread: the nerfs need to be "reasonable". Several minor nerfs would keep the spirit of what Eldar are without over doing it.
For example, making Windriders a Fast only choice with a 4+ armour that pays 20pts per Scatter laser and only 1 per 3. That is a gross over nerf, yet some of those together would be reasonable. Windriders will always be Troops as they should be, there are enough of them on each craftworld to merit Troop status. And the ship has sailed on them getting only 1 per 3 special weapon, The kit includes 1 Shuricat, 1 Shurcannon & 1 Scatter laser PER BIKE.
But a 4+ only armour is reasonable. As is 20pts per Scatter laser (on the bikes only). But I would hesitate to do both. A 20pt weapon that is snap-firing most of the game is not appealing. 15ppm might be best if we are doing a 4+ armour
As for Warp Spiders, Flicker jump needs to go way. They are 3+ armoured Jet-pack infantry with Battlefocus and a Psuedo-Rending gun. They are special enough The same needs to happen with all Aspect warriors. Players choose Dire Avengers over Guardians because they have a better amour save and a longer ranged gun. NOT because of the counter-attack/BS2 overwatch special snowflake rule. Aspect Warriors are unique enough with their special wargear & weapon options. They don't need other special rules just for "reasons".
Martel732 wrote: That's not why it's low quality. It only works half the time. Or less, for armor worse than 4+. AP4 is negating stuff that can be brute-forced through very easily.
Did you mean AV 12? Or did you intentionally leave that out. Because 16% chance to 0% chance is pretty huge.
If you're shooting S6 weapons at an AV12 target something's gone horribly wrong in the first place. Or you're playing Harlequins, and therefore boned. (I'm operating under the assumption that if I want to hull-point out a vehicle I'm not going to be shooting weapons that only do damage on a 6 unless I have no other choice. So I'd shoot a S5 weapon and a S6 weapon at an AV10 target, a S6 weapon but not a S5 weapon at an AV11 target, and neither at an AV12 target (preferring instead to seek a better angle or use better-suited weapons).)
As for AP4 negating stuff that can be easily brute-forced through I'd suggest you consider your standards for a moment. The jump from AP5 to AP4 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against a Sv4+ target in 5+ cover. But the jump from S5 to S6 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against T4 targets. Or 1x as effective against T3 targets. Yet one is massive, and one is irrelevant?
Martel732 wrote: That's not why it's low quality. It only works half the time. Or less, for armor worse than 4+. AP4 is negating stuff that can be brute-forced through very easily.
Did you mean AV 12? Or did you intentionally leave that out. Because 16% chance to 0% chance is pretty huge.
If you're shooting S6 weapons at an AV12 target something's gone horribly wrong in the first place. Or you're playing Harlequins, and therefore boned. (I'm operating under the assumption that if I want to hull-point out a vehicle I'm not going to be shooting weapons that only do damage on a 6 unless I have no other choice. So I'd shoot a S5 weapon and a S6 weapon at an AV10 target, a S6 weapon but not a S5 weapon at an AV11 target, and neither at an AV12 target (preferring instead to seek a better angle or use better-suited weapons).)
As for AP4 negating stuff that can be easily brute-forced through I'd suggest you consider your standards for a moment. The jump from AP5 to AP4 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against a Sv4+ target in 5+ cover. But the jump from S5 to S6 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against T4 targets. Or 1x as effective against T3 targets. Yet one is massive, and one is irrelevant?
I've seen a lot of AV 12 stuff die to scatterlasers because they only need 3 "6"s to kill it. It's purely a function of vehicles having no saves.
" Yet one is massive, and one is irrelevant?"
It's the one-two punch of an extra shot and an extra strength. A marine heavy bolter kills 0.44 marines, whereas an Eldar scatterlaser kills 0.74 marines. Scatterlasers hull point out IKs, dreadnoughts, Falcons, waveserpents, Chimera fronts. Heavy bolters can't touch any of those.
Martel732 wrote: That's not why it's low quality. It only works half the time. Or less, for armor worse than 4+. AP4 is negating stuff that can be brute-forced through very easily.
Did you mean AV 12? Or did you intentionally leave that out. Because 16% chance to 0% chance is pretty huge.
If you're shooting S6 weapons at an AV12 target something's gone horribly wrong in the first place. Or you're playing Harlequins, and therefore boned. (I'm operating under the assumption that if I want to hull-point out a vehicle I'm not going to be shooting weapons that only do damage on a 6 unless I have no other choice. So I'd shoot a S5 weapon and a S6 weapon at an AV10 target, a S6 weapon but not a S5 weapon at an AV11 target, and neither at an AV12 target (preferring instead to seek a better angle or use better-suited weapons).)
As for AP4 negating stuff that can be easily brute-forced through I'd suggest you consider your standards for a moment. The jump from AP5 to AP4 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against a Sv4+ target in 5+ cover. But the jump from S5 to S6 makes your weapon 1.17x as effective against T4 targets. Or 1x as effective against T3 targets. Yet one is massive, and one is irrelevant?
I've seen a lot of AV 12 stuff die to scatterlasers because they only need 3 "6"s to kill it. It's purely a function of vehicles having no saves.
" Yet one is massive, and one is irrelevant?"
It's the one-two punch of an extra shot and an extra strength. A marine heavy bolter kills 0.44 marines, whereas an Eldar scatterlaser kills 0.74 marines. Scatterlasers hull point out IKs, dreadnoughts, Falcons, waveserpents, Chimera fronts. Heavy bolters can't touch any of those.
I've seen a Stormtrooper run down a Terminator squad. We can anecdote up whatever we want. It isn't going to change the facts of the median-case 'most games' state the rules ought to be written for.
(Also for the record you've given quite a few vehicles with saves in your list of things the scatter laser can kill easily because vehicles have no saves.)
Okay, well, I'll continue to avoid AP4 as much as I can, due to it not being very efficacious and I guess you can load up on it and see how that goes for you. I'll also continue to prefer the scatterlaser going away from any Imperial heavy weapon other than a grav cannon.
Changing the scatbike to 4+ armor would provide an actual meaningful unit with 4+ armor other than Wulfen. Which would make your claims more true.
And I'll change my statement to non-anecdotes: scatterlasers MASSACRE AV 12 and less in a general sense. You and I don't need to see it. Each scatterlaser removes 0.44 hps. Seven scatterlasers equals dead vehicle.
Martel732 wrote: Okay, well, I'll continue to avoid AP4 as much as I can, due to it not being very efficacious and I guess you can load up on it and see how that goes for you. I'll also continue to prefer the scatterlaser going away from any Imperial heavy weapon other than a grav cannon.
Changing the scatbike to 4+ armor would provide an actual meaningful unit with 4+ armor other than Wulfen. Which would make your claims more true.
And I'll change my statement to non-anecdotes: scatterlasers MASSACRE AV 12 and less in a general sense. You and I don't need to see it. Each scatterlaser removes 0.44 hps. Seven scatterlasers equals dead vehicle.
So Fire Warriors, half the Aspects, Carapace-armoured Guardsmen, Necron Warriors, and Scouts just don't exist?
Seven Scatter Lasers kill an AV12 vehicle. Oh my god. OP, pls nerf. A hundred and eighty nine points of scatterbikes can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
What other heavy weapons do you suppose can one-round a Chimera if you point seven of them at it?
(Scatterbikes are powerful, but they're really not anti-armour tools.)
So Fire Warriors, half the Aspects, Carapace-armoured Guardsmen, Necron Warriors, and Scouts just don't exist?
Seven Scatter Lasers kill an AV12 vehicle. Oh my god. OP, pls nerf. A hundred and eighty nine points of scatterbikes can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
A hundred and eighty nine points of Jetbikes with what is supposed to be an anti-infantry weapon can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
What other heavy weapons do you suppose can one-round a Chimera if you point seven of them at it?
(Scatterbikes are powerful, but they're really not anti-armour tools.)
Whether they are anti-armour or not, they can function as such in the current rules setting.
It's ridiculous that a weapon with AP6 can harm a vehicle, much less destroy it.
So Fire Warriors, half the Aspects, Carapace-armoured Guardsmen, Necron Warriors, and Scouts just don't exist?
Seven Scatter Lasers kill an AV12 vehicle. Oh my god. OP, pls nerf. A hundred and eighty nine points of scatterbikes can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
A hundred and eighty nine points of Jetbikes with what is supposed to be an anti-infantry weapon can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
What other heavy weapons do you suppose can one-round a Chimera if you point seven of them at it?
(Scatterbikes are powerful, but they're really not anti-armour tools.)
Whether they are anti-armour or not, they can function as such in the current rules setting.
It's ridiculous that a weapon with AP6 can harm a vehicle, much less destroy it.
Back up a step. I'm trying to assert that the S5-6 jump isn't much bigger than any other +1S jump unless you happen to be in an environment that only contains things where it's a massive deal. You and Martel seem convinced that an S6 weapon is an effective primary anti-armour tool despite the fact that you need seven Scatterbikes to kill a vehicle.
Let's imagine for the moment that the one gun in three rule was applied. Those 189pts of scatterbikes are now spread across a minimum of two squads, containing 21 jetbikes between them and costing 438pts.
Is this hypothetical 21-model 438pt investment still a significant, or even a relevant primary anti-armour tool? It was already mediocre at it. It's now about 2.3x the cost. Is the fact that Scatter Lasers existed in the first place the problem, or is the fact that they were available on every model in the squad the problem?
It's ridiculous that a weapon with AP6 can harm a vehicle, much less destroy it.
I wouldn't say that. Armour penetration isn't the only thing to consider.
A shotgun blast isn't going to penetrate modern body armour. It's just going to make the front of the vest meet the back.
That kinetic energy has to go somewhere (assuming for the sake of argument that these Eldar 'lasers' impart kinetic energy. Hell maybe they just boil off the hull).
Hit something hard enough, enough times, and it doesn't matter that none of the shots penetrated it. It's going to be too beat up to function.
The only army that really worries about the jump from S5 to S6 is Dark Eldar as thats where it negates our FnP.
Sure, Scatter Lasers can glance out AV12, but if your dedicating that much firepower to do so then either you or your opponent are doing something very wrong.
Galef wrote: Bladestorm should be AP3 on a '6'. Otherwise it's just Rending without the bonus to AV. Eldar do not hurt for other AP2 options, so making Bladestorm only AP3 on a 6 will not hurt them too much.
And that leads me to point out a key factor in this thread: the nerfs need to be "reasonable". Several minor nerfs would keep the spirit of what Eldar are without over doing it.
For example, making Windriders a Fast only choice with a 4+ armour that pays 20pts per Scatter laser and only 1 per 3. That is a gross over nerf, yet some of those together would be reasonable.
Windriders will always be Troops as they should be, there are enough of them on each craftworld to merit Troop status. And the ship has sailed on them getting only 1 per 3 special weapon, The kit includes 1 Shuricat, 1 Shurcannon & 1 Scatter laser PER BIKE.
But a 4+ only armour is reasonable. As is 20pts per Scatter laser (on the bikes only). But I would hesitate to do both. A 20pt weapon that is snap-firing most of the game is not appealing. 15ppm might be best if we are doing a 4+ armour
As for Warp Spiders, Flicker jump needs to go way. They are 3+ armoured Jet-pack infantry with Battlefocus and a Psuedo-Rending gun. They are special enough
The same needs to happen with all Aspect warriors.
Players choose Dire Avengers over Guardians because they have a better amour save and a longer ranged gun. NOT because of the counter-attack/BS2 overwatch special snowflake rule.
Aspect Warriors are unique enough with their special wargear & weapon options. They don't need other special rules just for "reasons".
-
Bladestorm: I'd be fine with this. I know bladestorm gets a lot of hate, but I've always seen it as a nice bonus rather than some super duper game winner. I'd be happy to drop it down to Ap3 on 6s for the sake of helping out units like terminators that are hit a bit too hard by it.
Jetbikes: Mostly agree. You're right that we need to avoid over-nerfing them, and I agree that they shouldn't be restricted to FA. After all, they're a key part of Saim-Hann's identity. The only point I really disagree with you on is that including weapons on a sprue somehow makes it mandatory that every model in the box be able to take a heavy weapon. Personally, I really kind of like how 1 per 3 heavy weapons on jetbikes play. You have to actually use your speed and mobility to stay safe while getting closer to the enemy, and you're sometimes encouraged to actually move in and take advantage of your twin-linked catapults and hammer of wrath in a pinch. I largely agree with you on this point though. Also, some other jetbike ideas:
* Restrict them to 1 per 3 on heavy weapons, but allow them to field 1 vyper per 6(?) jetbikes. Obviously you'd need to give vyper a toughness value and make them a "jetbike," but I like that this option allows you to add a little extra variety of heavy weapon support to this hypothetical jetbike squad. 6 bikes with two shuricannons joined by a vyper with a star cannon or lance sounds like a fun unit to scoot around. It also prevents the vyper from competing directly with hornets.
* Split jetbikes up into troop bikes that are the "classic" 1 per 3 jetbikes that only have access to shurikens and then FA jetbikes that have a wide variety of heavy weapons available (similar to corsairs) but at a higher price per gun. So you can spam scatbikes at a higher cost, but you have to do so using FA slots, or you can field relatively tame "classic" bikes as troops. Or as members of a windrider host.
