Note up front - I'm not trying to start an "Eldar suck!" or "They're the bestest" thread... just want to share some of my thoughts on the new rules we've seen and get other people's thoughts.
After the previews we've seen from the Eldar codex, I find myself thinking that it won't really change much for Eldar players. With the exception of Alaitoc's -1 to hit, the craftworld abilities are not very useful.
Fire Prisms got a big buff, so we'll start to see them again. Rangers and Dire Avengers got a points cut, so playing them will become practical, but they're still just average at best.
The Craftworld traits are all things we've seen elsewhere before, and didn't introduce any new mechanics. Alaitoc's -1 to hit will be useufl, but RG, and AL have the same rule - the only difference is that Eldar have a number of units with a native -1 penalty that will stack nicely at over 12" range. Conceal is no longer a bubble so it won't be possible to make a blob of "can't shoot this" units. It will be possible to make an Alaitoc list centered around this, running Rangers, Warp Spiders, Hemlocks, etc, and this might push the meta in a given direction if it becomes common enough, but overall it probably won't be game breaking.
What stands out to me most, is that GW took the one standout unit Eldar already had, Dark Reapers, and gave them a 25% points reduction. Reapers were already good, and now they're nuts. Why wouldn't you take 20 Dark Reapers in every list.
I was honestly hoping that GW would expand the number of playable/strong units, and encourage diversity of army building instead of reinforcing the units that were already seeing common usage.
That said, I am thinking about trying to do an Alaitoc Build as above - air wing of hemlocks for anti tank, Ranges for troop slots and to camp objectives, and a pile of warp spiders - but I don't think it'd be that competitive.
What are other people seeing as possibilities from the new book?
I'm actually interested in playing a Guardian-centric force with Biel Tan, of all things. Grumbling aside, I do find their Craftworld trait interesting, and playing traditional Guardian eldar (Defender squads, war walkers, weapon batteries and Farseer backed by some non-Wave serpent tanks) is something I wanted to do for a while.
The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
- 12 pt Rangers
- HQs granting an aura of rerolls on 1
- Trait that vehicles use double wounds in determining damage tier AND old commissar rule for all units
- Point reductions across the board for nearly everything
These alone are massive buffs for Eldar that improve their game and just what I remember off the top of my head in 10 seconds. Eldar are easily gong to be upper middle tier at worst unless future codex releases are nuts.
Cream Tea wrote: The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
Eldar probably won't shoot up to the top tier of 40k factions, but they got some really good buffs. for the casual player, this is some huge changes and makes a lot more things viable.
But as this forum repeatedly showed, if you're not OP, you're not worth talking about other than as some hyperbole to compare other OP stuff to.
This isn't the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex (which is still the bar for a "Good" codex), but it is pretty good overall.
Cream Tea wrote: The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
Eldar probably won't shoot up to the top tier of 40k factions, but they got some really good buffs. for the casual player, this is some huge changes and makes a lot more things viable.
But as this forum repeatedly showed, if you're not OP, you're not worth talking about other than as some hyperbole to compare other OP stuff to.
This isn't the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex (which is still the bar for a "Good" codex), but it is pretty good overall.
I MISS the 5th ed codex soooo much, my heart sink everyday from 6th ed till now, DE was gutted to the extreme, i've played many DE games in 8th but already dropped them again.
Cream Tea wrote: The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
Eldar probably won't shoot up to the top tier of 40k factions, but they got some really good buffs. for the casual player, this is some huge changes and makes a lot more things viable.
But as this forum repeatedly showed, if you're not OP, you're not worth talking about other than as some hyperbole to compare other OP stuff to.
This isn't the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex (which is still the bar for a "Good" codex), but it is pretty good overall.
Comparing the strengths of different armies for "casual play" seems counter intuitive to me, as "casual play" usually indicates a certain level of unwillingness to optimize or maximize list building.
I never said it's bad, I said it doesn't change much - I think we'll see a lot of the same units we saw before the codex (Serpents and Dark Reapers, Fire Dragons and Scytheguard) and I think many players (most even) will still play Ynnari. I think SfD is better than all the CW traits except Alaitoc, and that depends on the type of list someone is playing.
DSing Shadow Specters now too, you forgot to talk about one of the best Ynnari units in the new Codex.
Im guessing it will be DS Shadow Specters, and Fire Dragons as Ynnari with WS+Wraithblades, Alaitoc Heavy detachment of Dark Reapers and Warlock or Autarch.
At least the codex is on par with everything released so far it looks like, though I hadn't had time to go over the internal balance of the codex.
That said, I'm gonna be a broken record again and say I'm annoyed that their vehicles benefit from Craftworld bonuses but my SM/CSM vehicles don't. Can't win them all.
Cream Tea wrote: The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
Eldar probably won't shoot up to the top tier of 40k factions, but they got some really good buffs. for the casual player, this is some huge changes and makes a lot more things viable.
But as this forum repeatedly showed, if you're not OP, you're not worth talking about other than as some hyperbole to compare other OP stuff to.
This isn't the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex (which is still the bar for a "Good" codex), but it is pretty good overall.
Cream Tea wrote: The points reductions alone are a huge deal, and while the Alaitoc trait may be a copy paste of earlier traits, that doesn't change the fact that it's extremely strong.
It's baffling to me that someone could think this codex doesn't change much.
Eldar probably won't shoot up to the top tier of 40k factions, but they got some really good buffs. for the casual player, this is some huge changes and makes a lot more things viable.
But as this forum repeatedly showed, if you're not OP, you're not worth talking about other than as some hyperbole to compare other OP stuff to.
This isn't the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex (which is still the bar for a "Good" codex), but it is pretty good overall.
Comparing the strengths of different armies for "casual play" seems counter intuitive to me, as "casual play" usually indicates a certain level of unwillingness to optimize or maximize list building.
I never said it's bad, I said it doesn't change much - I think we'll see a lot of the same units we saw before the codex (Serpents and Dark Reapers, Fire Dragons and Scytheguard) and I think many players (most even) will still play Ynnari. I think SfD is better than all the CW traits except Alaitoc, and that depends on the type of list someone is playing.
Not bad, just doesn't change much.
I wasn't exactly comparing different armies and I have no idea why people consider casual play "unwilling to optimize" since, in a sense, they do. They just like fielding sub-optimal units because they like those units for reasons outside of pure in-game power, but they will still try to optimize them within the restrictions they're given. No one brings a unit, especially one they like, just to have them die so they can say "I had it in my army". They will try to make it work. This codex just makes it easier since, with price drops across the board, some of those options that usually would take monumental effort to make work now takes less work.
At the high competitive level, I agree. Little to nothing will change. At the Friday night beer and pretzel table, you may start seeing different units on the board that you haven't seen in a while. At least a few people here on Dakka have voiced their intention to field falcons and fire prisms since they actually look worthwhile now.
Shock horror....I will be playing Iyanden as Craftworld Iyanden. Looking forward to wraith constructs getting rebuilt and not really suffering from degraded stats. A unit of 5 WG exiting from a web portal sounds great too (unless that is Ulthwe only?)
Well, Alaitoc seems to be the most competitive CW.
But not everybody wants to play Alaitoc for fluff reasons.
I wish we could get back the old disruption table.
bullyboy wrote: Shock horror....I will be playing Iyanden as Craftworld Iyanden. Looking forward to wraith constructs getting rebuilt and not really suffering from degraded stats. A unit of 5 WG exiting from a web portal sounds great too (unless that is Ulthwe only?)
Thats a general Craftworlds Strategem, the Ulthwe Strategem is specifically for Guardians (I think it's the one that gives them +1 to hit). Personally I'll be using the Ulthwe trait for my Iyanden army as the actual Iyanden trait does nothing for them and I've already got two other players in my group fielding armys with the Alaitoc trait so a little variety will be nice.
bullyboy wrote: Shock horror....I will be playing Iyanden as Craftworld Iyanden. Looking forward to wraith constructs getting rebuilt and not really suffering from degraded stats. A unit of 5 WG exiting from a web portal sounds great too (unless that is Ulthwe only?)
Thats a general Craftworlds Strategem, the Ulthwe Strategem is specifically for Guardians (I think it's the one that gives them +1 to hit). Personally I'll be using the Ulthwe trait for my Iyanden army as the actual Iyanden trait does nothing for them and I've already got two other players in my group fielding armys with the Alaitoc trait so a little variety will be nice.
My fluff based list will be Alaitoc, but my "stronger" list will be a mix between Alaitoc, Saim-Hann and Ulthwe - just cos....
bullyboy wrote: Shock horror....I will be playing Iyanden as Craftworld Iyanden. Looking forward to wraith constructs getting rebuilt and not really suffering from degraded stats. A unit of 5 WG exiting from a web portal sounds great too (unless that is Ulthwe only?)
Thats a general Craftworlds Strategem, the Ulthwe Strategem is specifically for Guardians (I think it's the one that gives them +1 to hit). Personally I'll be using the Ulthwe trait for my Iyanden army as the actual Iyanden trait does nothing for them and I've already got two other players in my group fielding armys with the Alaitoc trait so a little variety will be nice.
I wouldn't say it does nothing for them. Wraithlords and knights (if you take them of course) along with vehicles continue to function at full capacity even when on low wounds. I'm also now tempted to take a Guardian sqd or 2 just to get access to more command points and will nto have to worry about their morale at all. Is it the best/ No, that's been discussed to death, but it's not worthless.
I have my own homebrew Craftworld so I am free to pick whatever I want. From the fluff I've thought for it, Iyanden or Ulthwe make the most sense, but I might just pick Alaitoc due to how strong it is. Although I want my core to be like Wraith units and some Guardians (maybe tank sand weapons batteries and war walkers) and a handful of aspects to fill gaps.
bullyboy wrote: Shock horror....I will be playing Iyanden as Craftworld Iyanden. Looking forward to wraith constructs getting rebuilt and not really suffering from degraded stats. A unit of 5 WG exiting from a web portal sounds great too (unless that is Ulthwe only?)
Thats a general Craftworlds Strategem, the Ulthwe Strategem is specifically for Guardians (I think it's the one that gives them +1 to hit). Personally I'll be using the Ulthwe trait for my Iyanden army as the actual Iyanden trait does nothing for them and I've already got two other players in my group fielding armys with the Alaitoc trait so a little variety will be nice.
I wouldn't say it does nothing for them. Wraithlords and knights (if you take them of course) along with vehicles continue to function at full capacity even when on low wounds. I'm also now tempted to take a Guardian sqd or 2 just to get access to more command points and will nto have to worry about their morale at all. Is it the best/ No, that's been discussed to death, but it's not worthless.
In my case I only have 2 Wave Serpents and don't want to turn the list into Serpent spam, whilst the Wraithlord and Knight don't seem to have had any meaningful buffs so they'll stay on the shelf for the rest of 8th. As for Guardians, I hate the models so will not run them ever, will probably go for Rangers instead. All this means that the Wraithguar/blades heavy list I have will get no benefit at all out of the Iyanden trait.
In my case I only have 2 Wave Serpents and don't want to turn the list into Serpent spam, whilst the Wraithlord and Knight don't seem to have had any meaningful buffs so they'll stay on the shelf for the rest of 8th. As for Guardians, I hate the models so will not run them ever, will probably go for Rangers instead. All this means that the Wraithguar/blades heavy list I have will get no benefit at all out of the Iyanden trait.
In this case, I'd play Ynnari since infantry (and also bikers) benefit from SfD.
I think the best (or worst) part about the Alaitoc trait is that is so generic that it doesn't even need to represent Alaitoc. Both Dark Eldar units (Venoms) and Harlies have -1 to be hit rules, so it is clearly an Aeldari ability that could be common. You can have a Saim-Hann army that has -1 to hit because your particular warband it skilled as darting around. Or an Ulthwe force that uses their innate psychic ability to obscure themselves to their enemy.
