What do you figure they're going to do with this?

Honestly as much as they don’t need it could be a buff

Do you mean are they due a trip to the Veterinarian? If so, there will be a great disturbance in the Farce. As if a million soul stones shattered at once . . .

Hopefully, they will finally figure out a way to balance SFD without having to constantly nerf it. Maybe come up with some way to make Ynnari be across your entire army, but give you access to one set of stratagems or more? Not sure, but like put an end to taking a DE Kabal detachment just for Vect. Maybe like your entire army has to be Ynnari, so detachments can't take craftworld/kabal/troupe rules.

I'm actually not sure how Ynnari even work now.

I have a feeling that inari may end up like the special detachments in both vigilus books. So you pay X CP for some set up of units and they get the Inari trait instead of the eldar,harli or dark eldar trait. A bit like the fallen . And each such "battalion" could be linked to taking specific heros. So to get inari eldar, you would have to take the demon thingy and a farseer, to get the dark eldar the Red Baron and some dark eldar HQ, harlis would be the cat lady and something harlequin in nature.

Inari specific stratagems. relics. they could even have a rule that says, you can only take a inari battalion with other inari battalions, so people stop running non Inari DE with them.

Regardless of balance (nerfed or buffed), I really hope the rules are cleaned up considerably.

The best way I can think of would be to remove that whole YNNARI detachment Keyword swapping nonsense.

The 3 Characters should be the only YNNARI units period. And, like Assassins, you add them to an AELDARI army in one of 3 ways:
-1 in an Aux detachment
-All 3 in a Supreme detachment, even though they are 2 HQs and 1 LoW
-Spend 1 CP and add one of them

After that, make SfD an aura ability and/or Stratagem that the Characters give out to AELDARI unit(s). This ability should give a bonus (+1 attack or +1 to wound rolls, etc) and NOT be a duplicate action.

-

Karol wrote:
I have a feeling that inari may end up like the special detachments in both vigilus books. So you pay X CP for some set up of units and they get the Inari trait instead of the eldar,harli or dark eldar trait. A bit like the fallen . And each such "battalion" could be linked to taking specific heros. So to get inari eldar, you would have to take the demon thingy and a farseer, to get the dark eldar the Red Baron and some dark eldar HQ, harlis would be the cat lady and something harlequin in nature.

Inari specific stratagems. relics. they could even have a rule that says, you can only take a inari battalion with other inari battalions, so people stop running non Inari DE with them.

That is a great idea.

If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Well if reapers couldint shoot twice and stuff fight twice it could just be pointed accordingly so i can take it in a normal cw army without it being stupidly overcosted and redundant.

The faction containing one kit box isint really an army... maybe turn ynnari into an actual army and give them 4 kits like garlequins so they can keep their grubby hands to themselves and not affect monodex points.

I'm really hoping for a nerf.

More importantly to me, I want to be able to take Kabs and Guardians and Troupers and Corsairs in one Ynnari detatchment again. Hopefully they can find a way to make that happen without being OP. But there's almost no chance of them doing that.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Honestly as much as they don’t need it could be a buff

I'm certain they'll add interesting stratagems and such that could be strong, but tackling SFD would be the best thing GW could do aside from handling Castellans.

 Argive wrote:
Well if reapers couldint shoot twice and stuff fight twice it could just be pointed accordingly so i can take it in a normal cw army without it being stupidly overcosted and redundant.

I'd rather have Reapers simply shoot twice like a Leman Russ, or maybe even with a strat like Endless Cacaphony, but not give up chapter traits, a useful warlord, be limited to only one unit doing it, pass a fickle and deniable psychic test to do it, give up my free relic, etc.., etc..

Yeah being a strat like.. 1cp for one unit to shoot or fight twice, 3 cp for 2. And then buff the sfd to just work, not need a death to happen. Cause we are eldar and we deserve things. I’m not being sarcastic either

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Agreed. Shoot twice, Fight twice, etc should be a Strat only, maybe also a Psychic power. SFD should be a 6-12" aura that any of the Ynnari Characters give Aeldari units and be a simple as +1 to wound rolls, or something like that.

-

Maybe some sort of death mechanics, where you stack upp oints for stuff being dead, and have a list of effects you can spend the points on. onet oken could be something simple like re-roll, while a lot of tokens could have table wide effects.

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

Sh sh sh, you’re making to much sense. Those units aren’t as good as dark reapers in their eyes cause they aren’t eldar therefore your argument is invalid. Just to be clear I agree with you, but that’s what others will say

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Sh sh sh, you’re making to much sense. Those units aren’t as good as dark reapers in their eyes cause they aren’t eldar therefore your argument is invalid. Just to be clear I agree with you, but that’s what others will say

Now you're just being disingenuous about what Ynnari brings to the table currently.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

Sh sh sh, you’re making to much sense. Those units aren’t as good as dark reapers in their eyes cause they aren’t eldar therefore your argument is invalid. Just to be clear I agree with you, but that’s what others will say

Way to build a straw man there!

Dark Reapers are better than Berserkers though. Not in a vacuum of course, but in the context of real armies.

People conflate "too easily/cheaply" with "Free". And doing so destroys any actual dialog that might be possible.

Ynnari get double actions too easily/cheaply. They pay, although they may not pay enough.

That said, compared to IoM Guard/Knight/Beatstick lists, it's rather apparent that they *don't* get it too easily/cheaply. But compared to the vast majority of the armies out there, they certainly do.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

considering stuff like dark reapers or s spears are undercosted, then the tax thing doesn't really happen. And the over laping buffs in form of eldar psychic powers make them even better. I mean if inari were so balanced or even weak, then wouldn't DE and eldar armies place higher then them in most events? Yet somehow it is always the Inari lists that do better. My fight another time works in melee, costs 3CP, can be vected, and my army also doesnt get to use relics or anything other then maybe 2 out of all of their stratagems.