Aspect Warrior Snowflakes:
I really like the aspect warrior snowflakes. The dire avenger's armor and range does make him a viable alternative to guardians, but that's not all there is to it. Competitively, I'd be better off taking a bunch of cheap guardians for 20+ bladestorming shots rather than a squad of avengers (assuming I"m not going bare-bones troops to save points). The 4+ armor is nice, but not enough to really make them stand out. The special rules that show off superior technology and training are what I really enjoy about them. My avengers exarch has an invul save because he's a space elf samurai pulling off defensive Matrix-style moves. Banshee masks deny overwatch because of cool technology that echoes their lore. Scorpions can go into "stealth" mode until they're ready to strike. Spiders can nightcrawler out of harm's way. Swooping hawks can sky leap and move 18" because they're lightning-quick space elves equipped with graceful alien technology instead of clunky space marines with rockets strapped to their backs.
Eldar, and aspect warriors especially, feel unique and alien. Whatever balance issues our book might have, I really enjoy how well our units capture the feel of their fluff (for the most part). Some rules need to be toned down, and some units could stand to go up a few points, but I'd rather look for solutions that don't sacrifice the army's flavor or unique feel. Plus, I'm a sucker for special rules. I know some people would rather see 90% of the special rules out there scrapped for the sake of simplifying things, but I kind of love mechanics that reward you for playing X instead of Y.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Imateria wrote: The only army that really worries about the jump from S5 to S6 is Dark Eldar as thats where it negates our FnP.
Sure, Scatter Lasers can glance out AV12, but if your dedicating that much firepower to do so then either you or your opponent are doing something very wrong.
This. Sure, S5 can't touch AV12 while S6 can, but I'll only ever shoot S6 at AV 12 if it's the only option I have available. Especially when you consider how many AV12 targets have jink. That said, I like the idea of scatter lasers going down to S5. It fits the "machinegun" niche they're going for better, and it scales nicely with shuriken cannons and star cannons. Number of shots versus quality of shots.
S6 is good in general, but it's only really a problem when you can spam the snot out of it. Thus why no one complains about multilasers on chimeras.
Here are my current list of houserules for eldar (including options from apocalypse book)
Spoiler:
Eldar jetbikes only give a 4+ armor save
Windrider jetbike units have a 4+ save instead of 3+.
Scatter Lasers are str5 instead of 6
Eldar missile launchers have a 36” range and are only 5 points more expensive than bright lances etc.
Warp Spiders may only use their flicker jump special rules once per player turn and may not use it against overwatch.
monofilament weapons treat penetrating hits as glancing hits. (With my houserules glances only grant an unmodified roll on the damage table, no hullpoint loss)
The warlock conclave does not generate warp charges based on its mastery level in addition to the rules presented in their profile
the aspect warrior host may not all be the same aspect, and only receive the bonus to ws/bs when within 12" of another unit from the same formation. Shadow spectres may be chosen as part of this formation.
wraithguard may not fire overwatch unless joined by a psyker.
All weapons with the “bladestorm” special rule are changed to an ap of “-” (they're supposed to have trouble dealing with hordes)
eldar titan holo fields only affect ranged attacks.
Points adjustments
Wave Serpent 125
Crimson hunter 135
Vyper 40
Hemlock wraithfighter 185
Falcon 140
Fire Prism 125
Nightspinner same
War walker same
wraithlord same
wraithknight (wraith cannons) 345 lose "jump"
wraithknight (“sword and board”) 350 lose "jump"
wraithknight (suncannon) 310 lose "jump"
avatar of khaine 210
Phantom titan: 1050 points and may add phantom pulsars (424 each) phantom D-cannon (330 each), or the phantom ccw (170)
Revenant titan: 950 points
Bladestorm: I'd be fine with this. I know bladestorm gets a lot of hate, but I've always seen it as a nice bonus rather than some super duper game winner. I'd be happy to drop it down to Ap3 on 6s for the sake of helping out units like terminators that are hit a bit too hard by it.
Yeah I'd be happy with this. Also helps give Starcannons their AP2 niche back, while keeping up the deadliness vs MEQ.
Jetbikes: Mostly agree. You're right that we need to avoid over-nerfing them, and I agree that they shouldn't be restricted to FA. After all, they're a key part of Saim-Hann's identity. The only point I really disagree with you on is that including weapons on a sprue somehow makes it mandatory that every model in the box be able to take a heavy weapon. Personally, I really kind of like how 1 per 3 heavy weapons on jetbikes play. You have to actually use your speed and mobility to stay safe while getting closer to the enemy, and you're sometimes encouraged to actually move in and take advantage of your twin-linked catapults and hammer of wrath in a pinch. I largely agree with you on this point though. Also, some other jetbike ideas:
* Restrict them to 1 per 3 on heavy weapons, but allow them to field 1 vyper per 6(?) jetbikes. Obviously you'd need to give vyper a toughness value and make them a "jetbike," but I like that this option allows you to add a little extra variety of heavy weapon support to this hypothetical jetbike squad. 6 bikes with two shuricannons joined by a vyper with a star cannon or lance sounds like a fun unit to scoot around. It also prevents the vyper from competing directly with hornets.
* Split jetbikes up into troop bikes that are the "classic" 1 per 3 jetbikes that only have access to shurikens and then FA jetbikes that have a wide variety of heavy weapons available (similar to corsairs) but at a higher price per gun. So you can spam scatbikes at a higher cost, but you have to do so using FA slots, or you can field relatively tame "classic" bikes as troops. Or as members of a windrider host.
Agreed on the over-nerfing, and they definitely need to stay as troops. It's a core part of Saim-Hann.
Love the idea of Troops Jetbikes with 1-in-3 Heavy Weapons (or even no special weapons), with a 2W T4/5 Vyper as a heavy weapons platform. Then you can have the same squad of Vypers in FA as a heavy weapons squad.
Not certain there's a call for a FA heavy weapons jetbike squad if you've got Vyper squadrons with wounds/toughness in FA as well.
Aspect Warrior Snowflakes:
I really like the aspect warrior snowflakes. The dire avenger's armor and range does make him a viable alternative to guardians, but that's not all there is to it. Competitively, I'd be better off taking a bunch of cheap guardians for 20+ bladestorming shots rather than a squad of avengers (assuming I"m not going bare-bones troops to save points). The 4+ armor is nice, but not enough to really make them stand out. The special rules that show off superior technology and training are what I really enjoy about them. My avengers exarch has an invul save because he's a space elf samurai pulling off defensive Matrix-style moves. Banshee masks deny overwatch because of cool technology that echoes their lore. Scorpions can go into "stealth" mode until they're ready to strike. Spiders can nightcrawler out of harm's way. Swooping hawks can sky leap and move 18" because they're lightning-quick space elves equipped with graceful alien technology instead of clunky space marines with rockets strapped to their backs.
Eldar, and aspect warriors especially, feel unique and alien. Whatever balance issues our book might have, I really enjoy how well our units capture the feel of their fluff (for the most part). Some rules need to be toned down, and some units could stand to go up a few points, but I'd rather look for solutions that don't sacrifice the army's flavor or unique feel. Plus, I'm a sucker for special rules. I know some people would rather see 90% of the special rules out there scrapped for the sake of simplifying things, but I kind of love mechanics that reward you for playing X instead of Y.
You and me both. They're fluffy. They're useful. For the most part they're not overpowered. Just a little bit of balancing would be infinitely preferable to just cutting them entirely.
I'll also agree with the keeping of special rules to make the world more varied. Having the bare rules on free-to-download dataslates would cut the main requirement for simplification (needing to buy half a dozen books to get the rules to play your army).
Keep the fun, fluffy special rules. More of them if anything, to give each army its own unique feel just make them easier to get hold of, and searchable
This. Sure, S5 can't touch AV12 while S6 can, but I'll only ever shoot S6 at AV 12 if it's the only option I have available. Especially when you consider how many AV12 targets have jink. That said, I like the idea of scatter lasers going down to S5. It fits the "machinegun" niche they're going for better, and it scales nicely with shuriken cannons and star cannons. Number of shots versus quality of shots.
S6 is good in general, but it's only really a problem when you can spam the snot out of it. Thus why no one complains about multilasers on chimeras.
Yeah I'd support a nerf to S5. It's already got a range bonus over Shuricannons. That and the rate of fire is enough to balance it against S6 and bladestorm for the same points. Then , with Starcannons as S7 and AP2 but only 2 shots that's a nice little balancing act between the 3 main eldar big guns.
Then give the Vyper all the current weapon options. The only other wargear option that would remain is the Holo-Field. While that's usually a vehicle option, there's no reason - fluff or crunch - why it can't be used on something with T instead of AV. And it's not like 15 points for a 5+ invulnerable save on something with 3+ armor and Jink is unbalancing. (If anything it's mildly overcosted.)
Martel732 wrote: Okay, well, I'll continue to avoid AP4 as much as I can, due to it not being very efficacious and I guess you can load up on it and see how that goes for you. I'll also continue to prefer the scatterlaser going away from any Imperial heavy weapon other than a grav cannon.
Changing the scatbike to 4+ armor would provide an actual meaningful unit with 4+ armor other than Wulfen. Which would make your claims more true.
And I'll change my statement to non-anecdotes: scatterlasers MASSACRE AV 12 and less in a general sense. You and I don't need to see it. Each scatterlaser removes 0.44 hps. Seven scatterlasers equals dead vehicle.
So Fire Warriors, half the Aspects, Carapace-armoured Guardsmen, Necron Warriors, and Scouts just don't exist?
Seven Scatter Lasers kill an AV12 vehicle. Oh my god. OP, pls nerf. A hundred and eighty nine points of scatterbikes can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
What other heavy weapons do you suppose can one-round a Chimera if you point seven of them at it?
(Scatterbikes are powerful, but they're really not anti-armour tools.)
Twice that many bikes can also one round an ik. The fact that they go both ways means they always have a target. That should cost 20 pts, imo.
Martel732 wrote: Okay, well, I'll continue to avoid AP4 as much as I can, due to it not being very efficacious and I guess you can load up on it and see how that goes for you. I'll also continue to prefer the scatterlaser going away from any Imperial heavy weapon other than a grav cannon.
Changing the scatbike to 4+ armor would provide an actual meaningful unit with 4+ armor other than Wulfen. Which would make your claims more true.
And I'll change my statement to non-anecdotes: scatterlasers MASSACRE AV 12 and less in a general sense. You and I don't need to see it. Each scatterlaser removes 0.44 hps. Seven scatterlasers equals dead vehicle.
So Fire Warriors, half the Aspects, Carapace-armoured Guardsmen, Necron Warriors, and Scouts just don't exist?
Seven Scatter Lasers kill an AV12 vehicle. Oh my god. OP, pls nerf. A hundred and eighty nine points of scatterbikes can one-round a sixty-five point Chimera outside of cover.
What other heavy weapons do you suppose can one-round a Chimera if you point seven of them at it?
(Scatterbikes are powerful, but they're really not anti-armour tools.)
Twice that many bikes can also one round an ik. The fact that they go both ways means they always have a target. That should cost 20 pts, imo.
...Try 4x as many (in the rear arc only). Scatterbikes don't ignore Invulnerable saves yet. Is 756 too many to be able to one-round an IK from the back? Is the 1708pts worth of jetbikes (and eight hundred dollars) you'd need to one-round an IK if upgrade guns were dropped to one per three too cheap?
Seriously, people. Scatterbikes are powerful. They're not a *bleep*ing instant-death-laser that hard-counters all possible targets.
You're not inspiring confidence here. Knights have AV 12 sides as well, and the ion shield is usually on the front trying to fend off the incoming D weapons. Or lances. Or some other Eldar nastiness.
Obviously AV 13 is safe, but AV 13 is relatively rare, and cost effective AV 13 is almost non-existent.
Scatter lasers at str5 is probably the best compromise that limits its anti-AV potential (it can no longer touch Knight or kill a Dread from the front/side). It also helps make the Shuricannon a bit more appealing and allows the Scatter laser to not need a points increase as its about as effective as the Shuricannon.
Combine this with Bladestorm only having AP3 on a '6' and the Scatter laser, Shuricannon and Star cannon are nicely balanced between each other and all seem to fill a purpose.
If you also make the Spiders' Deathspinner only Str5, suddenly the Shuricannon really becomes more appealing as the only Str6 weapon that can be taken en mass (since Star cannons are still pretty limited).
and BTW, making Scatter lasers Str5 is also the easiest to Errata since points cost is varied from platform to platform (hint, hint, GW!). Eldar Players would be fine with it and it would make the haters hate less.
Galef wrote: Scatter lasers at str5 is probably the best compromise that limits its anti-AV potential (it can no longer touch Knight or kill a Dread from the front/side). It also helps make the Shuricannon a bit more appealing and allows the Scatter laser to not need a points increase as its about as effective as the Shuricannon.
Combine this with Bladestorm only having AP3 on a '6' and the Scatter laser, Shuricannon and Star cannon are nicely balanced between each other and all seem to fill a purpose.
If you also make the Spiders' Deathspinner only Str5, suddenly the Shuricannon really becomes more appealing as the only Str6 weapon that can be taken en mass (since Star cannons are still pretty limited).
and BTW, making Scatter lasers Str5 is also the easiest to Errata since points cost is varied from platform to platform (hint, hint, GW!). Eldar Players would be fine with it and it would make the haters hate less.
-
I'd be fine with this. Especially given my opinion on St 5 vs St 6, which I stand by.
