Hi all, I've been thinking about our future codex after the few updates/snippets on WarCom that we've got so far. Ie wraithseer (ap-1 is ap0) and incubi (+1WS).
If these rules are consistent across those unit types ie aspect warrior and wraith construct, do you think that would be a benefit? I certainly believe it would help especially if the ranged aspects get 2+BS. What's others thought's on these 2 changes and how they may affect those unit types?
I think those changes are good starts but not enough to get us up to speed on their own. What other (realistic if you can) changes would you like to see going forward?
What I'd really like to see even more than new strats and relics is battle focus extended to the vehicles (not monsters) and all the heavy weapons become assault. This IMHO would really lean in to our manouvreability being our key strength as we would be back to being faster than SM as we should be IMHO.
I also think all of the heavy weapons need a total rework now. Not just changed to assault(A) as above but I'd like to see some thing like 2 more shots on the Scatter Laser maybe a -x ap on a 6, maybe a -2? The Shuriken Cannon needs to be D2 IMHO as it's supposed to be our HB equivalent. Maybe an extra shot for the ap and range loss. As the -3 on a 6 just doesnt make up the difference.
Starcannons now need a flat damage, ideally 3. However if it was D2 I'd like to see +1d on a 6 or similar. AML I still think is fine as flexibility is its biggest bonus and if the BL goes to Dd3+3 I wouldn't mind, maybe +1D on a 6? This would give it not as good a range of a LC but a bit more consistent damage like it's supposed to be and because ap-4 is mostly wasted due to the amount of invulnerable saves about. This would make it a little more worth its points IMHO and actully compete with LC and MM.
I think these changes would go a long way to helping differentiate the roles of the heavy weapons as we'd then have, keeping any current special abilities:
SL: A6 S6 ap0 D1,
AML Ad6 S4 -1ap D1,
ShC: A4 S6 ap0 D2,
StC: A2 S6 -3ap D2/3,
AML: A1 S8 -2 Dd6,
BL: A1 S8 -4ap Dd3+3,
These changes would help show off our mobility but would also give us a better consistency of damage for the currently underperforming weapons( I'm looking at you BL) and also make each weapon type more specific to hunting certain unit types as we are meant to do.
I do realise that these changes would invalidate CTM as an upgrade and also we would not suffer the -1 to hit when firing these weapons in melee. I can't think of other issue's with the changes. Maybe someone else can? I'm sure points would need to change as well of course. But point changes are for another thread lol.
I think these changes would help massively and still be in keeping with the fluff and style of the army.
What do you think? And what would you like to see changed going forward.
Expensive 1W/T3 models are going to leave the Codex utterly screwed by the damage creep people need to deal with Space Marines until the next time GW burns the system down and starts over, no matter how much you pump the Eldar firepower.
I could honestly see the cap on negative mods to hit/wound being bumped up to a max of 2 for eldar in general as a way of giving them more durability. Now stacking lightning fast reflexes with an existing -1 to hit mod is now relevant beyond using it against units with +1 to hit buffs. It also better reflects Eldar type survivability, where it's less about sheer toughness or wounds like marines and more like not getting hit to begin with. You'll still be able to hit on 6's to hit for those who aren't BS3+ or better, but I feel like this is a semi-reasonable way of addressing the issues without just upping eldar weapon damage (though that is part of it) and decreasing costs. You get to keep an aspect of their elite nature rather than just pricing them to be spammed, which would go against their elite army type.
I expect to see more Aspects (specifically Warp Spiders and Scorps), and they will probably become more deadly. Likewise Banshees who I expect to gain an additional attack to go with their +1S power weapons.
Wraith constructs ignoring AP-1 is a real good change, hopefully sticks. Wraithblade sword variant should give +1 attack for each sword (needs a reason to be taken over current axe/shield)
Weapons should be an easy fix. Brightlance D3+3 damage. Scatter laser Hvy 6 Ap-1, maybe drop to S5. Shuricannon goes to D2. Others are basically fine, maybe D2 starcannon.
Vehicles are in a good spot already.
Phoenix Lords need to become almost Godly, they are a joke currently. likewise the Avatar.
shuriken catapults need a massive range increase, but stats are OK as is.
I'd like to see the warlock removed as a singular HQ choice, and instead become part of either a warlock council, or an upgrade to Guardian sqd (like a sgt). Skyrunner for windriders, foot for Guardians.
And we could probably start a whole new thread on the wraithknight, but it needs some serious help.
Finally, relics and warlord traits need to be upgraded dramatically, they are so bad.
I just hope this edition is not one where GW decides to let the codex "coast" again with the intention of upgrading it in 10th. I'm willing to wait this edition for a range update, but it certainly is time....more so than any other range in 40k.
Yeah there's two fundamental aspects that need to be addressed.
Basic damage dealing and statlines have changed little or actively gotten worse since 3rd Edition. The Shuriken Catapult was a strong profile in 3rd Edition, but it looks laughable now and worse yet encourages a style of play on Guardian Defenders that is completely at odds with how they should act on the battlefield. A similar issue exists with the Shuriken Cannon, where a S6 AP0 D1 weapon just does not cut it in modern 40k. The Incubi changes are encouraging because, combined with the Triarch Praetorian changes, are a clear acknowledgment by GW that an Elite-killing Elite unit should be D2 on its attacks as standard and so things like Banshees are highly likely to see changes in these areas. If we were going pure wishlist, I'd really amplify the shock troop nature of Banshees and give them insane bonuses on the charge (1+ attack and re-rolling wounds in first round of combat) along with generally good weapon stats (S+1 AP -3 D2 swords) so they could really be what they are in-lore; the pre-eminent shock assault troops in the galaxy, the kind that make even Astartes sweat.
But as AnomanderRake mentions, we have a square that needs to be circled. The big elephant in the room. How do you make an elite army, on the same level of "eliteness" as Marines, actually survivable when it is comprised of T3 1W models? Especially when stacking modifiers are dead. If this can't be solved then either the army continues to be vehicle only because the infantry are all too expensive to survive a turn, or it becomes a cheap chaff horde army. Stratagem use can only go so far here, like how Fire and Fade and LFR can help offset the extreme fragility-per-point of Dark Reapers, but now other units that need these stratagems to not die are left out in the cold with no way to survive. I'm not sure invuns are the answer either, because they don't do anything for Dire Avengers currently and they're certainly not what make Harlequins strong. Maybe some kind of system that adds increasing defensive buffs based on movement taken.
I also do think that, judging by the anti-Aeldari stratagem in the DW supplement, all space elves are going to be getting some way to manipulate enemy ballistic skill which is essentially a way to add stacking modifiers back in. I eagerly await all the salt that will generate.
I doubt banshees will see D2 added to their weapons. their weapons are literally power swords aren't they? we've seen the buff given to them (I kinda think the +1 str power swords have now was done specificly with Banshees in mind) I'd give them two attacks on the charge or when charged. essentially a super charged version of the SM shock assault rule. and thats what I'd more or less start doing with eldar across the board. giving their aspects targeted special rules that buffs them at their job.
They can easily just be given "Mastercrafted" power swords in rule and lore terms. For instance, do BGV swords look that physically different to normal power swords? In fact Banshee power swords look much different to other power swords within the CWE range so they can be made whatever type of weapon that's needed.
Giving them extra damage and only 1 extra attack (which could be based on charging) helps focus them in what they should be good at; Elite-killing shock troops. This is the entire niche and supposed job of Banshees. Upping their numbers of attacks instead turns them into horde blenders which is a job other Aspect Warriors are more focused on.
D2 power swords do not make sense for banshees. Increase their attacks (on the charge probably best way to do it) to show their speed and ferociousness in combat. 4A when charging would be enough to make them viable.
An Aspect Warrior keyword ability that causes all attacks targeting them to be no better than BS/WS 4+ would do a lot for survivability. I also think there are clues within that Deathwatch stratagem.
The Drukhari codex will drop some hints moving forward, mainly looking at Wyches as the example of an infantry unit relying on speed to survive. Any infantry unit moving 7+" in it's previous movement phase gaining an invulnerable save may be another way of doing it, but invulnerable saves help Wyches because they have no armor and would feel pretty situational on a 3+ save aspect warrior.
Avatar to get the Ghaz/C'tan wounds-per-phase rule as well.
CWE might be able to lower BS as well as give a -1 to hit. Effectively a -2 to hit work around. Without rerolls it could be enough to grant survivability to those key paper thin units... Could be ok if they go this route.
I persoanly think there was absolutely nothing wrong with -2 to hit on a couple units especially if you have a caveat that 6's always hit and there will be fewer re-rolls. .
I think D-cannon/wraith weapon is going D3+3
But I think BL is staying D6 like the las cannon making it just worse... unless they make it dirt cheap
Fusion.. I dont know.. At this point im past guessing what GW is thinking.
Shuriken weapons will be very important..
I think the DE codex will be a decent indicator of what we might see.
As things stand I'm neither hopeful nor optimistic lol. So far the wraith construct rule in the world of duty eternal for free for everyone, is very luckluster so Im expecting more of the same all around for xenos...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: Avatar needs to either reduce melta damage or ignore (like before), as a big middle finger to the eradicators and melta meta
bullyboy wrote: Avatar needs to either reduce melta damage or ignore (like before), as a big middle finger to the eradicators and melta meta
He should be like his 2nd ed self - the same cost as a bloodthirster with similar power.
8" 2+ 2+ S8 T8 W16 A8 Ld10 Sv2+
Immune: treats all plasma, flamer, and melta weapons as damage 0
Molten armour: can't reduce his armour save to less than 4+
That's a rough approximation of what his 2nd ed version would look like in 9th.
Automatically Appended Next Post: IMO all eldar in the current climate of reduced modifiers and no Initiative value, require a baked in rule that makes them harder to hit to reflect the supposed 'speed over armour' aspect GW have claimed for 30 years but continue to strip away every edition.
Some options:
Aeldari Quicksilver:
Eldar cannot be hit on an unmodified attack roll of less than 3+.
Now you effectively get -2 from stacking -1 abilities etc with this one. It also means that characters become more survivable by being harder to hit - phoenix lords are thus more survivable.
or
Eldar ignore AP unless it reduces their armour to 7+.
this means they become all or nothing - either getting their armour save or not at all. Representing everything but the most powerful strikes being glancing blows as they kung fu their way through oncoming fire.
guardians 5-10:
Lasblasters - 24" S3 Assault 4
or
Shuriken rifles 24" S5 Assault 1 rend
+ 1 heavy weapon platform per 5 models
storm guardians 5-10:
Shuriken catapults 18" S4 Assault 2 rend
+ Pistols and CCW, + 1 special weapon per 5 models
Autarchs
7" 3+ 3+ 3 3 5 4 9 3+
Path of Command: Roll a d6 when you use a strategem, on a 5+ you regain a SP. if the unit you are using a strategem on is within 6" of this unit, improve this to 3+.
Master of strategies: Choose 3pts of strategem at the beginning of the game. These may be used at any point for free. You cannot regain these through the Path of Command.
Exarch Lord
7" 2+ 2+ 4 4 4 5 9 3+
4+ invulnerable save
<ASPECT> - choose the aspect keyword that they belong to
Shrine leader: may take up to 2 units of their aspect as troops choices with obsec. If already troops, don't count against slots.
May take 3 exarch powers.
Phoenix Lord
8" 2+ 2+ 5 5 6 6 2+
4+ invulnerable save
Eternal Warrior: All attacks are reduce to Damage 1
Knows all the exarch powers of their shrine and may choose 3 to be active at the beginning of any turn.
Oaka wrote: An Aspect Warrior keyword ability that causes all attacks targeting them to be no better than BS/WS 4+ would do a lot for survivability.
Yeaaah, because what 8th edition clearly shown, nerfing stats of elite units opponent bought for extra points after list was built /game started is brilliant way to have a balanced game with fun for both sides instead of terrible, broken mechanic-- Oh wait
Also, funnily enough, that would make power fists/thunder hammers by far the best anti-Eldar weapons, thanks to them already being 4+. Yup, a weapon with grace and speed of brick being best anti-Eldar gear makes a ton of sense
Oaka wrote: An Aspect Warrior keyword ability that causes all attacks targeting them to be no better than BS/WS 4+ would do a lot for survivability.
Yeaaah, because what 8th edition clearly shown, nerfing stats of elite units opponent bought for extra points after list was built /game started is brilliant way to have a balanced game with fun for both sides instead of terrible, broken mechanic-- Oh wait
Also, funnily enough, that would make power fists/thunder hammers by far the best anti-Eldar weapons, thanks to them already being 4+. Yup, a weapon with grace and speed of brick being best anti-Eldar gear makes a ton of sense
Because so many models is rocking a thunder hammer and a power fist... Very big problem for 1w T3 3+/4+infantry and not those 25 WS 3+ S4 Ap0/-1 attacks..
Oaka wrote: An Aspect Warrior keyword ability that causes all attacks targeting them to be no better than BS/WS 4+ would do a lot for survivability.
Yeaaah, because what 8th edition clearly shown, nerfing stats of elite units opponent bought for extra points after list was built /game started is brilliant way to have a balanced game with fun for both sides instead of terrible, broken mechanic-- Oh wait
Also, funnily enough, that would make power fists/thunder hammers by far the best anti-Eldar weapons, thanks to them already being 4+. Yup, a weapon with grace and speed of brick being best anti-Eldar gear makes a ton of sense
No what it means is that the eldar are so fast you can't out finesse them, and you have the same chance of hitting them with your fist as you do an unwieldy hammer. Thus you go for the most damaging weapon so that when you do hit, it does the most damage.
bullyboy wrote: Avatar needs to either reduce melta damage or ignore (like before), as a big middle finger to the eradicators and melta meta
He should be like his 2nd ed self - the same cost as a bloodthirster with similar power.
8" 2+ 2+ S8 T8 W16 A8 Ld10 Sv2+
Immune: treats all plasma, flamer, and melta weapons as damage 0
Molten armour: can't reduce his armour save to less than 4+
That's a rough approximation of what his 2nd ed version would look like in 9th.
Automatically Appended Next Post: IMO all eldar in the current climate of reduced modifiers and no Initiative value, require a baked in rule that makes them harder to hit to reflect the supposed 'speed over armour' aspect GW have claimed for 30 years but continue to strip away every edition.
Some options:
Aeldari Quicksilver:
Eldar cannot be hit on an unmodified attack roll of less than 3+.
Now you effectively get -2 from stacking -1 abilities etc with this one. It also means that characters become more survivable by being harder to hit - phoenix lords are thus more survivable.
or
Eldar ignore AP unless it reduces their armour to 7+.
this means they become all or nothing - either getting their armour save or not at all. Representing everything but the most powerful strikes being glancing blows as they kung fu their way through oncoming fire.
guardians 5-10:
Lasblasters - 24" S3 Assault 4
or
Shuriken rifles 24" S5 Assault 1 rend
+ 1 heavy weapon platform per 5 models
storm guardians 5-10:
Shuriken catapults 18" S4 Assault 2 rend
+ Pistols and CCW, + 1 special weapon per 5 models
Autarchs
7" 3+ 3+ 3 3 5 4 9 3+
Path of Command: Roll a d6 when you use a strategem, on a 5+ you regain a SP. if the unit you are using a strategem on is within 6" of this unit, improve this to 3+.
Master of strategies: Choose 3pts of strategem at the beginning of the game. These may be used at any point for free. You cannot regain these through the Path of Command.
Exarch Lord
7" 2+ 2+ 4 4 4 5 9 3+
4+ invulnerable save
<ASPECT> - choose the aspect keyword that they belong to
Shrine leader: may take up to 2 units of their aspect as troops choices with obsec. If already troops, don't count against slots.
May take 3 exarch powers.
Phoenix Lord
8" 2+ 2+ 5 5 6 6 2+
4+ invulnerable save
Eternal Warrior: All attacks are reduce to Damage 1
Knows all the exarch powers of their shrine and may choose 3 to be active at the beginning of any turn.
I think they're going to give the Avatar the Ghazghkull makeover like they did with C'tan. New big, targetable model and an only take x wounds per phase ability. Not exactly original but if it aint broken no real need to change it.
Going by the incubi statline they showed off this weekend, I suspect Aspects will also get a WS (or BS) and damage buff, but not much else.
AnomanderRake wrote:Expensive 1W/T3 models are going to leave the Codex utterly screwed by the damage creep people need to deal with Space Marines until the next time GW burns the system down and starts over, no matter how much you pump the Eldar firepower.
I'm not so sure. Damage creep doesn't actually matter much against 1W. The new heavy bolter isn't any better against eldar infantry, for example. All the multi-damage attacks people need to deal with marines don't actually help against footdar. They actually have the potential to sneak in past the skew in that regard.
The big concern is the sheer quantity of attacks that get thrown around these days. Boosting that aspect of eldar (which is what they've blatantly said they're doing with dark eldar) doesn't actually help them stand up against the pure blender lists that people can drop on the table.