 Galef wrote:
The best way I can think of would be to remove that whole YNNARI detachment Keyword swapping nonsense.

The 3 Characters should be the only YNNARI units period. And, like Assassins, you add them to an AELDARI army in one of 3 ways:
-1 in an Aux detachment
-All 3 in a Supreme detachment, even though they are 2 HQs and 1 LoW
-Spend 1 CP and add one of them

I like that idea (and btw the Yncarne is also an HQ).

I also hope for a complete rework of SftD. I don't like fight/shoot twice abilities, even as stratagem, so I would prefer if they just removed it completely.
Auras could be nice, and they could re-use some of the current SftD mecanism. When a unit is destroyed, an Aeldari unit close by, if it's also under the aura of an Ynnari character, gets a buff. And the buff could be something like +1A, or +1BS, or +2" movement or something, until next turn (or until the end of the unit's next move/shoot/fight phase). It would keep some of the same vibe, while removing the most busted combos.

Overall, I think the idea that your units get something if they're close to people dying is a pretty nice thing, both fluff wise and in terms of game mechanism. The problem is the nature of the buff.
You could even have some type of on/off state for the units: if they're close to a dying unit, it switches their "invigorated" state on. Could be something fancy, or a boring 6+ FNP, but I really think they need to keep the "get close to units when they die" thing.

Karol wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

considering stuff like dark reapers or s spears are undercosted, then the tax thing doesn't really happen. And the over laping buffs in form of eldar psychic powers make them even better. I mean if inari were so balanced or even weak, then wouldn't DE and eldar armies place higher then them in most events? Yet somehow it is always the Inari lists that do better. My fight another time works in melee, costs 3CP, can be vected, and my army also doesnt get to use relics or anything other then maybe 2 out of all of their stratagems.

Hahaha..haha.. aah, you said dark reapers and Spears are UNDER costed? No my friend.. far from the truth.

Bharring 773368 10395721 wrote:

Hahaha..haha.. aah, you said dark reapers and Spears are UNDER costed? No my friend.. far from the truth.

a S Spear costs less then a paladin has more harder hiting attacks, augmented by eldar psychic powers, has hard to compare speed, can fight twice without paying 3 CP for it. And can be souped to have access to vect or other eldar or D eldar support units. Same with reapers a unit that can deep strike and then vanish behind a wall to be unshotable, can be pulled off by my dread with astral aim. The thing is it is hard to compare a las+rocket launcher dreadnought with a unit of dark eldar. Which again can be buffed by doom, protected by vect etc.

They seem cheap to me, for what they do.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Sh sh sh, you’re making to much sense. Those units aren’t as good as dark reapers in their eyes cause they aren’t eldar therefore your argument is invalid. Just to be clear I agree with you, but that’s what others will say

Now you're just being disingenuous about what Ynnari brings to the table currently.

Nobody says they aren't good.

But claiming double activations are somehow unique to Ynnari and/or unique to Ynnari as a non-stratagem or not a common feature in basically all 40K armies is disingenuous too.

To some extend, just soul bursting cannot logically be the problem, because if it was, Drukhari Ynnari would arguably better than Craftworld Ynnari, as Drukhari perform better as non/Ynnari than Craftworlds perform as non/Ynnari.

The kicker, to a large degree, are the strong psychic buffs available to Craftworlds and the ability to get "double value" out of those buffs thanks to soul burst.

Addressing some of those issue, e.g. making doom work only for (non/ynnari) craftworld eldar with the same <craftworld> as the farseer, for example, is something overdue for Eldar, ynnari or not.

And, of course, other double activations are also problematic and, IMO, somewhat too frequent in the game. Especially as strats.

From a game-design perspective, I think soul burst is a far better mechanic for double activation because the opponent can interact with it through denys, smart pulling of casualties, etc.. It's "a game" here. With stratagems or extra activations like those of the Sisters (which might also be a template for Nu-Ynnari), that player interactivity is lost and the double activation is far more predicatable/powerful, abusable and less fun as a game-mechanic.


I also think Ynnari are an important part of the diversity of the meta. It's one of the few (if not the only? As Custodes drift further and further?) that can hang in a competitive game with "normal" 5-10 men (or elf) units that just do their thing, neither spamming million of bodies nor playing the raw math game of a T8 3++ wall.

The game IMO needs more armies (whether Eldar-Codex based or not) that fight "competitively" with under 40 models of T3 or T4 guys, maybe a single transport and a handful of support characters.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

This is how you know Eldar players are disillusioned. You want a 5 wound psyker with a 4++, a +1 to cast and deny on all spells , who heals back for every model slain around her and can cast two powers per turn to cost less than 100 pts...

Do you understand that a chaos sorcerer is 98 pts, only he doesn' have a 4++, nor a +1 to cast, with only 4 wounds , less movement, who doesn't heal himself and does not confer ANY ability whatsoever?

"considering stuff like dark reapers or s spears are undercosted, then the tax thing doesn't really happen."
See, if you said "But the cost is so low, and the units it gets used with are so good even without it, that it feels free", you'd have made a reasonable and informed argument. Instead, your comment just seems to argue that Ynnari are "free".

" I mean if inari were so balanced or even weak, then wouldn't DE and eldar armies place higher then them in most events?"
We actually do see that fairly frequently - non-Ynnari Aeldari are taking many of the formerly-Ynnari slots at the top levels.