You're not inspiring confidence here. Knights have AV 12 sides as well, and the ion shield is usually on the front trying to fend off the incoming D weapons. Or lances. Or some other Eldar nastiness.
Obviously AV 13 is safe, but AV 13 is relatively rare, and cost effective AV 13 is almost non-existent.
Cool. So is 854pts (14 scatterbikes with 28 more to fill out the minimum squad sizes, in an imaginary world where scatter lasers are one gun per three) and an extra 300+pts for the D-weapon to draw out the ion shield in another arc still too cheap for enough guns to one-round a Knight? Should you be paying 994pts plus the D-weapon instead of 854pts plus the D-weapon to one-round a four hundred point model?
Cutting guns to one-per-three is a 34pt price hike to each scatterbike. Making it a 44pt price hike instead is unnecessary and irrelevant.
(That said if three scatterbikes with one gun were 61pts Harlequin jetbikes (50pts for one shuriken cannon with two wounds) start to look a bit less grotesquely overpriced.)
Automatically Appended Next Post: (Point of comparison: 291pts of Sternguard or Deathwatch with combi-meltas in a pod will kill an Imperial Knight in one round. According to Martel 1,154pts is too cheap for a generalist unit that'd to the same thing.)
I'm not talking about the 1 gun per 3 paradigm. You are. If only the Eldar paid 1,154 to kill anything.
I'm also not sure where you are getting the 291 for sternguard, but there is a big difference between suiciding sternguard against an ideal target and having scatbikes nuke it down from 36" away and live to keep nuking more units.
I tihnk the thing about scatbikes is less their raw damage potential, more their massive flexibility that's unbalancing.
They can move 12" normally, shoot 4 S6 shots at 36", have a 3+ save, can Jink, have Battle Focus, can turbo-boost, are obsec and can be taken in units of 3 with no mandatory sarge.
All for a relatively hefty points cost per model, but evidently it's not quite balanced enough as it's pretty iffy to choose something that's not scatbikes/cannonbikes in competitive play.
Rather than recosting, just knock those attributes down a peg. Even if they're significantly less killy with 1 S/L per 3, they've still got all the rest of the things they can do.
Of course, I'm assuming all these little nerfs will be applied equally to the other top tier armies (and the lowest tier ones buffed) so they all meet in the middle somewhere. Just swapping one top codex for a different one isn't really getting anywhere.
Ynneadwraith wrote: I tihnk the thing about scatbikes is less their raw damage potential, more their massive flexibility that's unbalancing.
They can move 12" normally, shoot 4 S6 shots at 36", have a 3+ save, can Jink, have Battle Focus, can turbo-boost, are obsec and can be taken in units of 3 with no mandatory sarge.
All for a relatively hefty points cost per model, but evidently it's not quite balanced enough as it's pretty iffy to choose something that's not scatbikes/cannonbikes in competitive play.
Rather than recosting, just knock those attributes down a peg. Even if they're significantly less killy with 1 S/L per 3, they've still got all the rest of the things they can do.
Of course, I'm assuming all these little nerfs will be applied equally to the other top tier armies (and the lowest tier ones buffed) so they all meet in the middle somewhere. Just swapping one top codex for a different one isn't really getting anywhere.
You start with the most aggregious units/weapons.
If the scatbikes don't table me in three turns, I deal with jink, turbo boost, etc.
Often I see reasonable changes (be they nerfs or buffs) rejected because $OTHER_FACTION still has problems. It's a cold day in hell that I ever see a change proposed as "this is the one change that will make the entire system perfect, no others are required". The demand for a Grand Unified Fix or nothing at all seems a bit unreasonable to me.
I don't like the hacksaw approach, either. Too many changes at once is bad. I prefer to appropriately cost the scatterlaser for 7th ed, but 4+ armor might do the trick.
The WK just needs a points boost. Done.
Warp spiders need a hefty points hike or to lose some kind of battlefield efficacy.
Martel732 wrote: I'm not talking about the 1 gun per 3 paradigm. You are. If only the Eldar paid 1,154 to kill anything.
I'm also not sure where you are getting the 291 for sternguard, but there is a big difference between suiciding sternguard against an ideal target and having scatbikes nuke it down from 36" away and live to keep nuking more units.
You're trying to put forth a change that makes less sense and leaves Scatterbikes much more powerful, on the basis that the cost of the gun in a vacuum is somehow relevant to the actual problem. I'm trying to point out that one-gun-in-three is enough to take them from a mediocre anti-armour weapon to an incredibly bad anti-armour weapon. You're trying to claim that they were a good anti-armour weapon in the first place, which is patently absurd.
It's not absurd. Everything AV 12 and less is vulnerable. That's a LOT of units. Yes, it takes a lot of shots to kill AV 12, but scatterbikes GET lots of shots because of range and ROF.
The scatterlaser is absolutely miscosted. It's miscosted on the bikes. It's miscosted on WK, it's miscosted on wave serpents, it's miscosted everywhere in that book. Making an Eldar list pay 200 pts more for their 20 scatterlasers will fix a lot.
Martel732 wrote: It's not absurd. Everything AV 12 and less is vulnerable. That's a LOT of units. Yes, it takes a lot of shots to kill AV 12, but scatterbikes GET lots of shots because of range and ROF.
The scatterlaser is absolutely miscosted. It's miscosted on the bikes. It's miscosted on WK, it's miscosted on wave serpents, it's miscosted everywhere in that book. Making an Eldar list pay 200 pts more for their 20 scatterlasers will fix a lot.
You're the one who wants a scatter laser on a bike to cost 37pts instead of 61pts.
Martel732 wrote: It's not absurd. Everything AV 12 and less is vulnerable. That's a LOT of units. Yes, it takes a lot of shots to kill AV 12, but scatterbikes GET lots of shots because of range and ROF.
The scatterlaser is absolutely miscosted. It's miscosted on the bikes. It's miscosted on WK, it's miscosted on wave serpents, it's miscosted everywhere in that book. Making an Eldar list pay 200 pts more for their 20 scatterlasers will fix a lot.
You're the one who wants a scatter laser on a bike to cost 37pts instead of 61pts.
That's because I think the root problem is the scatterlaser, not the jetbike. Maybe the shuricannon needs a 5pt boost as well.
We can go back to the 1 per 3 thing, but that scraps a lot of models at this point. I'd rather just make them pay. I'm usually in favor of more options balanced by cost than arbitrary restrictions.
Martel732 wrote: It's not absurd. Everything AV 12 and less is vulnerable. That's a LOT of units. Yes, it takes a lot of shots to kill AV 12, but scatterbikes GET lots of shots because of range and ROF.
The scatterlaser is absolutely miscosted. It's miscosted on the bikes. It's miscosted on WK, it's miscosted on wave serpents, it's miscosted everywhere in that book. Making an Eldar list pay 200 pts more for their 20 scatterlasers will fix a lot.
You're the one who wants a scatter laser on a bike to cost 37pts instead of 61pts.
That's because I think the root problem is the scatterlaser, not the jetbike. Maybe the shuricannon needs a 5pt boost as well.
We can go back to the 1 per 3 thing, but that scraps a lot of models at this point. I'd rather just make them pay. I'm usually in favor of more options balanced by cost than arbitrary restrictions.
The fundamental problem is the 100% gun density, not the cost of the gun in a vacuum. So long as everyone else in the game has to take tax models to field heavy weapons and Jetbikes don't they will remain too powerful.
(I know I magnetized my Jetbikes' guns, but open letter to the rest of the Eldar community, if you've glued in scatter lasers on enough jetbikes that a 1-per-3 ruling would make it an obnoxious financial burden to buy enough jetbikes to pad out your squads, then it serves you right.)
AnomanderRake wrote: , but open letter to the rest of the Eldar community, if you've glued in scatter lasers on enough jetbikes that a 1-per-3 ruling would make it an obnoxious financial burden to buy enough jetbikes to pad out your squads, then it serves you right.
And this is where you lose a bit of my respect. GW created the kit with options for each bike to take a heavy weapon and thusly made the instructions to do so, Players who have purchased the new kit and put Scatterlasers on every bike, were instructed to do so by the kit itself. Let's not punish the player for a modeling choice that was not only supported by GW, but encouraged. And this comes from a player who actually has less than half his bikes modeled with Scatters.
The ONLY way to acceptably make Scatter lasers a 1-n-3 choice again is to create 2 new units: One Troop unit with 1-n-3 and one Fast Attack that can take all heavies that validates the kit. This thankfully will not happen. The ship has sailed on the 1-n-3 option because the kit exists. What we need to do is either bump the cost of Scatters as Martel suggests (which is fair, but I am not a fan of) or make the Scatter laser less powerful by reducing its Str to 5. Str5 firmly keeps the Scatter laser as an anti-infantry weapon and almost eliminates its anti-AV potential. It also creates a much better internal balance between the Shuricannon & Star Cannon.
While Martel and I rarely agree on Eldar (he favors price hikes, while I prefer stat/rule nerfs) we both agree that the 1-n-3 weapon loadout is not the best answer
Nerfing to Str 5 works as well Id say. I was just trying to avoid such a nerf. I know all too well the futility of Str 5 in 7th ed. When you're praying for 6's against rhinos, you are firmly out of the effective anti-tank regime. We can even give it AP4 for all I care. Although guardsman will care. There is something very mechanically wrong when S6 AP 6 is that much better than S5 AP 4.
AnomanderRake wrote: , but open letter to the rest of the Eldar community, if you've glued in scatter lasers on enough jetbikes that a 1-per-3 ruling would make it an obnoxious financial burden to buy enough jetbikes to pad out your squads, then it serves you right.
And this is where you lose a bit of my respect. GW created the kit with options for each bike to take a heavy weapon and thusly made the instructions to do so, Players who have purchased the new kit and put Scatterlasers on every bike, were instructed to do so by the kit itself. Let's not punish the player for a modeling choice that was not only supported by GW, but encouraged.
And this comes from a player who actually has less than half his bikes modeled with Scatters.
The ONLY way to acceptably make Scatter lasers a 1-n-3 choice again is to create 2 new units: One Troop unit with 1-n-3 and one Fast Attack that can take all heavies that validates the kit.
This thankfully will not happen. The ship has sailed on the 1-n-3 option because the kit exists. What we need to do is either bump the cost of Scatters as Martel suggests (which is fair, but I am not a fan of) or make the Scatter laser less powerful by reducing its Str to 5.
Str5 firmly keeps the Scatter laser as an anti-infantry weapon and almost eliminates its anti-AV potential. It also creates a much better internal balance between the Shuricannon & Star Cannon.
While Martel and I rarely agree on Eldar (he favors price hikes, while I prefer stat/rule nerfs) we both agree that the 1-n-3 weapon loadout is not the best answer
-
And again. The fact that GW shipped the kit with that many weapons doesn't reflect what they ought to be able to do in the game any more than the fact that they ship War Walkers with ten guns means that they should be able to take ten guns.
GW deletes options, punishes players for building the kits as shipped, punishes players for buying the wrong kits in the first place, and writes counterintuitive sets of restrictions all the time. I don't see how capping upgrade guns on Jetbikes is any different from taking peoples' 5e GK armies and nerfing the PAGK into unusability, or rewriting the squad size requirements on Henchmen warbands, or deleting army-wide strategy-enabling characters from the DE book.
It isn't ideal for the people who have built lots of scatterbikes, no, but choosing to ignore the basic problem in favour of a partial band-aid patch is why 40k gets rules bloat and awful balance decisions in the first place. Attempting to not rock peoples' armies too much is why releasing ever more powerful tools to counter the last set of powerful tools has become GW's basic release model.
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
The wave serpent can move 12" and fire two guns at full BS, has the serpent shield, and AV 12 sides AND the ability to jink.
The Chimera has to remain immobile to fire two guns effectively. That's a massive limitation. And the weapons are strictly inferior.
I'm of the view that the scatterlaser is a problem on every platform. It's performance to cost ratio is crazy. It's been an overpowered weapon for a long, long time. Savvy Eldar players were able to leverage this weapon's brokenness to be mediocre in 5th, when everything else was stacked against them.
(On War Walkers specifically: A Land Speeder with an assault cannon is 65pts, has four S6/AP4/Rending shots, three S5/AP4 shots, can Jink, can Deep Strike, can move 12" and fire one gun, can turbo-boost, and has AV10 and two hull points. A War Walker with two scatter lasers is 60pts, has eight S6/AP- shots, can't Jink, has a built-in 5++, can't Deep Stirke, can walk 6" and fire both guns, is Open-Topped, and has AV10 and two hull points. If you're operating under the delusion those two units aren't broadly comparable you're grossly overvaluing the S5 to S6 hop, and grossly undervaluing AP4, Rending, Jink, and the ability to move more than 6" a turn.)
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
Wave Serpents can get twin-linked Scatter Lasers.
Chimeras get a hull mounted(read: unable to target beyond a fixed arc) Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer, a turret mounted Heavy Bolter, Heavy Flamer, or Multi-Laser(Scatter Laser), and then they get two Lasgun(S3 AP- Rapid Fire with a 24" range) Arrays that have a fixed targeting arc and require troops to be mounted within in order to fire them.
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
The wave serpent can move 12" and fire two guns at full BS, has the serpent shield, and AV 12 sides AND the ability to jink.
The Chimera has to remain immobile to fire two guns effectively. That's a massive limitation. And the weapons are strictly inferior.