Even stuff like the revision to the stalker (no penalties anymore, but against aircraft they get 12 attacks rather than 6 _and_ +1 to hit) is far more of a problem for eldar than a lot of the damage boosts that leave other armies so concerned.
BrianDavion wrote: I just hope that D2 doesn't get so common we're right back to the start with marines paying points for defensive stats that are essentially useless
Yeah that's a possibility, as was the AP2/3 spam of 3-7 ed. And that's mostly because the presence of marines in the meta forces it that way.
It rarely has anything to do with the rule itself and more to do with the cost benefit of taking it based on the likelyhood of your opponent being space marines.
This is a problem of GW's own making. If they supported and spruiked other armies to the extent they do marines, the playing field would be more even and the choice harder to make.
D2 on Incubi makes sense because they are carrying glaives.....power swords are not glaives, lol.
Autarch star glaive; goes to D2
Fuegan Fireaxe: goes to D2 or maybe D3
Avenger Exarch power glaive: goes to D2
Warp spider powerblades; +1A for each blade, -2, reroll wounds.
BrianDavion wrote: I just hope that D2 doesn't get so common we're right back to the start with marines paying points for defensive stats that are essentially useless
Yeah that's a possibility, as was the AP2/3 spam of 3-7 ed. And that's mostly because the presence of marines in the meta forces it that way.
It rarely has anything to do with the rule itself and more to do with the cost benefit of taking it based on the likelyhood of your opponent being space marines.
This is a problem of GW's own making. If they supported and spruiked other armies to the extent they do marines, the playing field would be more even and the choice harder to make.
Pretty much...
They already gave out 2D HB to everyone in the IOM and chaos.. While at the same time giving 3W T5 troops to marines.. Its not like there's a lack of multi damage weapons in any codex if you build for it.. so what difference does it make if Eldar get some of it?
We need more elite AT for CWE so its actually a choice between say a star cannon and a dang AML/ BL. Expensive single shot D6dmg weapons now are ugly....
Eldar need what literally everything else in the game needs: MASSIVE, MASSIVE DURABILITY INCREASES.
Unfortunately GW's codex designers have a spike through their brain, and are still slamming their foreheads into the wall screaming DAMAGE DAMAGE DAMAGE DAMAGE so, nothing will change.
I never understood the move of shuriken catapults to short range weapons when they were orginally basically storm bolters. You would think the reservist shopkeeper school teacher soldiers would be equipped with a longer range weapons instead of a suicide weapon with the range of a pistol. I think the idea of defenders with lasblasters but with crappier BS would make more sense if catapults stay short range. Shuriken cannon seems like it should be higher rate of fire lower damage weapon-like D1 heavy bolter with double the shots or something.
bullyboy wrote: D2 on Incubi makes sense because they are carrying glaives.....power swords are not glaives, lol.
Autarch star glaive; goes to D2
Fuegan Fireaxe: goes to D2 or maybe D3
Avenger Exarch power glaive: goes to D2
Warp spider powerblades; +1A for each blade, -2, reroll wounds.
etc
But as I keep saying, mastercrafted power swords exist and there could be any number of justifications for why Banshee Power Swords do more damage. Maybe because they just get renamed to Banshee Swords and so can be whatever the feth they need to be.
And at the end of the day, an Elite unit thats entire purpose is killing other Elite units in sudden shock assaults cannot function within 8/9th on D1 weaponry. It's why Incubi were always problematic, it's why Praetorians were always awful and it's why BGV, Praetorians and Incubi now have D2 weapons. Keeping Banshees on D1 weaponry, but increasing their attacks shifts the job of the unit into horde blending, which is not and never has been what Banshees are about, on the tabletop or in-lore. They have always been the pre-eminent Marine-killers at least in theory if not in practice. You cannot be a Marine-killer if you're D1.
bullyboy wrote: D2 on Incubi makes sense because they are carrying glaives.....power swords are not glaives, lol.
Autarch star glaive; goes to D2
Fuegan Fireaxe: goes to D2 or maybe D3
Avenger Exarch power glaive: goes to D2
Warp spider powerblades; +1A for each blade, -2, reroll wounds.
etc
But as I keep saying, mastercrafted power swords exist and there could be any number of justifications for why Banshee Power Swords do more damage. Maybe because they just get renamed to Banshee Swords and so can be whatever the feth they need to be.
And at the end of the day, an Elite unit thats entire purpose is killing other Elite units in sudden shock assaults cannot function within 8/9th on D1 weaponry. It's why Incubi were always problematic, it's why Praetorians were always awful and it's why BGV, Praetorians and Incubi now have D2 weapons. Keeping Banshees on D1 weaponry, but increasing their attacks shifts the job of the unit into horde blending, which is not and never has been what Banshees are about, on the tabletop or in-lore. They have always been the pre-eminent Marine-killers at least in theory if not in practice. You cannot be a Marine-killer if you're D1.
power swords ignoring armor or not I find it..... doubtful that a T3 S3 Melee unit has EVER been a "pre-eminant marine killer"
Also, funnily enough, that would make power fists/thunder hammers by far the best anti-Eldar weapons, thanks to them already being 4+. Yup, a weapon with grace and speed of brick being best anti-Eldar gear makes a ton of sense
well it makes sense. you can dodge a blow from a spear or a sword or mace, but if someone does a 16x16 aoe mini earthquake and static explosin in the air, there is no dodging that.
What eldar also need is psychic protection, they are linked to the matrix through their soul stones, and if an active eldar race member is near the protection should be even stronger.
bullyboy wrote: D2 on Incubi makes sense because they are carrying glaives.....power swords are not glaives, lol.
Autarch star glaive; goes to D2
Fuegan Fireaxe: goes to D2 or maybe D3
Avenger Exarch power glaive: goes to D2
Warp spider powerblades; +1A for each blade, -2, reroll wounds.
etc
But as I keep saying, mastercrafted power swords exist and there could be any number of justifications for why Banshee Power Swords do more damage. Maybe because they just get renamed to Banshee Swords and so can be whatever the feth they need to be.
And at the end of the day, an Elite unit thats entire purpose is killing other Elite units in sudden shock assaults cannot function within 8/9th on D1 weaponry. It's why Incubi were always problematic, it's why Praetorians were always awful and it's why BGV, Praetorians and Incubi now have D2 weapons. Keeping Banshees on D1 weaponry, but increasing their attacks shifts the job of the unit into horde blending, which is not and never has been what Banshees are about, on the tabletop or in-lore. They have always been the pre-eminent Marine-killers at least in theory if not in practice. You cannot be a Marine-killer if you're D1.
power swords ignoring armor or not I find it..... doubtful that a T3 S3 Melee unit has EVER been a "pre-eminant marine killer"
2nd ed was the last time the Eldar ever really played like they were supposed to. And banshees slaughtered marines.
Power swords were s5, wounding marines on a 3+. Banshee masks ignored overwatch and the target rolled no attack dice.
What this meant was that a squad of banshees charging any unit, roll an average of 4 on their attack dice (2 dice for sword and pistol pick the highest) while their target rolled nothing. For every pt higher the combined ws + charge and dice where than the target, it took that many hits. So a charging banshee would on average score 5 s5 asm-3 hits on EACH marine they were btb with.
That included characters. Marine characters would drop like a sack against them. High ws didn't mean much when you can't roll any dice, and outnumbering gives you the upper hand. Charging alone made them ws5, so their average roll was a total of 9, beating every marine character, special or otherwise and scoring 1-3 hits depending on their targets ws
alextroy wrote: Really? There were no durability increases in Codex Space Marines nor Codex Necrons?
Sorry, but you are just wrong. They are adjusting both damage and durability. Damage is increasing, but not against static durability.
Space marine infantry got more durable, 1w necron infantry got more durable, multiwound necron infantry got less durable, and necron vehicles got less durable (against dedicated antitank weaponry, anyway.)
And from these previews and the forgeworld work, it does not look like eldar are seeing any kind of useful durability increases. The wraithseer got an unspeakably stupid defensive rule tacked on and lost wounds, resulting in a model that costs the same as an Ironclad dreadnought and takes roughly 2/3 the firepower to take out while dealing significantly less damage to basically every target. Unless GW sneaks some kind of durability increase into the "battle focus" rule, Eldar are looking to be full glass cannon mode 'hope you make your points back in a single turn'.
Which, they might be able to, looking at Incubi. Those guys look like absolute cancer to play against. Drukhari and CWE might end up just absolute turn 2 tabling nightmare armies.
Most of the Eldar units seem to have some sort of durability increase in the IA Compendium. There are a number of -1 To Hit by ranged attacks and static Invulnerable Saves I don't recall being on units. The Wraithseer does seem to be on the short end of the list with the AP -1 counts as AP 0, but it's better than nothing.
alextroy wrote: Most of the Eldar units seem to have some sort of durability increase in the IA Compendium. There are a number of -1 To Hit by ranged attacks and static Invulnerable Saves I don't recall being on units. The Wraithseer does seem to be on the short end of the list with the AP -1 counts as AP 0, but it's better than nothing.
I mean, it actually did go down in terms of durability. IIRC the wraithseer had more than 8W before...
Shadow Spectres: Gained Deep Strike, no durability increase.
Irrilyth gained a 4++ and deep strike.
Hornet -1 to hit now always on, not just when it advances.
Wraithseer nerfed from W12 to W8, gained gakky ignore AP-1 ability
Warp Hunter durability identical.
Lynx gained a 5++ vs shooting.
Skathcatch Wraithknight incredibly disappointingly durability identical. Still a hugely expensive superheavy with two lackluster guns and no invuln unless it gives up one of those two guns. Nothing like a superheavy that's nearly as expensive as a knight that is armed with literally a single Heavy D6 Multimelta.
"OK, here's allllllllllllllllllll the guns on my fething gigantic 405pt superheavy firing! Whoops! Wouldn't you know it, rolled a 1 for shots."
I mean, it is a bit blurry so I suppose it could be 9. But the wraithseer has a single-digit wound count and no damage track in the new IA compendium. I read it as 8. Yeah, it got significantly less durable against all weaponry, even ap-1 weaponry. It is also now identically priced to an Ironclad Dreadnought, which it is less durable than (even if you assume it casts Protect on itself) and does less damage in melee than (even if you assume it casts Enhance or Smites prior to attacking).
So basically your typical "Anything anybody else has VS the equivalent option from Marine 3.0" comparison.
I mean, it is a bit blurry so I suppose it could be 9. But the wraithseer has a single-digit wound count and no damage track in the new IA compendium. I read it as 8. Yeah, it got significantly less durable against all weaponry, even ap-1 weaponry. It is also now identically priced to an Ironclad Dreadnought, which it is less durable than (even if you assume it casts Protect on itself) and does less damage in melee than (even if you assume it casts Enhance or Smites prior to attacking).
So basically your typical "Anything anybody else has VS the equivalent option from Marine 3.0" comparison.
unless they change protect, wraithseers can't cast it on themselves. Wraithlords have always been "dreadnoughts but tankier" and now theyre basically even since duty eternal just about offsets the T8 vs T7. And yeah, ironclads are straight up tankier.
I mean, it is a bit blurry so I suppose it could be 9. But the wraithseer has a single-digit wound count and no damage track in the new IA compendium. I read it as 8. Yeah, it got significantly less durable against all weaponry, even ap-1 weaponry. It is also now identically priced to an Ironclad Dreadnought, which it is less durable than (even if you assume it casts Protect on itself) and does less damage in melee than (even if you assume it casts Enhance or Smites prior to attacking).
So basically your typical "Anything anybody else has VS the equivalent option from Marine 3.0" comparison.
unless they change protect, wraithseers can't cast it on themselves. Wraithlords have always been "dreadnoughts but tankier" and now theyre basically even since duty eternal just about offsets the T8 vs T7. And yeah, ironclads are straight up tankier.
Yep, tankier and deals more damage. And gets free ranged weapons, the wraithseer has to pay for its ranged weapons.
It's all round preeeeeeeeeetty gakky, and it puts me at about a 0% hopium level that GW is going to fix any non-marine faction from where they're at right now, because they just do not seem to get what the problems currently are.
(psssst. GW. it's the 7-8 special rules you just slapped on a whole gak ton of marine stuff without making any of it pay for anything. You dun went and fixed the statlines but you didnt take away any of the special rules you slapped on willy nilly to make sure marines started winning tournaments again after 2.0)
the_scotsman wrote: It's all round preeeeeeeeeetty gakky, and it puts me at about a 0% hopium level that GW is going to fix any non-marine faction from where they're at right now, because they just do not seem to get what the problems currently are.
Marines being overpowered is by design. They're what new players are most likely to buy, so they have an unfair advantage so that new players don't get stomped and stop playing.
The Wraithseer went from 12W to 9 and gained a point of toughness which certainly makes me think that Wraithlords are losing a Wound too.
Which is actually a positive thing since on WL's since 10W is the worst value to have in the game right now. Does suck for Wraithseers but complaints about their stats changes are missing the forest through the trees in that it is now HS instead of HQ which is the real nerf.
Let me make sure I understand this correctly, Wraithseer with T8 W8/9 3+/5++ and Count AP -1 as AP 0 is a lot less durable than an Ironclad Dreadnaught with T8 W8 3+ and -1 Damage?
And while it has a lot less weapons, it is a Eldar Psycher. You'd expect less firepower from a support unit than you get out of an assault unit.
So we seem to be having an apples and oranges problem here.
Compare it to a librarian dreadnought if you want then.. And tell me how its apple and oranges and the wraith-seer is remotely close in terms of durability, firepower/damage output as well as utility for its points.
The whole point of a wraith seer was the fact it was a character so you could give it a trait and a relic. Ynnari wraith-seers were actually decent. Very decent. You had to take a relic/warlord trait to give it half damage and FNP.. But that also meant you had to take a ynnari detachment to do it. And trhey were actually tanky. But still hit like a wet noodle.. No smite, only one weapon and 4 atatcks. But fine.. whatever.. It was worth it. Now? Hes been written out of most peoples list. I now have 3 wraith-seers I'm unlikely to use at any matched play level... You could argue it synergies with expert crafters but with only one weapon? 4 attacks ? A d-cannon is 30 fethin points man!! Thats more then an entire eradicator... Also hes now Heavy support. Which is our factions most crowded spot.. this is some major kind of dumassery from GW no if or buts...
No other faction outside of SM gets rules stuff for free and with no downside cost. Lets not have this conversation all over again and pretend its anything else.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bosskelot wrote: The Wraithseer went from 12W to 9 and gained a point of toughness which certainly makes me think that Wraithlords are losing a Wound too.
Which is actually a positive thing since on WL's since 10W is the worst value to have in the game right now. Does suck for Wraithseers but complaints about their stats changes are missing the forest through the trees in that it is now HS instead of HQ which is the real nerf.
It did not gain a point of toughness. It was faq to T8 to match the wraithlord (as it should be) 2 years ago.
Bosskelot wrote: The Wraithseer went from 12W to 9 and gained a point of toughness which certainly makes me think that Wraithlords are losing a Wound too.
Which is actually a positive thing since on WL's since 10W is the worst value to have in the game right now. Does suck for Wraithseers but complaints about their stats changes are missing the forest through the trees in that it is now HS instead of HQ which is the real nerf.
Wraithseers and Wraithlords were already T8
And yeah the biggest nerf to the wraithseer was removing its character status. It makes zero sense from a lore perspective since a wraithseer is basically a dreadnought body for a character psyker (spiritseer). Moving it to heavy support and removing the character keyword makes as much sense as putting the BA librarian dreads into heavies and making them non characters.
They nerfed a unit that was one of the only reason to actually take Ynnari at the moment, and even with Ynnari it wasn't op since it wasnt a heavy hitter (put 20 GEQ around it and watch it do nothing for the rest of the game)
I honestly think moving the cap up to -2 to hit for Eldar would really do the trick.
Without mass re-rolls it really would make a difference. If you've ever played alitoic vs non re-roll everything army you know what I'm talking about. a -2 on a couple key units via powers/strat is plenty survivability.
As to the aspects I don't even know how you salvage a 1w T3 model unit without just making it dirt cheap.. The ROF coming out of most armies at ST3/4 is solid.
Quins have the benefit of cheap utility transport to hide their frail bodies.
But to be honest I have no idea whee to go from here.. It seems GW is refusing to adjust the statline for certain factions and units, so really its not looking good.
alextroy wrote: Let me make sure I understand this correctly, Wraithseer with T8 W8/9 3+/5++ and Count AP -1 as AP 0 is a lot less durable than an Ironclad Dreadnaught with T8 W8 3+ and -1 Damage?
Addressing this part of the post only, are you expressing skepticism or agreement? Because Ignore AP-1 is not NEARLY as good as -1 Damage on a model like these are.
alextroy wrote: Let me make sure I understand this correctly, Wraithseer with T8 W8/9 3+/5++ and Count AP -1 as AP 0 is a lot less durable than an Ironclad Dreadnaught with T8 W8 3+ and -1 Damage?