"My fight another time works in melee, costs 3CP, can be vected"
Ynnari Fight Twice can fail to manifest or be denied. Which will happen much more frequently.

"I also hope for a complete rework of SftD"
Likewise. Maybe stratagems. Maybe death refunds CP somehow. Maybe just weaker buffs. I'd rather SfD were things like "5+ FnP" or "+1 WS/BS" or "Reroll 1s".

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Malfurious wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they do that I’d be fine with it. But then add in a formation where you take dark reapers and they shoot twice, shining spears fight twice, you know things that make us not lose the playability of our army and how it works. Maybe some points drops too. Yvraine should literally be like.. 100 points. If that.

Other armies have stratagems for that, generally in the 2 to 3CP range.. Ynnari getting that for basically free is/was ridiculous

Ynnari don't get it for free. They have to take pricey HQ tax characters, loose chapter tactics, loose the free relic, AND it's far more easily countered than strats (they also lose CP farming to fuel the strats).

And lots of armies get it totally free without a strat. Khorne Berzerkers, all Imperial Guard on Move! Move Move!, the Swarmlord just does it to another unit, Leman Russ, etc.., etc..

So the Swarmlord is not a "pricey HQ tax character"? Also, I remember the last time I went to a tournament and 40% of the table were Khorne Berzerkers. Indeed. If SfD is so crappy as you describe it, how come every last competitive dude prefers to play it instead of anything else?

"a S Spear costs less then a paladin has more harder hiting attacks"
Your Termies have less than 2 attacks? And they're below S6?

Stock Marine Termies cost about the same as a Spear, have the same number of attacks, and is either +2S or +6S depending on whether the Spear charged. Yes, that is +6.

"augmented by eldar psychic powers, has hard to compare speed, can fight twice without paying 3 CP for it."
Reasonable points.

"And can be souped to have access to vect or other eldar or D eldar support units."
But can't be souped into Loyal32 or with Castellians or anything else from the top Faction - unlike even GK.

"Same with reapers a unit that can deep strike and then vanish behind a wall to be unshotable,"
For 2CP, using stratagems.

"can be pulled off by my dread with astral aim. The thing is it is hard to compare a las+rocket launcher dreadnought with a unit of dark eldar."
LasRocket Dread? Lets take a look at the BL/ML Wraithlord.

"Which again can be buffed by doom, protected by vect etc. "
But again, can't get Assasisns or Loyal32 or Castellians or...

On the balance, Spears are good. But you're overstating.

Bharring wrote:
"a S Spear costs less then a paladin has more harder hiting attacks"
Your Termies have less than 2 attacks? And they're below S6?

You really comparing a jetbike with a terminator?

The other guy did it first.. thing is non eldar players tend to whine a little.. to much at eldar players. It gets to the point I enjoy broken things because it’s like.. I’ll give you a reason to whine if you’re gonna. Ya know

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
The other guy did it first.. thing is non eldar players tend to whine a little.. to much at eldar players. It gets to the point I enjoy broken things because it’s like.. I’ll give you a reason to whine if you’re gonna. Ya know

That's a pretty horrendous attitude. You know people on all sides whine right? This isn't a partisan issue.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
The other guy did it first.. thing is non eldar players tend to whine a little.. to much at eldar players. It gets to the point I enjoy broken things because it’s like.. I’ll give you a reason to whine if you’re gonna. Ya know

The fact that you even split the playerbaase into "Eldar players" and "non eldar players" tells me way too much about your personal disposition.

Oh and I really can't remember the last time an Eldar player whined after their unit died because "Eldar are supposed to win against X, they are ancient". Definitely never happened. Removed, mind your manners please - BrookM

EDIT: Oh, you're the guy who thinks Yvraine should be sub 100 pts. I get it now. Nvm, do your thing.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
The other guy did it first.. thing is non eldar players tend to whine a little.. to much at eldar players. It gets to the point I enjoy broken things because it’s like.. I’ll give you a reason to whine if you’re gonna. Ya know

The fact that you even split the playerbaase into "Eldar players" and "non eldar players" tells me way too much about your personal disposition.

Oh and I really can't remember the last time an Eldar player whined after their unit died because "Eldar are supposed to win against X, they are ancient". Definitely never happened. Removed, mind your manners please - BrookM

EDIT: Oh, you're the guy who thinks Yvraine should be sub 100 pts. I get it now. Nvm, do your thing.

Anyway back on topic, I hope there are buffs to the units. They could use it.

Karol wrote:

Same with reapers a unit that can deep strike and then vanish behind a wall to be unshotable,

Reapers actually cannot do that.

No unit arriving as reinforcements, whether it's from tactical reserves or via other means such as DMC, Gate of Infinity, Da Jump, summoning, etc.. can subsequently be moved. Not by warptime, not by quicken, not by soulburst, not by move! move! move!, not by fire & fade, not by the nid overrun stratagem, not by hive commander, not by drive-by-demolitons, not by anything really (To my knowledge, GSC's A Perfect Ambush is the only stratagem in existence, that is an explicit exception to this).

Somebody just misplayed there.

At the very least this could be a nice update to have all the current Ynnari rules in one place. Not sure how long it will be current, but hey it's a start.

 Galef wrote:
Regardless of balance (nerfed or buffed), I really hope the rules are cleaned up considerably.

The best way I can think of would be to remove that whole YNNARI detachment Keyword swapping nonsense.