Mixing and matching abilities (Saim-Hann using the Biel-tan trait, Iyanden using Ulthwe trait, ec) is going to be fairly common, but Alaitoc stands out because is can apply to any CW from a fluff standpoint AND it's a strong trait. You cannot say the same about the other traits (Iyanden trait makes no sense for Alaitoc or Biel-tan, for example)
While this is possibly true, if that happens then the meta may shift to account for it. Obliterators, raptors, terminators, scions, anything with a deepstrike or infiltrate ability can all pop in and completely negate the alaitoc trait. These aren't uncommon units anyway.
I do think alaitoc is strong, but I don't think it's unbeatable. It may get to the top table, but the other top table armies will change to counter it pretty easily.
While this is possibly true, if that happens then the meta may shift to account for it. Obliterators, raptors, terminators, scions, anything with a deepstrike or infiltrate ability can all pop in and completely negate the alaitoc trait. These aren't uncommon units anyway.
I do think alaitoc is strong, but I don't think it's unbeatable. It may get to the top table, but the other top table armies will change to counter it pretty easily.
The thing about reactions like this is that even if the -1 modifier doesn't actually get used, it's still having an impact on the way your opponent plays. Of course, the trick with that is using the shift to your favour. The stronger Alaitoc lists will be the ones that can take advantage of your opponents having to get closer to be more effective.
It's a roundabout way of doing things, but I am glad that flamer-style weapons are starting to become somewhat effective, at least in some ways.
While this is possibly true, if that happens then the meta may shift to account for it. Obliterators, raptors, terminators, scions, anything with a deepstrike or infiltrate ability can all pop in and completely negate the alaitoc trait. These aren't uncommon units anyway.
I do think alaitoc is strong, but I don't think it's unbeatable. It may get to the top table, but the other top table armies will change to counter it pretty easily.
The thing about reactions like this is that even if the -1 modifier doesn't actually get used, it's still having an impact on the way your opponent plays. Of course, the trick with that is using the shift to your favour. The stronger Alaitoc lists will be the ones that can take advantage of your opponents having to get closer to be more effective.
It's a roundabout way of doing things, but I am glad that flamer-style weapons are starting to become somewhat effective, at least in some ways.
That is true, as Eldar shooting is (stupidly) very short ranged. Guardians, Avengers and Wraiths would be especially pleased if you turned up within 12" of them. As would spectres and warp spiders... in fact I think there's quite a lot of units with 12" ranges.
While this is possibly true, if that happens then the meta may shift to account for it. Obliterators, raptors, terminators, scions, anything with a deepstrike or infiltrate ability can all pop in and completely negate the alaitoc trait. These aren't uncommon units anyway.
I do think alaitoc is strong, but I don't think it's unbeatable. It may get to the top table, but the other top table armies will change to counter it pretty easily.
The thing about reactions like this is that even if the -1 modifier doesn't actually get used, it's still having an impact on the way your opponent plays. Of course, the trick with that is using the shift to your favour. The stronger Alaitoc lists will be the ones that can take advantage of your opponents having to get closer to be more effective.
It's a roundabout way of doing things, but I am glad that flamer-style weapons are starting to become somewhat effective, at least in some ways.
That is true, as Eldar shooting is (stupidly) very short ranged. Guardians, Avengers and Wraiths would be especially pleased if you turned up within 12" of them. As would spectres and warp spiders... in fact I think there's quite a lot of units with 12" ranges.
Spectres are 18" range. But the pressure to come in close should help make them ridiculously good (and fun!) with smart use of the jump-shoot-jump stratagem and your choice of fire modes.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: I'm actually interested in playing a Guardian-centric force with Biel Tan, of all things. Grumbling aside, I do find their Craftworld trait interesting, and playing traditional Guardian eldar (Defender squads, war walkers, weapon batteries and Farseer backed by some non-Wave serpent tanks) is something I wanted to do for a while.
This. I am totally psyched about taking my aspect warrior list and using guardians again.
Dire a answers, guardians with weapon platforms, war walkers, and bikers, all with shuriken weapons, trying to take everything out with only shuriken weapons (Oh, your toughness 8? Suck shuriken cannon!).
Seriously though, I definitely like what's changed here. Fluff should always have a place in army building and the new eldar codex has that going just fine.
Imateria wrote: whilst the Wraithlord and Knight don't seem to have had any meaningful buffs so they'll stay on the shelf for the rest of 8th.
The Wraithlord got buffed to T8 and also got an extra attack so it now compares pretty favourably with the SM Deadnought.
Sadly the WK is roughly 100 points overpriced compared to the IK and that is scarcely a powerhouse unit in 8th. :(
Whats the points on the Dreadnaught? I get the feeling it's cheaper whilst being either better at shooting, better at close combat or at least as good a generalist.
Well when comparing wraithlords with sm dreads you're basically looking at a dread with a power fist and a twin lascannon/twin something else. The downside to our version is that we can't choose to swap the melee arm for more guns. Still, for a generalist setup, I think ours is ok now that it's been buffed.
shortymcnostrill wrote: Well when comparing wraithlords with sm dreads you're basically looking at a dread with a power fist and a twin lascannon/twin something else. The downside to our version is that we can't choose to swap the melee arm for more guns. Still, for a generalist setup, I think ours is ok now that it's been buffed.
Well if you're going to compare, a Wraithlord is essentially a standard Dread with the toughness of an Ironclad Dread. So you get the range and the durability. I don't think they're hurting too much.
Galef wrote: Mixing and matching abilities (Saim-Hann using the Biel-tan trait, Iyanden using Ulthwe trait, ec) is going to be fairly common, but Alaitoc stands out because is can apply to any CW from a fluff standpoint AND it's a strong trait.
You cannot say the same about the other traits (Iyanden trait makes no sense for Alaitoc or Biel-tan, for example)
-
For biel-tan howabout that with war-centric craftworld not only they build their vehicles extra strong, knowing very well how brutal it is, and are used to the horrors of war so don't run away. Elite troops tends to be better than conscripts in morale side and biel-tan is craftworld where even basic guys are well versed in war thus giving them morale boost over craftworlds who are less experienced in war.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Would this apply to the Wraithseer or is an all-Wraithlord Army still boned because it's warlord is worse than the line troops?
The wraithseer does not get the +1 Toughness nor the <WRAITH CONSTRUCT> keyword. Atleast not until FWFAQs it. (I would assume anyway)
But wraith armies have a great HQ now. Spiritseer joins the ranks of spamming smite builds. Here is an approximate list based losely off points so far.
@hoodwink - the standard Wraithlord comes with 2 Shuriken Catapaults. The typical Wraithlord, though, is probably what you meant.
The Wraithlord can take 2xHeavies without dropping it's CCW. It also degrades. The Dread has to drop it's CCW, but one of it's heavies match 2 of the Wraithlord's heavies:
TLLC vs 2xBrightlance: Same number of shots, +1 S, +12" range
AC vs 2xSC: AC has innate -1AP, SC has -3 on a 6, otherwise the same
Storm bolters are similar to 2xShuriken Catapaults.
Heavy Flamers are a little worse than 2xFlamers
Melta Guns and MultiMeltas - the Wraithlord doesn't have an analogue.
So if the Dread could take 2xHeavies *and* a CCW, it'd clearly outclass the Wraithlord. With the changes, the Wraithlord is more durable but degrades.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Would this apply to the Wraithseer or is an all-Wraithlord Army still boned because it's warlord is worse than the line troops?
The wraithseer does not get the +1 Toughness nor the <WRAITH CONSTRUCT> keyword. Atleast not until FWFAQs it. (I would assume anyway)
But wraith armies have a great HQ now. Spiritseer joins the ranks of spamming smite builds. Here is an approximate list based losely off points so far.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Would this apply to the Wraithseer or is an all-Wraithlord Army still boned because it's warlord is worse than the line troops?
The wraithseer does not get the +1 Toughness nor the <WRAITH CONSTRUCT> keyword. Atleast not until FWFAQs it. (I would assume anyway)
But wraith armies have a great HQ now. Spiritseer joins the ranks of spamming smite builds. Here is an approximate list based losely off points so far.
This is aiming at a 2k build.. but still has points left over. It was just quick math estimates
What's the deal with the Spiritseers? Smite spam can be rather effective.
But how can this army be decomposed into detachments?
Spiritseers are basically Warlocks, but with full strength smite and double the wounds, all for a paltry 10 points more. A spiritseer on foot vs a warlock on foot, the Spiritseer is just better in every possible way, under every circumstance. GW really messed up the points on Warlocks, they should be about 20 points at most.
The only time you'd consider a Warlock, is if you want them on Jetbikes, as Spiritseers can't take jetbikes.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Would this apply to the Wraithseer or is an all-Wraithlord Army still boned because it's warlord is worse than the line troops?
The wraithseer does not get the +1 Toughness nor the <WRAITH CONSTRUCT> keyword. Atleast not until FWFAQs it. (I would assume anyway)
But wraith armies have a great HQ now. Spiritseer joins the ranks of spamming smite builds. Here is an approximate list based losely off points so far.
This is aiming at a 2k build.. but still has points left over. It was just quick math estimates
What's the deal with the Spiritseers? Smite spam can be rather effective.
But how can this army be decomposed into detachments?
Easy, 3 Spiritseers, 3 units of 10 Guardians, 3 units of 5 Wraithguard and 4 Wave Serpents make a Battalion and the 8 remaining Spiritseers can be split into two Supreme Command detachments giving you a total of 8 comman points.
Autarchs probably usually took the same loadout each time, but limiting the weapons on each type is silly. Buy a couple of each if you want to mix loadouts. But no, no options.
Also, where did the Warpjump autarch go? Lost in the warp, and the back of the storeroom, I expect.
Skinnereal wrote: Autarchs probably usually took the same loadout each time, but limiting the weapons on each type is silly. Buy a couple of each if you want to mix loadouts. But no, no options.
Also, where did the Warpjump autarch go? Lost in the warp, and the back of the storeroom, I expect.
It is now the favorite Autarch btw. Since there is no new datacard they get to use the index. With the index rules they can choose the reaper launcher for a weapon unlike the others. With the rules and point changes of the codex they are permitted to take the sniper warlord trait, use the lower point costs and still get a banshee mask.
Now there is a nice chance for this autarch to kill most characters in one shot. or to use his mask to prevent overwatch and let a melee unit charge in without fear.
got my codex today. overall i already knew everything...but has been a nice surprise to find out havy weapon platform have the "guardian" keyword, the ulthwe' stratagem is gonna work on them
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: Would this apply to the Wraithseer or is an all-Wraithlord Army still boned because it's warlord is worse than the line troops?
The wraithseer does not get the +1 Toughness nor the <WRAITH CONSTRUCT> keyword. Atleast not until FWFAQs it. (I would assume anyway)
But wraith armies have a great HQ now. Spiritseer joins the ranks of spamming smite builds. Here is an approximate list based losely off points so far.
This is aiming at a 2k build.. but still has points left over. It was just quick math estimates
What's the deal with the Spiritseers? Smite spam can be rather effective.
But how can this army be decomposed into detachments?
Spiritseers are basically Warlocks, but with full strength smite and double the wounds, all for a paltry 10 points more. A spiritseer on foot vs a warlock on foot, the Spiritseer is just better in every possible way, under every circumstance. GW really messed up the points on Warlocks, they should be about 20 points at most.
The only time you'd consider a Warlock, is if you want them on Jetbikes, as Spiritseers can't take jetbikes.
I would consider dropping 2 spiritseers for a Farseer the Acess to runes of Fate, plus the Stratagem that allows to re-roll wounds result of 1" at all units near Farseer can make the already Deadly Wraithguard weapons shine at full potential.