Addressing this part of the post only, are you expressing skepticism or agreement? Because Ignore AP-1 is not NEARLY as good as -1 Damage on a model like these are.
I don't know. Would your rather have -1 Damage or a 5+ Invulnerable save?
Argive wrote:Compare it to a librarian dreadnought if you want then..
And tell me how its apple and oranges and the wraith-seer is remotely close in terms of durability, firepower/damage output as well as utility for its points.
Going by the IA, the WS is cheaper than the Librarian Dreadnought and has +1 T, +1 W, and a 5++. So while not being a character, he is certainly not insignificantly more durable than a LD. So while not being a character, the WS is tougher but not as offensively powerful. We will see if that holds when the Codex Supplement arrives
The whole point of a wraith seer was the fact it was a character so you could give it a trait and a relic.
Ynnari wraith-seers were actually decent. Very decent. You had to take a relic/warlord trait to give it half damage and FNP.. But that also meant you had to take a ynnari detachment to do it. And trhey were actually tanky. But still hit like a wet noodle.. No smite, only one weapon and 4 atatcks. But fine.. whatever.. It was worth it. Now? Hes been written out of most peoples list. I now have 3 wraith-seers I'm unlikely to use at any matched play level... You could argue it synergies with expert crafters but with only one weapon? 4 attacks ? A d-cannon is 30 fethin points man!! Thats more then an entire eradicator... Also hes now Heavy support. Which is our factions most crowded spot.. this is some major kind of dumassery from GW no if or buts...
No other faction outside of SM gets rules stuff for free and with no downside cost.
Lets not have this conversation all over again and pretend its anything else.
GW begs to differ. Apparently they don't want the WS to be all those things you say it is. The question to ask is does it serve a role that it can be used for, not does it serve the role it used to.
alextroy wrote: Let me make sure I understand this correctly, Wraithseer with T8 W8/9 3+/5++ and Count AP -1 as AP 0 is a lot less durable than an Ironclad Dreadnaught with T8 W8 3+ and -1 Damage?
Addressing this part of the post only, are you expressing skepticism or agreement? Because Ignore AP-1 is not NEARLY as good as -1 Damage on a model like these are.
I don't know. Would your rather have -1 Damage or a 5+ Invulnerable save?
For anything short of Melta weapons, -1 Damage.
Not to mention, pretty sure you can snag an Invuln somehow, knowing how bloated the Marine Dex is.
alextroy wrote: Let me make sure I understand this correctly, Wraithseer with T8 W8/9 3+/5++ and Count AP -1 as AP 0 is a lot less durable than an Ironclad Dreadnaught with T8 W8 3+ and -1 Damage?
Addressing this part of the post only, are you expressing skepticism or agreement? Because Ignore AP-1 is not NEARLY as good as -1 Damage on a model like these are.
I don't know. Would your rather have -1 Damage or a 5+ Invulnerable save?
Argive wrote:Compare it to a librarian dreadnought if you want then.. And tell me how its apple and oranges and the wraith-seer is remotely close in terms of durability, firepower/damage output as well as utility for its points.
Going by the IA, the WS is cheaper than the Librarian Dreadnought and has +1 T, +1 W, and a 5++. So while not being a character, he is certainly not insignificantly more durable than a LD. So while not being a character, the WS is tougher but not as offensively powerful. We will see if that holds when the Codex Supplement arrives
The whole point of a wraith seer was the fact it was a character so you could give it a trait and a relic. Ynnari wraith-seers were actually decent. Very decent. You had to take a relic/warlord trait to give it half damage and FNP.. But that also meant you had to take a ynnari detachment to do it. And trhey were actually tanky. But still hit like a wet noodle.. No smite, only one weapon and 4 atatcks. But fine.. whatever.. It was worth it. Now? Hes been written out of most peoples list. I now have 3 wraith-seers I'm unlikely to use at any matched play level... You could argue it synergies with expert crafters but with only one weapon? 4 attacks ? A d-cannon is 30 fethin points man!! Thats more then an entire eradicator... Also hes now Heavy support. Which is our factions most crowded spot.. this is some major kind of dumassery from GW no if or buts...
No other faction outside of SM gets rules stuff for free and with no downside cost. Lets not have this conversation all over again and pretend its anything else.
GW begs to differ. Apparently they don't want the WS to be all those things you say it is. The question to ask is does it serve a role that it can be used for, not does it serve the role it used to.
1. The libby dread is not cheaper as far as I can tel. Libby dread with melta gun comes in at 150pts The wraithseer with a D-cannon is 170pts.. And if you wana go for same-ish profile as the LD with a BL its 150pts so its same pts.. Or as near as it makes no differnce if BS is inacurate here.
2. Whats better then an extra point of toughness and 1w and a 5++? Exactly... Not being able to be shot at all. And then having -1 damage once you can be shot. Don't forget. Eldar weapons dont have fancy 2+d6 damage profile coming out of their butts.. So I don't see how -1 ap is better than -1 damage in this or any scenario ever.
3. It does not currently serve a any role. It is worse shooting than a wraith-lord or war walker or any heavy support choice because it has one weapon... And its best weapons cost 40 blimin points.. And because he has a big ol target on his face hes not reliable to buff or output consistent smite MW because he will easily die... beacsue hes targetable... So please tell me what role he currently performs? You seem to be the expert on wraithseers so I'm all ears.
4. What relics and traits can the LD take for free? what relics and or traits can the WS take ? Exactly.. 4.1. Im pretty sure the libby gets a +1 to cast and deny base dont he?
5. Its the only option we have. Non marines dont get 10 veriation of a walker.. we get 2.. Some factions dont get any.
I am puzzled as to why the wraithseer was moved to heavy, unless GW for some reason has an idea to make a wraithlord character for the new dex (unlikely). It was such a good slot for it and made sense lore wise. Hvy support makes no damn sense, unless we are moving Libby dreads to Heavy support too.
looking at the Incubi, it certainly seems that GW feels Eldar should be glass cannons (outside of wraith constructs). T3 1W is going to stay, even for Aspects (except Exarchs of course). Just make them more deadly and I'll be fine.
So we are going to keep comparing not quite comparable things, are we?
150 Points gets a Librarian Dreadnought with a Fist, Force Stave, and Stormbolter. It knows Smite, two more Psychic Powers, can cast 2 powers, and deny 1 power.
150 Points gets a Wraithseer with Ghost Spear, Wraith Shield, and an Aeldari Missile Launcher. It knows Smite and 1 seer dual power, can cast 1 power, and deny 1 power.
What are our differences?
1. The LD is a character and an HQ unit while the WS is a Heavy Support unit.
2. The WS has +2M, +1S, +1T, and +1 W.
3. The LD gets -1 Damage when attacked, while the WS has a 5+ Invulnerable Save.
4. The LD can cast two powers, but both effectively know the same number of powers.
5. The WS has much more ranged firepower in the AML compared to a Stormbolter.
So for the same 150 points, the things that make the LD better are that it is a Character (assuming this stays this way when the Codex Supplement comes out), it is a better Psycher, and it has access to things like Warlord Traits and Relics. Then there are the intangibles like Space Marines having better faction rules that Craftworld. We won't know if that gets evened out until a new Codex Craftworlds comes out.
So end analysis on my part. Not nearly as uneven as your complaints.
Theres no point in a circular argument.. if you want to ignore key things and omit key things and underplay these things you do you.
1. I could be wrong according to BS the dread have a melta rather then stave/halberd?
2. The fact it is a character is pretty important... it means it cannot be shot at. all.. which is the best defence of all despite how much you wana gloss over it. It will at least survive 2 turns easily. The wraith seer will not.
3. The fact it can buff itself or allies as well as smite is not insignificant...Not to mention you give the the sarcophagus for free so its a better psyker as well as being able to cast more powers reliably because it will be alive to cast them.. .
4. Also lets just ignore the fact that it gets more attacks in combat. and it gets double strength with fist if memory saves me right ? So the whole strength thing counts for like nothing..
At least we agree it is uneven. As to what extent you can band aid that all you like so it does not "seem that bad" if it make you feel better.
But anyway lets wait and see.. Haven't we been hearing that a lot for the last year plus lol..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: I am puzzled as to why the wraithseer was moved to heavy, unless GW for some reason has an idea to make a wraithlord character for the new dex (unlikely). It was such a good slot for it and made sense lore wise. Hvy support makes no damn sense, unless we are moving Libby dreads to Heavy support too.
looking at the Incubi, it certainly seems that GW feels Eldar should be glass cannons (outside of wraith constructs). T3 1W is going to stay, even for Aspects (except Exarchs of course). Just make them more deadly and I'll be fine.
I would have loved to have him as elite or HQ. The character status only sucks because he has gone down in wounds and cannot be protected.. So its like a double compound nerf. It really would not have made much difference if he stayed at 12 wounds because he was target able anyway and if he lost character in that scenario it would not have been too bad..
As things stand i can put building the 3rd wraithseer on the back burner and the wraith-seers I have can go to the back of the paint ques to get finished. Probably wont be seeing a lot of play unti/ if/when we get a codex.
Boy would I love to have character wraithlords/seers via CP. That would be amazing.
Argive wrote: Theres no point in a circular argument.. if you want to ignore key things and omit key things and underplay these things you do you.
1. I could be wrong according to BS the dread have a melta rather then stave/halberd?
2. The fact it is a character is pretty important... it means it cannot be shot at. all.. which is the best defence of all despite how much you wana gloss over it. It will at least survive 2 turns easily. The wraith seer will not.
3. The fact it can buff itself or allies as well as smite is not insignificant...Not to mention you give the the sarcophagus for free so its a better psyker as well as being able to cats more powers reliably because it will be alive to cast them.. .
4. Also lets just ignore the fact that it gets more attacks in combat. and it gets double strenght with fist if memory saves me right ? So the whole strenght thing counts for like nothing..
At least we agree it is uneven.
As to what extent you can band aid that all you like so it does not "seem that bad" if it make you feel better.
But anyway lets wait and see.. Haven't we been hearing that a lot for the last year plus lol..
I think we can agree that the LD is probably better for the points, but not better in every way. That's my point. Declaring the WS crap because the LD is better is one of those fallacies that runs rampant on Dakka Dakka.
1. Per the Index Astartes Blood Angels, 150 points is storm bolter, Furioso fist, and Furioso force halberd. It cost 5 to upgrade to Meltagun or Heavy Flamer.
2. Important? Yes. Better? Probably. But that doesn't negate the better stats on the WS.
3. You say that like the WS doesn't buff it's allies. That's the entire point of it's Psychic Lore. As for the sarcophagus, it's free only in the sense that you don't pay points for a Relic. There is still the cost in either it is your free relic or you pay a CP for it and it takes the place of one of your possible relics.
4. Number of attacks isn't everything. The WS has 4 S10 AP -3 Dmg D3+3 attacks. The LD (assuming it charged, was charged, or performed a Heroic Intervention) has 5 S12 AP -3 D3 attacks (fist) and 1 S8 AP -3 Dmg D3+3 attack (halberd). I've got better things to do than run the numbers on which does more damage to which targets.
So as I said LD is probably a bit better. Of course, it has a new codex and we are still waiting to see what happens to the Craftworld Aeldari. Maybe their general rules will help make up the current difference.
Let's try not to derail this into a marines argument.
I think straight up durability bonuses for the eldar would... feel wrong. they're an army noted for swift mobility etc.
I think if I was writing a codex craftworld Eldar I'd do two things.
first of all I'd get rid of lighting fast reactions, and instead make it a intrinsic ability of most eldar units. (this means most CWE forces would have a built in -1 to hit)
secondly, I'd give CWE a stratigium that allows them to, after their opponent has moved, but before he begins his shooting phase, move an infantry unit, this would however count as their movement in the next movement phase. this would enable a CWE player to pull a infantry unit out of LOS of what could be heavy fire, and even potentially bait the enemy into a trap. which I feel would be VERY eldaresque.
Marines out shooting the shooting specialist units, and out fighting the fighty specialist units feels wrong too buddy... But you are right lets not derail this. I am not the one that brought the "its not as bad as you claim" and "just wait and see" and other such nonsesnse just to argue in bad faith.. But whatever.
A contsruct that has no mechanical or organic parts and is powered by psychic energy which is made from psychomantic space magic material should not be as/more durable as a metal box with a half dead mortal inside it ? Sure buddy. sure..
The -1 cap needs to go up to -2 but be hard to get and only be applicable to like 1-2 units per turn.. Having a whole army at -2/3 was a problem..
We already have quicken/ and fire and fade that does exactly this type of movement shenanigans....
I agree. the movement needs to increase.
I would also sugest auto advance 6" to all infantry, bikers and skimmers to really give them the speed and set them apart from wraith constructs.
But also need the psychci powers revamped, casting improved. How is that a namless librarian gets better casting then eldrad ulthran of a farseer who are the most psychic of all psychcis..? Also why cant I cast quicken on a wraithlord? Or enrevate? Or protect ?
The problem with giving banshees more attacks is it steps on the toes of striking scorpians who should be the aspect that vomits out attacks to deal with hordes.
banshees should have low attacks with high damage to deal with "elite" units while still making them weak to getting tarpitted.
or they could just let aspects take alternate gear like other units. banshees with executioners or mirror swords or the Chakrams.... but seeing as how banshees just got a new box not going to happen.
if banshees natively got the mortal wound scream or mortal wounds on the charge per individual like the DE psychic awakening traits could do a lot for them without raising their attacks, makes their speed more meaningful, and gives them a weakness of being out of position and charged.
alextroy wrote: So we are going to keep comparing not quite comparable things, are we?
150 Points gets a Librarian Dreadnought with a Fist, Force Stave, and Stormbolter. It knows Smite, two more Psychic Powers, can cast 2 powers, and deny 1 power.
150 Points gets a Wraithseer with Ghost Spear, Wraith Shield, and an Aeldari Missile Launcher. It knows Smite and 1 seer dual power, can cast 1 power, and deny 1 power.
What are our differences?
1. The LD is a character and an HQ unit while the WS is a Heavy Support unit.
2. The WS has +2M, +1S, +1T, and +1 W.
3. The LD gets -1 Damage when attacked, while the WS has a 5+ Invulnerable Save.
4. The LD can cast two powers, but both effectively know the same number of powers.
5. The WS has much more ranged firepower in the AML compared to a Stormbolter.
So for the same 150 points, the things that make the LD better are that it is a Character (assuming this stays this way when the Codex Supplement comes out), it is a better Psycher, and it has access to things like Warlord Traits and Relics. Then there are the intangibles like Space Marines having better faction rules that Craftworld. We won't know if that gets evened out until a new Codex Craftworlds comes out.
So end analysis on my part. Not nearly as uneven as your complaints.
D'you want to actually run like a defensive or offensive comparison between the two?
Assuming 9 wounds on the seer, and assuming BS3+ models shooting at them:
30.7 Autocannons
11.6 Krak Missiles
8.7 Lascannons
7.38 meltaguns in melta range
And the librarian dreadnought, assuming his character protection means nothing at all:
24 Autocannons
10.8 krak missiles
8.7 lascannons
4.0 meltaguns in melta range
I'm assuming he stays a character, though, because that's what he is in the Blood Angels index and IIRC there were not significant statline changes between the deathwatch or wolves index and the resulting codex. The wraithseer also does not have access to a psychic power that catapults him forward 12" - if the librarian dreadnought loses his self-buffs due to CORE restrictions the comparison is a lot more fair.
Offensively:
Neither has an "anti-horde" attack, so I'll just compare vs vehicles where they can deal their damage value.
Wraithseer: 7.4 damage vs T7 3+
Libdread: 7.4 damage vs T7 3+
Basically, being character protected and the librarian dreadnought being a better psycher is pretty much the only useful comparison. The defensive benefits of the wraithseer are more than offset by character protection, and offensively they're identical (well, the libdread makes more attacks, so he's better vs heavy infantry)
perhaps you could take the "space marines are OP" arguement elsewhere? because this thread might actually be constructive if it can avoid getting sidetracked by "SPACE MARINES WE HATES THEM PRECIOUS!"
BrianDavion wrote: Let's try not to derail this into a marines argument.
I think straight up durability bonuses for the eldar would... feel wrong. they're an army noted for swift mobility etc.
I think if I was writing a codex craftworld Eldar I'd do two things.
first of all I'd get rid of lighting fast reactions, and instead make it a intrinsic ability of most eldar units. (this means most CWE forces would have a built in -1 to hit)
.
The main problem I have with this idea is how it now interacts with the stupid stupid -1 to hit cap.
It means when playing against eldar, you get the following special abilities army-wide for free:
-Move and fire heavy weapons
-Advance and fire assault weapons
-ignore Dense Cover
It's not gonna feel super fluffy to play "the fast army" with your grand old +1" of movement if your opponent's just like "Welp, might as well advance with all my gak, you're already -1 to hit!"