The 3 Characters should be the only YNNARI units period. And, like Assassins, you add them to an AELDARI army in one of 3 ways:
-1 in an Aux detachment
-All 3 in a Supreme detachment, even though they are 2 HQs and 1 LoW
-Spend 1 CP and add one of them

After that, make SfD an aura ability and/or Stratagem that the Characters give out to AELDARI unit(s). This ability should give a bonus (+1 attack or +1 to wound rolls, etc) and NOT be a duplicate action.

-

I'm of the opposite opinion - if Ynnari are going to exist, then please don't just have them be based around 3 sodding special characters.

 vipoid wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Regardless of balance (nerfed or buffed), I really hope the rules are cleaned up considerably.

The best way I can think of would be to remove that whole YNNARI detachment Keyword swapping nonsense.

The 3 Characters should be the only YNNARI units period. And, like Assassins, you add them to an AELDARI army in one of 3 ways:
-1 in an Aux detachment
-All 3 in a Supreme detachment, even though they are 2 HQs and 1 LoW
-Spend 1 CP and add one of them

After that, make SfD an aura ability and/or Stratagem that the Characters give out to AELDARI unit(s). This ability should give a bonus (+1 attack or +1 to wound rolls, etc) and NOT be a duplicate action.

-

I'm of the opposite opinion - if Ynnari are going to exist, then please don't just have them be based around 3 sodding special characters.

Yup. This

If they go down that path, please go all the way back to 5th Edition Space Marines and force people to take Vulkan to unlock Salamander Chapter Tactics, etc.,. and all that Jazz.

 vipoid wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Regardless of balance (nerfed or buffed), I really hope the rules are cleaned up considerably.

The best way I can think of would be to remove that whole YNNARI detachment Keyword swapping nonsense.

The 3 Characters should be the only YNNARI units period. And, like Assassins, you add them to an AELDARI army in one of 3 ways:
-1 in an Aux detachment
-All 3 in a Supreme detachment, even though they are 2 HQs and 1 LoW
-Spend 1 CP and add one of them

After that, make SfD an aura ability and/or Stratagem that the Characters give out to AELDARI unit(s). This ability should give a bonus (+1 attack or +1 to wound rolls, etc) and NOT be a duplicate action.

-

I'm of the opposite opinion - if Ynnari are going to exist, then please don't just have them be based around 3 sodding special characters.

But that would require a full Codex, which we now know isn't happening. Ynnari are getting updated in the same way as Assassin, which means the datahseets for JUST the 3 Characters are being updated will some additional rules and Strats.
The best way to do this (IMO) is to just make the 3 Characters "addable" to any AELDARI list similarly to Assassins.

It would be much cleaner. You also have the opportunity to remove SfD as a unit-to-unit rule. It should just be an Aura from the Characters and doing actions twice should be a Strat

-

 Galef wrote:
But that would require a full Codex, which we now know isn't happening. Ynnari are getting updated in the same way as Assassin, which means the datahseets for JUST the 3 Characters are being updated will some additional rules and Strats.
The best way to do this (IMO) is to just make the 3 Characters "addable" to any AELDARI list similarly to Assassins.

It would be much cleaner. You also have the opportunity to remove SfD as a unit-to-unit rule. It should just be an Aura from the Characters and doing actions twice should be a Strat

-

Why?

The Crimson Fists update worked fine in White Dwarf, neither forcing you to take Pedro nor even updating his data sheet.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Galef wrote:
But that would require a full Codex, which we now know isn't happening. Ynnari are getting updated in the same way as Assassin, which means the datahseets for JUST the 3 Characters are being updated will some additional rules and Strats.
The best way to do this (IMO) is to just make the 3 Characters "addable" to any AELDARI list similarly to Assassins.

It would be much cleaner. You also have the opportunity to remove SfD as a unit-to-unit rule. It should just be an Aura from the Characters and doing actions twice should be a Strat

-

Why?

The Crimson Fists update worked fine in White Dwarf, neither forcing you to take Pedro nor even updating his data sheet.

OK, I see what you are saying now. Yeah, I could see paying CPs to give Aeldari Detachments the YNNARI keyword.
But I stand by my statement that the Ynnari Characters should be added in the same way as Assassins if you want them in your list

And that SfD needs a complete overhaul. And not because it's OP (although that is a factor) but more because it's a mess. SfD should either be a single Strat that give 1 unit an "act twice" abililty, or if it's a blanket rule for all Ynnari, then just give them +1 to wound rolls or something like that

-

 Galef wrote:
But that would require a full Codex, which we now know isn't happening. -

Why would it need a full codex? The relevant dataslates are already available in their own codices.

 Galef wrote:
Ynnari are getting updated in the same way as Assassin, which means the datahseets for JUST the 3 Characters are being updated will some additional rules and Strats.

But this is the thing, I'm not asking for new characters. I'm merely saying that the Ynnari rules shouldn't mandate the use of one or more of the special characters.

Just have some alternative Warlord Traits and Artefacts for regular Eldar/DE/Harlequin characters.

 Galef wrote:
The best way to do this (IMO) is to just make the 3 Characters "addable" to any AELDARI list similarly to Assassins.

It would be much cleaner. You also have the opportunity to remove SfD as a unit-to-unit rule. It should just be an Aura from the Characters and doing actions twice should be a Strat
-

It's cleaner, sure, but it's also the most boring option. All you end up with are 3 characters with no-customisation that will probably end up being auto-includes in every Eldar army.

I just want the Ynnari to be a single army as they should be... as GW wrote them to be. You should be able have Craftworlds, Drukhari, and Harlequins all in the same detachment without having to split them. That completely removes everything that makes Ynnari who they are from both a fluff and a tabletop/game perspective. Otherwise, they are just Aeldari Soup and the Ynnari should just be removed as an army in 8th.