Marfuzzo wrote: got my codex today. overall i already knew everything...but has been a nice surprise to find out havy weapon platform have the "guardian" keyword, the ulthwe' stratagem is gonna work on them
I noticed that too. However it is somewhat limited by the fact that if you get a unit of 3, once deployed they are all treated separately so only 1 can. Benefit from the Stratagem rather than all of them.
Marfuzzo wrote: got my codex today. overall i already knew everything...but has been a nice surprise to find out havy weapon platform have the "guardian" keyword, the ulthwe' stratagem is gonna work on them
I noticed that too. However it is somewhat limited by the fact that if you get a unit of 3, once deployed they are all treated separately so only 1 can. Benefit from the Stratagem rather than all of them.
What are people's thoughts on Iyanden lists? Their trait is good for Wraithlords/Knights and massed infantry, but doesn't really help Wraithguard/Blades. Is a mix of all wraith units worthwhile, or should Iyanden be Infantry+Wraith lords, and Wraithguards better as Ulthwe or Alaitoc?
Also, are warp spiders worth using? Under what circumstances?
Drudge Dreadnought wrote: What are people's thoughts on Iyanden lists? Their trait is good for Wraithlords/Knights and massed infantry, but doesn't really help Wraithguard/Blades. Is a mix of all wraith units worthwhile, or should Iyanden be Infantry+Wraith lords, and Wraithguards better as Ulthwe or Alaitoc?
Also, are warp spiders worth using? Under what circumstances?
Iyanden should work well with large units with degrading stats (vehicles, Wraith Lords and Wraithknight) but i feel Ulthwe outshines it with the Warlord Trait ( another deny the witch for Iyanden, a chance to gain free CP for Ulthwe) and the reworded Fortune wich can affect now units with a save vs Mortal wounds unlike the Index one.
I think Warp Spiders are pretty much useless with current stats Windriders are almost better in every sense even more with Battle focus for just 5 points more you get extra T and W, with similar move and weapons vs normal infantry. Unless you really need a Deep Strike unit (but i would choose Swooping hawks for such duty )
I seriously miss they didn't made the Spiders the anti-Horde spec unit they was on 2nd Edition when i fell in love with them.
Drudge Dreadnought wrote: What are people's thoughts on Iyanden lists? Their trait is good for Wraithlords/Knights and massed infantry, but doesn't really help Wraithguard/Blades. Is a mix of all wraith units worthwhile, or should Iyanden be Infantry+Wraith lords, and Wraithguards better as Ulthwe or Alaitoc?
Also, are warp spiders worth using? Under what circumstances?
Iyanden should work well with large units with degrading stats (vehicles, Wraith Lords and Wraithknight) but i feel Ulthwe outshines it with the Warlord Trait ( another deny the witch for Iyanden, a chance to gain free CP for Ulthwe) and the reworded Fortune wich can affect now units with a save vs Mortal wounds unlike the Index one.
I think Warp Spiders are pretty much useless with current stats Windriders are almost better in every sense even more with Battle focus for just 5 points more you get extra T and W, with similar move and weapons vs normal infantry. Unless you really need a Deep Strike unit (but i would choose Swooping hawks for such duty )
I seriously miss they didn't made the Spiders the anti-Horde spec unit they was on 2nd Edition when i fell in love with them.
I'm interested in running a Wraithlord centered list, but I'm not as interested in Wraith Guard. What do you think would go well with multiple wraith lords, and could it actually be good?
That was my impression about Warp spiders too. I really like them from playing lots of Dawn of War 2, so it's a shame.
Guardians are nothing more than wounds to soak up and protect a grav platform (sadly...). They received a minor buff with Craftworld traits and stratagems but are still perilously fragile Tough 3 models which need to get in close to enemies. At least the Storm Guardians get access to flamers and fusion.
Dire Avengers are an okay choice. Still pricey but good defense (Overwatch) and vaguely capable range if you add in Battle Focus. Still crumble under anything, including lasfire. Some new Shuriken rules can make them shine a bit?
Rangers are now 60% of their previous cost which is much better and sniping is always a decent thing to try. They're still Tough 3 and perish to a strong wind, but hopefully you get some shots off first. Despite their -1 to hit and benefits in cover they are still tissue paper.
Personally, given what you have? I'd say get some scouts.
I'm interested in running a Wraithlord centered list, but I'm not as interested in Wraith Guard. What do you think would go well with multiple wraith lords, and could it actually be good?
That was my impression about Warp spiders too. I really like them from playing lots of Dawn of War 2, so it's a shame.
Well, Wraithlords are meh. Too slow and too low damage output.
Wraithguard with D-scythes is one of the best units in the game.
Elbows wrote: Guardians are nothing more than wounds to soak up and protect a grav platform (sadly...). They received a minor buff with Craftworld traits and stratagems but are still perilously fragile Tough 3 models which need to get in close to enemies. At least the Storm Guardians get access to flamers and fusion.
Dire Avengers are an okay choice. Still pricey but good defense (Overwatch) and vaguely capable range if you add in Battle Focus. Still crumble under anything, including lasfire. Some new Shuriken rules can make them shine a bit?
Rangers are now 60% of their previous cost which is much better and sniping is always a decent thing to try. They're still Tough 3 and perish to a strong wind, but hopefully you get some shots off first. Despite their -1 to hit and benefits in cover they are still tissue paper.
Personally, given what you have? I'd say get some scouts.
Rangers can easily become -3 to hit though. They might be tissue paper, but they're side-on tissue paper. They die fast, if you can hit them.
Elbows wrote: Guardians are nothing more than wounds to soak up and protect a grav platform (sadly...). They received a minor buff with Craftworld traits and stratagems but are still perilously fragile Tough 3 models which need to get in close to enemies. At least the Storm Guardians get access to flamers and fusion.
Dire Avengers are an okay choice. Still pricey but good defense (Overwatch) and vaguely capable range if you add in Battle Focus. Still crumble under anything, including lasfire. Some new Shuriken rules can make them shine a bit?
Rangers are now 60% of their previous cost which is much better and sniping is always a decent thing to try. They're still Tough 3 and perish to a strong wind, but hopefully you get some shots off first. Despite their -1 to hit and benefits in cover they are still tissue paper.
Personally, given what you have? I'd say get some scouts.
Rangers can easily become -3 to hit though. They might be tissue paper, but they're side-on tissue paper. They die fast, if you can hit them.
Everything that can hit them automatically will annihilate them.
Elbows wrote: Guardians are nothing more than wounds to soak up and protect a grav platform (sadly...). They received a minor buff with Craftworld traits and stratagems but are still perilously fragile Tough 3 models which need to get in close to enemies. At least the Storm Guardians get access to flamers and fusion.
Dire Avengers are an okay choice. Still pricey but good defense (Overwatch) and vaguely capable range if you add in Battle Focus. Still crumble under anything, including lasfire. Some new Shuriken rules can make them shine a bit?
Rangers are now 60% of their previous cost which is much better and sniping is always a decent thing to try. They're still Tough 3 and perish to a strong wind, but hopefully you get some shots off first. Despite their -1 to hit and benefits in cover they are still tissue paper.
Personally, given what you have? I'd say get some scouts.
Rangers can easily become -3 to hit though. They might be tissue paper, but they're side-on tissue paper. They die fast, if you can hit them.
Everything that can hit them automatically will annihilate them.
Well... yeh. But isn't that mostly Flamer units with an 8" range? If a unit of those has reached your rangers unmolested, then you already have much bigger problems. Unless the opponent has dedicated a super fast transport like a Valkyrie to carrying a heavy flamer squad, just to kill 60 points of rangers per turn... if so, the Rangers have already done their job.
Unless you were thinking of deep strikers, but they can't land within flamer range, so they'd have to spend a turn sitting around getting shot at before they can attack. Or maybe deep striking assault troops? They only have a 50/50 chance of actually making that charge range, otherwise they also get shot at for a whole turn.
And again, the opponent would have to dedicate one of their deep strike units to try and kill 60 points of Rangers.
wuestenfux wrote: Not the ''normal flamer'', but e.g. the heavy incinerator with 12'' range.
lol, dude, it took me a few minutes of searching to figure out what units can even take a heavy incinerator. I totally thought you'd be talking about Scions, or heavy weapon teams, or something else cheap and spammable that would be a decent unit to throw at cheapo rangers in cover.
Freaking. Nemesis. Dreadknights.
If the opponent decides to send his 250 point + dreadknight against a 60 point unit of Rangers, then those rangers have done their job. Especially as, while the dreadknight is messing around burning small units of Rangers, the Eldar player will completely destroy it in one turn with Fire Prisms, or War Walkers, or Vypers, or anything else that the opponent should be focussing on more than Rangers.
Also, while we are at it, I don't really get your point... is there any 60-point troops choice in the ENTIRE GAME that won't die easily to a Dreadknight with dual heavy incinerators? I mean yeh, concscripts I guess, because you have like 20 of them.
daedalus wrote: Hellhounds have a 16" range Inferno Cannon that does something similar, along with 12" movement. 101 points.
Chaos has the Heldrake. There may be others.
Could also be on its way to get at something else too. NDK deepstrikes in, fries the rangers, and then casually assaults at something else.
Well... I mean it's still 250+ points that has so far only killed 60 points of Rangers. It can then 'casually' assault something, but it still only has a 50/50 chance of making the charge, and that's assuming there's a decent target within 12" of where it landed in order to kill the Rangers in the first place.
And that's then assuming the Dreadknight even gets that far. If we're taking this wild hypothetical to the full distance, then that Dreadknight has to be -very careful- about this perfect landing spot that is within range of multiple Eldar units, because if it is also within line of sight of Dark Reapers, or possibly a Fire Prism, then it might get wiped off the board before it even gets to shoot.
Again, this is your big plan to kill a msu squad of rangers. This seems incredibly stupid, sorry.
And you have listed multiple other pretty expensive units that are capable of killing 60 points of troops, as if this proves that Rangers are weak. But my previous point still holds true - 60 points of ANY TROOPS CHOICE will die equally as much to any of those options.
It's like saying "omg Imperial Guardmen are so terrible, they just die so easily to Wraithguard D-Scythes". Well, yeh.. Duh.
On Dakka a unit from your codex is useless if an opponent can kill it in one turn with a unit that costs twice as much but units from other people's codexes are totally unfair and OP if you can't kill them in one turn with a unit that costs the same.
Elbows wrote: Guardians are nothing more than wounds to soak up and protect a grav platform (sadly...). They received a minor buff with Craftworld traits and stratagems but are still perilously fragile Tough 3 models which need to get in close to enemies. At least the Storm Guardians get access to flamers and fusion.
Dire Avengers are an okay choice. Still pricey but good defense (Overwatch) and vaguely capable range if you add in Battle Focus. Still crumble under anything, including lasfire. Some new Shuriken rules can make them shine a bit?
Rangers are now 60% of their previous cost which is much better and sniping is always a decent thing to try. They're still Tough 3 and perish to a strong wind, but hopefully you get some shots off first. Despite their -1 to hit and benefits in cover they are still tissue paper.
Personally, given what you have? I'd say get some scouts.
I disagree - gardians have become a pretty stellar unit with the new codex. A 20 man unit in a webway drop can be buffed up to some pretty extreme levels and really become a nusance.
Heres the combo
1CP to drop in the guardians - 1 command point to make them +1 to hit. Then you guide them. Then you hit them with Yvraines soulburst ability and reroll 1's. This is an insane amount of Dakka for 200 points. the bright lances are 3+ reroll ones even though they moved and everything else is just rerolling 76 bladestorm shots and 4 birght lances that only miss on 2's.