BrianDavion wrote: Let's try not to derail this into a marines argument.
I think straight up durability bonuses for the eldar would... feel wrong. they're an army noted for swift mobility etc.
I think if I was writing a codex craftworld Eldar I'd do two things.
first of all I'd get rid of lighting fast reactions, and instead make it a intrinsic ability of most eldar units. (this means most CWE forces would have a built in -1 to hit)
.
The main problem I have with this idea is how it now interacts with the stupid stupid -1 to hit cap.
It means when playing against eldar, you get the following special abilities army-wide for free:
-Move and fire heavy weapons
-Advance and fire assault weapons
-ignore Dense Cover
It's not gonna feel super fluffy to play "the fast army" with your grand old +1" of movement if your opponent's just like "Welp, might as well advance with all my gak, you're already -1 to hit!"
I guess you could justify this by saying that Eldar are so good at dodging even the most well-placed shot that if you're shooting at them, you *may as well* just be running around, firing wildly in their general direction.
Think of it not as a bonus, I guess, but an extension to the drawback?
BrianDavion wrote: Let's try not to derail this into a marines argument.
I think straight up durability bonuses for the eldar would... feel wrong. they're an army noted for swift mobility etc.
I think if I was writing a codex craftworld Eldar I'd do two things.
first of all I'd get rid of lighting fast reactions, and instead make it a intrinsic ability of most eldar units. (this means most CWE forces would have a built in -1 to hit)
.
The main problem I have with this idea is how it now interacts with the stupid stupid -1 to hit cap.
It means when playing against eldar, you get the following special abilities army-wide for free:
-Move and fire heavy weapons
-Advance and fire assault weapons
-ignore Dense Cover
It's not gonna feel super fluffy to play "the fast army" with your grand old +1" of movement if your opponent's just like "Welp, might as well advance with all my gak, you're already -1 to hit!"
yeah on that I agree. why I'd be tempted to also add in that the -1 STACKS with other -1s (meaning eldar can impose a max of a -2 to to hit them) I'd possiably also require the eldar unit to have moved to get the benifit (so no parking a unit in dense cover all game)
warmaster21 wrote: The problem with giving banshees more attacks is it steps on the toes of striking scorpians who should be the aspect that vomits out attacks to deal with hordes.
Why should sxorps be the horde killer? Why is that they are thrust into that tiny design space? Banshees are fast and do devastating lightning assaults, they should just blend units, while the Exarch takes on tougher targets.
The goal should then be to create a new design space for scorpions. They're infiltrators for one, and are more armoured than banshees. Their chainsword should be S4 AP-1 base. I'm all for GW changing the fluff on these guys to go full Predator. Malus to hit that possibly extends to untargetable over x inches, shoulder mounted weapon on Exarch, base S4 across the board. They shouldn't be frontline assault specialists, but enemy backfield hunters taking out weaker units and hiding in the shadows.
Edit: only downside to untargetable would be people using them for home-based secondary scorers. Maybe just slap them with the Ravenguard chapter trait rules.
BrianDavion wrote: Let's try not to derail this into a marines argument.
I think straight up durability bonuses for the eldar would... feel wrong. they're an army noted for swift mobility etc.
I think if I was writing a codex craftworld Eldar I'd do two things.
first of all I'd get rid of lighting fast reactions, and instead make it a intrinsic ability of most eldar units. (this means most CWE forces would have a built in -1 to hit)
.
The main problem I have with this idea is how it now interacts with the stupid stupid -1 to hit cap.
It means when playing against eldar, you get the following special abilities army-wide for free:
-Move and fire heavy weapons
-Advance and fire assault weapons
-ignore Dense Cover
It's not gonna feel super fluffy to play "the fast army" with your grand old +1" of movement if your opponent's just like "Welp, might as well advance with all my gak, you're already -1 to hit!"
yeah on that I agree. why I'd be tempted to also add in that the -1 STACKS with other -1s (meaning eldar can impose a max of a -2 to to hit them) I'd possiably also require the eldar unit to have moved to get the benifit (so no parking a unit in dense cover all game)
Sure, why the heck not. We already just added Attrition into the game and then granted a solid 1/3 of the armies and 9/10ths of the units in the game complete and total immunity to any modifiers to attrition tests, screw the modifier cap I never liked it anyway.
yeah, making 6's autohit was enough of a fix to the mechanic IMO
Let's be clear, it wasn't about fixing anything - it was about buffing Astartes wrt Eldar. -1 to hit means orks lose 50% of their shooting effectiveness whereas Astartes only lose 25%.
yeah, making 6's autohit was enough of a fix to the mechanic IMO
Honestly, I'm not sure it was needed. 6s always hitting, that is.
I'd rather have addressed certain combos that could make large portions of your army unhittable, like the -4 Lord Discordant and the AL Strat to make anything behind it untargetable. Because, with the exception of Orks (who already HAD 6s always hit) most people hit on a 4+ or better in their chosen phase. -1 wasn't too hard to get. -2 was harder. But could you reasonably get -3 across the board? And, more to the point, SHOULD YOU be able to do that?
Making one or two units unhittable isn't the end of the world, especially if there's counterplay (like getting within 12", killing support characters, etc.).
at the very least it should be a -1 cap from abilities/powers/conditions applying to the target, and -1 from abilities/powers/conditions applying to the firer.
If my unit has -1 to hit, you should still suffer -1 to hit if you advance and fire an assault weapon, or move and fire a heavy weapon, or if you are firing through dense cover.
I can understand stacking up to -4 to hit on an eldar flyer with a trait and a strat and a whatever is obnoxious.
1. Attacks boost to out CC unit specialist and lords . All of them. Scrpions and banshee rocking like 4-5 attacks on the charge would actualy make them a threat.
2. A whole heap of new traits, warlord traits, and startegems and psychic powers.
3. Auto advance 6" and range boost + damage boost to shuriken and Pts drops on basic infantry troops. Because we are not getting stat boosts. A ranger can not be 15 pts compared to a tac marine...
I have no idea, but I'd bet the farm they will get some D2 buffs as with marines gaining a wound, we will see D2 all over. Kinda makes you scratch your head and wonder why make the change if they will now just be sure it means little eh ? Oh GW, when won't you make change for changes sake then raise the bar to make the change pointless. You scamps you.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I have no idea, but I'd bet the farm they will get some D2 buffs as with marines gaining a wound, we will see D2 all over. Kinda makes you scratch your head and wonder why make the change if they will now just be sure it means little eh ? Oh GW, when won't you make change for changes sake then raise the bar to make the change pointless. You scamps you.
Not useless with an Apothecary.
6+++ means that D2 against W2 only has a 70% chance of killing a model.
While I don't collect or play Eldar I'd personally love to see a reworked Avatar. I've always loved the models (mainly the FW ones) and the rules should reflect that he's pretty much a god. He should be on-par with the likes of Guilliman, Ghaz and the C'tan.
Valkyrie wrote: While I don't collect or play Eldar I'd personally love to see a reworked Avatar. I've always loved the models (mainly the FW ones) and the rules should reflect that he's pretty much a god. He should be on-par with the likes of Guilliman, Ghaz and the C'tan.
i fully expect him to be once we get the codex. The fact that GW was finally willing to make Ghaz and Ctan shards good is a good indicator imo
But would that not require a new model?
Be a pain for newcomers to eldar to have to invest in crappy failcast avatar only to use his potentially super decent rules..
If the answer is yes we know its not likely to happen becasue unfortunately GW doesn't care about eldar models.
The apothecary will only be so many places and with enough saturation it'll still not be much of a boon when we haven't seen how far this D2 train will go yet. I'd be willing to bet it'll grow much larger in saturation. It's what you call the terminator situation. Where they have high armor, yet plasma is all over, so they get a mild invuln and still can't live, so get cheaper, but not still kinda meh, then get good SS and now too hardy and now the SS gets worse.
I think marines may follow this trend once they over D2 it all up. Also any kind of FNP ends up being near useless then on single wound models when all these D2s come a knocking.
I mean we can agree to disagree but even incubies went up to D2 and they are a usually thought to be elite unit to hunt elites, I doubt that is an oddity and more a sign of things to come and a showing what some eldar weapon and unit changes will be. Probably won't gain any durability but they can easily ramp up their damage and the best defense is a good offense as they say.
Argive wrote: But would that not require a new model?
Be a pain for newcomers to eldar to have to invest in crappy failcast avatar only to use his potentially super decent rules..
If the answer is yes we know its not likely to happen becasue unfortunately GW doesn't care about eldar models.
Theyve shown with banshees and Jainzar that theyre willing to make new models.
Based on the FW Compendium, GW seems willing to expand defensive abilities to the Eldar beyond more Toughness and Wounds. I sincerely doubt there will be an exception to the -1 Hit Roll rule, so expect other bonuses instead. GW isn't highly likely to negate that rule so quickly after putting it in place. Probably a mixed bag of buffs rather than the same one for everything. Maybe Battle Focus gives a -1 Hit and adds a +1 Save if the target gets -1 Hit from another source (the reverse of the Raven Guard rule)?
Useful speculation won't really happen until we see what they did with the Drukhari, but I wouldn't be surprised to see living infantry get at -1 Hit (like the Shadow Spectres) while the Wraith Constructs get other buffs (hopefully more compelling that just AP -1 is AP 0). Vehicles may be looking at combinations of -1 Hit and/or Invulnerable Saves.
That being said, I expect more emphasis on maneuverability and offense than defense. Aeldari are supposed to be fast and deadly. That means they need better weapons. More range on Shuriken weapons. More deadly close combat ability. Just imagine what the Incubi stat block, adjusted slightly for each Aspect, would do for Aspect Warriors.
Expect to see an upgrade on weapon damage and attacks for the more than small arms of the faction. Shuriken Cannon will almost certainly be D2 given it is the Eldar Heavy Bolter-equilvant weapon. Fusion Weapons will get the new Melta rules. An half the things we will never predict.
alextroy wrote: Based on the FW Compendium, GW seems willing to expand defensive abilities to the Eldar beyond more Toughness and Wounds. I sincerely doubt there will be an exception to the -1 Hit Roll rule, so expect other bonuses instead. GW isn't highly likely to negate that rule so quickly after putting it in place. Probably a mixed bag of buffs rather than the same one for everything. Maybe Battle Focus gives a -1 Hit and adds a +1 Save if the target gets -1 Hit from another source (the reverse of the Raven Guard rule)?
Useful speculation won't really happen until we see what they did with the Drukhari, but I wouldn't be surprised to see living infantry get at -1 Hit (like the Shadow Spectres) while the Wraith Constructs get other buffs (hopefully more compelling that just AP -1 is AP 0). Vehicles may be looking at combinations of -1 Hit and/or Invulnerable Saves.
That being said, I expect more emphasis on maneuverability and offense than defense. Aeldari are supposed to be fast and deadly. That means they need better weapons. More range on Shuriken weapons. More deadly close combat ability. Just imagine what the Incubi stat block, adjusted slightly for each Aspect, would do for Aspect Warriors.
Expect to see an upgrade on weapon damage and attacks for the more than small arms of the faction. Shuriken Cannon will almost certainly be D2 given it is the Eldar Heavy Bolter-equilvant weapon. Fusion Weapons will get the new Melta rules. An half the things we will never predict.
They definitely need something. always strike first in melee as a racial trait (given the current system being entirely around whether you charged or not) would also be helpful for all eldar. It basically reflects their Initiative in previous editions being higher than most so they would always go first. That was one of their 'defensive' abilities in melee - by striking first they had the opportunity to remove incoming attacks and survive better.
IMO in this current design paradigm it's the most practical melee buff you can give living eldar.
I'm unsure what the incubi stat block represents TBH. It was only with 8th ed iirc, that their WS normalised with aspect warriors. Previously they'd always had higher WS than CWE aspects. But perhaps it's a sign that aspects will get their main stat at 2+ as a buff? Avengers at BS2+, scorpions at WS2+? Not sure if that will work with Reapers and Crimson hunters though...
There are 2 areas of survival - shooting and melee.
And there are ~3 types of response to these:
Changing eldar armour - giving them all great armour as it's more advanced. Even a 2+ sv T3 1W model isn't that great, but heavy aspect armour at 2+ could work, while normal at 3+ would be a little boost. That or special rules about ignoring AP levels to represent their ability to dodge - armour is only affected by AP if it reduces it to 7+ (ie all or nothing armour to reflect their acrobatics) and so on.
Changing eldar movement - keeping them as-is, but making them move so fast that they cross the board before you and strike. Perhaps with Charge phase movement for jump shoot jump.
Defensive rules - invulnerable saves, always count as 12" further away to minimum of 6" (ie the further away they are the harder it becomes to hit them AT ALL), always strike first in melee, unmodified hit rolls of 2 are also considered failures etc.
DE have had power from pain for a while now so they've always had that special ++ protection, I assume they'll continue this in the next codex.
warmaster21 wrote: The problem with giving banshees more attacks is it steps on the toes of striking scorpians who should be the aspect that vomits out attacks to deal with hordes.
Why should sxorps be the horde killer? Why is that they are thrust into that tiny design space? Banshees are fast and do devastating lightning assaults, they should just blend units, while the Exarch takes on tougher targets.
The goal should then be to create a new design space for scorpions. They're infiltrators for one, and are more armoured than banshees. Their chainsword should be S4 AP-1 base. I'm all for GW changing the fluff on these guys to go full Predator. Malus to hit that possibly extends to untargetable over x inches, shoulder mounted weapon on Exarch, base S4 across the board. They shouldn't be frontline assault specialists, but enemy backfield hunters taking out weaker units and hiding in the shadows.
Edit: only downside to untargetable would be people using them for home-based secondary scorers. Maybe just slap them with the Ravenguard chapter trait rules.
Becuase tiny niche cases is how aspects were designed in the first place? they hone 1 art to master craft at the expense of all others? fire dragons are anti tank/monster. sure id love to give them the option to swap our their fusion guns for the flamers. Banshees were suppose to be elite infantry killers in melee and have always struggled with that role becuase s3. reapers were fire support who were good at gunning down everything. etc etc
Scorpions by how their gear is designed are like the opposite of banshees. banshes light armor, becuase armor doesnt help fighting against other elite infantry also armed with power weapons, scorpians? heavy armor to shrug off the attacks of hordes while they rip the lightly armored foes apart with chainswords and their mandiblasters, which id rather see turned into like 2 extra attacks at like s4 ap-2, and the scorpian exarch to claw their way out of being engaged by elite infatry with their power fist.
but sure ill make some consessions that some of the roles of aspects could change, but still banshees = melee anti elite, scorpions = melee anti light infantry. swopping hawks = ranged anti light infantry, reapers = ranged anti heavy infantry, and later also added in anti tank/monster for reasons. fire dragons = anti tank/monster. warp spiders= something. exarch with power blades used to be scary, s6 used to be scary against vehicles, their mobility is great i guess? i guess they are also ranged anti light infantry. could probably diverge hawks and spiders more. dire avengers = line infantry all rounders.
and I'm probably wrong on several of my assessments on the aspects.
I agree they need to add more design space for the aspects but some things just step on the toes of other aspects.
I have it backwards in my mind. Ive always imagined scorpions to be elite killers/assasins. Striking from the shadow to ambush the enemy leader + bodyguard. While the banshees can blender and dance their way through line troops.
I honestly wouldint mind if they reverse the roles for those two. Give scorpions more oomph vs elite units and banshees the ability to just blender hordes.
ID liek to see swoopng hawks to get nieche ability to harass enemies with soem sort of haywire/tangle grenades to slow down vehicles and plink off supporting infantry. A debuff grenade halving movement would be solid. Maybe thats more of a deathspinenr thing.
What are ideasd for monofilament weapons? Currently they seem to be little different to shuriken. Still fishing for wounds on 6's which aint great.
The deathshroud cannon on the scatchach wraithknight suggest we are moving to a dual profile of either flamer short range or long range focused with static AP and higher damage.
This could potentially make the spiders really good.
Also, judging by the shadow spectre data sheet, exarch powers are going the way of the dod unless we get generic ones :(
Argive wrote: I have it backwards in my mind. Ive always imagined scorpions to be elite killers/assasins. Striking from the shadow to ambush the enemy leader + bodyguard. While the banshees can blender and dance their way through line troops.
I honestly wouldint mind if they reverse the roles for those two. Give scorpions more oomph vs elite units and banshees the ability to just blender hordes.
ID liek to see swoopng hawks to get nieche ability to harass enemies with soem sort of haywire/tangle grenades to slow down vehicles and plink off supporting infantry. A debuff grenade halving movement would be solid. Maybe thats more of a deathspinenr thing.
What are ideasd for monofilament weapons? Currently they seem to be little different to shuriken. Still fishing for wounds on 6's which aint great.