SG

All I am saying is that no other faction has the ability to sub-out Keywords to apply army-wide abilities in the same capacity.
Imperium and Chaos may be able to cherry-pick, but their detahcmetns are fairly defined as their own thing.

CWE/DE/Harlies don't need special snow-flake rules to make their soup any more unique that Imperial/Chaos soup.
Some Aura abilites from special characters and some Strats/WL traits would be enough.
But replacing Faction tratis with SfD needs to die. It's confusing (mostly for opponents, which adds to their salt towards ALL Aeldari lists) and unneeded for their to be so many varants for the same datasheet.
Are those Alaitoc -1 to be hit Reapers? Or Shoot twice Reapers? They should be the SAME Reapers.

 ServiceGames wrote:
I just want the Ynnari to be a single army as they should be... as GW wrote them to be. You should be able have Craftworlds, Drukhari, and Harlequins all in the same detachment without having to split them. That completely removes everything that makes Ynnari who they are from both a fluff and a tabletop/game perspective.

I disagree. Ynnari may be a new faction in their own right, but if so, they need their own non-CW, non-DE, non-Harlie units. "Borrowing" units from other factions to combine into one is the absolute most easily abused Soup imaginable.

Otherwise, they are just Aeldari Soup and the Ynnari should just be removed as an army in 8th.

Aside from the established 3 Characters, this is kinda what Ynnari should be in 8E. Not a true faction at all, but a group of followers from the other 3 factions united by the 3 Characters.
I know a lot of people who would be jsut fine if Ynnari was removed as a faction altogether

-

Plenty of factions have special snowflake rules over and above auras and chapter tactics.

The entire Imperial Guard orders-system is an extra layer (including access to double move and fall-back-and-shoot) of special snowflake stuff over the "normal rules". GSC get army-wide look-out-sir for free as well as their army-wide deep strike and blips thing. Orks get their moral-shenanigans and charge re-rolls. Sisters their faith thing. AdMech get Canticles. There's noting intrinsically unique about SfD being an added layer on top, except that Ynnari lose the -1 Alaitoc or whatever, and all the others above do not (but probably should).

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Honestly as much as they don’t need it could be a buff

Sean Nayden is selling his eldar army, i guess eldar are getting overnerfed.

Seriously people are defending Strength from Death and claiming that the army that came out of LVO with the highest win percentage isn't in need of a reduction in power?

Yannari need rebalanced badly, they also need to be rethought to have a lower skill floor as they are currently utterly trash when played by a bad player and bonkers to OP when played by good players.

Marin wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Honestly as much as they don’t need it could be a buff

Sean Nayden is selling his eldar army, i guess eldar are getting overnerfed.

Ynnari, not Eldar (unless something major in FAQ)

Marin wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Honestly as much as they don’t need it could be a buff

Sean Nayden is selling his eldar army, i guess eldar are getting overnerfed.

Or he's just tired of them playing it for a year+ nearly every weekend

But yeah, overnerf is pretty likely, not least because ITC missions and terrain houserules make Ynnari quite a bit stronger than they really are in normal 40K, and quite a few playtesters seem to view them through the distorted ITC lens.

 Galef wrote:
"Borrowing" units from other factions to combine into one is the absolute most easily abused Soup imaginable. Aside from the established 3 Characters, this is kinda what Ynnari should be in 8E. Not a true faction at all, but a group of followers from the other 3 factions united by the 3 Characters.
I know a lot of people who would be jsut fine if Ynnari was removed as a faction altogether

There's no borrowing being done. It's a group of followers from all three Aeldari factions *united* (as you posted above, and united is the key word here) under one to three characters depending on who is leading which detachment. But, it should be a united force... all being in one detachment. Not three detachments of completely different factions mixed into into Aeldari soup. If allowing all three factions to be in one detachment is going to cause game balance issues, then the Ynnari should be taken out of competitive play. Allow the Aeldari to ally with each other and even allow the members of the Triumverate of the Ynnead to lead them if you like. But, without allowing them to all be part of the same detachment, you're taking away everything that makes the Ynnari what they are. So, either make the Ynnari an actual army that can consist of any and all Index and Codex units from Craftworlds, Drukhari, and Harelquins in the same detachment or just pull the Ynnari from being allowed to be in competitive play (they could definitely still find their way into Narrative play as a single detachment). Single detachment army or don't allow them in competitive play... one or the other... don't force them to be an Aeldari soup army.

SG

Ice_can wrote:
Seriously people are defending Strength from Death and claiming that the army that came out of LVO with the highest win percentage isn't in need of a reduction in power?

Yannari need rebalanced badly, they also need to be rethought to have a lower skill floor as they are currently utterly trash when played by a bad player and bonkers to OP when played by good players.

Yes. Because Strength from Death isn't the problem. 50% is ITC terrain houserules. Play on a typical white dwarf battle report table and there's really no hiding those Dark Reapers or Spears. And 50% is Doom. Take that psychic power away and you're looking at a low tier army with double activations seriously sub-par to the far more reliable CP or unit-ability base double activations.

Ynarri should really be its own codex. that way units cna be balanced for points based on access to sfd. boom problem solved.

in a game of limited activation it really not surprising the faction with extra activation is able to pull ahead. in the case of reapers finding a points cost for a unit ignoring bs modifiers and putting out a ton of decent str /ap shots is already difficult, but throw in extra activations and its either going to end up overcosted in one army or undercosted in the other.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
Ynarri should really be its own codex. that way units cna be balanced for points based on access to sfd. boom problem solved.

I honestly don't disagree with this at all. As long as all three factions can be in the same detachment, I'm fine with some point changes as necessary as long as it doesn't make it so that Ynnari are so overcosted that they become the new MEQ.