If you have a warlock or a hemlock nearby you can hit them with +1 save and then hit them with a 4++ save with another command point - that becomes a 3++. Ulthwe have 6+ FNP too. So They are pretty much forced to ignore them - or charge them to tie them up and then they can just use another command point to fallback and shoot. This is a lot of command point use but with an autarch and ulthwe warlord trait it's possible you are getting some of them back.
Dire avengers in an Ulthwe army also seem to be a great buy. You have to combine with asurman ofc to give them 4++ saves but that stacks great with the 6+ FNP - Beiltan also seem like a good choice but that can just be duplicated by an autarchy. 3 10 man avengers sitting strong with 4++ saves and dishing out blade storm seems like it could even be competitive - that's a pretty cheap screening force for something - maybe...D cannons? Fireprisms? IDK.
The rangers though they dropped a lot I just don't see their value. They have no offense and their defense is easy to override with assault/flamers/and ignore cover. Dark reapers eat them for breakfast.
Marfuzzo wrote: got my codex today. overall i already knew everything...but has been a nice surprise to find out havy weapon platform have the "guardian" keyword, the ulthwe' stratagem is gonna work on them
I noticed that too. However it is somewhat limited by the fact that if you get a unit of 3, once deployed they are all treated separately so only 1 can. Benefit from the Stratagem rather than all of them.
that'right, and sucks
Yeah it's really weak. Would have loved to get a unit of 3 D cannons benefiting from the +1 to hit or 4++ stratagem. This does have upside though. It makes them harder to focus down and also lets you cover more area. I still plan on running 6 in my 2000 point army.
On Dakka a unit from your codex is useless if an opponent can kill it in one turn with a unit that costs twice as much but units from other people's codexes are totally unfair and OP if you can't kill them in one turn with a unit that costs the same.
I disagree - gardians have become a pretty stellar unit with the new codex. A 20 man unit in a webway drop can be buffed up to some pretty extreme levels and really become a nusance.
Heres the combo
1CP to drop in the guardians - 1 command point to make them +1 to hit. Then you guide them. Then you hit them with Yvraines soulburst ability and reroll 1's. This is an insane amount of Dakka for 200 points. the bright lances are 3+ reroll ones even though they moved and everything else is just rerolling 76 bladestorm shots and 4 birght lances that only miss on 2's.
If you have a warlock or a hemlock nearby you can hit them with +1 save and then hit them with a 4++ save with another command point - that becomes a 3++. Ulthwe have 6+ FNP too. So They are pretty much forced to ignore them - or charge them to tie them up and then they can just use another command point to fallback and shoot. This is a lot of command point use but with an autarch and ulthwe warlord trait it's possible you are getting some of them back.
It's not that this is weak, but there's a massive opportunity cost here. I would also note that the value of this combo is pretty divorced from the actual cost of the Guardians themselves -- they could cost 9 and it wouldn't be much less appealing or 7 and it wouldn't be much more appealing. Ultimately, you're allocating half of a 100 point Farseer, a ~40 point RoB psyker (and the use of one of the best RoB powers), and the much more valuable of 132 point Yvraine's two psychic powers to this, plus you're paying 50 points for heavy weapons and planning on spending at least 2 CP (including one on a very in-demand stratagem). This is at least 400 points' worth of stuff. Like, for 70 more points you get a full squad of Shining Spears which get just as many catapult shots plus a ton of laser lance attacks if you can make a charge and/or move them closer somehow (Quicken, Soulburst, or Fire and Fade followed by Soulburst), get a 2+/3++ with Protect without having to use another CP, and which are then massively more mobile in later turns while being much less vulnerable to getting tied up in CC.
I feel like you probably only want to be using Guardians cheaply, because once you start adding in the cost of support other options look a lot more appealing. A 20-man unit deep-striking in is pretty good, especially with morale mitigation like the Alatoic warlord trait, but you probably don't want to bother with all the other stuff except maybe the 4++ if they get targeted. Likewise 10-man units in Serpents are decent if unspectacular options. I would certainly put them as the best or second-best Troops pick, with Rangers as the other, but I'm not sure you'd take very many of either if they weren't Troops.
I don't really see the case for Dire Avengers. In your edit you mention Asurmen, but Asurmen is 175 points and is otherwise not that good. This is not a screening force. Even in cover, Dire Avengers near Asurmen are just not that durable in the face of most kinds of anti-infantry shooting, which is what will be used against them anyway and which the 4++ won't even matter for. I think it's uncontroversial at this point that tactical Marines in the open are not very durable. A bolter hit kills 2.17 points of 3+ Marine, and a heavy bolter hit kills 4.33 points of 3+ Marine. Bolter and heavy bolter hits alike kill 4 points of 4+/4++ Avenger, and even if they're in cover the bolter still kills 2.67 points' worth. (Alatoic) Rangers in cover are exactly as durable as Avengers when shot with flamers and are far more durable in the face of (heavy) bolter fire. They also shoot a lot better if the enemy isn't coming to you and are actually not that much worse against MEQs even at close range.
Lots of concern over what you can do to buff cheap troops choices with HQs, psychic powers and stratagems seems kinda silly to me. Sure, you can do it, and forgive me here because I'm not a regular player so my tactical brain might not be that sharp, but wouldn't you be better buffing your tougher, more valuable units? I get that trying to keep every last member of the race alive is very fluffy, but honestly, looking at the stat lines for Eldar, after years off and on of Marine armies, I'm more than resigned to the fact that a bunch of my pointy ears are going to die. I'd rather it be Rangers or Guardians taking us closer to extinction than something actually threatening.
I'll still be looking to get some Rangers, because I can't get over not being able to target characters, so am going to have the option for snipers in any army I build now, but they, and Guardians are going to be list fillers and afterthoughts compared to all the sexy shiny Aspects and Wraiths.
So, are warlocks too expensive or are spiritseers too cheap? Obviously 10pt difference doesnt make the warlock attractive since the seer has full smite and 4 wounds, the latter being important since it means a single perils cant kill him and decimate nearby units.
Playing Iyanden, the seer is fluffy for me but I'd like to take warlocks when playing Ulthwe.
bullyboy wrote: So, are warlocks too expensive or are spiritseers too cheap? Obviously 10pt difference doesnt make the warlock attractive since the seer has full smite and 4 wounds, the latter being important since it means a single perils cant kill him and decimate nearby units. Playing Iyanden, the seer is fluffy for me but I'd like to take warlocks when playing Ulthwe.
I think Spiritseers are about right. They could be 50ppm and still be good Warlocks, otoh, are definitely too expensive. Character Warlocks should be no more than 30ppm and Conclave warlocks should be 25ppm or less. The only reason to ever take Warlocks is to take Skyrunners, but they are also too expensive. 2 Skyrunner Warlocks should cost less than a Skyrunner Farseer, but they do not.
Which model is supposed to be used for a standard Autarch? If GW only has rules for models, why drop the warp jump autarch and keep rules for a model that doesnt exist?
Granted, they probably expect you to use Yriel but he has Iyanden runes on him. Just an odd choice IMHO.
bullyboy wrote: So, are warlocks too expensive or are spiritseers too cheap? Obviously 10pt difference doesnt make the warlock attractive since the seer has full smite and 4 wounds, the latter being important since it means a single perils cant kill him and decimate nearby units.
Playing Iyanden, the seer is fluffy for me but I'd like to take warlocks when playing Ulthwe.
I think Spiritseers are about right. They could be 50ppm and still be good
Warlocks, otoh, are definitely too expensive. Character Warlocks should be no more than 30ppm and Conclave warlocks should be 25ppm or less.
The only reason to ever take Warlocks is to take Skyrunners, but they are also too expensive. 2 Skyrunner Warlocks should cost less than a Skyrunner Farseer, but they do not.
-
Personally, i tend to agree that the basic warlock is too expensive for a 2 wound model, especially when it means you've got a 66% chance of killing yourself and other models if you peril. As for warlock skyrunners, i feel that they are ok when compared to a farseer skyrunner. 2 warlocks are only 5 points more than the farseer, which is the cost of the extra twin shuriken catapult... However, i wouldn't say no if gw decided to change it so they were 5 or 10 points cheaper. But, the set of powers they get are so good, it'd be hard to justify.
wuestenfux wrote: Not the ''normal flamer'', but e.g. the heavy incinerator with 12'' range.
lol, dude, it took me a few minutes of searching to figure out what units can even take a heavy incinerator. I totally thought you'd be talking about Scions, or heavy weapon teams, or something else cheap and spammable that would be a decent unit to throw at cheapo rangers in cover.
Freaking. Nemesis. Dreadknights.
If the opponent decides to send his 250 point + dreadknight against a 60 point unit of Rangers, then those rangers have done their job. Especially as, while the dreadknight is messing around burning small units of Rangers, the Eldar player will completely destroy it in one turn with Fire Prisms, or War Walkers, or Vypers, or anything else that the opponent should be focussing on more than Rangers.
Also, while we are at it, I don't really get your point... is there any 60-point troops choice in the ENTIRE GAME that won't die easily to a Dreadknight with dual heavy incinerators? I mean yeh, concscripts I guess, because you have like 20 of them.
Dont take it too seriously.
There are also situations in which fast moving units with flamers can reach the enemy front ranks and then fry some Rangers.
Do you want an example? Assault Marines can have flamers.
bullyboy wrote: Which model is supposed to be used for a standard Autarch? If GW only has rules for models, why drop the warp jump autarch and keep rules for a model that doesnt exist?
Granted, they probably expect you to use Yriel but he has Iyanden runes on him. Just an odd choice IMHO.
They probably chose too keep the basic Autarch because it would seem weird not to have the basic form of a model when you have two variant versions.
I too believe they expect you to use Yriel. You can always remove the Iyanden iconography.
I disagree - gardians have become a pretty stellar unit with the new codex. A 20 man unit in a webway drop can be buffed up to some pretty extreme levels and really become a nusance.
Heres the combo
1CP to drop in the guardians - 1 command point to make them +1 to hit. Then you guide them. Then you hit them with Yvraines soulburst ability and reroll 1's. This is an insane amount of Dakka for 200 points. the bright lances are 3+ reroll ones even though they moved and everything else is just rerolling 76 bladestorm shots and 4 birght lances that only miss on 2's.
If you have a warlock or a hemlock nearby you can hit them with +1 save and then hit them with a 4++ save with another command point - that becomes a 3++. Ulthwe have 6+ FNP too. So They are pretty much forced to ignore them - or charge them to tie them up and then they can just use another command point to fallback and shoot. This is a lot of command point use but with an autarch and ulthwe warlord trait it's possible you are getting some of them back.
It's not that this is weak, but there's a massive opportunity cost here. I would also note that the value of this combo is pretty divorced from the actual cost of the Guardians themselves -- they could cost 9 and it wouldn't be much less appealing or 7 and it wouldn't be much more appealing. Ultimately, you're allocating half of a 100 point Farseer, a ~40 point RoB psyker (and the use of one of the best RoB powers), and the much more valuable of 132 point Yvraine's two psychic powers to this, plus you're paying 50 points for heavy weapons and planning on spending at least 2 CP (including one on a very in-demand stratagem). This is at least 400 points' worth of stuff. Like, for 70 more points you get a full squad of Shining Spears which get just as many catapult shots plus a ton of laser lance attacks if you can make a charge and/or move them closer somehow (Quicken, Soulburst, or Fire and Fade followed by Soulburst), get a 2+/3++ with Protect without having to use another CP, and which are then massively more mobile in later turns while being much less vulnerable to getting tied up in CC.
I feel like you probably only want to be using Guardians cheaply, because once you start adding in the cost of support other options look a lot more appealing. A 20-man unit deep-striking in is pretty good, especially with morale mitigation like the Alatoic warlord trait, but you probably don't want to bother with all the other stuff except maybe the 4++ if they get targeted. Likewise 10-man units in Serpents are decent if unspectacular options. I would certainly put them as the best or second-best Troops pick, with Rangers as the other, but I'm not sure you'd take very many of either if they weren't Troops.