The deathshroud cannon on the scatchach wraithknight suggest we are moving to a dual profile of either flamer short range or long range focused with static AP and higher damage.
This could potentially make the spiders really good.
Also, judging by the shadow spectre data sheet, exarch powers are going the way of the dod unless we get generic ones :(
Was fun while it lasted
monofilament weapons should just go back to being flamers.
scorpions are anti-geqs (chainswords), banshees anti MEQ (power swords)
Wow! 3 pages. Just goes to show how much love there is for the Asuryani on t'internet.
I doubt the minus cap will change as someone was hoping for as that caused too many feel bads for opponents and it looks like GW is cutting right back on those.
I'm not convinced of durability buffs being the way 2 go for us. Our durability is poor and i don't see how making it mediocre will help much tbh.
So, you have basically decided what the role of the Aspect is based purely on weapon loadout instead of fluff. All that does is continually jam the units into a small design space. I'm more with Argive, banshees should be the blender unit with more attacks, greater speed, etc. Scorpions need a different role, and not be the horde blender (which they're not that great at anyway)
From the fluff, Banshees are the straight up combat specialists, capable of killing a fully armoured marine as well as a simple guardsman, whereas scorpions excel in ambush and attacking in cover from the shadows. They deserve a redesign based on the fluff, not a sweeping "banshee power weapon...elite killer, scorpion chainsword....horde killer". This is probably why Aspects generally suck right now. They need a new philosophy to redefine what they can do on the battlefield.
Banshees should for starters be 3A, 4 for the Exarch. Heck, Incubi now have that and they are not as swift as banshees and are equipped with more sluggish weapons.
Now, I'd want more time to create Scorps to be fluffy and useful, but plonking them as a horde killer is just lazy.
bullyboy wrote: So, you have basically decided what the role of the Aspect is based purely on weapon loadout instead of fluff. All that does is continually jam the units into a small design space. I'm more with Argive, banshees should be the blender unit with more attacks, greater speed, etc. Scorpions need a different role, and not be the horde blender (which they're not that great at anyway)
From the fluff, Banshees are the straight up combat specialists, capable of killing a fully armoured marine as well as a simple guardsman, whereas scorpions excel in ambush and attacking in cover from the shadows. They deserve a redesign based on the fluff, not a sweeping "banshee power weapon...elite killer, scorpion chainsword....horde killer". This is probably why Aspects generally suck right now. They need a new philosophy to redefine what they can do on the battlefield.
Banshees should for starters be 3A, 4 for the Exarch. Heck, Incubi now have that and they are not as swift as banshees and are equipped with more sluggish weapons.
Now, I'd want more time to create Scorps to be fluffy and useful, but plonking them as a horde killer is just lazy.
Given that ambushing is the name of the game for Scorpions, maybe make their specialty deep strike CC assassins? Like for each scorpion squad they can choose an enemy unit as a their "prey" (each SS squad needs to choose a different target) pre-game and be able to reroll failed charges when charging against said unit which cannot overwatch against them and give them either a flat +1 to wound or some other kind of bonus against their designated target. Makes them more of a lurking threat your opponent has to be worried of mid-game versus that of banshees who should be the shock assault troops that attack the front line as soon as possible.
I hope scorpions will get a good look at. I love those models. I think a perfect ambush type of startegem/ ability would be really good along with the ability to put hurt on T5 characters..
Being able to DS closer than 9" as well as a true infiltrate deployment would be huge as it would give the unit ultilty to be either DS assasins of characters or sacrifical screen which eldar need anyway. . The exarch is no push over with the claw. With proposed more attacks he would be something like 3-4 S6 -3 D3 attacks so not to shabby.
I dont see why the design needs to be totaly hobbled by the wargear..
The only real way to make scorpions assassin types, is with special rules. Their equipment is useless for it.
So you'd basically have do things like:
Shadow strike: if the unit attacks an enemy infantry unit in cover, they increase their AP and Damage by 1.
Patient hunter: on the turn the scorpions reveal themselves, they automatically wound enemy infantry.
Exarch powers - if the exarch rolls a 6 to wound, the target suffers an additional 1d3 mortal wounds (decapitations).
mandiblasters - 5+ mortal wounds.
AMbush: the scorpions deploy 1D6+3" away from the enemy.
Those sorts of things make them more assassin-y.
Banshees
Need more attacks, perhaps 6s to hit generate more hits on the charge.
A 9th ed version of the 2nd ed banshee mask would be:
Can't be overwatched, units charged are reduced to 6+ to hit (given in 2nd most enemy units would lose combat with charging banshees virtually automatically, this is a less lethal equivalent).
I still strongly believe we will be seeing new scorps next year (also Warp Spiders), simply because of their mention in PA stories. This allows GW to expand upon the design and possibly make some changes while keeping a similar aesthetic. They didn't change banshees at all, so I doubt they'll mess with the design too much.
Of course, now the issue is what is T3 1W 3+ save worth these days? Not much really. I hate that Eldar will still be constrained to relying on their armoured vehicles to work.
bullyboy wrote: So, you have basically decided what the role of the Aspect is based purely on weapon loadout instead of fluff. All that does is continually jam the units into a small design space. I'm more with Argive, banshees should be the blender unit with more attacks, greater speed, etc. Scorpions need a different role, and not be the horde blender (which they're not that great at anyway)
From the fluff, Banshees are the straight up combat specialists, capable of killing a fully armoured marine as well as a simple guardsman, whereas scorpions excel in ambush and attacking in cover from the shadows. They deserve a redesign based on the fluff, not a sweeping "banshee power weapon...elite killer, scorpion chainsword....horde killer". This is probably why Aspects generally suck right now. They need a new philosophy to redefine what they can do on the battlefield.
Banshees should for starters be 3A, 4 for the Exarch. Heck, Incubi now have that and they are not as swift as banshees and are equipped with more sluggish weapons.
Now, I'd want more time to create Scorps to be fluffy and useful, but plonking them as a horde killer is just lazy.
Given that ambushing is the name of the game for Scorpions, maybe make their specialty deep strike CC assassins? Like for each scorpion squad they can choose an enemy unit as a their "prey" (each SS squad needs to choose a different target) pre-game and be able to reroll failed charges when charging against said unit which cannot overwatch against them and give them either a flat +1 to wound or some other kind of bonus against their designated target. Makes them more of a lurking threat your opponent has to be worried of mid-game versus that of banshees who should be the shock assault troops that attack the front line as soon as possible.
maybe have them works a liiiitle like Hounds of Mokai in that their pistols can ignore look out sir?
Maybe some enemy targeting manipulation based on positioning like Alpha Legion or Deepkin in AoS. Aside from allowing neg stacking or the can only be hit on X ideas not sure how else they can represent resilience through speed and elusiveness in the current system.
Eldarain wrote: Maybe some enemy targeting manipulation based on positioning like Alpha Legion or Deepkin in AoS. Aside from allowing neg stacking or the can only be hit on X ideas not sure how else they can represent resilience through speed and elusiveness in the current system.
6++ invul save, that improves to 5++ if the unit moved, and 4++ if the unit advanced?
Eldarain wrote: Maybe some enemy targeting manipulation based on positioning like Alpha Legion or Deepkin in AoS. Aside from allowing neg stacking or the can only be hit on X ideas not sure how else they can represent resilience through speed and elusiveness in the current system.
6++ invul save, that improves to 5++ if the unit moved, and 4++ if the unit advanced?
I like that. Especially it's clear improvement with added speed. Would be happy to see that as part of the official update.
Regarding scorps, banshees, and incubi... The reason incubi have more attacks than scorps and banshees is that incubi used to be "dark mirrors" of scorpions. Once upon a time, both units had their own gun hats (mandiblasters and tormentor helms) that granted +1 Attacks. At some point, they started experimenting with mandiblasters eventually resulting in the mortal wound mechanic we have now while the incubi just had their +1 attack lumped into their profile rather than wargear (and then later gained a new gunhat rule in the form of their morale gimmick).
So incubi were basically scorpions that let the hate flow through them and invested in power swords (all the better to slice you with) while the scorpions had less killy gear and powers but more utility/nuance in the form of outflank mechanics.
If you'd asked an eldar player in 5th edition what the roles for banshees and scorpions were, they'd tell you banshees are a little better at killing heavy infantry, and scorpions are more durable and a little better at clearing hordes.
My disorganized wishlist:
* Battle Focus no longer lets us ignore the to-hit penalty with assault weapons. Instead, it gives us a 5+ "ward save" when we advance. Basically an invuln save that you take after failing saves but before any FNP rolls. This gives the eldar a durability boost that doesn't punish armies with good BS for paying for good BS. Making it a simple FNP would work less well because you shouldn't be worse at dodging a multi-damage krak missile than a single damage lasgun shot.
* Give scorpions a way to deepstrike closer to the enemy. Maybe let them land 6" away if they appear in terrain, or else just let them steal the Calidus's rule. You could even make it a stratagem, but they should probably be able to reliably charge a target out of deepstrike.
* Give scorpions a stratagem that lets them deepstrike at the end of their opponent's movement phase. Let them burst out of hiding to throw a wrench in your opponent's plans. Maybe the scorpions are blocking a charge now. Maybe they're not blocking anything, but they're suddenly in position to score points on an objective or go after one of your opponent's units unless he kills them this turn.
* Give fire dragons the Alpha Legion Sabotage strat (+/- 2 to Explodes rolls). Rather than giving them the raw (power creepy) offense of eradicators, let them use their superior skill and reflexes to target the important bits of the enemy unit. Turn every vehicle in your opponent's army into a potential source of mortal wounds. That said, I wouldn't mind just making fusion weapons 1d6+2 damage at all ranges as a nod to eldar tech being superior to imperial tech.
* Give Swooping Hawks the ability to impose a -1 to hit on units they target with their grenade packs representing the concussive or EMP nature of their grenades. Reinforces their role as the "harassment" unit.
* If all the models in a warp spiders unit target the same enemy in the shooting phase, said enemy cannot fall back or advance in their following turn.
* Autarchs lose the current Path of Command. Instead, let them do one of the following "orders" each command phase:
1.) Survey the battlefield. Gain a CP.
2.) Let a targeted friendly unit shoot or charge after falling back this turn.
3.) Let a targeted friendly unit move up to 7" after shooting this turn. It may not charge if it does so.
* Phoenix Lords. I'm reluctant to give units raw power boosts, but these guys really warrant it. Most of them hit less hard than a generic marine captain despite having the fluff gravitas of something closer to a primarch. You could also give them "orders" that benefit their own aspect.
* Bring back squad warlocks. I like the idea of giving them relatively minor buff psychic powers that are always active unless your opponent spends DtW attempts in the psychic phase to deny them (always count as having rolled a 7 on a psychic test for purposes of DtW).
* Give Dire Avengers some combination of overwatching like Tau, heroically intervening, or being allowed to make a charge attempt at the start of the enemy charge phase. Some or all of those might need to be stratagems. I want these guys to be the unit that has your other units' backs. You should want these guys protecting your other units from charges and giving your opponent reasons to shoot at them instead of your elites.
* Wraith Lords. Just drop them to 9 Wounds and ditch the vehicle damage chart. They're actually pretty okay right now when they're not hitting on 5+.
* D-Weapons/Wraith Weapons. Good candidates for d6+2 damage? Make them hit harder than other anti tank weapons again, but being expensive and only available to certain platforms should keep them from being an autotake.
* Shining Spears. I kind of think ditch the invuln (especially with my proposed battle focus change) and just give them the Withdraw exarch power as a squad ability. It's always weird when bikers decide to stop moving so the enemy can spend two turns punching them.
* Banshees are actually pretty close to being good against non-marines right now. Strength 4 power swords really helped them out. Give them +1 Attacks, and I think you're golden. All of the melee aspects (and dire avengers) could probably stand to have +1 attacks, really.
* Change Ghost Helms to no longer ignore wound when casting. Instead, you can never lose your last wound to perils of the warp. Your opponent will be less annoyed that you're shrugging off wounds, and your millenia-old psyker will stop randomly exploding because this just happened to be his unlucky day. Oh, and give these modified Ghost Helms to warlocks.
* Change warlock councils to be made up of 1 or 2 wound models, and make them cheaper. A squad of jedi is fun, and weapons that wound on 2+ with no AP and decent damage have t heir place. They're just way too expensive at the moment. Fluff it as these guys being less experienced warlocks who can pull stuff off when working in tandem but struggle to do their job on their own.
* Reduce guardian squads' minimum sizes to 5. Spending nearly 100 points on ablative wounds for 1 missile launcher is awkward as heck, and 8 man storm guardian squads are obnoxious to fit inside their semi-mandatory wave serpents.
I was thinking the same thing with scorpions as far as deep striking in cover. Outside of 6" seems reasonable, and now that Deathwing have already broken the deepstrike inside 9" rule (plus a few others), it's not out of the realm of possibility.
It is time for Eldar infantry to have a serious redesign ruleswise, the rest of the codex (bikes, vehicles, artillery) works just fine (barring a few weapon redesigns). Tie that in with new infantry models and it could be a great time to be an Eldar player.
the main issue is just: we learned over the course of all of 8th that W1 marine infantry just DID NOT WORK at a 15ppm-ish price point with the lethality of 8th-9th. Once you get up to about 12ppm for basically any kind of W1 infantry with no other special defenses, things really start to fall apart because basically any anti-infantry weapon becomes hyper-efficient at killing them.
It seems like GW is leaning into the lethality route to try and make it so it doesn't matter if your gak dies to a stiff breeze, it makes its points back INSTANTLY if it gets just one round of attacks.
Honestly, I think that'll suck to play against. I don't like it when my opponents are just frustrated playing against eldar stuff, it's not ever a good time as an eldar player. but I'm concerned that that's the direction we're headed here having seen the stat block for incubi.
I think the elephant in the room is expert crafters.
Or more to the point, army wide traits.
We just don't have any...expert crafters is theonly thing that's letting us compete. Itslike a glue holding the codex together currently allowing us any kind of flexibility in terms of list building.
And some would argue its too powerful. But if you get rid of it, what then?
In the world of doctrinessuper doctrines and sacred rights, we certainly can expect something. But What?
Argive wrote: I think the elephant in the room is expert crafters.
Or more to the point, army wide traits.
We just don't have any...expert crafters is theonly thing that's letting us compete. Itslike a glue holding the codex together currently allowing us any kind of flexibility in terms of list building.
And some would argue its too powerful. But if you get rid of it, what then?
In the world of doctrinessuper doctrines and sacred rights, we certainly can expect something. But What?
It'll be called something like "the path of war" and it'll be a totally fixed doctrine-esque ability set but with no flexibility (because the eldar are so fixed in their strategies!) and it'll be something similar on the "heavy weapons - assault weapons - melee weapons" marine progression.
None of these rules have any real fluff basis, They're just pure manufactured discontent, like how in 7th your new codex meant you got a superformation and you got to play that superformation against opponents who hadn't gotten their codex yet and get a huge unfair advantage, and in 8th you got your relics traits strats and armywide rules and you got to play against index armies who didn't get gak, and now you get your oh-so-fluffy armywide bonus rule because "why not" and you'll use it against armies that don't have one yet because why the feth not, you've been forced to play against marines with their fething doctrines time after time after time. And THAT wasn't fair so screw it now YOU'RE going to get your free rule and you'll pretend theyll get theirs when their codex comes out and GW won't just pop a new edition and reset the clock and pick some faction+Space Marines to get their new special thing that nobody has an equivalent of.
It's incredible to me that we're 3 editions into this cycle and people havent figured it out yet and just...decided not to play along. It's not like it's hard to spot the gimmick rules that GW is using for this purpose. They want to make sure an army is stronger after their codex than before it, so they're just like "eh screw it, give 'em a....I dunno, give 'em plus one strength on all their guns and an extra -1AP, army wide, just for buying the codex."
An interesting questions. We have three pure factions rules types. Will CWE use one of those models or something uniquely different. For review:
Space Marine Doctrines: Fixed temporary bonus for limited items with semi-fixed progression
Necron Command Protocols: One turn bonuses with flexible, but prearranged activation
Sisters of Battle Sacred Rights: Single (or two if you roll randomly) selected bonus for army for the game
Would any of these models even make sense for the CWE?
Making it a simple FNP would work less well because you shouldn't be worse at dodging a multi-damage krak missile than a single damage lasgun shot.
That is like saying there is no difference in avoiding a pencil thrown at your and a 50kg sack of flour. Maybe it shouldn't work on weapons with blast, or something. no fast moving should be able to save you when a plasma anihilator turns 100m around you in to super heated slag.
alextroy wrote: An interesting questions. We have three pure factions rules types. Will CWE use one of those models or something uniquely different. For review:
Space Marine Doctrines: Fixed temporary bonus for limited items with semi-fixed progression
Necron Command Protocols: One turn bonuses with flexible, but prearranged activation
Sisters of Battle Sacred Rights: Single (or two if you roll randomly) selected bonus for army for the game
Would any of these models even make sense for the CWE?