SG

If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

They won't nerf it to the ground. Despite loud opinions GW does actually understand the game and issues at hand.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

They won't nerf it to the ground. Despite loud opinions GW does actually understand the game and issues at hand.

This is the FOURTH nerf Ynnari have had in 8th. GW don't understand the game in any way, shape or form.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

They won't nerf it to the ground. Despite loud opinions GW does actually understand the game and issues at hand.

That’s what I was thinking. Plus they actually wanna sell the models, and the fact that next year is probably gonna be slannesh daemons vs Aeldari as a whole concept with rumors of ynnari getting new models leads me to believe they might just get reinvisioned.
Edit: you’re saying 4th nerf but it could be a reimagining or even buff of some sort

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

They won't nerf it to the ground. Despite loud opinions GW does actually understand the game and issues at hand.

This is the FOURTH nerf Ynnari have had in 8th. GW don't understand the game in any way, shape or form.

If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing. When GW fixed, their own words, BA they reducted the whole army to type of HQ and scouts. That is a nerf.

 ServiceGames wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
Ynarri should really be its own codex. that way units cna be balanced for points based on access to sfd. boom problem solved.

I honestly don't disagree with this at all. As long as all three factions can be in the same detachment, I'm fine with some point changes as necessary as long as it doesn't make it so that Ynnari are so overcosted that they become the new MEQ.

SG

they should def be able to ally other eldar, craftworlds, drukari and harlies just with thier own different points cost based on thier power with Ynarri special rules. maybe even flesh out Ynarri more wih thier own relics strategems etc. I don't think they should be able to plug into eachothers detachments though more just allies.

Karol wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
If they nerf it into the ground their making a huge mistake. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. If it does as I stated earlier, Craftworlds, harlequins, and drukhari as a whole need buffs to make up for the loss.

They won't nerf it to the ground. Despite loud opinions GW does actually understand the game and issues at hand.

This is the FOURTH nerf Ynnari have had in 8th. GW don't understand the game in any way, shape or form.

If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing. When GW fixed, their own words, BA they reducted the whole army to type of HQ and scouts. That is a nerf.

Here is the problem. Right here. People think when something needs nerfed, it needs to no longer be able to compete. This is false. Should it be made to where other top armies don’t struggle as bad against it, and have a chance of actually beating it? Sure. Should it still be able to top 8 tournies? Absolutely. No reason why not what so ever that you can validly give me. “But it’s been there for forever” oh well. So what?

Karol wrote:

If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing. When GW fixed, their own words, BA they reducted the whole army to type of HQ and scouts. That is a nerf.

That, or, maybe it's better to make small incremental changes instead of large ones that are destabilizing?

Bottom line is eldar units are not the problem. Eldar units in ynnari soup are a problem.

Trust me, monodex eldar are ok but by no means OP. CA has increaed points for those units because of their application in ynari lists rather than fix ynari abiltiies.

A mix of units form 3 codexes in a soup with double action shennanighans? Of course thats pisisng people off. I wouldint want to play against that.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing. When GW fixed, their own words, BA they reducted the whole army to type of HQ and scouts. That is a nerf.

That, or, maybe it's better to make small incremental changes instead of large ones that are destabilizing?

Exactly. People just wanna see all Aeldari factions in the gutter because I feel like it’ll give them some sort of Napoleon complex? Little guy feeling big I guess? Eh.

At the end of the day, I just want Ynnari to be an alternate choice, not the ONLY choice, nor an invalid choice

That's been my issue with them so far. Depending on what FAQ you're playing by, Ynnari are either auto-take or auto-pass.
There has been no in-between

I want to be able to take mono-dex CWE and not feel like I am missing out on something "more" competitive because I didn't choose an Ynnari WL.
Or take a well-built Ynnari list and not feel like I'd be better off playing CWE because there are too many restrictions imposed.

This is why I'd rather YNNARI disappear as a playable faction and the 3 Characters be more like Assassins in that you can just add them to any Aeldari list for some extra Strats and buffs.
While many might see that as "boring", it's going to be the easiest way to limit shenanigans.

-

Ynnari are going to lose the ability to act twice on demand. That power is strictly reserved for guardsmen and sisters of battle, because reasons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:
At the end of the day, I just want Ynnari to be an alternate choice, not the ONLY choice, nor an invalid choice

-

They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Some craftworld eldar units actually need a buff (scorpions/howling banshee's, wraithlords), and some need a nerf (the flyers are all undercosted. You cant be more maneuverable, just as deadly, and cheaper points than everyone elses flyers sorry.)

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Karol wrote:


If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing.

In the GW GT final Ynnari did not make a showing at all. Nor did the Castellan for that matter. Different missions and terrain rules matter. We just need to accept that the ITC meta is at least in part a result of ITC rules and not GW rules. I don't see why GW should fix balance issues that only exist within certain sets of house-rules which are nothing to do with them.

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Karol wrote:


If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing.

In the GW GT final Ynnari did not make a showing at all. Nor did the Castellan for that matter. Different missions and terrain rules matter. We just need to accept that the ITC meta is at least in part a result of ITC rules and not GW rules. I don't see why GW should fix balance issues that only exist within certain sets of house-rules which are nothing to do with them.

Because no serious tournament players go to a GW GT.

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Karol wrote:


If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing.

In the GW GT final Ynnari did not make a showing at all. Nor did the Castellan for that matter. Different missions and terrain rules matter. We just need to accept that the ITC meta is at least in part a result of ITC rules and not GW rules. I don't see why GW should fix balance issues that only exist within certain sets of house-rules which are nothing to do with them.