I don't really see the case for Dire Avengers. In your edit you mention Asurmen, but Asurmen is 175 points and is otherwise not that good. This is not a screening force. Even in cover, Dire Avengers near Asurmen are just not that durable in the face of most kinds of anti-infantry shooting, which is what will be used against them anyway and which the 4++ won't even matter for. I think it's uncontroversial at this point that tactical Marines in the open are not very durable. A bolter hit kills 2.17 points of 3+ Marine, and a heavy bolter hit kills 4.33 points of 3+ Marine. Bolter and heavy bolter hits alike kill 4 points of 4+/4++ Avenger, and even if they're in cover the bolter still kills 2.67 points' worth. (Alatoic) Rangers in cover are exactly as durable as Avengers when shot with flamers and are far more durable in the face of (heavy) bolter fire. They also shoot a lot better if the enemy isn't coming to you and are actually not that much worse against MEQs even at close range.
You make good points. It's also not easy to acquire command points in eldar as their troops aren't cheap. I still think the 20 man Guardian drop has potential with soulburst. Then again - A 10 man dark reaper does too and it doesn't even require command points to work. Rangers fit best into the gun line concept I guess and they are pretty cheap. Eldar just don't seem like a good gunline army to me. Their best damage comes at close range. I guess you could build a list with all long range shooting. Fireprisms/darkreapers/warwalkers/crimson hunters all have good firepower per cost. Maybe the gardian deepstrike has more value as a defensive drop than offense?
I disagree - gardians have become a pretty stellar unit with the new codex. A 20 man unit in a webway drop can be buffed up to some pretty extreme levels and really become a nusance.
You stumbled upon the thing I've been trying lately, and having a ton of fun with.
20 Guardians with 2 Shuriken Cannons coming out of Webway Strike to perform as a roadblock/forward line/general headache. What has REALLY surprised me is that 36 Shuriken Catapult shots and 6 Cannon shots with the Biel-Tan craftworld trait is deceptively strong. I put Protect on them, as well, and kept the CP ready to give them the 4+ invulnerable save (3+ with protect active). They've far exceeded my expectations. Took down about half a Rhino, 5-ish Noise Marines, 5-ish Berserkers in overwatch, an enemy Farseer on jetbike, a full squad of Hellions, and a Chaos Sorcerer in just two games. They also got beat up by Kharne in melee because Jain Zar kept knocking away his axe so he'd take out that frustration on the poor Guardians, they also did more damage to Kharne than Jain did thanks to some good invuls from Kharne, and some bad wound rolls from Jain. The one snag with Guardians like that would be their Morale. It is easy to force some morale casualties on them, especially when Protect + Celestial Shield (or whatever the stratagem is named) are not available.
All-in-all, though, I have been REALLY pleased with Webway Striking Guardian blobs. It addresses one of their most obvious weaknesses: engaging them with that shoddy 12" gun so that your opponent has to make a decision on whether they are worth the resources to remove.
Indeed, a large Guardian Defender unit popping out of the webway can be rather scary. The Biel Tan attribute is mandatory here.
Surprisingly, they can be made quite durable for a short while.
The rangers though they dropped a lot I just don't see their value. They have no offense and their defense is easy to override with assault/flamers/and ignore cover. Dark reapers eat them for breakfast.
Are Reapers better? Sure they are but Rangers are much cheaper and they are Troops which is useful for ObjSec and farming CPs.
Rangers also have double the range of the next nearest contender in the Troops section (Guardian platforms aside) which means they don't need transports or Webway shenanigans (which eat up your CPs). Just drop your Rangers on a cosy objective on a flank and plink away with them.
Nobody is claiming they are a powerhouse unit but for 60 points they are decent in the right context. If you opponent dedicates something more expensive to hunting them down then they are probably worth the distraction. Best result is if your opponent shoots them half-heartedly in the hope of shifting them and ends up splitting his firepower without seriously affecting the Rangers.
daedalus wrote: Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
daedalus wrote: Anyone else notice that there's an effective 18 different psychic powers to cast?
Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
Yeah - I think at least 3-4 warlocks are needed in your eldar force these days. Too bad they only have 1 power each. It's also too bad farseers can't use the runes of battle...these powers are pretty much better than runes of fate from a buff perspective. Runes of fate is pretty much offensive except for fortune and the morale buff. I really want to run a big unit of warlocks but I think they are much better utilized as single models so they remain characters.
daedalus wrote: Anyone else notice that there's an effective 18 different psychic powers to cast?
Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
Yeah - I think at least 3-4 warlocks are needed in your eldar force these days. Too bad they only have 1 power each. It's also too bad farseers can't use the runes of battle...these powers are pretty much better than runes of fate from a buff perspective. Runes of fate is pretty much offensive except for fortune and the morale buff. I really want to run a big unit of warlocks but I think they are much better utilized as single models so they remain characters.
Supreme Command detachment, 3 Warlocks for 105 points... and the CP from it is a nice bonus. Really nice solution to that problem
daedalus wrote: Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
You always could.
Huh. Yeah, I guess you can. I'm pretty sure my opponents had always been playing it as casting either/or. Still, 18 powers is pretty amazing though.
daedalus wrote: Anyone else notice that there's an effective 18 different psychic powers to cast?
Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
Yeah - I think at least 3-4 warlocks are needed in your eldar force these days. Too bad they only have 1 power each. It's also too bad farseers can't use the runes of battle...these powers are pretty much better than runes of fate from a buff perspective. Runes of fate is pretty much offensive except for fortune and the morale buff. I really want to run a big unit of warlocks but I think they are much better utilized as single models so they remain characters.
Supreme Command detachment, 3 Warlocks for 105 points... and the CP from it is a nice bonus. Really nice solution to that problem
Yep - was thinking the same thing. You can even make them whatever craftworld you want in this situation.
daedalus wrote: Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
You always could.
Huh. Yeah, I guess you can. I'm pretty sure my opponents had always been playing it as casting either/or. Still, 18 powers is pretty amazing though.
Oh yes, the extra powers are really nice, but it's annoying that you only get one non-smite power for each RoB psyker.
I disagree - gardians have become a pretty stellar unit with the new codex. A 20 man unit in a webway drop can be buffed up to some pretty extreme levels and really become a nusance.
You stumbled upon the thing I've been trying lately, and having a ton of fun with.
20 Guardians with 2 Shuriken Cannons coming out of Webway Strike to perform as a roadblock/forward line/general headache. What has REALLY surprised me is that 36 Shuriken Catapult shots and 6 Cannon shots with the Biel-Tan craftworld trait is deceptively strong. I put Protect on them, as well, and kept the CP ready to give them the 4+ invulnerable save (3+ with protect active). They've far exceeded my expectations. Took down about half a Rhino, 5-ish Noise Marines, 5-ish Berserkers in overwatch, an enemy Farseer on jetbike, a full squad of Hellions, and a Chaos Sorcerer in just two games. They also got beat up by Kharne in melee because Jain Zar kept knocking away his axe so he'd take out that frustration on the poor Guardians, they also did more damage to Kharne than Jain did thanks to some good invuls from Kharne, and some bad wound rolls from Jain. The one snag with Guardians like that would be their Morale. It is easy to force some morale casualties on them, especially when Protect + Celestial Shield (or whatever the stratagem is named) are not available.
All-in-all, though, I have been REALLY pleased with Webway Striking Guardian blobs. It addresses one of their most obvious weaknesses: engaging them with that shoddy 12" gun so that your opponent has to make a decision on whether they are worth the resources to remove.
I've got this pretty much refined down with my Alaitoc army (I was Alaitoc before the codex too, my 20 Guardians are all converted lol)
Webway strike the Guardians for 1CP, then have a Shiftshroud relic Warlord Farseer (Alaitoc relic) pop up in support of them. Farseer has Guide and Fortune for casting on the Guardians, as well as the Alaitoc Puritanical Leader Warlord Trait, giving the Guardians autopass on morale.
Whole setup only costs 1CP and the Farseer and Guardians themselves are only 290 odd points for the package.
daedalus wrote: Anyone else notice that there's an effective 18 different psychic powers to cast?
Each Runes of Battle effect counts as a different power for matched play. You can Conceal a unit, and then Reveal a different one. That's fascinating.
Yeah - I think at least 3-4 warlocks are needed in your eldar force these days. Too bad they only have 1 power each. It's also too bad farseers can't use the runes of battle...these powers are pretty much better than runes of fate from a buff perspective. Runes of fate is pretty much offensive except for fortune and the morale buff. I really want to run a big unit of warlocks but I think they are much better utilized as single models so they remain characters.
Supreme Command detachment, 3 Warlocks for 105 points... and the CP from it is a nice bonus. Really nice solution to that problem
I love the Supreme Command detachment. Coming from a very 2nd edition army composition mindset I always like to have a few more characters than the basic 2 that Patrols give you. That it nets us an extra CP is all the better. It's also a cheeky way to stick in an extra Elite unit too.
Not sure why you'd willingly choose Warlocks, though (at least, from a competitive standpoint).
Smitespam might be nerfed and that's all well and good, but for 10 points I will 100% take the ability to survive one peril and not require me to burn a reroll over getting instagibbed 2/3 times when you peril.
Peril deaths are a much bigger deal in 8th than 7th.
The Eldar list I just wrote up for my force features 1 farseer, 5 spiritseers and a Hemlock (for Horrify). Every RoB power is worth taking, and none of them are blatantly OP with the nerf to Conceal.
New Runes of Battle may actually be the single best psychic table we've ever seen in the game. Nothing broken, nothing worthless, all worth around 35/45 points to grab a character to bring to the table.
the_scotsman wrote: Not sure why you'd willingly choose Warlocks, though (at least, from a competitive standpoint).
Smitespam might be nerfed and that's all well and good, but for 10 points I will 100% take the ability to survive one peril and not require me to burn a reroll over getting instagibbed 2/3 times when you peril.
Peril deaths are a much bigger deal in 8th than 7th.
The Eldar list I just wrote up for my force features 1 farseer, 5 spiritseers and a Hemlock (for Horrify). Every RoB power is worth taking, and none of them are blatantly OP with the nerf to Conceal.
New Runes of Battle may actually be the single best psychic table we've ever seen in the game. Nothing broken, nothing worthless, all worth around 35/45 points to grab a character to bring to the table.
Because it gets the point across without having to dive into tactics, point investments, configurations and blah blah.
Yes, you can make a Supreme Command with 3 Spirit Seers and enjoy all those perks for 135 instead of 105.
Me, personally? Love being a bit more fluffy. Farseer + Warlock/Spirit Seer in a Supreme Command and call it part of the Warhost's Council. Not like I wasn't bringing a Farseer, either way!
the_scotsman wrote: Not sure why you'd willingly choose Warlocks, though (at least, from a competitive standpoint).
Smitespam might be nerfed and that's all well and good, but for 10 points I will 100% take the ability to survive one peril and not require me to burn a reroll over getting instagibbed 2/3 times when you peril.
Peril deaths are a much bigger deal in 8th than 7th.
The Eldar list I just wrote up for my force features 1 farseer, 5 spiritseers and a Hemlock (for Horrify). Every RoB power is worth taking, and none of them are blatantly OP with the nerf to Conceal.
New Runes of Battle may actually be the single best psychic table we've ever seen in the game. Nothing broken, nothing worthless, all worth around 35/45 points to grab a character to bring to the table.
They have the same psychic ability -1 the smite. Safe to say you wont ever be casting smite with a warlock anyways though. Most of the warlock powers are better than smite. So it really just comes down to the points you have available. You get 4 warlocks for every 3 spirit seers. The main drawback is in durability but in character form warlocks are immune to enemy shooting anyways. They probably should cost 5 points less but runes of battle is also as you say - the best psychic discipline yet released.
the_scotsman wrote: Not sure why you'd willingly choose Warlocks, though (at least, from a competitive standpoint).