SoB-like would make the most sense to me. Fluff it as the Skein of fate, being manipulated by the seers to favor certain aspects.
T1 - All <Vehicle> Fly get 3" movement bonus / Fats attack battlefield role units reroll hit rolls of 1 in the shooting phase.
T2 - <Wraith construct>; add 1 to damage characteristics of ranged weapons / Heavy support battlefield choice units re-roll wound roll of 1
T3 - <Aspect warrirors> Get 1+ wound roll/ Elite units re-roll hit rol and reroll wound roll (expert crafters aimed at exarchs)
Or something along those lines. Would that be busted?
This would be somewhat fluffy as the eldar will use specific units at specific times to do specific jobs.
Hit hard targets with vehicles and get in key positions. Next use wraith constructs to hit hard key targets. Then use Aspects to deliver the coup de grâce.
Probably too limiting to army list diversity. Though after decades of writing rules expecting us to take a varied array of units instead of the unbalanced skew that is so prevalent they might start going down a route like that.
There are so many ways you can slice it, it's hard to know exactly which way they will go.
I'd like to think they will do a massive update and release for them, given how old their units are, and thus do a complete rebuild of the army.
But that doesn't mean they will...
The eldar have also had some questionable fluff added to them over the years like the autarch.
We are discussing how specialised the eldar are, yet the autarch is supposed to be able to flexibly lead the army and undertake breathtaking strategies.
So on the one hand the army should be rigid and on the other it should also be flexible.
I still think that the army has 3 distinct strands within it, just like the dark eldar do:
Guardian Hosts
Wraith Hosts
Aspect Hosts
THis was how the army was built in various versions of EPIC, you bought specific hosts as detachments.
So IMO it would make sense that you could buy mini detachement groups around this concept and they came wiht their own special rules.
The autarchs and farseers then synergise the hosts with one another.
But that means you've got:
Supreme Command (across all 3 hosts)
Farseers, Autarchs, Avatar
Auxiliary (across all 3 hosts)
Warlocks, wraith fighters, wraith knights
guardian command staff (autarchs in training?) Demiarchs
Guardian hosts - defenders, storm, support weapons, jetbikes, war walkers, tanks, vypers, etc
Senior Exarch war council (shrine leaders, oldest exarchs etc)
Aspect hosts - all the aspect squads and transports
Ghost seers (the spirit seers of various seniority)
You buy your hosts in whatever combination you like and the supreme command offers different synergy bonuses between them.
Or you go pure Host and you get special bonuses (eg Aspects of Khaine - an aspect host gets +1 to wound) with the options to add Supreme command and Auxiliary units to any of them.
That reflects how their armies actually form better, and how they fight together or separately.
Sometimes only guardians are deployed, sometimes the battle is just aspects. Given that the guardians are militia they would normally only be deployed for battles where extra bodies are needed.
I'm sure there will be model(s) with the release of the new codex. So far, no Codex this edition has been released without some accompanying models (SM Supplements are getting general SM releases). We know the Death Guard have at least 2 models coming and we know they have shown what appears to be a new plastic Leith Hesperax that should come out with Drukhari.
This mostly seem to indicate that CWE are a ways off with the Ork, Sisters of Battle, and Adeptus Mechanicus models spoiled still needing to be released.
Making it a simple FNP would work less well because you shouldn't be worse at dodging a multi-damage krak missile than a single damage lasgun shot.
That is like saying there is no difference in avoiding a pencil thrown at your and a 50kg sack of flour.
I'll be sure to factor that in once "projectile circumference" is a stat. ;D My point was more that speed-based defense probably shouldn't care about the damage stat of the weapon they're defending against. A basketball and a bowling ball are roughly the same size and shape. If you throw both at me at roughly the same speed, the bowling ball will hurt me more than the basketball. But you'll have a harder time hitting me with either of them if I'm zig-zagging and doing ninja flips.
Maybe it shouldn't work on weapons with blast, or something. no fast moving should be able to save you when a plasma anihilator turns 100m around you in to super heated slag.
That's probably reasonable. Toss in a line saying you can't take the ward save against blasts or weapons that auto-hit. Some lists might have more of those than others, but most armies will have a decent number of guns that the 5+ ward save would help against. Meanwhile, the eldar player will be trading a little offense for that extra defense.
I still think that the army has 3 distinct strands within it, just like the dark eldar do:
Guardian Hosts
Wraith Hosts
Aspect Hosts
Ranger Hosts. Jetbike Hosts. Oh look, we just covered the 5 main craftworlds.
You have good taste, Hellebore, but I personally wouldn't want the army to be handled that way. It was novel when the drukhari first did it, but I honestly kind of miss the good old days of being able to shove a cheap haemonculus in a raider with some wyches and have him up their durability. I'd be fine with just having a craftworld trait that encourages or expands the use of certain units. I don't want a splashed-in wraith or guardian unit to suddenly muck up my aspect-centric list building, and I don't want to jump through hoops just to have access to my whole codex.
Actually I'd add rangers to the auxiliary list as they sit outside the craftworld command structure.
Jetbikes are guardian units so are within the guardian host.
I doubt they'd do anything like that, but I can see it as almost a chapter doctrine type thing - if you only take aspect and transport marked units you get an aspect host special rule and so on.
IMO the problem is GW doesn't want to do anything with eldar while they have old models. They only do interesting things with new models, as evinced by the fact that new eldar plastics generally got new stuff (wraithguard/blade, jetbike scatter lasers) excepting howling banshees.
So we won't see anything interesting happen to the eldar until GW decides to release updates or new units.
While giving Eldar invun saves for movement would be nice, as people have already pointed out T3 1W is cripplingly fragile and an Invun save does not help that. Currently if a Harlequin unit gets caught out it just dies. Your Dire Avengers nearby Asurmen? They just die. The sorts of weapons shooting at these types of units are usually S4 AP0 so an Invun does very little to help them.
The idea of defensive buffs based on movement is a cool idea, but there would need to be more to it. You could even have different buffs depending on the type of unit. Like, say Infantry units fully advancing get a 4++ and a -1 to wound (thereby helping them not immediately fold to small arms fire) however a -1 to wound on a T7 Vehicle is probably a little too strong so that could be changed to something else.
Making it a simple FNP would work less well because you shouldn't be worse at dodging a multi-damage krak missile than a single damage lasgun shot.
That is like saying there is no difference in avoiding a pencil thrown at your and a 50kg sack of flour. Maybe it shouldn't work on weapons with blast, or something. no fast moving should be able to save you when a plasma anihilator turns 100m around you in to super heated slag.
No, that doesn't work like that, maybe if you do the dodging in vacum. But there is a huge difference between being shot by a 2cm in diameter beam of light and be in a area just hit by a clustering projectile. A RL doesn't have to hit, to kill something t3 . If it explodes 2 m away from you and that creates a shower of fast moving and hot metal and stone parts, on top of a blast wave the effect is going to be just as good as a direct hit happened, although not as spectacular visualy.
Karol wrote: No, that doesn't work like that, maybe if you do the dodging in vacum. But there is a huge difference between being shot by a 2cm in diameter beam of light and be in a area just hit by a clustering projectile. A RL doesn't have to hit, to kill something t3 . If it explodes 2 m away from you and that creates a shower of fast moving and hot metal and stone parts, on top of a blast wave the effect is going to be just as good as a direct hit happened, although not as spectacular visualy.
Karol, if you think dodging a LASER BEAM is easier then dodging a metal projectile (explosive or not) you proably need to pay more attention in your science classes...
A "dodge" invulnerable save doesn't have to necessarily mean dodging the actual projectile or beam after it is fired. It can also mean the actions of the firer telegraph where they are going to fire so the dodger is already out of the way by the time the trigger is pulled, or the firer cannot track the target fast enough to even place the target within their sights. One doesn't have to dodge lightspeed.
The 3rd edition Dark Eldar Codex described Wyches kicking grenades back at their thrower or out of the way, so that could also represent a successful dodge save against a grenade.
Phoenix Lords could also have invulnerable saves be more supernatural martial arts feat, such as how Jain Zar is described in the Night Lords novel as blocking heavy bolter shots by spinning her Blade of Destruction and chopping or prematurely detonating the shells against the Blade's power field.
Argive wrote: Jain zar should absolutely be able to slice tank shell/shells multiple in half..
All the while doing a backflip.
Nahhhh dude, she can never get more than 4 attacks, she'd be way too OP and there is no world where non-SM are allowed to have rules that reflect their lore.
JainZar SHOULD lose to Ragnar in a 1v1 melee fight.
I guess you could technically use the Eldar paths as a guide for customizing the force ala doctrines.
So this would be in addition to your Chapter trait of course..
Path of Command
Path of the Seer
Path of the Warrior
I'm not sure if there is one that really fits with communing with the dead, but there should be. It could technically be the Path of Awakening but not really the Path of Grief.
I don't think there is design space for Path of the Outcast, unless they planned to reintroduce Corsairs. I mean, Yriel's cohort would be pretty damn cool.
To unlock these paths, your warlord must be either an Autarch (Command), Farseer (Seer), Exarch commander (needs new name for this new unit entry) for Warriior, and Spiritseer (Awakening). Named characters would have specific paths, with Phoenix Lords obviously leading to warrior.
Path of Command would be the generalist one (not sure on specific buffs at the moment but would revolve around Guardians)
Path of Seer would boost psychic tests, denials etc.
Path of the Warrior boosts for Aspect squads.
Path of Awakening would boost wraith constructs (including specific strat to make 1 wraithlord or wraithseer a character)
Because of Alaitoc, i would be tempted to do an outcast path, but would really like corsairs involved and I don't see that happening.
So currently you have Ulthwe who would probably want either Command or Seer, Saim Hann (Command), Biel Tan (Warrior), Iyanden (Awakening), and Alaitoc (?), but the choice should be for any depending on how you built your force.
edit: As a caveat, I'd rather them remove Exarchs from aspect squads and make them HQ choices similar to Lts (where 2 takes up one slot), They are so much more than sergeants and this should be represented in the game by giving them far better stats. That way, Autarchs could become the leader/buffers they are supposed to be and leave Exarchs for the real fighting. Aspects could still retain a single Aspect form for each squad (one of the current Exarch powers, not sure which) but having a particular Exarch as an HQ on the table would allow you to take a second one from a list (similar to what we have now but not requiring CP). The Aspect kits can make regular models so you're not stuck with having to make Exarchs (similar to Harlequin Troupes and Troupe Masters)
Karol, if you think dodging a LASER BEAM is easier then dodging a metal projectile (explosive or not) you proably need to pay more attention in your science classes...
Tell one friend to take a laser pointer and 20 other to start throwing stones at you, then come back and tell us what was easier to dodge. Of course anything that fragments is harder to dodge, that is why we have fragmentation grenades, barrages, mines etc
It will be unpopular, but I'd prefer the general primarisification of expensive models.
Harlequins suggest that yes, you can balance reasonably expensive but fragile models by having minuses to hit and wound and solid invuls. But I sort of feel that's their gimmick. I don't think Eldar should just get get a 5++ "cos their fast". Calling it a dodge save doesn't really change the mechanics of it.
I just think going "yeah, Aspect warriors are basically Space Marines, they get 2 wounds, Exarchs can have 3" will allow a much easier balancing of 40k over all, rather than this rather awkward scenario of "Marines get 2 wounds, the Xenos factions will have to sort of simulate that with high toughness, invuls, FNPs, minuses to hit etc to recognise the fact they have models in the teens (or more) of points with just one wound".
Maybe a bold take but I think they should take the whole craftworld eldar book and throw it out. Then get some designers who have never read any eldar rulebook to start designing a new one. Give them the lore just not the rules. The current rules feel so out of whack with the lore.
Dieing race that goes to extremes to save eachother souls since they are all eternally damned by the sins of their predecessors.
K base unit will be 3 toughness 5 up save 12" gun. The are cheap and die in droves.
Eldar have Super advanced technology, and once ruled the galaxy.
Terrible armor. Most guns are duplicates of imperium stuff. Our unique guns ignore armor occasionally.
I like eldar lore, but I don't think it comes through in gameplay. I don't think any small changes to the codex are going to fix that. It needs a whole redo.
Karol, if you think dodging a LASER BEAM is easier then dodging a metal projectile (explosive or not) you proably need to pay more attention in your science classes...
Tell one friend to take a laser pointer and 20 other to start throwing stones at you, then come back and tell us what was easier to dodge. Of course anything that fragments is harder to dodge, that is why we have fragmentation grenades, barrages, mines etc
Uh... it'd definitely be the stones. You can't dodge light that moves at the fastest speed possible. Again, a basic science education might help; you come from a country that has produced many scientists of great fame, I'd expect more.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
coblen wrote: Maybe a bold take but I think they should take the whole craftworld eldar book and throw it out. Then get some designers who have never read any eldar rulebook to start designing a new one. Give them the lore just not the rules. The current rules feel so out of whack with the lore.
Dieing race that goes to extremes to save eachother souls since they are all eternally damned by the sins of their predecessors.
K base unit will be 3 toughness 5 up save 12" gun. The are cheap and die in droves.
Eldar have Super advanced technology, and once ruled the galaxy.
Terrible armor. Most guns are duplicates of imperium stuff. Our unique guns ignore armor occasionally.
I like eldar lore, but I don't think it comes through in gameplay. I don't think any small changes to the codex are going to fix that. It needs a whole redo.
The issue is that the people who design the Eldar codex (and indeed any codex) are trying to design them in terms of "how does it feel when they get beaten by Astartes. Does it feel right?"
Slaughtering an ancient, dying race en masse is an incredible power fantasy for Astartes players, that's why it's a thing.
Karol, if you think dodging a LASER BEAM is easier then dodging a metal projectile (explosive or not) you proably need to pay more attention in your science classes...
Tell one friend to take a laser pointer and 20 other to start throwing stones at you, then come back and tell us what was easier to dodge. Of course anything that fragments is harder to dodge, that is why we have fragmentation grenades, barrages, mines etc
You would need to be less of a superhuman to dodge the 20 stones than to dodge the light, its basic physics.
Unless being capable of moving faster than 299 792 458 m/s AND having even faster reflexes is easier than dodging a stone that goes 100mph (assuming your friends throwing it are professionnal baseball players).
The reason we use fragmentation is because A : we don't have lasguns yet and B: their job is to clear large areas in one shot.
Karol, if you think dodging a LASER BEAM is easier then dodging a metal projectile (explosive or not) you proably need to pay more attention in your science classes...
Tell one friend to take a laser pointer and 20 other to start throwing stones at you, then come back and tell us what was easier to dodge. Of course anything that fragments is harder to dodge, that is why we have fragmentation grenades, barrages, mines etc
Karol, the world record for a thrown baseball (a reasonably fair comparsion to a thrown rock) is 105.1 miles per hour, a laser pointer's beam travels at somewhere along the lines of 670,616,629 .
you DO realize Lasers travel at, quite literally, the speed of light right?
You would need to be less of a superhuman to dodge the 20 stones than to dodge the light, its basic physics.
Unless being capable of moving faster than 299 792 458 m/s AND having even faster reflexes is easier than dodging a stone that goes 100mph (assuming your friends throwing it are professionnal baseball players).
The reason we use fragmentation is because A : we don't have lasguns yet and B: their job is to clear large areas in one shot.
We don't need laser guns to check. have you done sports in your life? because I will intreduce you to this novel idea of human speed vs projectiles like punchs or fast moving balls. In all cases the human brain and body is too slow to properly react to them. That is why you dodge or move before the projectile is actualy thrown at you, same with punchs or grips. In combat, you zig zag before someone shots at you. If you try dodge after you seen or heard a shot, then all you can do is to tank the blow.
again take a laser pointer and try to get a good hit on someone trying to zig zag in a uncontroled patern, when you can't go "full auto" with it. And then try dodging and exploding bag of flour. The laster pointer is "easier" to dodge. Heck crossbow bolts are easier to dodge then projectiles from mud catapults, and I know it, because we played war for 3 years, before someone snitched to our parents, and no one was killed in that time or lost an eye. But dirty we were everytime.
I think its a written rule on dakka that Karol can only have 5 posts before he has to mention sports or grey knights. Make that 3 posts if it also includes Craftworld Eldar power through the editions.
bullyboy wrote: I think its a written rule on dakka that Karol can only have 5 posts before he has to mention sports or grey knights. Make that 3 posts if it also includes Craftworld Eldar power through the editions.
apparently Karol is missing the fact that we're talking a race with literally super human reaction speed and is thinking because he literally can't dodge a ball they can't.
Well we can just look at paintball, if you think hitting a fast running humanoid through trees/terain is easy to hit from a distance while you are alos ducking and running for life/cover... I suggest you try it.