1750 points has a bigger impact on lists than the missions will, but if you have a good source of all the lists in attendance I'd love to look through all of them.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Karol wrote:


If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing.

In the GW GT final Ynnari did not make a showing at all. Nor did the Castellan for that matter. Different missions and terrain rules matter. We just need to accept that the ITC meta is at least in part a result of ITC rules and not GW rules. I don't see why GW should fix balance issues that only exist within certain sets of house-rules which are nothing to do with them.

1750 points has a bigger impact on lists than the missions will, but if you have a good source of all the lists in attendance I'd love to look through all of them.

People will never stop saying ynnari this ynnari that. Here is hoping to a rework that at first makes them stop QQ and then we find how broken it is, remain top dog and enjoy our salty beverages. (Their tears)

The biggest driver in the current meta is freaking Imperial Knights and Imperial Guard.

If those things stopped crowding the space you'd see armies that present a nasty matchup for Ynnari actually able to exist. As it stands right now, if you cannot deal with Guard, and you cannot deal with Knights, don't even bother showing up.

Ynnari are using them as a shield to be relevant. It is a HUGE points dump to make a Ynnari detachment and you are putting all your eggs in one basket. There is considerable risk, especially since there are some brutal counters out there.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

Free additional turns isn't specific and fluffy it's game breaking.

Your saying you would be ok playing a game were your opponents always get 7 turns and you only get 5?

Thats what your saying in fair and balanced, then again at a certain point it reads more like your trying to troll rather than have an honest discussion about balance.

Ice_can wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

Free additional turns isn't specific and fluffy it's game breaking.

Your saying you would be ok playing a game were your opponents always get 7 turns and you only get 5?

Thats what your saying in fair and balanced, then again at a certain point it reads more like your trying to troll rather than have an honest discussion about balance.

Move move move
Fix bayonets
First rank fire, second rank fire
Emperor's Wrath

Cry me a god damn river.

I have an idea, let's make orders once per turn period, and require a 8+ to activate.

 Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

Free additional turns isn't specific and fluffy it's game breaking.

Your saying you would be ok playing a game were your opponents always get 7 turns and you only get 5?

Thats what your saying in fair and balanced, then again at a certain point it reads more like your trying to troll rather than have an honest discussion about balance.

Move move move
Fix bayonets
First rank fire, second rank fire
Emperor's Wrath

Cry me a god damn river.

I have an idea, let's make orders once per turn period, and require a 8+ to activate.

Oh wow your evidence that Yannari the most broken faction aren't broken is Guard the second most broken really?

I mean, it fulfills the purpose of a counter point...

Neither should, but given one exists unoposed dont penalise the other

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

Free additional turns isn't specific and fluffy it's game breaking.

Your saying you would be ok playing a game were your opponents always get 7 turns and you only get 5?

Thats what your saying in fair and balanced, then again at a certain point it reads more like your trying to troll rather than have an honest discussion about balance.

Move move move
Fix bayonets
First rank fire, second rank fire
Emperor's Wrath

Cry me a god damn river.

I have an idea, let's make orders once per turn period, and require a 8+ to activate.

Oh wow your evidence that Yannari the most broken faction aren't broken is Guard the second most broken really?

Are you being sarcastic, my friend? Curious as to what you play now..

 IHateNids wrote:
I mean, it fulfills the purpose of a counter point...

Neither should, but given one exists unoposed dont penalise the other

This, acting out of phase for free is broken beyond reason, but let's not be selective about it when Guard are winning major events and Ynnari aren't.

 Marmatag wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I mean, it fulfills the purpose of a counter point...

Neither should, but given one exists unoposed dont penalise the other

This, acting out of phase for free is broken beyond reason, but let's not be selective about it when Guard are winning major events and Ynnari aren't.

Ok just ban all free activation powers, orders, strategums etc from matched play

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I mean, it fulfills the purpose of a counter point...

Neither should, but given one exists unoposed dont penalise the other

This, acting out of phase for free is broken beyond reason, but let's not be selective about it when Guard are winning major events and Ynnari aren't.

Ok just ban all free activation powers, orders, strategums etc from matched play

I would rather they just completely squatted Ynnari and gave every faction an Orders/Prayers/Acts mechanic (including Eldar). But i never get my way.

Why does everyone almost always default to wanting every army to have the same rules to be balanced....??

Hey pal, welcome to Earth where nothing is fair or balanced!

:-)

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I mean, it fulfills the purpose of a counter point...

Neither should, but given one exists unoposed dont penalise the other

This, acting out of phase for free is broken beyond reason, but let's not be selective about it when Guard are winning major events and Ynnari aren't.

Ok just ban all free activation powers, orders, strategums etc from matched play

Bad idea.

Bear in mind most powers/orders/stratagems are for specific things. For example, the new Primaris Librarian power dictates they Must advance.

AFAIK, Ynnari dont have those kind of restrictions. It's a "I feel doing this"

Pain4Pleasure 773368 10396228 wrote:
Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

then why the hell when GW was writing Grey Knight rules did they make them pay for everything, including stuff they can't use. they limited the number of psychic powers the army has, so after 2 HQ and 3 units, most units have nothing to cast, they made GK cost as if they were deep striking their whole army, but they nerfed the deep strike mechanic. They gave GK bad special weapons, which were suppose to be balanced by psychic powers and smite, but then they nerfed the GK smite.

Or is it a new way of thinking about design GW just decided to implement ?