I'm of the view that the scatterlaser is a problem on every platform. It's performance to cost ratio is crazy. It's been an overpowered weapon for a long, long time. Savvy Eldar players were able to leverage this weapon's brokenness to be mediocre in 5th, when everything else was stacked against them.
The Wave Serpent can move 6" and fire two guns at full BS. It hasn't been able to move 12" and fire both guns since 4th when 'defensive weapon' meant S6 and below.
It's also slightly shorter-ranged than the Chimera and is 60pts more expensive if you want comparable firepower. And can't get camo netting. And has no fire points.
You've been impressively inconsistent on whether hull-pointing out vehicles is more relevant than being able to one-shot them, and on whether the hop from 24" range to 36" range is relevant or not. If you'd like to argue that a Wave Serpent is better than one Chimera go ahead. It is. Woo. Yay. Cool. Now argue that the Wave Serpent is better than the two Chimeras it costs as much as. Or possibly the Chimera and the heavy weapon teams that sit inside it and give it 2x the firepower instead of equivalent firepower.
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
Wave Serpents can get twin-linked Scatter Lasers.
Chimeras get a hull mounted(read: unable to target beyond a fixed arc) Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer, a turret mounted Heavy Bolter, Heavy Flamer, or Multi-Laser(Scatter Laser), and then they get two Lasgun(S3 AP- Rapid Fire with a 24" range) Arrays that have a fixed targeting arc and require troops to be mounted within in order to fire them.
You really want to compare the two?
I want to compare two Chimeras (130pts) to one Wave Serpent with a twin-linked scatter laser and a shuriken cannon (125pts). If you want to argue that a 125pt vehicle needs a nerf because it's better than a 65pt vehicle then I can't help you.
AnomanderRake wrote: (On War Walkers specifically: A Land Speeder with an assault cannon is 65pts, has four S6/AP4/Rending shots, three S5/AP4 shots, can Jink, can Deep Strike, can move 12" and fire one gun, can turbo-boost, and has AV10 and two hull points. A War Walker with two scatter lasers is 60pts, has eight S6/AP- shots, can't Jink, has a built-in 5++, can't Deep Stirke, can walk 6" and fire both guns, is Open-Topped, and has AV10 and two hull points. If you're operating under the delusion those two units aren't broadly comparable you're grossly overvaluing the S5 to S6 hop, and grossly undervaluing AP4, Rending, Jink, and the ability to move more than 6" a turn.)
We can agree to disagree. 5++ is much better than jinking for non-Ravenwing. AP4 is garbage, and I have 16 years of playing under the AP system to back this opinion up. Warwalkers have battle focus, so they can also move more than 6". This leaves rending. Four rending shots aren't enough to rely on, and so I basically discount it. Rending, like AP 4, is also neutered significantly by cover. Mass wounds can be relied upon statistically speaking.
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
The wave serpent can move 12" and fire two guns at full BS, has the serpent shield, and AV 12 sides AND the ability to jink.
The Chimera has to remain immobile to fire two guns effectively. That's a massive limitation. And the weapons are strictly inferior.
I'm of the view that the scatterlaser is a problem on every platform. It's performance to cost ratio is crazy. It's been an overpowered weapon for a long, long time. Savvy Eldar players were able to leverage this weapon's brokenness to be mediocre in 5th, when everything else was stacked against them.
The Wave Serpent can move 6" and fire two guns at full BS. It hasn't been able to move 12" and fire both guns since 4th when 'defensive weapon' meant S6 and below.
It's also slightly shorter-ranged than the Chimera and is 60pts more expensive if you want comparable firepower. And can't get camo netting. And has no fire points.
Oh noes, Chimeras get camo netting!
What can Wave Serpents get again for survival tricks? And let's not forget about Jinking, right?
You've been impressively inconsistent on whether hull-pointing out vehicles is more relevant than being able to one-shot them, and on whether the hop from 24" range to 36" range is relevant or not. If you'd like to argue that a Wave Serpent is better than one Chimera go ahead. It is. Woo. Yay. Cool. Now argue that the Wave Serpent is better than the two Chimeras it costs as much as. Or possibly the Chimera and the heavy weapon teams that sit inside it and give it 2x the firepower instead of equivalent firepower.
In order for you to have more than one Heavy Weapon Team sitting inside a Chimera, you need to be placing a Heavy Weapons Squad which purchased a Chimera as a Dedicated Transport(which they can't do, and Chimeras aren't Fast Attack choices) inside.
Anyways, humoring your ill-informed comparison:
That means you have placed a unit taking 6 spots(Heavy Weapon Teams are Bulky) into a vehicle where only two of those will be able to take advantage of the Firing Point.
You then have one model remaining that can fire the Lasgun Array...which means a single S3 AP- shot.
Martel732 wrote: 1 per 3 doesn't address the scatterlaser on platforms such as the warwalker. Appropriately costing the scatterlaser does.
...Because the scatterlaser on other platforms is dramatically less of a problem, perhaps? If a Wave Serpent's scatterlaser is that much of an issue to you I'd hate to see your views on the Chimera (half the price, twice the guns. GG.).
Wave Serpents can get twin-linked Scatter Lasers.
Chimeras get a hull mounted(read: unable to target beyond a fixed arc) Heavy Bolter or Heavy Flamer, a turret mounted Heavy Bolter, Heavy Flamer, or Multi-Laser(Scatter Laser), and then they get two Lasgun(S3 AP- Rapid Fire with a 24" range) Arrays that have a fixed targeting arc and require troops to be mounted within in order to fire them.
You really want to compare the two?
I want to compare two Chimeras (130pts) to one Wave Serpent with a twin-linked scatter laser and a shuriken cannon (125pts). If you want to argue that a 120pt vehicle needs a nerf because it's better than a 65pt vehicle then I can't help you.
So your comparison is two barebones Chimeras(read: no Camo Netting, which is a 15 point upgrade, or any upgrades of any kind...not sure why you were complaining about Camo Netting anyways since it is a simple +1 to a Cover Save, even out in the open.) versus a Wave Serpent with an upgraded weapon option.
In any regards, I don't think you quite grasp the reason why I made the statement I did. The thing you're complaining about("half the price, twice the guns") is not strictly true.
A Chimera is only a Dedicated Transport. The IG book has no provision for them to be taken as a Fast Attack choice.
S 6/7 are the panacea strengths in 7th ed. Unfortunately for the Imperium, the auto cannon has half the shots and comes on drastically inferior platforms.
AnomanderRake wrote: (On War Walkers specifically: A Land Speeder with an assault cannon is 65pts, has four S6/AP4/Rending shots, three S5/AP4 shots, can Jink, can Deep Strike, can move 12" and fire one gun, can turbo-boost, and has AV10 and two hull points. A War Walker with two scatter lasers is 60pts, has eight S6/AP- shots, can't Jink, has a built-in 5++, can't Deep Stirke, can walk 6" and fire both guns, is Open-Topped, and has AV10 and two hull points. If you're operating under the delusion those two units aren't broadly comparable you're grossly overvaluing the S5 to S6 hop, and grossly undervaluing AP4, Rending, Jink, and the ability to move more than 6" a turn.)
We can agree to disagree. 5++ is much better than jinking for non-Ravenwing. AP4 is garbage, and I have 16 years of playing under the AP system to back this opinion up. Warwalkers have battle focus, so they can also move more than 6". This leaves rending. Four rending shots aren't enough to rely on, and so I basically discount it. Rending, like AP 4, is also neutered significantly by cover. Mass wounds can be relied upon statistically speaking.
So if we take your axiomatic/anecdotal insistence built up over sixten years of playing that AP4 and Rending are irrelevant the Scatter Laser is more powerful than your shooting. If we take my axiomatic/anecdotal insistence built up over twelve years of playing that AP4 and Rending are very relevant the Scatter Laser is roughly comparable to your shooting.
I'm sorry, but this looks to me like you're suggesting that the mediocre units in the Eldar army are overpowered because there exist matchups (completely cover/Invul-dependent armies with AV11 vehicles) in which they're better than the equivalent Imperial shooting, despite the fact that they're equivalent to or worse than the equivalent Imperial shooting against pretty much everything else.
The problem is Scatterbikes specifically, not the scatter laser in general. Eldar vehicles are dramatically more expensive than their Imperial equivalents, and frequently dramatically underarmed and/or squishier for the price; they're kept functional by their effective mid-power guns and the power of the stuff they can haul around. The existence of the scatter laser doesn't override the fact that the Eldar are paying 2-3x as much as the Imperium for their transports, don't have ordnance, and can't spam anything to even a fraction of the same level.
The only Eldar vehicles that are actually overpowered and desperately in need of nerfing rather than merely somewhere between pretty good (the War Walker) and awful (the Firestorm) are the Warp Hunter and the Lynx, and both of those only because they happen to haul underpriced D-weapons around.
What can Wave Serpents get again for survival tricks? And let's not forget about Jinking, right?
My ability to pay 15pts for a 5++ or jink for a 4+ cover (negating all the advantages of my slightly superior firepower) are an improvement over your ability to sit behind a dirt-cheap Aegis line and have a 3+ cover save that doesn't inhibit your firepower?
In order for you to have more than one Heavy Weapon Team sitting inside a Chimera, you need to be placing a Heavy Weapons Squad which purchased a Chimera as a Dedicated Transport(which they can't do, and Chimeras aren't Fast Attack choices) inside.
Anyways, humoring your ill-informed comparison:
That means you have placed a unit taking 6 spots(Heavy Weapon Teams are Bulky) into a vehicle where only two of those will be able to take advantage of the Firing Point.
You then have one model remaining that can fire the Lasgun Array...which means a single S3 AP- shot.
Will concede I may be overestimating the Chimera's utility as a gun-bunker for the Guard given that I have more live play experience with Inquisitorial Chimeras (which can have Joakero (lascannons) and Gun-Servitors inside pretty easily).
That said I put it to you that having access to a transport with fire points for squads with special weapons is a massive upgrade over having squads with special weapons and no open-topped/fire-point transports (unless I want to ally in the worst Codex in the game) to put them in.
So your comparison is two barebones Chimeras(read: no Camo Netting, which is a 15 point upgrade, or any upgrades of any kind...not sure why you were complaining about Camo Netting anyways since it is a simple +1 to a Cover Save, even out in the open.) versus a Wave Serpent with an upgraded weapon option.
In any regards, I don't think you quite grasp the reason why I made the statement I did. The thing you're complaining about("half the price, twice the guns") is not strictly true.
A Chimera is only a Dedicated Transport. The IG book has no provision for them to be taken as a Fast Attack choice.
I attempted to construct an environment in which the Wave Serpent was upgraded until it had armament comparable to the Chimera's and checked how many Chimeras' worth of points it'd be. If you'd rather compare them in a vacuum (the Chimera has seven S5-6 shots at 36" range, the Wave Serpent has three S6 shots at 24" range and two S4 shots at 12" range) then you're going to have to explain to me why 45pts isn't a fair price for a more durable vehicle with worse guns and no fire points.
As far as the 'only a Dedicated Transport' v. Fast Attack choice question that may be the most irrelevant part of this comparison. A Guard CAD can take a theoretical 50 Chimeras versus a theoretical 15 Wave Serpents. Three Wave Serpents per detachment can be taken without units, the rest need a 70-150pt unit to haul around. No Chimeras can be taken without units, the rest need a 50-100ish-pt unit to haul around. Woo.
(No, seriously, why would you ever, ever take a Wave Serpent as a Fast Attack choice? Vypers (one of the worst units in the Codex, which makes them on the border between mediocre and bad by the standards of most armies) are better at toting heavy weapons in Fast Attack, War Walkers are better at toting heavy weapons more generally, Warp Spiders, the aircraft, and Swooping Hawks are better at being powerful-to-OP in Fast Attack, there are zero units in the Codex or any allied Codex that want to ride in a Wave Serpent and don't either have one as a Dedicated Transport or have a better transport in their own book, and Shining Spears are better at being cool in Fast Attack. Wave Serpents' ability to be taken as a Fast Attack choice is the moral equivalent of Chimeras' Amphibious rule; it's technically there, but it's so irrelevant it may as well not be there.)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: "very relevant the Scatter Laser is roughly comparable to your shooting. "
I already showed how its not even close, really.
You're operating under the assumption AP4 and Rending are irrelevant. I'm operating under the assumption that AP4 and Rending are relevant. Until either of us chooses to accept that the other person's math and anecdotal logic is enough to override our own this isn't going to change.
That said I will ask when the last time you saw Mechdar perform competitively was. I suspect it was before 7th's nerfs to scatter lasers, the Serpent Shield, and Jink, but if you've got a more recent one I'd love to hear it.
No one would use mechdar over WK/scatbike/warpspider. I agree on this. However, that doesn't stop other Eldar units equipped with scatterlasers from overperforming for their price point.
AP4 is irrelevant in any quantity. I'm not budging on this. Cover is too easy to get and there is too much 3+/2+ armor in the game. AP 4 is non-benefit. It's always better in the general case to have more shots and more strength. 4+ armor units with no cover is just way too rare. If we have all vehicles a 4+ armor save, things change quickly.
Rending is only truly useful in high volume. A single turn of misfortune in an IG list can generate rending equal to all the rending a marine list can pump out over a game. Assault cannons, due to cost, range, and platform do not provide a significant amount of rending imo. If you can show me a list where the Imperium can field statistically relevant amount of rending via assault cannon AND have the list be good in a general sense, I might budge on this. But as it stands, I consider the assault cannon trash due to these factors.