Granted those things have crap range are are about as accurate as a musket.. but still. Its quite easy to imagine that shooting at something moving twice as fast could be problematic.
in 2nd ed you got -1 to hit if the target moved 10" or more, and the eldar were all minimum M5.
I probably sound like a broken record, but this is why I keep saying 2nd ed was really the last time the eldar played like GW describes them.
I'm not talking tricked out exarchs, but the squad sizes of aspects, their cost relative to marines, the power level of their special wargear and the fact that eldar speed was actually reflected as a defensive bonus that was a core part of the rules.
The biggest issue we are running into at the moment is GW keeps (intentionally or not) stripping core rules components that directly reflect eldar speed.
Initiative was a simple way for eldar to reduce incoming attacks by going first. Now they've removed that.
hit modifiers were the next way you could represent eldar speed as defence, but they've capped that.
So what you're left with is rules exceptions and special rules that often lead to shenanigans TM
So the eldar then get trapped in a position where to act like they 'should' they then have to ignore core rules or get special bonuses, reinforcing the stereotype amongst players that eldar are cheesy and annoying.
2nd ed was the last time the core rules encompassed every aspect of the game so the number of exceptions to these was at a minimum.
Hellebore wrote: The biggest issue we are running into at the moment is GW keeps (intentionally or not) stripping core rules components that directly reflect eldar speed.
Like many things that end up affecting the Eldar or non-Imperial factions in general, I think it is unintentional because I get the feeling these non-humans factions are an afterthought (if thought of at all) whenever they do such changes. That is why they are always having to then later amend things because there was for example nobody to say in the beginning “Wait a minute, this will cause xyz”
A case in point might be how for example in Apocaypse several editions ago, Destroyer strength weapons were written to ignore invulnerable saves...seemingly without awareness of Eldar Titan holo-fields being invulnerable saves, making all Eldar Titans hideously vulnerable to any Imperial Titan. Then belatedly the holo-field had to be rewritten as a separate class of save that was not negated by Destroyer weapons.
If GW does make a wraith tree then they're going to need to make some sort of wraith troop model or move wraithblade/guard to the troop section of the rules. Maybe treat them like the specialized CSM elite units that become troops if the warlord is of the same mark.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: If GW does make a wraith tree then they're going to need to make some sort of wraith troop model or move wraithblade/guard to the troop section of the rules. Maybe treat them like the specialized CSM elite units that become troops if the warlord is of the same mark.
Nope, just do what they are doing with Dark Angels Ravenwing and Deathwing. Make wraithguard and blades obsec in specific detachments. Don't need to be Troops.
Tyel wrote: It will be unpopular, but I'd prefer the general primarisification of expensive models.
Harlequins suggest that yes, you can balance reasonably expensive but fragile models by having minuses to hit and wound and solid invuls. But I sort of feel that's their gimmick. I don't think Eldar should just get get a 5++ "cos their fast". Calling it a dodge save doesn't really change the mechanics of it.
I just think going "yeah, Aspect warriors are basically Space Marines, they get 2 wounds, Exarchs can have 3" will allow a much easier balancing of 40k over all, rather than this rather awkward scenario of "Marines get 2 wounds, the Xenos factions will have to sort of simulate that with high toughness, invuls, FNPs, minuses to hit etc to recognise the fact they have models in the teens (or more) of points with just one wound".
I hear you. It just gets a little weird that a krak grenade would suddenly become more effective at killing a space elf than a frag grenade. Similarly, something like a powerfist (sluggish but hard-hitting) would be better at taking down an eldar than a relatively quick power sword. That's why I like the idea of giving them a save that happens after armor and before FNP.
That said, simply getting a wound increase wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. If GW eventually really embraced the "hit point" thing and raised wounds and damage across the game, damage might feel more abstract and make this a non-issue too. Like, maybe marines end up being 5 wounds, eldar 3 or 4, and humans 1 with bolters being damage 2 or something. We could all unfocus our eyes and go, "Yeah, the eldar speed/training is reflected in those extra hit points compared to a guardsman."
The biggest issue we are running into at the moment is GW keeps (intentionally or not) stripping core rules components that directly reflect eldar speed.
Initiative was a simple way for eldar to reduce incoming attacks by going first. Now they've removed that.
hit modifiers were the next way you could represent eldar speed as defence, but they've capped that.
So what you're left with is rules exceptions and special rules that often lead to shenanigans TM
So the eldar then get trapped in a position where to act like they 'should' they then have to ignore core rules or get special bonuses, reinforcing the stereotype amongst players that eldar are cheesy and annoying.
Totally agree. I started playing in 5th edition. Eldar felt "fast" from between 5th and 7th with their initiative stats, lots of move-shoot-move, and skimmers being a relative rarity that could hit the gas and zip across the table. In 8th, it felt like their speed was harder to find (mostly being a thing on flyers and the single unit you used LFR on each turn), but at least you could say that the army overall was hard to hit. Now you can't even say that. :(
I do wonder if switching autarchs and a few psychic powers over to being more mobility-related would help. Like if the autarch was giving out Fire and Fade every turn or if warlock sergeants could reliably spread arounnd the Drain and Conceal spells cost-effectively and reliably.
You would need to be less of a superhuman to dodge the 20 stones than to dodge the light, its basic physics.
Unless being capable of moving faster than 299 792 458 m/s AND having even faster reflexes is easier than dodging a stone that goes 100mph (assuming your friends throwing it are professionnal baseball players).
The reason we use fragmentation is because A : we don't have lasguns yet and B: their job is to clear large areas in one shot.
We don't need laser guns to check. have you done sports in your life? because I will intreduce you to this novel idea of human speed vs projectiles like punchs or fast moving balls. In all cases the human brain and body is too slow to properly react to them. That is why you dodge or move before the projectile is actualy thrown at you, same with punchs or grips. In combat, you zig zag before someone shots at you. If you try dodge after you seen or heard a shot, then all you can do is to tank the blow.
again take a laser pointer and try to get a good hit on someone trying to zig zag in a uncontroled patern, when you can't go "full auto" with it. And then try dodging and exploding bag of flour. The laster pointer is "easier" to dodge. Heck crossbow bolts are easier to dodge then projectiles from mud catapults, and I know it, because we played war for 3 years, before someone snitched to our parents, and no one was killed in that time or lost an eye. But dirty we were everytime.
yeah, i've done wrestling in high school, right before my wargaming group litterally smashed my miniatures because i dared to ask them to not play OP lists because my army was botton tier. When i was doing wrestling, i used to smash people's bones so i could hit them with the rocks i was throwing at them.
Dude, at some point you just come off as a massive troll. Assuming both the rocks and laser have good aim, you're gonna dodge way more rocks than you will lasers.
Given the three main streams of the craftworld war machines (guardians, wraiths, aspects), there is plenty of capacity to grow what's available to them.
Aspects can get different levels of exarch mastery as characters and squad leaders, you can have veteran aspect warrior squads who have trod that aspect multiple times and are REALLY good at it.
You can add new aspects (or different aspect focus weapons for existing aspects - biting blade scorpions, shuriken cannon reapers etc)
You can create more guardian command structures, with differing levels of autarch in training as well as other guardian squad types.
You can add new spirit seer ranks, you can add new types of wraith lord/guard.
You can bring back the ghost assassin etc, having smaller, faster and lighter wraithguard units.
when you consider each Host a force in its own right, it leads you to natural design choices for new units.
I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Aspects can get different levels of exarch mastery as characters and squad leaders, you can have veteran aspect warrior squads who have trod that aspect multiple times and are REALLY good at it.
...
You can create more guardian command structures, with differing levels of autarch in training as well as other guardian squad types.
You can add new spirit seer ranks, you can add new types of wraith lord/guard.
Can you make those differing skill levels distinctive enough to be interesting and not render each other redundant though? What do "veteran scorpions" look like compared to normal scorpions? How do we make both feel like they're worth their points and not just have one unit be a less efficient version of the other? Ditto for the autarchs and spirit seers and so on. Sincere question. I'm open to it. I've just never looked at the crossover between assault marines and vanguard vets and felt that both were good options at the same time. Ditto captains and chapter masters.
You can add new aspects (or different aspect focus weapons for existing aspects - biting blade scorpions, shuriken cannon reapers etc)
Could be cool. I'd argue that it might be a big enough symbolic departure from the parent aspect to technically be an offshoot aspect rather than "real" scorpoins/reapers/etc., but could be cool. Again, the trick here is to make sure that biting blade scorpions aren't just straight up better or worse than normal scorpions.
You can bring back the ghost assassin etc, having smaller, faster and lighter wraithguard units.
I'm chuckling at the mental image of a "sneaky" wraith guard bumping into walls, falling over, and randomly freezing up due to spirit sight issues. XD
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Argive wrote: I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Just in case you didn't know, we did/do have a bonesinger option. He's just in legends at the moment. I'm sort of torn on making them more of a thing on the battlefield. It could be a bit awkward in terms of fluff if bonesingers suddenly start skewering their foes on wraithbone thorns and bone-bending new cover into existence mid-battle. Maybe they could be a piece of wargear for vehicles that lets them autoheal a wound each turn? Or maybe you create a new fortification with a bonesinger inside? The fluff being that, while eldar don't really hold ground much, they can have their bonesingers whip up impromptu defensive positions if given a few hours.
Argive wrote: I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Couldnt bonesingers actually be techmarines + apothecary even? Isn't all eldar armor made of wraithbone?
It's not really though as it means you will have to pay 3CP to run the Vanguard, but the bonus being the wraith units get obsec. That's different than just giving them Troop status (plus rule of 3).
I do hope that happens though, would make wraith based lists somewhat viable.
Argive wrote: I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Couldnt bonesingers actually be techmarines + apothecary even? Isn't all eldar armor made of wraithbone?
I don't believe so. 40k lore isn't super consistent, but I believe most (non-wraithguard) armor is made of "psychoplastics" or whatever. Basically space plastic. Their vehicles seem to often have wraithbone components though.
I just think going "yeah, Aspect warriors are basically Space Marines, they get 2 wounds, Exarchs can have 3" will allow a much easier balancing of 40k over all, rather than this rather awkward scenario of "Marines get 2 wounds, the Xenos factions will have to sort of simulate that with high toughness, invuls, FNPs, minuses to hit etc to recognise the fact they have models in the teens (or more) of points with just one wound".
I think the problem lies somewhat in the fact that as physical specimens Harlequins, Drukhari, and Asuryani all get described as physically similar in their capabilities and fitness.
Personally I wouldn't mind Craftworlds being made into the "sturdier" aeldari, especially since they have already been heading there with their wraith units and skimmer vehicles. It would also maybe help them define them from the glasscannon Drukhari and the nimble Harlequin more.
Argive wrote: I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Couldnt bonesingers actually be techmarines + apothecary even? Isn't all eldar armor made of wraithbone?
I don't believe so. 40k lore isn't super consistent, but I believe most (non-wraithguard) armor is made of "psychoplastics" or whatever. Basically space plastic. Their vehicles seem to often have wraithbone components though.
Eldarsif wrote: I think the problem lies somewhat in the fact that as physical specimens Harlequins, Drukhari, and Asuryani all get described as physically similar in their capabilities and fitness.
Personally I wouldn't mind Craftworlds being made into the "sturdier" aeldari, especially since they have already been heading there with their wraith units and skimmer vehicles. It would also maybe help them define them from the glasscannon Drukhari and the nimble Harlequin more.
This is true, but only if you don't accept a certain aggregate "resilience" is then modelled through toughness/wounds/saves.
Personally I don't see the problem with say a Guardian being T3 5+, and a Dark Reaper being T3/3+ 2 wounds - recognising that he's an aspect warrior, so more resilient than a guardian, and wearing significantly heavier armour.
I don't think its going to happen though, because we have the revealed Incubi statline. At say 16ish points, its pretty soft on defence but fights like a unit costing double its points. (Bladeguard/Skorpekhs). Which arguably isn't good for the game, because it just exacerbates this trend that all factions should be glasshammers.
Which has always sort of been a problem Aeldari in general. "Eldar are the glasshammer army." "Wait, Dark Eldar are even more glass hammer." "Wait, Harlequins are the glasshammeriest of them all!!". At least Ynnari have chicken.
I know it's a Necron thing, but what if we upped Eldar durability by giving them something like:
Retreat and Regroup:
At the end of a turn where an Aeldari unit is not engaged in melee and has taken casualties, you may remove that unit from play. If you do mark that unit's location with an Aeldari regroup token and note the number of models removed and the number of units removed as casualties this turn.
At the start of your next movement phase roll a die for each casualty that was noted down, on a 5+ return that model plus the number of models removed from play to the table within 6" of the regroup token. Models setup on the table in this way may not be within 1" of an enemy unit.
-----
I know it's more complicated than most 9th edition rules and is very similar to Reanimation Protocols but it's a good way to represent that a 'casualty' may have dodged enemy fire and could rejoin the battle if given time to regroup; It also allows for movement shenanigans. The downside is that the enemy gets some fairly easy counter play but that's where playtesting would come into the mix.
Aspects can get different levels of exarch mastery as characters and squad leaders, you can have veteran aspect warrior squads who have trod that aspect multiple times and are REALLY good at it.
...
You can create more guardian command structures, with differing levels of autarch in training as well as other guardian squad types.
You can add new spirit seer ranks, you can add new types of wraith lord/guard.
Can you make those differing skill levels distinctive enough to be interesting and not render each other redundant though? What do "veteran scorpions" look like compared to normal scorpions? How do we make both feel like they're worth their points and not just have one unit be a less efficient version of the other? Ditto for the autarchs and spirit seers and so on. Sincere question. I'm open to it. I've just never looked at the crossover between assault marines and vanguard vets and felt that both were good options at the same time. Ditto captains and chapter masters.
You can add new aspects (or different aspect focus weapons for existing aspects - biting blade scorpions, shuriken cannon reapers etc)
Could be cool. I'd argue that it might be a big enough symbolic departure from the parent aspect to technically be an offshoot aspect rather than "real" scorpoins/reapers/etc., but could be cool. Again, the trick here is to make sure that biting blade scorpions aren't just straight up better or worse than normal scorpions.
You can bring back the ghost assassin etc, having smaller, faster and lighter wraithguard units.
I'm chuckling at the mental image of a "sneaky" wraith guard bumping into walls, falling over, and randomly freezing up due to spirit sight issues. XD
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Argive wrote: I think bone singing and vehicles should be a thing.. I know we are not allowed it because marines have techmarines so we cant have nice things as they need to be unique... But still..
Gosh I wish bonesingers made a return. There could be a whole new separate psyker discipline and wraith/vehicle focus.
Just in case you didn't know, we did/do have a bonesinger option. He's just in legends at the moment. I'm sort of torn on making them more of a thing on the battlefield. It could be a bit awkward in terms of fluff if bonesingers suddenly start skewering their foes on wraithbone thorns and bone-bending new cover into existence mid-battle. Maybe they could be a piece of wargear for vehicles that lets them autoheal a wound each turn? Or maybe you create a new fortification with a bonesinger inside? The fluff being that, while eldar don't really hold ground much, they can have their bonesingers whip up impromptu defensive positions if given a few hours.
Yes I do own said bonesinger and have used him all the time in 8th ed until he got legended... :(
I dont feel comfortable with playing legend stuff in current ed format. It just feels wrong. The big plys for him was that he was an elite and a character. He was sort of a smite battery but then his random heals plus tears of isha strategem could regen up to 6 wounds (4 on average) on a wraithseer/wraithlord which was fun. By no means is it OP or broken and usualy you'd just dot he smite but he is a fun unit. Its a shame its not supported.
I believe the bonesinger are the remnants of what the pre-fall eldar did in terms of crafting so they are the guys that do all of the repairs, contstructs and vehicles (which are all wraithbone things).
The guardian armor I believe is different kind of tech.
The Eldar were described as using psychoplastics in all their engineering, so all their construction was psychically able.
Wraithbone was one type of psychoplastic, which was often the core of a construction as it's the most psychically sensitive and tough. Craftworlds are build around a core of wraithbone which is where the Infinity circuit lies. It connects all parts of the craftworld so psychic communication and soul transfer can occur anywhere.
GW started flanderising wraithbone to be all psychoplastic and kept describing all things made from wraithbone.
But originally wraithbone was a rare and valuable material.
bullyboy wrote: D2 power swords do not make sense for banshees
something something cool name ala lethal precision: Against <Infantry>, Banshee Sword is Damage 2. This will make them kill heavy infantry but do nothing against "unrealistic" targets.
I could see them getting D2 on the charge, given that they're shock troops. I think Shadenuat's idea is good as well, to help differentiate their specialty in hunting elite infantry.
bullyboy wrote: D2 power swords do not make sense for banshees
something something cool name ala lethal precision: Against <Infantry>, Banshee Sword is Damage 2. This will make them kill heavy infantry but do nothing against "unrealistic" targets.
Make it D3 (or 4) and only if it kills a model. Otherwise 1.