Karol wrote:

Pain4Pleasure 773368 10396228 wrote:
Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

then why the hell when GW was writing Grey Knight rules did they make them pay for everything, including stuff they can't use. they limited the number of psychic powers the army has, so after 2 HQ and 3 units, most units have nothing to cast, they made GK cost as if they were deep striking their whole army, but they nerfed the deep strike mechanic. They gave GK bad special weapons, which were suppose to be balanced by psychic powers and smite, but then they nerfed the GK smite.

Or is it a new way of thinking about design GW just decided to implement ?

Oh dear, someone doesn’t know how GW squats an army.. well, when GW producers and GW big wigs hate a codex very much, they uh.. well shoot, usually parents explain this I think, but oh well. They make terrible rules to eventually write it out of existence. Oh dear.. I hope I explained everything thoroughly for you?

Karol wrote:

Pain4Pleasure 773368 10396228 wrote:
Someone needs to watch and listen to Frontline Gamings newest podcast. They talk about layers like you.. that want points paid for specific and fluffy actions. And how it’s not the way the game is meant to be made and shouldn’t happen. Worth a watch

then why the hell when GW was writing Grey Knight rules did they make them pay for everything, including stuff they can't use. they limited the number of psychic powers the army has, so after 2 HQ and 3 units, most units have nothing to cast, they made GK cost as if they were deep striking their whole army, but they nerfed the deep strike mechanic. They gave GK bad special weapons, which were suppose to be balanced by psychic powers and smite, but then they nerfed the GK smite.

Or is it a new way of thinking about design GW just decided to implement ?

Because there is no overarching vision on the design team and individual codex writers have way to much freedom to feth about.

at Adepticon Games Workshop Studio Preview they implied the white dwarf index next month will change things for ynari and made joke about dark reapers.

 clodax66 wrote:
at Adepticon Games Workshop Studio Preview they implied the white dwarf index next month will change things for ynari and made joke about dark reapers.

Dark reapers, ynnari or not, destroy units and will be taken. Truth be told, ynnari gives an extra action. MAYBE. Two with good set up. If I’m gonna table you well, I’m gonna do it without the need from PfD. Dark reapers are gonna murder whatever they shoot at. Shining spears are gonna slice whatever they charge. Skyweavers are gonna bring down whatever they decide to point themselves towards. The solitaire will continue to be a beststick. 20 defender blobs will always be the best deepstrike unit. eldar fliers will continue to reign supreme. The list goes on and on. All without ynnari. Ynnari just takes that 9 to a 10. That’s it. So all these people complaining will just go from complaining of ynnari, to the Aeldari factions. In which case we will white glove slap them just like we are now, challenge them to a game, destroy them, and give them even more reason to complain. All hail the supreme Aeldari race. Master over the armored marines, chaos and laoyalist. Owner of the necron tier. Directors of the greater good. The race that dares oppose the chaos gods, specifically slaneesh. The owners of the idiotic orks. If I forgot your faction.. well you aren’t important enough then obviously

 BaconCatBug wrote:

happy_inquisitor wrote:

Karol wrote:


If GW nerfed Inari 4 times in 8th ed, and it still ends up in top 8, then either the nerfs aren't real nerfs or they really don't know what they are doing.

In the GW GT final Ynnari did not make a showing at all. Nor did the Castellan for that matter. Different missions and terrain rules matter. We just need to accept that the ITC meta is at least in part a result of ITC rules and not GW rules. I don't see why GW should fix balance issues that only exist within certain sets of house-rules which are nothing to do with them.

Because no serious tournament players go to a GW GT.

How is it there in Scotland?

(No True Scotsman Fallacy)

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:


They aren't. You can make a wide variety of craftworld, dark eldar, and craftworld + dark eldar lists that compete well. Ynnari are a massive crutch that pushes Craftworlds into the stratosphere. I main Eldar in the competitive scene.

Does that by your own description mean that Yannari as writen in the index are inherently broken if they take an ok- good soup and push it into the stratosphere.

You want an army that gets 8 turns to everyone else's 6 you should be paying for that 25 to 35% improvement in turns.

Multiple free actions every turn was never going to be balanceable especially when your doing it to units from other codex's for esentially free sacrificing a minor trait even -1 to hit vrs extra turns is a no brainer.

That people are trying to defend Yannari when it's still got the highest win percentage of any codex or index after multiple nerfs and makes craftworld and Drukari which are both achieving within the balanced to good win rates look poor highlights how much of a balance problem they are.

The biggest tournament WR are IG, even the Ynnari can`t keep with them. If we count that SfD is the Ynnari strongest treat, IG have good numbers, that are competitive in every environment. It will be interesting to see how much really Ynnari are winning when non ITC rules are used.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:


Oh dear, someone doesn’t know how GW squats an army.. well, when GW producers and GW big wigs hate a codex very much, they uh.. well shoot, usually parents explain this I think, but oh well. They make terrible rules to eventually write it out of existence. Oh dear.. I hope I explained everything thoroughly for you?

No you did not, you were just mean to me. If GW were to remove Grey Knight fromt he game then they shouldn't have writen down codex for them or tell people to buy CA, b because they are going to be fixed in that book.

Well, as a long-term Eldar player I think that we don't need Ynnari at all.
Not in the way it is configured as just three models introducing a strong special rule and one strong spell.

Marin wrote:

Ice_can 773368 10396143 wrote:

The biggest tournament WR are IG, even the Ynnari can`t keep with them. If we count that SfD is the Ynnari strongest treat, IG have good numbers, that are competitive in every environment. It will be interesting to see how much really Ynnari are winning when non ITC rules are used.

Ok, but was it always like that, or was it not realy IG, but a combination of IG+castellan+something that made them win. Pre castellan IG had their armies with baneblades and they were not winning as much as they do now.