Martel732 wrote: No one would use mechdar over WK/scatbike/warpspider. I agree on this. However, that doesn't stop other Eldar units equipped with scatterlasers from overperforming for their price point.
AP4 is irrelevant in any quantity. I'm not budging on this. Cover is too easy to get and there is too much 3+/2+ armor in the game.
Rending is only truly useful in high volume. A single turn of misfortune in an IG list can generate rending equal to all the rending a marine list can pump out over a game. Assault cannons, due to cost, range, and platform do not provide a significant amount of rending imo.
Okay. I can see I'm not getting anywhere. Next question. If the problem with the scatter laser is the fact that a four-shot S6 weapon exists for 10pts in the first place are you going to propose making Valkyries and Chimeras 10pts more expensive? They've got the same gun.
Supplemental question: Why is an Eldar Codex where a Scatter Laser War Walker costs 80pts and a Jetbike Scatter Laser costs 37pts prefereable to you than an Eldar Codex where a Scatter Laser War Walker costs 60pts and a Jetbike Scatter Laser costs 61pts? Why is keeping the Troops unit's price-per-gun performance equivalent to the Heavy Support unit's a positive thing?
This whole discussion looks to me like you're asserting that the Codex as a whole is underpriced because there exist units within it that are underpriced, ignoring the fact that the internal balance of the book is actually pretty bad. There are mediocre and bad units in the book, the Eldar aren't all sunshine and rainbows. If you want to attack scatterbikes, D-weapons, and Wraithknights that's all well and good and I'm absolutely in favour of that. If you want to start going after War Walkers and Wave Serpents you've wandered out of "reasonable Eldar nerfs" territory and into "this Codex must be made nonfunctional in vengeance for the OPness of scatterbikes" territory. Taking away the OP units is reasonable. Leaving the OP units in place while nerfing everything else is dumb.
If you want to complain that the Eldar get to do certain things better than the Imperium more generally I could start to ask questions about 2+ armour, Storm Shields, AV13+, Ordnance, Drop Pods, S/T 4, Assault Vehicles, melee characters that don't exist just to be turned into a bloody pulp, Eternal Warrior, special weapons spread out amongst multiple squads instead of required to be clustered together in single uniformly-armed squads, 35pt transports, and Fire Points.
What can Wave Serpents get again for survival tricks? And let's not forget about Jinking, right?
My ability to pay 15pts for a 5++ or jink for a 4+ cover (negating all the advantages of my slightly superior firepower) are an improvement over your ability to sit behind a dirt-cheap Aegis line and have a 3+ cover save that doesn't inhibit your firepower?
A 5++ Invulnerable Save is a save that can't be negated by any weapon barring D with a lucky roll.
A Wave Serpent Jinking gets you almost as high of a cover save as a Chimera taking a 15 point upgrade(Camo Netting) and parked behind a 50 point Fortification.
Also, it's highly entertaining that we've gone from "Chimera bring as much firepower as a Wave Serpent and can get Camo Netting, so why are Wave Serpents ridiculous?" to "Chimera with Camo Netting behind Aegis Lines don't suffer a penalty to their firepower for their survival traits!"
Because they actually do suffer a penalty. It's called "They have to sit there and can be hit from behind".
In order for you to have more than one Heavy Weapon Team sitting inside a Chimera, you need to be placing a Heavy Weapons Squad which purchased a Chimera as a Dedicated Transport(which they can't do, and Chimeras aren't Fast Attack choices) inside.
Anyways, humoring your ill-informed comparison:
That means you have placed a unit taking 6 spots(Heavy Weapon Teams are Bulky) into a vehicle where only two of those will be able to take advantage of the Firing Point.
You then have one model remaining that can fire the Lasgun Array...which means a single S3 AP- shot.
Will concede I may be overestimating the Chimera's utility as a gun-bunker for the Guard given that I have more live play experience with Inquisitorial Chimeras (which can have Joakero (lascannons) and Gun-Servitors inside pretty easily).
That said I put it to you that having access to a transport with fire points for squads with special weapons is a massive upgrade over having squads with special weapons and no open-topped/fire-point transports (unless I want to ally in the worst Codex in the game) to put them in.
A single special weapon in a standard Infantry Squad or 3 Special Weapons in a Veteran Squad.
Two models can fire out of the top hatch of a Chimera.
So your comparison is two barebones Chimeras(read: no Camo Netting, which is a 15 point upgrade, or any upgrades of any kind...not sure why you were complaining about Camo Netting anyways since it is a simple +1 to a Cover Save, even out in the open.) versus a Wave Serpent with an upgraded weapon option.
In any regards, I don't think you quite grasp the reason why I made the statement I did. The thing you're complaining about("half the price, twice the guns") is not strictly true.
A Chimera is only a Dedicated Transport. The IG book has no provision for them to be taken as a Fast Attack choice.
I attempted to construct an environment in which the Wave Serpent was upgraded until it had armament comparable to the Chimera's and checked how many Chimeras' worth of points it'd be. If you'd rather compare them in a vacuum (the Chimera has seven S5-6 shots at 36" range, the Wave Serpent has three S6 shots at 24" range and two S4 shots at 12" range) then you're going to have to explain to me why 45pts isn't a fair price for a more durable vehicle with worse guns and no fire points.
A Chimera has 3 shots with a Multi-laser(S6 AP6) and 3 with a Heavy Bolter(S5 AP4). Not sure where you're getting 7 shots from.
Additionally, as I mentioned earlier, the Heavy Bolter is a hull mounted weapon. That means you have a 45 degree 'slice' that it can fire within versus the 360 of the turret.
As far as the 'only a Dedicated Transport' v. Fast Attack choice question that may be the most irrelevant part of this comparison. A Guard CAD can take a theoretical 50 Chimeras versus a theoretical 15 Wave Serpents. Three Wave Serpents per detachment can be taken without units, the rest need a 70-150pt unit to haul around. No Chimeras can be taken without units, the rest need a 50-100ish-pt unit to haul around. Woo.
It's actually exceedingly relevant, because there are comparatively few units within the Imperial Guard book that can take Chimeras. And since they are strictly Dedicated Transports, it means that none of the units that would really excel with Gun Bunkering(Special Weapon Squads and Heavy Weapon Squads) do not even have access to such things.
(No, seriously, why would you ever, ever take a Wave Serpent as a Fast Attack choice? Vypers (one of the worst units in the Codex, which makes them on the border between mediocre and bad by the standards of most armies) are better at toting heavy weapons in Fast Attack, War Walkers are better at toting heavy weapons more generally, Warp Spiders, the aircraft, and Swooping Hawks are better at being powerful-to-OP in Fast Attack, there are zero units in the Codex or any allied Codex that want to ride in a Wave Serpent and don't either have one as a Dedicated Transport or have a better transport in their own book, and Shining Spears are better at being cool in Fast Attack. Wave Serpents' ability to be taken as a Fast Attack choice is the moral equivalent of Chimeras' Amphibious rule; it's technically there, but it's so irrelevant it may as well not be there.)
Whether you're taking them as a Fast Attack choice isn't really relevant. The examples you gave were invalid and can't be done outside of allying things or running a FW specific list.
Martel732 wrote: No one would use mechdar over WK/scatbike/warpspider. I agree on this. However, that doesn't stop other Eldar units equipped with scatterlasers from overperforming for their price point.
AP4 is irrelevant in any quantity. I'm not budging on this. Cover is too easy to get and there is too much 3+/2+ armor in the game.
Rending is only truly useful in high volume. A single turn of misfortune in an IG list can generate rending equal to all the rending a marine list can pump out over a game. Assault cannons, due to cost, range, and platform do not provide a significant amount of rending imo.
Okay. I can see I'm not getting anywhere. Next question. If the problem with the scatter laser is the fact that a four-shot S6 weapon exists for 10pts in the first place are you going to propose making Valkyries and Chimeras 10pts more expensive? They've got the same gun.
"Why is keeping the Troops unit's price-per-gun performance equivalent to the Heavy Support unit's a positive thing? "
Because I think the scatterlaser is a 20pt weapon in the general case. If you really want to make it one per three, that's fine, but it's still a 20 pt weapon. It might cease to be a 20 pt weapon in 8th ed, but as it stands, it's absolutely the equivalent of the assault cannon.
The Eldar codex is underpriced across the board for the most part. Only the most undercosted units are obviously use d competitively. My compalaint is not the Eldar doing things better, it's how cheap they get to do them. Almost everything you listed off for the BA is overcosted in the 7th ed game. Overcosted and largely ineffective, actually. Or the BA wouldn't be terrible.
Martel732 wrote: I've read it. Laugh all you want. It's an amazing book. I guess we fundamentally disagree about how Eldar should be costed.
I've been playing the army for twelve years, though three books, through fat times and lean. I've got some semblance of an understanding of how the internal balance of the army works. And the assertion that this book is undercosted across the board is one of the most absurd bits of tripe I've ever had the misfortune to read.
This Eldar book has some of the worst internal balance in the game today. Units range from incredibly undercosted and brutally powerful (Scatterbikes, the Wraithknight), through merely good (Farseers, War Walkers), down into mediocre/sort of usable (Guardians, Vypers) before plunging headlong into the toilet from whence no light can escape (Storm Guardians, the Fire Prism). You want to cut down the overpowered units, cool. You want to tweak the rest of it, cool. You want to nerfbat the whole thing? What's next? A price hike for Ork Boyz? Nerfs to Wyches?
pm713 wrote: I hope you mean Wraithknight. If you think the Wraithlord is horribly OP then we have a serious disagreement.
Typo corrected. The Wraithlord is not horribly OP, the Wraithknight is. The Wraithseer might be, but he's also more expensive than a Land Raider and doesn't have a spot in the meta-detachment. (As for other prefix-Wraith things Wraithguard are, Wraithblades are really not.)
pm713 wrote: I hope you mean Wraithknight. If you think the Wraithlord is horribly OP then we have a serious disagreement.
Typo corrected. The Wraithlord is not horribly OP, the Wraithknight is. The Wraithseer might be, but he's also more expensive than a Land Raider and doesn't have a spot in the meta-detachment. (As for other prefix-Wraith things Wraithguard are, Wraithblades are really not.)
I've never really seen the Wraithseer as that OP. Really expensive and it gets forced to go alone and doesn't have any ranged weapons without extreme cost.
pm713 wrote: I hope you mean Wraithknight. If you think the Wraithlord is horribly OP then we have a serious disagreement.
Typo corrected. The Wraithlord is not horribly OP, the Wraithknight is. The Wraithseer might be, but he's also more expensive than a Land Raider and doesn't have a spot in the meta-detachment. (As for other prefix-Wraith things Wraithguard are, Wraithblades are really not.)
I've never really seen the Wraithseer as that OP. Really expensive and it gets forced to go alone and doesn't have any ranged weapons without extreme cost.
He's a move-and-fire-capable D-cannon on a platform that's difficult for a lot of armies to deal with (T8/3+ MC). He's certainly good, but his OPness is borderline if it's there at all.
pm713 wrote: I hope you mean Wraithknight. If you think the Wraithlord is horribly OP then we have a serious disagreement.
Typo corrected. The Wraithlord is not horribly OP, the Wraithknight is. The Wraithseer might be, but he's also more expensive than a Land Raider and doesn't have a spot in the meta-detachment. (As for other prefix-Wraith things Wraithguard are, Wraithblades are really not.)
I've never really seen the Wraithseer as that OP. Really expensive and it gets forced to go alone and doesn't have any ranged weapons without extreme cost.
He's a move-and-fire-capable D-cannon on a platform that's difficult for a lot of armies to deal with (T8/3+ MC). He's certainly good, but his OPness is borderline if it's there at all.
It's mobile D, but it's mobile small blast D. He'll trade efficiently against land raiders make scat bikes spend some time shooting at him. He'll also die to a couple salvos of krak, grav, fusion, D, etc.
I really don't see wraithguard as being all that OP. They're certainly good, but, well... D-scythes put out a ton of hits and anhilate whatever they overwatch against, but the -1 to the D table hurts more than you might think. I usually webway my wraithguard in, and I dropped the d-scythes after their vulnerability to unlucky rolls and difficulty positioning all templates when deepstriking became too much of a liability. I've started saving point by using wraith guard, and I've found that they perform more consistantly than the d-scythes. Non-d-scythe wraithguard are still really good, but they're much more susceptible to assault, and both varieties are susceptible to AP3 shooting. Sure, you have to use quality firepower to take them out, but you kill off 35(?) points every time you land a kill. That's a rhino per kill.
I must admit, I've been reading through this thread and I think that all options for limiting the efficacy of scatbikes are equally viable...provided the implications for any changes are followed through.
1-in-3 If Scatbikes are made 1-in-3, then that solves that problem neatly. Eldar Jetbikes are fast obsec troops that are reasonably durable. They will still have a solid place in eldar lists without the ability to mass S6 firepower. It would bring a bit more balance back to the codex which would be nice. Lots of people have too many Scatbikes to make this popular, but the composition of competitive armies changes between codices so why is that a surprise? Also, I can't see GW being too angsty about people buying even more Jetbike kits...
Re-cost Scatter Lasers Also solves the problem with Scatbikes. Also nerfs a lot of other units that don't need nerfing, so if you're re-costing the Scatterlaser then those units that are made sub-par by this need a corresponding points decrease. Simple. If people complain for some reason that the eldar codex has no (or very few) dud units, then isn't that what all codices should be like? Where's the sense in making codices where only a few units are viable, just because other codices are in that crap position.