Smitespam might be nerfed and that's all well and good, but for 10 points I will 100% take the ability to survive one peril and not require me to burn a reroll over getting instagibbed 2/3 times when you peril.
Peril deaths are a much bigger deal in 8th than 7th.
The Eldar list I just wrote up for my force features 1 farseer, 5 spiritseers and a Hemlock (for Horrify). Every RoB power is worth taking, and none of them are blatantly OP with the nerf to Conceal.
New Runes of Battle may actually be the single best psychic table we've ever seen in the game. Nothing broken, nothing worthless, all worth around 35/45 points to grab a character to bring to the table.
Because it gets the point across without having to dive into tactics, point investments, configurations and blah blah.
Yes, you can make a Supreme Command with 3 Spirit Seers and enjoy all those perks for 135 instead of 105.
Me, personally? Love being a bit more fluffy. Farseer + Warlock/Spirit Seer in a Supreme Command and call it part of the Warhost's Council. Not like I wasn't bringing a Farseer, either way!
Yeah, I'm just using the warlock models as Spiritseers aka "warlocks who aren't garbage at being psykers". I like the models better. Just like how I use a Wyrdvane model as my primaris - the puffed up space wizard sculpt just doesn't do it for me.
Xenomancers wrote: You get 4 warlocks for every 3 spirit seers. The main drawback is in durability but in character form warlocks are immune to enemy shooting anyways.
What they aren't immune to, as has been pointed out and ignored by you already, is Perils. Which will not only be ignored by a Spiritseer and kill a Warlock, but also kill whatever that Warlock is standing next to.
Yep...a Toughness 3, two-wound model is a psychic bomb waiting to go off in the middle of your army --- particularly when your casting impacts units at very close distance, meaning you're standing next to them.
Warlocks suck cheesy choad. I'll still take a couple because I have the models, but they've fallen so comically far from what they used to be...makes me sad panda.
Elbows wrote: Yep...a Toughness 3, two-wound model is a psychic bomb waiting to go off in the middle of your army --- particularly when your casting impacts units at very close distance, meaning you're standing next to them.
Warlocks suck cheesy choad. I'll still take a couple because I have the models, but they've fallen so comically far from what they used to be...makes me sad panda.
I feel it necessary to point out that many of the runes of battle are no longer auras and have a range of 18". While your warlocks are still wandering psychic landmines... the fact that they have to be right up close to friendly models to work is misleading.
You can certainly position to mitigate the perils... or take spiritseers.
wuestenfux wrote: Indeed, a large Guardian Defender unit popping out of the webway can be rather scary. The Biel Tan attribute is mandatory here.
Surprisingly, they can be made quite durable for a short while.
I disagree with Biel Tan attribute being mandatory, I don't even think it's the second best.
Alaitoc you can freely bring a character in support, who if warlord, confers fearless. 100 point Farseer is pretty useful - Guide and Fortune perhaps. Also Alaitoc trait sometimes in play.
Ulthwe, you can just drop the Guardians as is without support character and still be effective: 1CP for +1 to hit and FotD. Not quite as good as rerolls and Fortune and fearless but without the 100 point warlord character.
Biel Tan rerolling hit rolls of 1 for Shurikens comes 3rd.
NurglesR0T wrote: Being a long time Biel Tan player I'm pretty happy with the traits. Free captain aura for all models shooting shuriken weapons is deceptively good.
Warlord trait is also quite good on a Farseer. Basically a free cast of Guide on a unit (albeit short range)
Not saying it's bad overall, it's just not the best pick for Webway Guardians. I'd even put Iyanden ahead of it, just because if you're bringing a couple of heavy weapons platforms with your Webway Guardian drop, that morale boosting trait has a big impact in ensuring the opponent can't just rely on morale to take care of the platforms.
So Alaitoc has the best benefits, but you probably want to commit more to take advantage of character support.
Then Ulthwe and Iyanden,
Then Biel Tan,
Last Saim Hain, but you probably want to go a different way than Guardians with their WWP given reroll to charges.
Xenomancers wrote: You get 4 warlocks for every 3 spirit seers. The main drawback is in durability but in character form warlocks are immune to enemy shooting anyways.
What they aren't immune to, as has been pointed out and ignored by you already, is Perils. Which will not only be ignored by a Spiritseer and kill a Warlock, but also kill whatever that Warlock is standing next to.
I think Mortal wounds only effect the unit and can not spill over into another unit.
Xenomancers wrote: You get 4 warlocks for every 3 spirit seers. The main drawback is in durability but in character form warlocks are immune to enemy shooting anyways.
What they aren't immune to, as has been pointed out and ignored by you already, is Perils. Which will not only be ignored by a Spiritseer and kill a Warlock, but also kill whatever that Warlock is standing next to.
Nah I get that - Ultimately I will pick a spirit seer every time over a warlock. It's just some strategies might only have the points available for 3 warlocks not 3 spirit seers.
Elbows wrote: I really hope Warlocks get an FAQ at some point...they're simply terrible. Now I need to buy and convert a bunch of Warlocks into Spiritseers (sigh).
nah - warlocks and spirit seers are basically interchangeable model wise IMO.
Xenomancers wrote: You get 4 warlocks for every 3 spirit seers. The main drawback is in durability but in character form warlocks are immune to enemy shooting anyways.
What they aren't immune to, as has been pointed out and ignored by you already, is Perils. Which will not only be ignored by a Spiritseer and kill a Warlock, but also kill whatever that Warlock is standing next to.
I think Mortal wounds only effect the unit and can not spill over into another unit.
This is true. But if the Warlock dies to Perils (which it will), he explodes and deals wounds to anything nearby.
Used 2 warlocks today....just couldn't find the points to upgrade to spiritseers (I did have one in my list) so that can happen. Did not perils in the game but was cautious where I placed them.
Elbows wrote: I really hope Warlocks get an FAQ at some point...they're simply terrible. Now I need to buy and convert a bunch of Warlocks into Spiritseers (sigh).
nah - warlocks and spirit seers are basically interchangeable model wise IMO.
Eh, they look different and have different wargear...so I'll be modeling them appropriately.
Halfpast_Yellow wrote: [spoiler] I've got this pretty much refined down with my Alaitoc army (I was Alaitoc before the codex too, my 20 Guardians are all converted lol)
Webway strike the Guardians for 1CP, then have a Shiftshroud relic Warlord Farseer (Alaitoc relic) pop up in support of them. Farseer has Guide and Fortune for casting on the Guardians, as well as the Alaitoc Puritanical Leader Warlord Trait, giving the Guardians autopass on morale.
Whole setup only costs 1CP and the Farseer and Guardians themselves are only 290 odd points for the package.
can you give 2 relics to the same character?
You could take the Asuraman psychic power instead of guide for the same effect....then deep strike in some warp spiders and swooping hawks to give them all the same buff.
wuestenfux wrote: Not the ''normal flamer'', but e.g. the heavy incinerator with 12'' range.
lol, dude, it took me a few minutes of searching to figure out what units can even take a heavy incinerator. I totally thought you'd be talking about Scions, or heavy weapon teams, or something else cheap and spammable that would be a decent unit to throw at cheapo rangers in cover.
Freaking. Nemesis. Dreadknights.
If the opponent decides to send his 250 point + dreadknight against a 60 point unit of Rangers, then those rangers have done their job. Especially as, while the dreadknight is messing around burning small units of Rangers, the Eldar player will completely destroy it in one turn with Fire Prisms, or War Walkers, or Vypers, or anything else that the opponent should be focussing on more than Rangers.
Also, while we are at it, I don't really get your point... is there any 60-point troops choice in the ENTIRE GAME that won't die easily to a Dreadknight with dual heavy incinerators? I mean yeh, concscripts I guess, because you have like 20 of them.
Dont take it too seriously.
There are also situations in which fast moving units with flamers can reach the enemy front ranks and then fry some Rangers.
Do you want an example? Assault Marines can have flamers.
I'm curious when the last time you saw Assault Marines with Flamers is. For me that was when you had the free Drop Pod.
Played a game yesterday with 3, each with Quicken, Conceal and protect respectively.
Having them that way meant that in any given turn I could prioritise the power I needed most and just use Seer Council Stratagem on them for the +1 to cast. Made a difference. You can’t do that with Spirit Seers.
Most of the time their increased Smite is irrelevant as you are only normally using their RoB powers anyway. And double 1s and double 6s are too infrequent to prevent their use. Just be careful on how you position them and keep a CP handy in case.
I don’t bother taking Spirit Seers as I value the 10pts and use of Seer Council more than the extra 2 wounds.
About the Conclave of Warlocks....with a big unit you can cast 3 times per round. Smite and 2 powers. Is it possible to just cast smite 3 times or must you do each power only once???
admironheart wrote: About the Conclave of Warlocks....with a big unit you can cast 3 times per round. Smite and 2 powers. Is it possible to just cast smite 3 times or must you do each power only once???
The Conclave unit is a psyker, there just happens to be more than one model in the unit. They can only attempt to manifest each power once each turn.
admironheart wrote: About the Conclave of Warlocks....with a big unit you can cast 3 times per round. Smite and 2 powers. Is it possible to just cast smite 3 times or must you do each power only once???
The Conclave unit is a psyker, there just happens to be more than one model in the unit. They can only attempt to manifest each power once each turn.
Isn't Smite excluded from the "only once per turn" rule?
admironheart wrote: About the Conclave of Warlocks....with a big unit you can cast 3 times per round. Smite and 2 powers. Is it possible to just cast smite 3 times or must you do each power only once???
The Conclave unit is a psyker, there just happens to be more than one model in the unit. They can only attempt to manifest each power once each turn.
Isn't Smite excluded from the "only once per turn" rule?
Yes and no. There are two once per turn restrictions, one in the general psyker rules and one for matched play. Smite is only exempt from Psychic Focus, the matched play specific rule.
Chance of a Warlock exploding from a psy test: 3.7%
Chance of warlock exploding with a CP reroll: 0.6%
A gambling man can save himself 10pts per psyker.
For one Warlock, yeah. This might make sense, for access to the Seer Council stratagem if nothing else. It gets a lot riskier with multiple Warlocks, and you're also risking not being able to use a CP to make sure that a power goes off. Like, with three Warlocks you have a ~10% chance each turn that one of them explodes, barring re-rolls. And what happens if your first Warlock rolls a 5 and a 1 for Quicken? Do you use a CP to re-roll the 1, even though you've got more Warlocks coming up? The Warlocks are also much more vulnerable to snipers and weird moves like Orbital Bombardment.
Sexy indeed. Its only a 1/18 chance per cast that you are faced with the decision to spend a CP or not. I wouldn't save CP if I needed the reroll earlier in the phase.
I would take 2 Spiritseers for Protect and Quicken then 2 warlocks for Enhance and Empower. The warlocks are acceptable losses if they pop so long as I keep them away from other units.
I run 3 Warlocks as standard, one for each of Protect, Conceal and Quicken.
I don’t know from turn to turn which one will be the most important, so having them all as Warlocks means in any given turn I can prioritise the use of Seer Council Stratagem accordingly.
If any of those 3 were a Spirit Seer, they would not have that option for the +1 to cast that key power that turn. I almost always use the Stratagem every turn to ensure I get my Farseers powers off, as 7s are a lot better to get to with the +1.
Tried Spirit Seers but not worth it imho, that’s lack of Seer Council optIon and net 30pts I would lose elsewhere in my list.
Purifying Tempest wrote: Compare Warlock to Malefic Lord - it is vastly overpriced for what it provides.
That being said... it is what we got, and they provide some really good buffs.
At least for 10 points you get some rigidity vs Perils AND a normal Smite, I believe.