Make Scatterlasers S5 Also viable, and personally I kind of like this to re-balance the Scatterlaser/Shuricannon/Starcannon trio (especially if Starcannons are S7). Would need to do some work on the Bright Lance to balance that against a S7 Starcannon, but overall it's sound.
I like strength 5 on the scatterlaser because of how it lines up with starcannons and disintegrators. Slowly losing rate of fire in favor of gaining damage output per shot.
I don't really take the shuriken cannon into account here because it is an assault weapon with a 1 foot shorter range.
I think of the three, I like the idea of S5 Scatterlasers the best.
The others, of course, would need some tweaking: this might be reasonable.
Scatterlaser: R36 S5 AP- Heavy 4
Shuriken Cannon: Unchanged (*)
Starcannon: R36 S7 AP2 Heavy 2
Brightlance: R48 S8 AP2 Heavy 1, Lance
Eldar Missile Launcher: Unchanged.
(*): Bladestorm would be reduced to AP3-on-a-6, but the shuricannon should stay Assault 3, not Heavy 3, because of issues for Harlequins and Corsairs if that changes. Most other platforms that can use it are Relentless anyway.
I'd have been tempted to make the Brightlance AP1 as well, but at that point it becomes obviously better than the Lascannon, rather than the tradeoff that it has now, where the Brightlance is better against AV14, while the Lascannon is better against AV12 and below. Also, the Scatterlaser is now AP- because seriously, do Boyz, Cultists and Gaunts need to be kicked in the butt more?
pm713 wrote: I hope you mean Wraithknight. If you think the Wraithlord is horribly OP then we have a serious disagreement.
Typo corrected. The Wraithlord is not horribly OP, the Wraithknight is. The Wraithseer might be, but he's also more expensive than a Land Raider and doesn't have a spot in the meta-detachment. (As for other prefix-Wraith things Wraithguard are, Wraithblades are really not.)
You can fit a Wraithseer into the Craftworld Warhost, Doom of Mymeara includes a whole mass of formations including one specifically for the Wraithseer and Wraithblades and the Pale Courts Battlehost can be customised to include almost anything, including a Wraithseer.
Of course with Eldar duel CAD is actually better anyway.
Martel732 wrote: "Also nerfs a lot of other units that don't need nerfing,"
I agree with your assessment other than this. The units in question don't have to take the scatterlaser.
And I'd even argue that other than War Walkers, most of them don't particularly want to. Vypers, Wave Serpents and Wraithlords are probably better off with Shuriken Cannons, Falcons probably want Starcannons or Brightlances.
War Walkers wouldn't be hurt excessively by a cost boost on Scatterlasers, I think, because they'd have all the other choices. Am I wrong on that assessment?
Martel732 wrote: "Also nerfs a lot of other units that don't need nerfing,"
I agree with your assessment other than this. The units in question don't have to take the scatterlaser.
And I'd even argue that other than War Walkers, most of them don't particularly want to. Vypers, Wave Serpents and Wraithlords are probably better off with Shuriken Cannons, Falcons probably want Starcannons or Brightlances.
War Walkers wouldn't be hurt excessively by a cost boost on Scatterlasers, I think, because they'd have all the other choices. Am I wrong on that assessment?
I'm going to try and turn this logic back around a bit. If AP and Rending are irrelevant, the shuriken cannon is a massive downgrade on the scatter laser, since the only other differences are one fewer shot and 12" less range. Why would you ever want a shuriken cannon under that premise?
Nobody I play against ever uses the shuriken cannon. So I guess no one does want it. That's why scatterlaser should cost more.
The Eldar can also field enough shuriken cannons cheaply enough to make the pseudo rending useful as opposed to IoM trying to get rending on the field w/o misfortune.
Martel732 wrote: Nobody I play against ever uses the shuriken cannon. So I guess no one does want it. That's why scatterlaser should cost more.
The Eldar can also field enough shuriken cannons cheaply enough to make the pseudo rending useful as opposed to IoM trying to get rending on the field w/o misfortune.
So if the shuriken cannon is a waste of time and space that should always be swapped for the scatter laser (since it's a free upgrade (+5pts on the Wave Serpent, but free elsewhere)) a 10pt price hike to the scatter laser would be a clear nerf to Vypers, Wave Serpents, War Walkers, and Falcons.
Fine with me. Eldar can endure a few nerfs. The scatterlaser is very clearly a 20 pt weapon to me.
My ultimate goal would be to get fewer Eldar models on the table, make existing Eldar models less effective or make existing Eldar models more fragile. Boosting the price on the scatterlaser does one of the first two depending on the choices made by the Eldar player.
I think a 10 pt price hike on an overperforming weapon certainly falls under the category "reasonable". We'll change it back if 8th ed changes things up. But an anti-infantry weapon that spams tons of wounds and destroys AV 12 and less from 36" out is very, very valuable.
Martel732 wrote: Fine with me. Eldar can endure a few nerfs. The scatterlaser is very clearly a 20 pt weapon to me.
My ultimate goal would be to get fewer Eldar models on the table, make existing Eldar models less effective or make existing Eldar models more fragile. Boosting the price on the scatterlaser does one of the first two depending on the choices made by the Eldar player.
And this is the part where to me you're departing from 'reasonable Eldar nerfs' into an uninformed spite-fuelled rampage. You've decided that an army that's already low-model-count and fragile needs to get made more low-model-count and fragile because it has about three very overpowered units, and your mode of execution is going to hit the non-OP units much harder than the OP units.
Martel732 wrote: Fine with me. Eldar can endure a few nerfs. The scatterlaser is very clearly a 20 pt weapon to me.
My ultimate goal would be to get fewer Eldar models on the table, make existing Eldar models less effective or make existing Eldar models more fragile. Boosting the price on the scatterlaser does one of the first two depending on the choices made by the Eldar player.
And this is where you and I differ. While I agree that the SL in its current iteration is worth 20ppm, I'd rather see it nerfed to Str5 than to have to pay an extra 100+pts per army just to use the same models I have
It's the same with the WK. Sure it is worth 400pts, but I want to use as many models as I can. Making a model more expensive that I currently field and will still want to field regardless of the change will mean I'll have to drop a few models from my lists. I do not want this. Reducing its wounds to 5 and making the Wraithcannon -1D would mean the WK is still good, but is more appropriate to its current cost.
Scatter lasers with Str5 is the BEST option because:
A) it allows the price to stay the same, thus keeping the model count
B) you can still comply with the kit that allows every bike to have one
C) it balances better with the Shuricannon & Star cannon without needing to make changes to those weapons
They're not low model count. They are not fragile. Eldar are basically a 3+ armor army with triple the firepower of a marine list. If you want spite fueled rampage, I can think of a lot more to do than increase a broken weapon by 10 pts. Hell, GW hands out far worse nerfs to units that don't need it arbitrarily.
" about three very overpowered units"
Almost everything in the codex is better than what's in my codex. Almost. I'd kill for the units Eldar throw in the trash.
Martel732 wrote: Fine with me. Eldar can endure a few nerfs. The scatterlaser is very clearly a 20 pt weapon to me.
My ultimate goal would be to get fewer Eldar models on the table, make existing Eldar models less effective or make existing Eldar models more fragile. Boosting the price on the scatterlaser does one of the first two depending on the choices made by the Eldar player.
And this is where you and I differ. While I agree that the SL in its current iteration is worth 20ppm, I'd rather see it nerfed to Str5 than to have to pay an extra 100+pts per army just to use the same models I have
It's the same with the WK. Sure it is worth 400pts, but I want to use as many models as I can. Making a model more expensive that I currently field and will still want to field regardless of the change will mean I'll have to drop a few models from my lists. I do not want this. Reducing its wounds to 5 and making the Wraithcannon -1D would mean the WK is still good, but is more appropriate to its current cost.
Scatter lasers with Str5 is the BEST option because:
A) it allows the price to stay the same, thus keeping the model count
B) you can still comply with the kit that allows every bike to have one
C) it balances better with the Shuricannon & Star cannon without needing to make changes to those weapons
-
Those work too. I did list off making Eldar models less effective.
Martel732 wrote: Fine with me. Eldar can endure a few nerfs. The scatterlaser is very clearly a 20 pt weapon to me.
My ultimate goal would be to get fewer Eldar models on the table, make existing Eldar models less effective or make existing Eldar models more fragile. Boosting the price on the scatterlaser does one of the first two depending on the choices made by the Eldar player.
And this is the part where to me you're departing from 'reasonable Eldar nerfs' into an uninformed spite-fuelled rampage. You've decided that an army that's already low-model-count and fragile needs to get made more low-model-count and fragile because it has about three very overpowered units, and your mode of execution is going to hit the non-OP units much harder than the OP units.
How many Scatterbikes and Wraithknights can you fit into a 2k list?
"Reducing its wounds to 5 and making the Wraithcannon -1D would mean the WK is still good, but is more appropriate to its current cost. "
We'd have to make the sword/shield a very expensive upgrade as well. GMC status is a pain in the ass in general. I'm not sure W5 -1 to wraith cannon is only 295 pts.
Martel732 wrote: "Also nerfs a lot of other units that don't need nerfing,"
I agree with your assessment other than this. The units in question don't have to take the scatterlaser.
And I'd even argue that other than War Walkers, most of them don't particularly want to. Vypers, Wave Serpents and Wraithlords are probably better off with Shuriken Cannons, Falcons probably want Starcannons or Brightlances.
War Walkers wouldn't be hurt excessively by a cost boost on Scatterlasers, I think, because they'd have all the other choices. Am I wrong on that assessment?
I'm going to try and turn this logic back around a bit. If AP and Rending are irrelevant, the shuriken cannon is a massive downgrade on the scatter laser, since the only other differences are one fewer shot and 12" less range. Why would you ever want a shuriken cannon under that premise?
My reasoning is as follows, I cannot speak for Martel here. On a Wave Serpent, I nearly always want to be within 24" anyway, since I'm trying to deliver a payload of infantry, most of whom have short-range guns. The one that doesn't, Dark Reapers, I would seldom take a transport for in any event. Therefore, I'll take the TL shuriken cannon because I already have a hull-mounted one (does anyone really leave the catapult on anything other than a Fire Prism?), and I'd rather have 6 shots with Bladestorm than have 7 shots, 4 of which don't have Bladestorm in most cases. The extra range doesn't matter much because I'm driving that Wave Serpent up your nose anyway. Much the same applies for Vypers, unless I'm trying to sit back and plink, and they're not a very efficient way to do that. If I am, I'd rather use a missile launcher, starcannon or brightlance, because that's the thing that they can do, and Windriders cannot. If I'm sitting back and peashooting with scatterlasers, Windriders are a better platform because they have a save without paying 15 points or Jinking, they're cheaper and they can JSJ. (Granted, AV10 flat-out laughs at a few things that T4 is plenty vulnerable to, but in my meta, most shooting is S4+ anyway.)
As for Wraithlords, the only reason I'm bothering to take them is as counter-assault screening, really, since they're moderately frightening in close combat (4 attacks at S9 AP2 at I4 does worry some things). Accordingly, I'm gonna be close, and probably fighting infantry or MCs rather than vehicles. Versus MEQ - a likely target - the shuricannons outdamage the scatterlasers. Versus T6/3+, the difference is even larger. Give either target set a 2+ save, and it grows even more. (As I've observed in the past, one for one, scatterlasers are only better against vehicles or in cases where the 36" range matters. Admittedly, that last one is a lot of cases - I daresay most of them except Serpents and Wraithlords.)
War Walkers are the other place where I'd take scatterlasers. They can JSJ, after a fashion (Battle Focus), they can Outflank to get annoying rear-armor shots or to get behind Aegis lines, and with two scatterlasers each, that's a lot of fire. I'd be OK with scatterlasers getting a price hike on them - it'd just give me a reason to prefer starcannons, which, frankly, I want a reason to like.
ETA: However, given all that, I'd still stand by dropping scatterlasers to S5, simply because they're way too damn good on Windriders and they outcompete most other choices on Guardian weapon platforms and War Walkers. Making them S5 helps the internal balance problem.
Kanluwen wrote: How many Scatterbikes and Wraithknights can you fit into a 2k list?
I'm genuinely asking here.
Unbound or bound?
1 Wraithknight (stock) is equal to approximately 3.5 units of 3x Scatbikes. If you maintain a relatively even ratio of Windrider units to Wraithknights, in Unbound, you will end up with 5 (barebone Warithknights), and 19 Scatbikes (divided up as you see fit).
If you go bound, you would have to run a Craftworld Warhost in order to maximize the number of wraithknights you can bring. in this case, since you also must purchase a Farseer Skyrunner, Warlock Skyrunner and Vyper, and you are limited to only three units of Windriders, the same 5 Wraithknights would net you only 13 Scatbikes (divided up amongst 3 units). If you drop 1 Wraithknight, you can add an additional 9 Scatbikes to spread amongst the three units.
Kanluwen wrote: How many Scatterbikes and Wraithknights can you fit into a 2k list?
I'm genuinely asking here.
Unbound or bound?
1 Wraithknight (stock) is equal to approximately 3.5 units of 3x Scatbikes. If you maintain a relatively even ratio of Windrider units to Wraithknights, in Unbound, you will end up with 5 (barebone Warithknights), and 19 Scatbikes (divided up as you see fit).
If you go bound, you would have to run a Craftworld Warhost in order to maximize the number of wraithknights you can bring. in this case, since you also must purchase a Farseer Skyrunner, Warlock Skyrunner and Vyper, and you are limited to only three units of Windriders, the same 5 Wraithknights would net you only 13 Scatbikes (divided up amongst 3 units). If you drop 1 Wraithknight, you can add an additional 9 Scatbikes to spread amongst the three units.
Excellent.
So, let's just think about that. 5 Wraithknights and 13 Scatterbikes with a Vyper(tax), Warlock, and Farseer.
That's going to be absurd for any army to deal with, whether you swing it one way or the other(dropping WKs for Scatterbikes or Scatterbikes for WKs).
Martel732 wrote: They're not low model count. They are not fragile. Eldar are basically a 3+ armor army with triple the firepower of a marine list. If you want spite fueled rampage, I can think of a lot more to do than increase a broken weapon by 10 pts. Hell, GW hands out far worse nerfs to units that don't need it arbitrarily.
" about three very overpowered units"
Almost everything in the codex is better than what's in my codex. Almost. I'd kill for the units Eldar throw in the trash.
And I'd kill for the mass quantities of T4/3+ infantry, Drop Pods, Rhinos, Assault Vehicles, and customizable-loadout units you're insisting on throwing in the trash. The Eldar Codex is better at the things it's good at than the Blood Angels. The Blood Angels are better at the things they're good at than the Eldar. Woo.
Find me a melee unit in the Eldar Codex (besides the Wraithknight) that doesn't have to s*** itself and scarper the instant a Terminator squad appears. Go ahead. I'll wait.
T4/3+ is now fragile in 7th ed. In part because of mass S6. Even DC have trivial defenses by 7th ed standards.
Drop pods are highly overrated ESPECIALLY for BA. Non-skyhammer pods are a crap shoot at best, imo.
Rhino is a wash with the Wave Serpent. One is more capable, the other is much cheaper.
BA assault vehicles are god awful. LR is in contention for worst unit in the game due to cost. Stormraven requires a land pad or to be put in reserves. Which sucks. DFTS makes Stormraven super gakky.
"Customizable". As in "pay for overcosted equipment so you can give up more points when you die to a scatterlaser"
Eldar melee units don't have to worry about terminators because they will die in the Eldar shooting phase. Unless you are Demons are SW, melee combat is for loser codices.
Martel732 wrote: T4/3+ is now fragile in 7th ed. In part because of mass S6. Even DC have trivial defenses by 7th ed standards.
Drop pods are highly overrated ESPECIALLY for BA. Non-skyhammer pods are a crap shoot at best, imo.
Rhino is a wash with the Wave Serpent. One is more capable, the other is much cheaper.
BA assault vehicles are god awful. LR is in contention for worst unit in the game due to cost. Stormraven requires a land pad or to be put in reserves. Which sucks. DFTS makes Stormraven super gakky.
"Customizable". As in "pay for overcosted equipment so you can give up more points when you die to a scatterlaser"
The double standards here are really getting on my nerves. T4/3+ is fragile when it's a Tactical Marine but durable when it's a Jetbike. The Drop Pod, hands down the best Dedicated Transport in this or any other Codex, which enables things non-Marine armies can't hope to replicate, is somehow 'overrated'.
Eldar melee units don't have to worry about terminators because they will die in the Eldar shooting phase. Unless you are Demons are SW, melee combat is for loser codices.
...Okay. Eldar melee units don't have to worry about melee because they can shoot melee units to death. But you don't want them to be able to shoot melee units to death. You'd rather we reverted to 5e and got to sit back watching out guns plink harmlessly off the incoming wave of power armour before getting violently disassembled with a chainsword? Is this a Traditio-esque "Eldar players must f*** off and die, and have their Codex burned" hate-fuelled rant, or do you have any interest in actually fixing anything?
". T4/3+ is fragile when it's a Tactical Marine but durable when it's a Jetbike"
36" range increases durability a LOT. Don't believe me? Look at how many weapons can engage 3+ at that range efficiently.
Drop pod is NOT the best dedicated transport. It's good for alpha strike. Except BA and DA don't have units that can really exploit that. Without skyhammer, drop pods are a total crap shoot.
" But you don't want them to be able to shoot melee units to death"
Martel732 wrote: T4/3+ is now fragile in 7th ed. In part because of mass S6. Even DC have trivial defenses by 7th ed standards.
Drop pods are highly overrated ESPECIALLY for BA. Non-skyhammer pods are a crap shoot at best, imo.
Rhino is a wash with the Wave Serpent. One is more capable, the other is much cheaper.
BA assault vehicles are god awful. LR is in contention for worst unit in the game due to cost. Stormraven requires a land pad or to be put in reserves. Which sucks. DFTS makes Stormraven super gakky.
"Customizable". As in "pay for overcosted equipment so you can give up more points when you die to a scatterlaser"
The double standards here are really getting on my nerves. T4/3+ is fragile when it's a Tactical Marine but durable when it's a Jetbike.
When you can get a 2+ or 3+ Cover Save when Jinking(mitigated by a weapon with Ignores Cover) versus a 3+ armor save(Mitigated by AP3), there is a difference.
It's an even bigger difference when you can have either/or.
The Drop Pod, hands down the best Dedicated Transport in this or any other Codex, which enables things non-Marine armies can't hope to replicate, is somehow 'overrated'.
You tried to talk about melee.
Drop Pods, while a pretty good Dedicated Transport, are not Assault Vehicles.
A melee centric army in Drop Pods is going to drop in and unless they have a special rule allowing it, be unable to Assault.
Eldar melee units don't have to worry about terminators because they will die in the Eldar shooting phase. Unless you are Demons are SW, melee combat is for loser codices.
...Okay. Eldar melee units don't have to worry about melee because they can shoot melee units to death. But you don't want them to be able to shoot melee units to death. You'd rather we reverted to 5e and got to sit back watching out guns plink harmlessly off the incoming wave of power armour before getting violently disassembled with a chainsword? Is this a Traditio-esque "Eldar players must f*** off and die, and have their Codex burned" hate-fuelled rant, or do you have any interest in actually fixing anything?
You do understand the reason he specifically noted Daemons and Space Wolves, right?
Those are, at the moment, two of the three books which have melee units that can prevent Overwatch.
The third book is Eldar with Howling Banshees.
Martel732 wrote: ". T4/3+ is fragile when it's a Tactical Marine but durable when it's a Jetbike"
36" range increases durability a LOT. Don't believe me? Look at how many weapons can engage 3+ at that range efficiently.
Does that make Devastators (48" range) more durable than Jetbikes?
Drop pod is NOT the best dedicated transport. It's good for alpha strike. Except BA and DA don't have units that can really exploit that. Without skyhammer, drop pods are a total crap shoot.
Most Dedicated Transports are mediocre tanks. Or increase the durability of the unit slightly. The Drop Pod is a force-multiplier that makes anything put in it vastly, vastly better. You want to bitch about your range? Your assault units' difficulty making it to melee? You've got a f***ing 35pt unit that erases all of those difficulties and it's overrated?
" But you don't want them to be able to shoot melee units to death"
I want them to pay for it. Quit being dramatic.
You want units that weren't a problem to get a pummeling with the nerfbat as collateral damage when you ham-fistedly take an ineffectual swat at the actual problem unit, out of some half-witted assumption that a gun must be costed in a vacuum.
You know what would happen if the only change you made to the current Eldar Codex was to add 10pts anywhere it said 'scatter laser'?
People would stop putting Scatter Lasers on vehicles. And Scatterbikes would still be a problem unit.
The Drop Pod, hands down the best Dedicated Transport in this or any other Codex, which enables things non-Marine armies can't hope to replicate, is somehow 'overrated'.
You tried to talk about melee.
Drop Pods, while a pretty good Dedicated Transport, are not Assault Vehicles.
A melee centric army in Drop Pods is going to drop in and unless they have a special rule allowing it, be unable to Assault.
Step back for a moment.
The problem with melee units is that they have to take some incoming shooting before getting to melee, so they have to weather fire before they can engage.
You can get around this by spending 200+pts on an assault transport, to take fire for your unit and hopefully get into melee without getting shot.
Now explain to me why getting to ensure your melee unit is going to be in position on turn one to charge on turn two, with no risk of failure, ensuring you only have to weather one turn of fire, for 35pts, is a downgrade on a Howling Banshee unit spending 120pts+ on a Wave Serpent that may get blown up or immobilized on the way in, and who still have to sit and weather an enemy Shooting phase before they get to charge, Overwatch or not?
Martel732 wrote: T4/3+ is now fragile in 7th ed. In part because of mass S6. Even DC have trivial defenses by 7th ed standards.
Drop pods are highly overrated ESPECIALLY for BA. Non-skyhammer pods are a crap shoot at best, imo.
Rhino is a wash with the Wave Serpent. One is more capable, the other is much cheaper.
BA assault vehicles are god awful. LR is in contention for worst unit in the game due to cost. Stormraven requires a land pad or to be put in reserves. Which sucks. DFTS makes Stormraven super gakky.
"Customizable". As in "pay for overcosted equipment so you can give up more points when you die to a scatterlaser"
The double standards here are really getting on my nerves. T4/3+ is fragile when it's a Tactical Marine but durable when it's a Jetbike.
When you can get a 2+ or 3+ Cover Save when Jinking(mitigated by a weapon with Ignores Cover) versus a 3+ armor save(Mitigated by AP3), there is a difference.
It's an even bigger difference when you can have either/or.
As opposed to sitting a Devastator squad in a Fortified ruin for a 3+ cover save that doesn't require them to snapfire?
"You want units that weren't a problem to get a pummeling with the nerfbat as collateral damage when you ham-fistedly take an ineffectual swat at the actual problem unit, out of some half-witted assumption that a gun must be costed in a vacuum. "
Not a vacuum. Compared to other guns of similar efficacy.
"Does that make Devastators (48" range) more durable than Jetbikes? "
On a per point basis, yes. But their inability to move and fire and being saddled with vastly inferior weapons kills them as a viable choice.
"And Scatterbikes would still be a problem unit."
I don't think so. But it would have to tested to find out.
"The Drop Pod is a force-multiplier that makes anything put in it vastly, vastly better. You want to bitch about your range? Your assault units' difficulty making it to melee? You've got a f***ing 35pt unit that erases all of those difficulties and it's overrated? "
Take all the non-skyhammer pods you want. My rhino borne lists will cut you to pieces. As will good Eldar players. As will good Tau players. As will good IG players. BA, on average, actually get worse in my opinion when you put them in pods. Being stranded on foot really sucks in 7th ed. So, yes, pods are highly, highly overrated.
Martel732 wrote: "You want units that weren't a problem to get a pummeling with the nerfbat as collateral damage when you ham-fistedly take an ineffectual swat at the actual problem unit, out of some half-witted assumption that a gun must be costed in a vacuum. "
Not a vacuum. Compared to other guns of similar efficacy.
No. Obviously. Every single gun needs to have a single linear price defined for it that can never change. A heavy bolter on a BS2 Renegade Chimera obviously must cost the same as a heavy bolter on a BS4 Legion Superheavy.
Not to mention you've decided that a gun that's 1-2x as good as a scatter laser against every possible target is obviously worse, and that its price tag that hasn't been updated since 4th edition is obviously perfect.
You know what? F*** you guys. I'm done. I came here to attempt to discuss reasonable nerfs, not to attempt to explain why "does a specific thing better than Space Marines" isn't the gold standard for "overpowered".
And if you're done sneering at your drop pods my Grey Knights and Inquisitorial Henchmen would love to take them off you. They might actually get to do something for once.
"And if you're done sneering at your drop pods my Grey Knights and Inquisitorial Henchmen would love to take them off you. "
They would fair no better against Xeno firepower. Also, you are neglecting the fact that there are many, many lists you don't want to be close to on the first turn.
jade_angel wrote: I think of the three, I like the idea of S5 Scatterlasers the best.
The others, of course, would need some tweaking: this might be reasonable.
Scatterlaser: R36 S5 AP- Heavy 4
Shuriken Cannon: Unchanged (*)
Starcannon: R36 S7 AP2 Heavy 2
Brightlance: R48 S8 AP2 Heavy 1, Lance
Eldar Missile Launcher: Unchanged.
(*): Bladestorm would be reduced to AP3-on-a-6, but the shuricannon should stay Assault 3, not Heavy 3, because of issues for Harlequins and Corsairs if that changes. Most other platforms that can use it are Relentless anyway.
I'd have been tempted to make the Brightlance AP1 as well, but at that point it becomes obviously better than the Lascannon, rather than the tradeoff that it has now, where the Brightlance is better against AV14, while the Lascannon is better against AV12 and below. Also, the Scatterlaser is now AP- because seriously, do Boyz, Cultists and Gaunts need to be kicked in the butt more?
This seems very, very reasonable.
It retains the differences that make armies unique (Space Marines can have their Drop Pods which are definitely better than other dedicated transports, Eldar can have their specialised squads which is their shtick).
It would also mean that weapons choices would be more varied.
Martel732 wrote: Nobody I play against ever uses the shuriken cannon. So I guess no one does want it. That's why scatterlaser should cost more.
I never see Wraithknights do anything worth their cost. They should cost less. See the bad logic?