Destructor is so bad for the risk...
You compared Warlocks to a broken unit? /shrug
It was too easy
Are Malefic Lords too good? Absolutely. They probably need to be in the 50+ point range.
Are Warlocks bad? Absolutely. Give them two wounds, and they're fine. That would mean all Spiritseers would provide is their horrible Wraith Sight trait and normal Smite for 10 points.
That would probably make Conclaves a lot better, too.
Wait, don't warlocks have 3 wounds in their character version?
Also, Malefic Lords and Primaris Pskyers are about the same.
The Malefic Lord has +1 save, and +1 toughness, and Warp Possession. The Primaris Psyker has +1 Weapon Skill, +1 Ballistic Skill, and It's For Your Own Good, as well as a laspistol.
The Malefic Lord is 2 points more expensive than the Primaris Psyker, if you strip away their wargear.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Wait, don't warlocks have 3 wounds in their character version?
Also, Malefic Lords and Primaris Pskyers are about the same.
The Malefic Lord has +1 save, and +1 toughness, and Warp Possession. The Primaris Psyker has +1 Weapon Skill, +1 Ballistic Skill, and It's For Your Own Good, as well as a laspistol.
The Malefic Lord is 2 points more expensive than the Primaris Psyker, if you strip away their wargear.
Warlocks have 2 wounds in both Conclave and solo configs. You can throw them on a Skyrunner to get 3.
Giving them 2 extra wounds would put them on par with those other guys, but they'd have the reduced stats for being Eldar.
Xenomancers wrote: They should cost 25 points and 20 in the conclave I think. The bike upgrade should only be 20 points too - not the current 35 that it is.
^^^This, so much this. I am fine with them only having 2 wounds (3 on a Skyrunner) as long as the points make sense for it. Alternatively, I would be happy with Warlocks at their current cost if they had 3 wounds (4 on Skyrunner) and Destructor was only half range, but still D3 mortal wounds.
The fact is, Warlocks could have been good choices equal to Spiritseers, but GW chose to over nerf them for no reason.
Just saw my first game with new Eldar. It was 2v2, Adepticon TT rules, my side GK/SM against two Eldar lists.
We barely squeezed out the win on objectives only because we called the game early at end of 3rd because one of the other guys needed to leave. The GK player was basically tabled by then, and I was solidly down roughly half my marines by the end of it.
20 rangers managed to kill my lieutenant across 3 turns. Actually, it was more like 20 rangers, 15 rangers, 6 rangers, cause I was desperately poking holes in them to try to stop them. They might not have caused a TON of damage, but they're pretty hard to move off an objective.
Biggest thing that caught us both off guard was the GK guy getting his GMDK taken down to one wound (due to lucky saves, as we determined later) from dark reapers during our turn because of a stratagem that gives a squad of eldar 7th ed interceptor in reaction to someone deep striking. We talk about bad game design a lot, and I feel like none of us really know what the feth we're talking about when we do that, but it does seem like a poor choice to give one army the ability to act entirely out of turn like that. And to be fair, we didn't know eldar. Totes our fault in that regard. He might have done something else with that DK if we knew it was a possibility. At the same time, there's not a lot else you can do with a DK other than deep strike it. The ability strikes me somewhat as a modern warp quake for denial purposes. Crazy good, at worst. At least it can only be used once per turn, for what little that's worth.
Rending shuriken weapons are still incredibly powerful. I'm fantasizing about an army of guardians just marching across a table edge, murdering literally everything when they get to the opponent. I mean, why not?
The thing that really sucked the air out of the room though was the Warp Spiders on the last turn though. Flickerjump, Fieldcraft, and Lightning Fast Reflexes really should not stack. Alternatively, we call excitedly admit that Invisibility is back and better than ever, in spite of being one of the reasons 7th was so bad.
Sadly, I think that was the final nail in the coffin for 8th for me though. Not for myself. I, at least, have a couple of decently strong codexes to work with, but that kind of killed it for at least half of the guys I normally play with.
The Stratagem "Auspex Scan" allows you to shoot deep strikers as well.
I had missed that one, so I guess that out of turn reactions aren't completely unheard of.
Wow though. The difference between those powers is staggering. I don't know if I've seen a situation where I could have used that and would actually want to.
The Stratagem "Auspex Scan" allows you to shoot deep strikers as well.
I had missed that one, so I guess that out of turn reactions aren't completely unheard of.
Wow though. The difference between those powers is staggering. I don't know if I've seen a situation where I could have used that and would actually want to.
I feel like your game had nothing to do with Eldar being OP (they are far from it) and more to do with not having enough familiarity with what other armies can do. Imperial armies actually have just as many "trick", if not more, than Eldar do. And Marine particularly have some of the most cost effective options.
This was why I was excited about the Indexes, but am becoming disappointed by the Codices. While the Indexes are clearly limited, they give newer players the ability to get "up to speed" with every enemy faction and can thus play to the fullest ability of their faction (i.e. adapt) I like what the Codices are doing overall, but I am sad that they are just pilling on all this extra "stuff". It is already starting to feel as convoluted as 7th.
I feel like your game had nothing to do with Eldar being OP and more to do with you guys not having enough familiarity with what other armies can do.
I definitely think that's at least partially the matter. I mean, I'll totally own that on the fact that we got caught off-guard by the deep strike sucker punch. I'm also going to keep pointing out the massive difference in what the 2CP stratagem gets you from SM from what it does in Eldar, as a component of said shock. I don't think the implications of that have been thought all the way through. Like, that's better than Coteaz was back in the day when he was "gamebreakingly OP" (not my words). It's huge.
The other component was just this sudden sinking feeling about literally seeing better than invisibility come back into the game. I felt like that was specifically one of the things with 2++ that were called out as the reason why 8th happened in the first place. Like, I thought that was officially said once on the warhammer-community site. I'm trying to find it now.
The Stratagem "Auspex Scan" allows you to shoot deep strikers as well.
I had missed that one, so I guess that out of turn reactions aren't completely unheard of.
Wow though. The difference between those powers is staggering. I don't know if I've seen a situation where I could have used that and would actually want to.
That's because it's a worthless limited range stratagem that also give's you -1 to hit.
Alpharius wrote: How did the Phoenix Lords fare this time around?
Especially Karandras?
Karandras did not fare to well - but asureman and maugan ra are pretty good for what you pay for.
Ah, that's too bad!
Karandras is my favorite, and I've love to start something up using him and some Scorpions as a base.
I've got this sweet Stiking Scorpion Wraithlord conversion I'd love to use too...
Any more details on my Karandras is bad and Asurmen and Maugan are good?
If you are into striking scoripons I think you'd be pleased to play with them - they are probably the best melle unit in the codex and they have some neat rules. Karandas is just basically a big striking scorpion - he doesn't have any really cool buff effect.
Asurman gives all aspects 5++ saves within 6 " and a 4++ to dire avengers. That is quite a good buff. Maugan lets all reapers around him reroll 1's and he himself can shoot his super shuriken cannon with 2 fire modes twice (dark reapers are basically the best unit in the codex too so that helps him).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fafnir wrote: The Guillistar doesn't care about -1 to hit.
Of course, if you're not running Guilliman... well, that depends on how much you need to put down that deepstriking unit.
A single razorback with -1 to hit is not a threat to any unit you'd willingly drop into 12" range to active the strategem. A unit of hellblasters isn't even scary - with -1 to hit overcharging is suicide. About the only unit that is scary in that situation would be aggressors because they can have 24 shots each if they havn't moved. Still - just go after another target out of 12" and you don't have to worry.
Alpharius wrote: How did the Phoenix Lords fare this time around?
Especially Karandras?
Karandras did not fare to well - but asureman and maugan ra are pretty good for what you pay for.
Ah, that's too bad!
Karandras is my favorite, and I've love to start something up using him and some Scorpions as a base.
I've got this sweet Stiking Scorpion Wraithlord conversion I'd love to use too...
Any more details on my Karandras is bad and Asurmen and Maugan are good?
He gets four attacks at S8/AP-3/Dd3, in addition to an extra attack on hit rolls of 6, and does 1.3 mortal wounds at the beginning of every fight phase, which is pretty nice. He can even come from reserves, which is a nice touch.
His problem is that he has no shooting presence, he buffs a unit that honestly is just not good, and he's 150 points for the privilege of all that. He also doesn't get an invulnerable save, which is a dangerous situation to be in when you're dropping right into the thick of it.
He's not garbage, because I'm sure we've all had situations where a deepstriking powerfist would be useful. But he's also not particularly good either, because he's a 150 point deepstriking powerfist, and that's still a lot to pay.
Asurmen has a 4++ (3++ in CC), dishes out some pretty good damage in CC (with some solid mortal wound output to boot!), and gives a solid invulnerable save bubble to Aspect Warriors within 6". He also doubles Dire Avenger overwatch capabilities.
Maugan Ra just has a solid toolkit that works well at any range. He's a bit expensive, but he'll put in work no matter where you put him.
Yes the Necrons sniper units have that same function and no cost in CP.
The Mordians also have the Strategem to auto target deep strike units within 12"...so Eldar don't deep strike guardians or cc units near a Mordian unit.
admironheart wrote: Yes the Necrons sniper units have that same function and no cost in CP.
The Mordians also have the Strategem to auto target deep strike units within 12"...so Eldar don't deep strike guardians or cc units near a Mordian unit.
There's a substantial difference between "I have to deep strike 12.01 inches away if I don't want to get shot" and "I literally cannot deep strike this unit without immediately removing it from the table."
You could also just wait a turn, kill or heavily injure the Reapers before deep striking the following turn. They are not that hard to kill. That way there is little if anything of the Reapers to shoot your deep striking unit.
Going back to the previous page, I really don't think Warlocks are too expensive.
First off I think the comparison to Malific lords and other cheap psykers is not very useful. Aside from the fact those are generally considered to be too cheap, they are not options in the Eldar codex and they don't cast Runes of Battle.
35pts to have access to one of the best tables of psychic powers is a price worth paying. Index dire avengers were too expensive- they just didn't do anything that was worth paying for- not so for warlocks. If guardians didn't exist you still wouldn't have wanted to pay for Dire Avengers- if Spirtseers didn't exist you would absolutely want to take Warlocks.
Now, there is definitely an argument for saying that the Spiritseer is a better buy for the points, so maybe the difference in price should be bigger, but paying 5pts more for the Sseer would make as much sense as paying 5 less for the Warlock. It's also worth remembering that in the majority of games there will be no practical difference between what these two options do.
Essentially what I'm saying is, regardless of the stat line, a Runes of Battle power is easily worth 35pts.
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: Going back to the previous page, I really don't think Warlocks are too expensive.
First off I think the comparison to Malific lords and other cheap psykers is not very useful. Aside from the fact those are generally considered to be too cheap, they are not options in the Eldar codex and they don't cast Runes of Battle.
35pts to have access to one of the best tables of psychic powers is a price worth paying. Index dire avengers were too expensive- they just didn't do anything that was worth paying for- not so for warlocks. If guardians didn't exist you still wouldn't have wanted to pay for Dire Avengers- if Spirtseers didn't exist you would absolutely want to take Warlocks.
Now, there is definitely an argument for saying that the Spiritseer is a better buy for the points, so maybe the difference in price should be bigger, but paying 5pts more for the Sseer would make as much sense as paying 5 less for the Warlock. It's also worth remembering that in the majority of games there will be no practical difference between what these two options do.
Essentially what I'm saying is, regardless of the stat line, a Runes of Battle power is easily worth 35pts.
I don't think this is a great way to look at it. Like, yes, for many lists a particular psychic power on turn 1 is going to be worth at least 35 points, and actually the stuff you're combining it with makes the cost of the power pretty insignificant. Say you're using Quicken on a big unit of Wraithguard or Wraithblades. If Wraithblades are anywhere near worth their price as a standalone unit, obviously it's worth paying 35 points and a CP to deep strike them and get them into CC turn 1. But the same could be said for a ton of psykers -- Runes of Battle don't jump out to me as being head and shoulders above all other disciplines. What it comes down to is that psykers are typically not costed as upgrades to units. Perhaps because of the matched play restriction, they're often fairly pushed, where they're cheap enough that of course you're going to take some and then the interesting decisions you make are about what powers to take and what to use them on. And so the cross-faction comparisons are very relevant. Several factions get psykers that aren't just not-overpriced but are clearly far too cheap for what they do in terms of their buffing/debuffing impact relative to other choices. The question is how Warlocks look compared to comparable psykers in other factions and how they look compared to other choices in the same codex.
The easiest thing to compare a Warlock to is an Astropath. The Warlock has 1 fewer wound but a better save, which makes him less durable overall probably, and is slightly better in CC but really you don't want either one anywhere near CC. Both have a bad version of Smite although the Astropath's is a lot better. Many of the Astropath's powers look a lot like Runes of Battle powers, and in some ways are actually better. Psychic Barrier is WC6 instead of 7 and improves any Guard unit's saves by 1. Likewise Nightshroud is a WC6 Conceal that targets any Guard unit. These can even be used on flyers and superheavies -- obviously it's worth paying 15 points to buff a Shadowsword like this. They even have a better version of Horrify (but both are bad and you shouldn't use them) and a pseudo-Smite that you could use instead of their inherent nerfed one. Astropaths also have an ability that functions a lot like a free, guaranteed cast of Reveal every turn (granted it only benefits nearby units). The only compensating advantage Warlocks get is that their powers have two modes, but in practice, if you're bringing a Warlock, he's probably casting just one mode for the first several turns of the game in 99% of games. The point is: there's a huge mismatch here. It seems basically impossible to justify the cost difference between Warlocks and Astropaths.
I think the Warlock should cost more than the Astropath for a few reasons (though arguable by how much)
1. There are a lot more better targets for the buffs than in an Imperial Guard army (Wraithguard, Shining Spears, Shadow Spectres etc)
2. Runes of Battle are more flexible having both buff and rebuff applications
3. Warlocks benefit from army wide craftworld traits which are better than the AM ones (eg Alaitoc to help against enemy snipers)
4. Warlock has a 4++ save. Much better than Astropath save.
5. Warlock has access to Seer Council Stratagem, increasing likelihood of casting a power.
6. Warlocks Smite is actually better than Astropaths. Astropath will average cast Smite 1/3 of the time for average 2 Mortal wounds. Warlock will average cast Destructor 3/4 of the time averaging 3 wounds. Astropath does more damage when it goes off but Warlock is much more likely to go off in the first place.
7. Warlock is quicker on foot and can take a jet bike, either way making them more mobile on battlefield than Astropath (though this is marginal benefit considering it is extra points for the bike)
There may be more but those are the main strengths of Warlock compared to Astropath that come to mind straight away.
I don't see it. Overpriced means not worth taking because of the price. Warlocks are worth taking, people just want them to be cheaper.
Cross codex comparisons are at there most pointless when considering buff characters, because their usefulness is entirely dependent on the rest of the codex they find them self in. Protect would be more powerful in a marine army than it is for Eldar for example- 2+ invul terminators or thunderwolf cavalry?
Ultimately the stats of an astropath have absolutely no bearing on whether or not you decide to take a Warlock. "I was going to use Quicken and Protect to make a unit of Shining spears a really tough turn 1 assault unit, but then I saw the cost of an Astropath so I didn't" - What?!
If you have Spiritseers in your list and find that you don't quite have enough points to put Vectored engines on your wave serpents, you should drop them down to warlocks to free up points. A 1 in 27 chance that your psyker blows up when casting a power is a chance worth taking to get -1 to hit on a serpent with important cargo. - That is the kind of decision making that is realistically going to happen when list building, not cross codex comparisons.
They are overpriced if you get a much better unit for roughly 25% more points in the Spirit Seer. That, by default makes a Warlock overpriced (just as many units throughout 40K completely negate other units due to cost/pricing).
Moosatronic Warrior wrote: I don't see it. Overpriced means not worth taking because of the price. Warlocks are worth taking, people just want them to be cheaper.
Cross codex comparisons are at there most pointless when considering buff characters, because their usefulness is entirely dependent on the rest of the codex they find them self in. Protect would be more powerful in a marine army than it is for Eldar for example- 2+ invul terminators or thunderwolf cavalry?
Ultimately the stats of an astropath have absolutely no bearing on whether or not you decide to take a Warlock. "I was going to use Quicken and Protect to make a unit of Shining spears a really tough turn 1 assault unit, but then I saw the cost of an Astropath so I didn't" - What?!
If you have Spiritseers in your list and find that you don't quite have enough points to put Vectored engines on your wave serpents, you should drop them down to warlocks to free up points. A 1 in 27 chance that your psyker blows up when casting a power is a chance worth taking to get -1 to hit on a serpent with important cargo. - That is the kind of decision making that is realistically going to happen when list building, not cross codex comparisons.
This doesn't really engage with what I said. Like I said, there are lots of scenarios where you'd take an Astropath for 30 points. If the cheapest RoB caster cost 60 points there would still be a strong case for taking at least 1 in lots of lists. These psykers are simply not costed as upgrades to units. Their pricing is supposed to strongly encourage you to take some, and your list-building decision is more about how many you're going to take, which means we're talking about the usefulness of their marginal powers rather than their best powers. And so ultimately you're not actually making a case that Warlocks ought to cost 35 just by arguing that sometimes you're willing to take one at 35. Or else we ought to apply the same kind of reasoning to other psykers and conclude that Astropaths should cost about twice as much as they do now. I was pointing out that the very different pricing of the two psykers doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It's also telling that your case for Warlocks over Spiritseers is "well if you just can't scrounge up the 10 points without massively impacting the usefulness of one of your other units..." Like, yeah, I can come up with a list where you don't take a Star Lance on your Shining Spear Exarch because you have nothing else to cut, but the Star Lance is still clearly under-priced relative to the Laser Lance and you're going to take it almost every time (this is not necessarily a bad thing since GW might want to set Exarchs apart by pushing special weapons for them). Likewise Spiritseers and Warlocks; there's maybe a case for 1 Warlock because of stratagems, but otherwise you're really going to be looking to take the Spiritseers instead, even if you have absolutely no use for the Wraith buff which is the main thing that's supposed to set them apart as Spiritseers. They are bizarrely close in price for how much better Spiritseers are.
It's not clear to me if you disagree with the appropriateness of the actual cross-codex comparison I drew. You set up a Marine strawman, but that's not the comparison that was made. I pointed out that Astropaths can (more easily) cast Conceal and Protect, and they get this on even flyers and superheavies while at the same time denying cover saves almost as if casting Reveal. This isn't hypothetical -- they actually do this. It doesn't seem to me that Conceal on a Vendetta is notably more or less powerful than Conceal on Shadow Spectres, and Protect on a Baneblade or on 3++ Crusaders or 4++ Bullgryn is a big deal.
The marine "strawman" was to demonstrate my point that the usefulness of a buff character is entirely dependent on the units they are buffing. it was not intended to be equivalent to any comparison you were making.
If the difference in price between a Warlock and Spiritseer is too small that does not necessarily mean a Warlock is too expensive.
If you never include one in your lists then they are too expensive. So far I have been putting them in my lists so I can't say they are too expensive for me.
EDIT to be clear: I disagree with the appropriateness of your cross codex comparison.
EDIT 2: the poster below makes a good point. The cheapest HQ choice in a codex always gets added value by virtue of being the easiest way to unlock detatchments.
With regard to Warlocks, I think we may be seeing a "spam tax" added onto the base cost of the unit. They're a cheap HQ in a Codex that can (relatively) easily unlock Brigades to provide enough CP to fuel their (very) powerful stratagems.
Character Warlocks are probably fine at 35ppm, but a Spiritseer is a way better choice at 45ppm. That's the issue. In an ideal situation, single Warlocks should be 30ppm and Spiritseers should be 50ppm.
Another issue for me personally (because I detest Infantry characters in general) is that the Skyrunner Warlocks are way too expensive. They should be no more that 60ppm with singing spear. The 75ppm they are at right now is just ludicrous. I'll pick a single Farseer over 2 Warlocks every time. Conclave Warlocks (Infantry and Bikes) are also way too expensive since they lose the protection of being Characters.
Yeah, I think Warlocks aren't bad, SpiritSeers are too cheap.
Spirit Seers weren't an option building my last list (didn't really fit 'Aspect Host', so didn't want to bring him). Warlock looked easily worth the points without that comparison.
I may have to eat a little humble pie. Last night the dice gods saw fit to punish me for my arrogance.
I took Eldrad, two Spiritseers and three warlocks with the intention of moving them around as a "council" and stacking an insane amount of buffs on a unit each turn.
I got turn 1 and dropped in 20 Guardian Defenders from the Webway. My first Warlock rolled double 6. I used a CP reroll to save him. My third warlock then got double 1, exploded, killed the other two Warlocks, and wounded the Sprirtseers and Eldrad. One of the Spiritseers then also got a Perils! As he was already wounded from the Warlock exploding, it killed him, finished off the other Spiritseer and left Eldrad on one wound.
So after my first Psychic phase 5 out of 6 psykers are dead, Eldrad is on one wound and I'd given up first blood and warlord.
Now, the odds of getting three perils is very rare and anecdotal evidence like this doesn't change the maths. However I won't be standing Warlocks next to other characters in future. Previously I had them moving around in units where losing a couple of guys won't be game changing.
The Guardian bomb was great though, despite being thrown out in front of a horde of Tyranids without any support. After collectively face palming at the psychic stupidity going on behind them, they proceeded to blow away 20+ Hormagants and 10 Genestealers before being dragged down.
It was 3 perils in 7 tests I think which lessens the odds, but then always rolling at least a 3+ for how many mortal wounds I suffered increases them again. Also I failed all my 6+++ Ulthwe saves.
Don't feel bad, I've nicknamed my buddy "Perils" because he genuinely will perils 2-3 times per game, even with one librarian on occasion. I mean, comically impossible luck that guy.
On the plus side he's normally near my stuff and blows it up.
Elbows wrote: Don't feel bad, I've nicknamed my buddy "Perils" because he genuinely will perils 2-3 times per game, even with one librarian on occasion. I mean, comically impossible luck that guy.
On the plus side he's normally near my stuff and blows it up.
Reminds me of my luck with Corsairs last edition, pretty much every single game would see at least one of my Psykers turn themselves into a Daemon of Slaanesh. One game had all three go that way, and turn 1 gave up first blood and slay the warlord as my Prince went first!
Elbows wrote: Don't feel bad, I've nicknamed my buddy "Perils" because he genuinely will perils 2-3 times per game, even with one librarian on occasion. I mean, comically impossible luck that guy.
On the plus side he's normally near my stuff and blows it up.
Reminds me of my luck with Corsairs last edition, pretty much every single game would see at least one of my Psykers turn themselves into a Daemon of Slaanesh. One game had all three go that way, and turn 1 gave up first blood and slay the warlord as my Prince went first!
What happens with untrained pirates. I miss Corsairs as an army in 7th.
Elbows wrote: Don't feel bad, I've nicknamed my buddy "Perils" because he genuinely will perils 2-3 times per game, even with one librarian on occasion. I mean, comically impossible luck that guy.
On the plus side he's normally near my stuff and blows it up.
Reminds me of my luck with Corsairs last edition, pretty much every single game would see at least one of my Psykers turn themselves into a Daemon of Slaanesh. One game had all three go that way, and turn 1 gave up first blood and slay the warlord as my Prince went first!