It was in response to nonsense post. Shuriken cannons have their place, as would the scatterlaser, even if the scatterlaser got a cost bump. As it is, the scatterlaser is a license to erase entire armies with little difficulty. They scrub open transports, kill most MCs, and kill infantry. All from 36" away.
Crazy.
I think the shuriken cannon should be a lot cheaper than the scatterlaser, as it is a lot more dangerous to use.
Martel732 wrote: Nobody I play against ever uses the shuriken cannon. So I guess no one does want it. That's why scatterlaser should cost more.
I never see Wraithknights do anything worth their cost. They should cost less. See the bad logic?
It was in response to nonsense post. Shuriken cannons have their place, as would the scatterlaser, even if the scatterlaser got a cost bump. As it is, the scatterlaser is a license to erase entire armies with little difficulty. They scrub open transports, kill most MCs, and kill infantry. All from 36" away.
Crazy.
I think the shuriken cannon should be a lot cheaper than the scatterlaser, as it is a lot more dangerous to use.
I may have missed it earlier in the thread, but what's your response to the Strength 5 scatter laser idea? It makes the debate about increasing scatter laser cost irrelevant and gives scatter lasers a clearer niche. Plus we get that nifty scaling between scatter lasers, shuriken cannons, and (possibly s7?) star cannons. Upping the cost of scatter lasers would make them less problematic competitively, but it wouldn't completely fix them, and it would definitely hurt them as a viable option for non-problematic scatter platforms like guardian squads, falcons, and serpents. Making them S5 and leaving the price alone arguably does more to balance them in competitive lists (no insta-gibbing t3, no wounding t4 on 2s, no hurting AV12, etc.) without significantly impacting their usefulness on other platforms. My war walkers might not take them any more because I depend on them to be all-rounders, but my serpent and guardians would still take them.
EDIT: Also, drop pods are actually quite good. Less good for melee-centric Blood Angels specifically, but they're almost as good as a webway portal archon for a third of the cost. Or for none of the cost if they happen to be free. Plus, they're actually quite good at killing those 36" range scatbikes before they can kill you. Just drop next to them and sprinkle some bolter shots on the bikers. They're only as tough as marines, but they're worth more points when they die. And ignoring all that, drop pods are a great way to simply plop a 3HP AV12 obsec unit on any objective on the board, forcing your opponent to deal with the pod instead of your army.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote: I say nerf them as hard as 7th edition Orks and let them suffer for a few editions
I started playing in 5th edition, and eldar were my first army. As I didn't spam seer councils, DAVU falcons, or fire dragons, I kind of feel like I've paid my dues.
I've found that eldar players simply reserve their bikes vs drop pods. Pods are strong, but not as strong as many xeno players claim. Pods completely fail if the alpha doesn't work more often than not.
SemperMortis wrote: I say nerf them as hard as 7th edition Orks and let them suffer for a few editions
I started playing in 5th edition, and eldar were my first army. As I didn't spam seer councils, DAVU falcons, or fire dragons, I kind of feel like I've paid my dues.
Nope, not even close
Let me know when your average to good units go up in price almost 50% (Killa Kanz) and your best unit becomes Bikes that have no special gimmick beyond being reasonably cost efficient.
Strength 5 scatterlaser, leave the starcannons at strength 6 unless you drop the range by a foot.
Eldar jetbikes should only give a 4+ save. Harlequin bikes are the exact same design and o my grant a 4+. Reaver jetbikes only grant a 5+ and all they are missing is the front hood.
Every eldar jetbikes should only increase a save by one. If you do this then the things that are supposed to kill them (autocannons and heavy bolters) will do so and also then balance out with shining spears (who have heavy aspect armor for the 3+) it is a win all around.
Wraithknight s need a slight price increase and lost "jump"
OR instead of drastically destroying Windriders we can just make the Scatterlasers 15 points and make their armor 4+ and call it a day?
It just seems like a lot of this thread is about venting and frustration rather than fixing the issue.
I have run my jetbikes as 4+ since I started in 5th. I have about 20 of them in my corsair armies. I dropped the strength to 5 when the decided to price them the same as shuriken cannons.
I like it at strength 5 because it becomes an actual anti horde weapon. With save 4+ the unit will actually have to jink if fired at by an autocannons or heavy bolter.
(The idea of an eldar jetbikes being slammed into head on by heavy bolter or autocannon shells and deflecting off is absurd in my opinion.)
Edit: just posting this to show I have no actual I'll intentions for eldar, I play them as my primary army.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Strength 5 scatterlaser, leave the starcannons at strength 6 unless you drop the range by a foot.
Eldar jetbikes should only give a 4+ save. Harlequin bikes are the exact same design and o my grant a 4+. Reaver jetbikes only grant a 5+ and all they are missing is the front hood.
Every eldar jetbikes should only increase a save by one. If you do this then the things that are supposed to kill them (autocannons and heavy bolters) will do so and also then balance out with shining spears (who have heavy aspect armor for the 3+) it is a win all around.
Wraithknight s need a slight price increase and lost "jump"
I like the idea of unifying Eldar Jetbike saves to 4+ across the board. Would mean you'd need to rework some things in the Dark Eldar codex as Reavers are already one of the best units they have, but TBH the Dark Eldar codex needs a bit of a rework anyway...
I also like the idea of a S7 24" Starcannon. Helps give it a niche while still keeping Bright Lances as AT. Plus, it would synergise well with Shuriken Cannons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: OR instead of drastically destroying Windriders we can just make the Scatterlasers 15 points and make their armor 4+ and call it a day? It just seems like a lot of this thread is about venting and frustration rather than fixing the issue.
That would be a quick and dirty fix, but I can't help but feed dropping them to S5 would be a better option for army variety and generally different tactics employed by Eldar armies.
Oh, and just to say I'm an Eldar player too, so I've got a vested interest in not destroying Windriders.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I have run my jetbikes as 4+ since I started in 5th. I have about 20 of them in my corsair armies. I dropped the strength to 5 when the decided to price them the same as shuriken cannons.
I like it at strength 5 because it becomes an actual anti horde weapon. With save 4+ the unit will actually have to jink if fired at by an autocannons or heavy bolter.
(The idea of an eldar jetbikes being slammed into head on by heavy bolter or autocannon shells and deflecting off is absurd in my opinion.)
Edit: just posting this to show I have no actual I'll intentions for eldar, I play them as my primary army.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Strength 5 scatterlaser, leave the starcannons at strength 6 unless you drop the range by a foot.
Eldar jetbikes should only give a 4+ save. Harlequin bikes are the exact same design and o my grant a 4+. Reaver jetbikes only grant a 5+ and all they are missing is the front hood.
Every eldar jetbikes should only increase a save by one. If you do this then the things that are supposed to kill them (autocannons and heavy bolters) will do so and also then balance out with shining spears (who have heavy aspect armor for the 3+) it is a win all around.
Wraithknight s need a slight price increase and lost "jump"
I like the idea of unifying Eldar Jetbike saves to 4+ across the board. Would mean you'd need to rework some things in the Dark Eldar codex as Reavers are already one of the best units they have, but TBH the Dark Eldar codex needs a bit of a rework anyway...
I also like the idea of a S7 24" Starcannon. Helps give it a niche while still keeping Bright Lances as AT. Plus, it would synergise well with Shuriken Cannons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: OR instead of drastically destroying Windriders we can just make the Scatterlasers 15 points and make their armor 4+ and call it a day?
It just seems like a lot of this thread is about venting and frustration rather than fixing the issue.
That would be a quick and dirty fix, but I can't help but feed dropping them to S5 would be a better option for army variety and generally different tactics employed by Eldar armies.
Oh, and just to say I'm an Eldar player too, so I've got a vested interest in not destroying Windriders.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I have run my jetbikes as 4+ since I started in 5th. I have about 20 of them in my corsair armies. I dropped the strength to 5 when the decided to price them the same as shuriken cannons.
I like it at strength 5 because it becomes an actual anti horde weapon. With save 4+ the unit will actually have to jink if fired at by an autocannons or heavy bolter.
(The idea of an eldar jetbikes being slammed into head on by heavy bolter or autocannon shells and deflecting off is absurd in my opinion.)
Edit: just posting this to show I have no actual I'll intentions for eldar, I play them as my primary army.
Corsair army? Have any pics
I wouldn't increase the reavers because their fluff is that they strip down their bikes for speed and handling. But their bike is only a +1 to save whereas the windrider are a +2. Just doesn't make thematic sense to be @ 3+ save to them.
I'll post them up tomorrow, I've only recently decided on a unifying theme. (Went with power rangers)
I have a combined total of around 6000 points of corsairs and a little over 2000 in harlequins...
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: S5 doesn't make sense because the weapon has BEEN S6. Just cost it appropriately.
It also used to be D6 shots and had a special rule called Laser-lock. What's your point? Statlines can be altered just like points costs can. The DE Dissintegrator was a Str7 AP2 small blast for over 10yrs before they changed it to an AP2 Heavy bolter
Making Scatterlasers 15-20ppm is a good idea, but it doesn't solve as many issues as making them Str5. Players will still choose the 15-20ppm Scatterlaser over a Star cannon or Shuricannon, but if Scatters are Str5, now the other 2 weapons are appealing. It would create wider diversity of lists, which is always the best option.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: S5 doesn't make sense because the weapon has BEEN S6. Just cost it appropriately.
It also used to be D6 shots and had a special rule called Laser-lock. What's your point?
Statlines can be altered just like points costs can.
The DE Dissintegrator was a Str7 AP2 small blast for over 10yrs before they changed it to an AP2 Heavy bolter
Making Scatterlasers 15-20ppm is a good idea, but it doesn't solve as many issues as making them Str5.
Players will still choose the 15-20ppm Scatterlaser over a Star cannon or Shuricannon, but if Scatters are Str5, now the other 2 weapons are appealing.
It would create wider diversity of lists, which is always the best option.
-
Actually it doesn't create diversity just like that. They don't NEED another anti-infantry weapon, so it wouldn't even be taken. You'd end up only seeing the other two weapons instead.
Think about it for a moment. Making them 15 points means you're choosing between 2 Scatterlasers or 3 Shuriken Cannons. THAT makes a choice. You either get 8 S6 shots with a foot more range or 9 shots with pseudo-rending.
StarCannon is a different matter. I don't even know the cost or the stats because I've only ever seen the former two.
Starcannon is a total victim of the scatterlaser and ranged D. AP 2 is quaint and underpowered for an eldar heavy weapon and two shots is low rof by eldar standards. I can't believe i was having to re-explain how absurd eldar are up above.
I'd like to see scatter lasers become s3 ap3, heavy 6. That way they'd still be relevant as infantry hunters but worth nothing against high toughness models and vehicles. Scatter lasers are far too good against a wide variety of targets which means you rarely see anything else.
ColdSadHungry wrote: I'd like to see scatter lasers become s3 ap3, heavy 6. That way they'd still be relevant as infantry hunters but worth nothing against high toughness models and vehicles. Scatter lasers are far too good against a wide variety of targets which means you rarely see anything else.
That's almost TWICE as many dead marines per scatterlaser per turn... And almost 50% more effective against Tyranid T6sv3+ MCs. Literally the worst "fix" proposition in this thread...
And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Martel732 wrote: And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Martel732 wrote: And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Read again - he wants it to be HEAVY 6!
Didn't see the 6. That's too much AP 3. Still a trashy gun vs Orks, and too good vs meqs and 3+ MCs.
Martel732 wrote: And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Read again - he wants it to be HEAVY 6!
Didn't see the 6. That's too much AP 3. Still a trashy gun vs Orks, and too good vs meqs and 3+ MCs.
Martel732 wrote: And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Read again - he wants it to be HEAVY 6!
Didn't see the 6. That's too much AP 3. Still a trashy gun vs Orks, and too good vs meqs and 3+ MCs.
Sounds pretty bad against MC's at S3.
Just do the math. It is 0.65 wound a turn vs current 0.43. Ap3 removes one entire roll from equation.
Martel732 wrote: And it becomes pure trash vs Orks. It's 0.89 dead Orks per gun, and 0.89 dead marines per gun, as opposed to 2.22 Orks and 0.74 marines. If those marines or orks get cover, this gun becomes even worse. The current scatterlaser inflicts 0.44 wounds on 3+ T6 and the new one inflicts 0.44 as well.
Read again - he wants it to be HEAVY 6!
Didn't see the 6. That's too much AP 3. Still a trashy gun vs Orks, and too good vs meqs and 3+ MCs.
Sounds pretty bad against MC's at S3.
Just do the math. It is 0.65 wound a turn vs current 0.43. Ap3 removes one entire roll from equation.
It is a single 10pt gun. For a price of a Carnifex you can get four or five, depending on platform. And this entire thread is about how even weaker than this "fixed" scatterlasers are to good for everything and this "fix" makes them better against everything without AV, T7 or 2+.
So everyone (on the receiving end) hates Scatter Lasers by the look of it.
Since Dark Eldar Reavers had their armour reduced to a 5+ in the 5th edition codex it has irked me that they didn't drop Windriders to a 4+
Also I remember in 3rd Edition the Big Shootas on Ork bikes had their range cut in half (from 36" to 18")
Would that be enough if they did both of those to the jetbike?
Yes. 4+ armor alone might do it. Heavy bolters force jinks or heavy casualties. 18" range on the laser means they are taking serious return fire. They might actually have to go down below 27 ppm at that point. Let no one say I'm not fair.
just make them easier to get hold of, and searchable 