Something unique and worthless against big stuff.
I feel they need to look at each Aspect and then make them really really good at ONE thing. And ok at other.
Then there is the protection. Which we need.
Some great ideas here. I liked the part about more protection with movement. But I would go with a kind of inverted Dark Reaper thing. Can only
Be hit on 3+, 4+ with full move, 5+ with advance. Kind of. That way the even harder units can have an invul aswell.
Then we have the psychers. Couldn't they give our troops protection a different way? Maybe a rule that gives units within 6" some small number of hits that can be made into misses. Maybe 1-2 for Warlocks. And 3 for farseer. Either as a phantasm thing, or that their psychic
Abilities charges the armour of the nearby units.
(This gives us more wounds, but without turning us into Marines).
Oh well. I must say I am really glad to read that people are (weirdly?) optimistic for the future.
bullyboy wrote: D2 power swords do not make sense for banshees
something something cool name ala lethal precision: Against <Infantry>, Banshee Sword is Damage 2. This will make them kill heavy infantry but do nothing against "unrealistic" targets.
Make it D3 (or 4) and only if it kills a model. Otherwise 1.
D2 is fine, 3W models should require concentrated firepower or heavy weapons to take down.
I still don't like banshees with D2 swords, hurts my head cannon (astartes wielding power swords D1 still). I think you have to make them better in a different way. I would say base 3A and 4 on charge (make it part of mask rule...no OW and +1A). That alone doubles their effectiveness. Thats 5 Banshees killing 2-3 marines without counting Exarch. D2 doubles that of course and makes the exchange 1 to 1. The only way that should happen is a rule like Devastating Charge, so it's D2 on charge only. I dont see that happening though.
As for scorpions, I think they need a redesign, horde blenders doesn't really fit.
I think Eldar players have to admit their base statlines are from old editions, it doesn't hold up anymore. But you can't make them stronger (although scorps have fluff to be S4). You can and should increase their attacks since they are faster than Astartes and should land more blows (since initiative isn't a thing anymore). Aspects need to show off their skills in special rules more than stat or weapon increases, so it doesn't feel artificial.
Now Exarchs on the other hand, god they should be beastly. I wish GW would acknowledge that in the rules.
I think Eldar players have to admit their base statlines are from old editions, it doesn't hold up anymore. But you can't make them stronger (although scorps have fluff to be S4). You can and should increase their attacks since they are faster than Astartes and should land more blows (since initiative isn't a thing anymore). Aspects need to show off their skills in special rules more than stat or weapon increases, so it doesn't feel artificial.
Now Exarchs on the other hand, god they should be beastly. I wish GW would acknowledge that in the rules.
I agree with this. Hopefully we'll be seeing some interesting changes to them in the near future.
It's possible for them steal one of the Lumineth rules from AoS for Aeldari in general, where when you nominate units to fight, you can choose 2 units instead of just 1 to go next. Makes multi-charging/multiple combats less threatening for Eldar.
Why not give Banshees the fight first rule that they get with Jan Zair without needing to have her nearby? Or even, give them a special rule that says that they always attack before any unit that they are engaged with. That way you can get your other charging units to swing before the enemy can interrupt and attack the banshees.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: Why not give Banshees the fight first rule that they get with Jan Zair without needing to have her nearby? Or even, give them a special rule that says that they always attack before any unit that they are engaged with. That way you can get your other charging units to swing before the enemy can interrupt and attack the banshees.
That could be the new Banshee Mask rule to be honest, giving them the Judiciar rule of forcing the enemy unit they charge to only be able to attack last and thus not be eligible for counter-attack would make them much more relevant now that Overwatch is much more limited outside of Tau.
Maybe they can differentiate the scorpions from that kind of banshee by giving them assassinate rules:
On a 6 to wound the target receives 1 mortal wound.
Combined with a better mandiblaster and you get the scorpions with lower offence swords that are more likely to kill multi wound units, while banshees are blenders that go through lots of infantry.
Aspects can get different levels of exarch mastery as characters and squad leaders, you can have veteran aspect warrior squads who have trod that aspect multiple times and are REALLY good at it.
...
You can create more guardian command structures, with differing levels of autarch in training as well as other guardian squad types.
You can add new spirit seer ranks, you can add new types of wraith lord/guard.
Can you make those differing skill levels distinctive enough to be interesting and not render each other redundant though? What do "veteran scorpions" look like compared to normal scorpions? How do we make both feel like they're worth their points and not just have one unit be a less efficient version of the other? Ditto for the autarchs and spirit seers and so on. Sincere question. I'm open to it. I've just never looked at the crossover between assault marines and vanguard vets and felt that both were good options at the same time. Ditto captains and chapter masters.
So this is where I think I have a different outlook on 40k. There is what I would prefer, and there's what actually IS. And what IS, is that GW is willing and able to make lots of different units that are very similar for marines, and I would like that for eldar. It's not about whether they are different enough to warrant being their own unit, it's the equality of treatment. Sometimes getting your units uniquely separate for fluff is just as valid as having distinct rules.
So I will say what I always do - I don't care which route you go down so long as everyone is treated equally. A bazillion similar units for marines? ok, then give me a bazillion for eldar, orks, guard, tyranids etc.
Rolling all similar units into one profile for marines to simplify? Ok, then leave everyone else as they are.
The fact is that hobbling eldar unit variety because marines SHOULDN'T have that much variety only punishes eldar players by closing down the opportunity for that variety only for them.
You can add new aspects (or different aspect focus weapons for existing aspects - biting blade scorpions, shuriken cannon reapers etc)
Could be cool. I'd argue that it might be a big enough symbolic departure from the parent aspect to technically be an offshoot aspect rather than "real" scorpoins/reapers/etc., but could be cool. Again, the trick here is to make sure that biting blade scorpions aren't just straight up better or worse than normal scorpions.
I'm not sure how that could be given that the exarch wields the weapon as part of that shrine already. It's clearly a striking scorpion ritual weapon, or the exarch couldn't have it. This is why I've never been a fan of the flanderisation of the complexity of eldar war philosophy down to specific weapons. Scorpions aren't the aspect of the chainsword, they're the aspect of the stalking hunter so whatever weapon you use that allows you to do this is a legitimate representation of that aspect of khaine.
Otherwise you get this image of a disarmed aspect warrior on the battlefield incapable of fighting because the only weapon they know they should use was lost or destroyed and they won't pick up another one. The chainsword doesn't make a striking scorpion, the philosophy of the aspect does and it doesn't live or die based on what weapon he has. A naked striking scorpion fighting bare handed is still a scorpion (their war mask isn't just physical but psychological).
You can bring back the ghost assassin etc, having smaller, faster and lighter wraithguard units.
I'm chuckling at the mental image of a "sneaky" wraith guard bumping into walls, falling over, and randomly freezing up due to spirit sight issues. XD
There are a couple of ways you could reconcile that. One is to say that these chassis are Fall era and still contain some of the programming engrams that help run the system. So you get a soul/AI combo that makes it more awake and alert.
Or you could say that the chassis is lighter and faster and the souls chosen are only the most awake or something.
Tyel wrote: I think Banshees are getting D2. Making it D2 versus infantry maybe works - but it adds weird loopholes that are not great.
If you just go "they get 4 attacks, come at me" - what do Scorpions get? 6+?
Harlequins work great at A4. If you asked me I'd place Harlequins and Scorpions at A4 (probably with a bonus attack in the case of scorps), all close-combat capable aspects at A3 (Banshees Spears and I'd include Dire Avengers since they are supposed to be 'the generalists that can do melee as well as shooting') and then shooting based aspects at A2 with Guardian units at A1. Kabalite Warriors being A2 can be a differentiating factor in the distinction between the more cc-focused dark eldar and the safer, heavy weapon having craftworld guardians (who mostly just need longer range at this point, because come on, 12" range on the super-cautious guardians and 24" range on the cuh-RAAAAZY hedonistic kabalite warriors?)
Considering base strength 3 and shock assault, eldar have a lot of design space to add a greater range of melee capabilities before they start horning in on the 99.999% of the game nobody is allowed to enter Lest They Require We Buff Astartes To Match The Lore.
Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
We've seen the incubi are still T3 W1, but we also know that the DE get their power from pain resilience, so the incubi are slightly more resilient than they appear (unless they've removed that rule...).
IMO they should just create a racial rule that affects all eldar armies (like the angels of death rule affects all marines) that gives them some kind of speed based defence.
Then you can tweak them based on their army types, so power from pain for DE, holofields for Harlequins etc.
Argive wrote: On a different note, how do we fix rangers ?
Are they mostly fine with a serious pt drop ? I think they could be as long as they get a proper scout deployment rule again.
IMO they should be one of a few load outs or options. They represent eldar on the path of the outcast, but not all eldar that leave to go on that path are issued cameleoline and a sniper rifle....
Their main thing is wandering the webway, giving them better access to battlefields.
But you should be able to take other equipment like catapults or lasblasters, or CCW and pistols to represent different types of outcast bands coming to the aid of their craftworld. The advantage here is that you can kind of fold corsairs into the same units, and thus have them available to play again.
Argive wrote: On a different note, how do we fix rangers ?
Are they mostly fine with a serious pt drop ? I think they could be as long as they get a proper scout deployment rule again.
IMO they should be one of a few load outs or options. They represent eldar on the path of the outcast, but not all eldar that leave to go on that path are issued cameleoline and a sniper rifle....
Their main thing is wandering the webway, giving them better access to battlefields.
But you should be able to take other equipment like catapults or lasblasters, or CCW and pistols to represent different types of outcast bands coming to the aid of their craftworld. The advantage here is that you can kind of fold corsairs into the same units, and thus have them available to play again.
the most important thing for them is to get a scout deploy rule IMO. But yes, giving them actual weapons would be a big plus. My rangers basically never killed anything
They are not killy.. But I have managed to plink off key MW wounds on a doomed targets without having to sink major firepower to finish off.. Their main problem isint the gun its the BS. As they are usually out screening/sitting in cover they don't have acess to autarch rerolls and youre not going to cast guide on them.
Their main shtick was just being hard to remove for their pts. With alitoic them sitting out anywhere at -2 was a pain in the ass.
I think that they should have Bs2 and scout move which should allow them to work independantly.
Was thinking about the MW going off on 5's or make them D3 on 6's.. But then everyone would just spam rangers and doom?
So they need something else. Maybe solid ap -3 And 2 damage vs infantry or D1 normaly plus BS2 with option to target characters would give them a role.
Argive wrote: They are not killy.. But I have managed to plink off key MW wounds on a doomed targets without having to sink major firepower to finish off.. Their main problem isint the gun its the BS. As they are usually out screening/sitting in cover they don't have acess to autarch rerolls and youre not going to cast guide on them.
Their main shtick was just being hard to remove for their pts. With alitoic them sitting out anywhere at -2 was a pain in the ass.
I think that they should have Bs2 and scout move which should allow them to work independantly.
Was thinking about the MW going off on 5's or make them D3 on 6's.. But then everyone would just spam rangers and doom?
So they need something else. Maybe solid ap -3 And 2 damage vs infantry or D1 normaly plus BS2 with option to target characters would give them a role.
Giving the current scaling of 40k, you could make all specialist eldar units 2+ in their chosen stat(s) and it wouldn't do a huge amount.
BS2+ rangers, reapers, dragons, avengers, crimson hunters, hawks
WS2+ banshees, spears, scorpions, avengers, spiders (this would be a retooling of spiders back to having auto hit flamers and making them more of an assault unit)
You could apply that to the current dex right now and (apart from hunters and reapers) it wouldn't have a huge impact.
IMO I still think that they should get better armour - eldar armour was always described as better than anything anyone else made.
Given that terminator armour is now: 2+Sv, +1w, 5++
Making scorpions, reapers, spiders, dragons 2+ sv, banshees, hawks, avengers, spears 3+ sv, and guardians 4+ sv would increase their survivability a tiny bit (but they're still all T3 W1), but not a lot.
WS/BS 2+ and Sv 2+/3+ for aspects would be a pretty simple way to make them better.
I will have to disagree I think that would make a huuuge impact to how reliable and killy these are..
The alpha strike potential in these units would be very high.
Imagine Dark reapers at BS2+ with inescapable accuracy getting a throw away reroll 1's from skytarch... That's worse than SMCM rerolls cheese... as its very close to 100% hitting.
Fire dragon also would suddenly look interesting - 5x Bs2+ fusion shots at 115 pts jumping out of a falcoln or webway ? with no need for troops.. thats pretty decent spend to fill the elite slot. Again chuck in an autarch for reroll 1's here and there and a doom and thats a lot of damage. Yes it all dies if soemthing looks at it but at least the cannon of the glass cannon part would be vaguely true.
Add some cheekey strategems ala Embark on transport after firing/ JSJ or something and you can see a very flowy mobile and lethal army on the table top.
I do agree aspect and heavy aspect armour needs to do more. Its just not enough currently. a 2+ & -1 to wound would be decent.
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Why? Because they were T3/1W in 3e? Space Marines had 1W/1A then. Crisis Suits had 2W, a battle cannon couldn't hit a vehicle more than once, and a Wave Serpent was 12/12/10, which is now gibberish.
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Why? Because they were T3/1W in 3e? Space Marines had 1W/1A then. Crisis Suits had 2W, a battle cannon couldn't hit a vehicle more than once, and a Wave Serpent was 12/12/10, which is now gibberish.
Because marines should have had 2W from the beginning. We've seen incubi stats....better get used to T3 1W elves (outside of tougher elements)
Argive wrote: I will have to disagree I think that would make a huuuge impact to how reliable and killy these are..
The alpha strike potential in these units would be very high.
Imagine Dark reapers at BS2+ with inescapable accuracy getting a throw away reroll 1's from skytarch... That's worse than SMCM rerolls cheese... as its very close to 100% hitting.
Fire dragon also would suddenly look interesting - 5x Bs2+ fusion shots at 115 pts jumping out of a falcoln or webway ? with no need for troops.. thats pretty decent spend to fill the elite slot. Again chuck in an autarch for reroll 1's here and there and a doom and thats a lot of damage. Yes it all dies if soemthing looks at it but at least the cannon of the glass cannon part would be vaguely true.
Add some cheekey strategems ala Embark on transport after firing/ JSJ or something and you can see a very flowy mobile and lethal army on the table top.
I do agree aspect and heavy aspect armour needs to do more. Its just not enough currently.
a 2+ & -1 to wound would be decent.
yes I think reapers and hunters would be improved more than others. reapers should be 3-6 per unit though.
So I'd go something like:
Banshees
M8 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv3+
M8 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv3+
Scorpions
M7 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv2+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv2+
Avengers
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W1 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A3 Ld9 Sv3+
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Right, so the fact that an exarch in 2nd ed was S4 T4 is irrelevant? That their bodies fuse to their armour and eventually they're just a walking suit of armour with souls swirling in them? Or that Farseers get tougher the older they get because they literally turn to crystal?
Or that Exarchs in 2nd ed had 2 wounds (as much as chaplain and librarian characters and only 1 less than a marine captain) could take +1 Toughness as an exarch warrior power which describes the exarchs as simply being 'incredibly resilient', making them Toughness 5?
Did you know that the eldar had 3 characters with Toughness 6 in 2nd ed, more than all the marine codices combined?
Karandras, Maugan and Eldrad were all T6, eldrad because he was old and crystal, karandras and maugan because they both had the Tough warrior power. This meant that that power swords (s5) only wounded them on 5+.
Kung fu magic psyker powers mean that the eldar are far more than just T3 elves.
IMO they should be one of a few load outs or options. They represent eldar on the path of the outcast, but not all eldar that leave to go on that path are issued cameleoline and a sniper rifle....
I mean... they kind of do the way Path of the Outcast portrays it. The main character goes ranger for a while and ends up on an outcast ship with weapon lockers that seem to be stocked exclusively with camo cloaks and long rifles. IIRC, they explain that being farther from the heart of the fighting makes it easier to resist becoming lost to Khaine if you haven't developed a proper warmask by treading the path of the warrior.
But I'm not opposed to giving rangers more loadouts ghostwalker band style. Alternatively, how about giving them a Shoot Sharp and Scarper type rule (basically fire and fade) so that they can improve their durability by getting out of LoS? Seems appropriate for a bunch of sneaky elves wearing camo cloaks. Other possible fixes for them:
* A simple points drop (a deepstriking troop is kind of useful even if it's neither survivable nor killy.)
* Maybe just give them their -1 to being hit back? Feels like the points adjuster guy didn't get the memo that they were losing this. Ironically, this makes the Alaitoc trait less useful for them.
* Give their rifles two profiles; a heavy profile with a better AP value, and an assault profile with the baked in move-shoot-move rule I suggested above. So on a given turn, you're either using your ninja elf reflexes to run and gun or to line up better shots.
* Giving them infiltrate would make them more useful, but it would also make them a sacrificial speedbump. Which feels like the opposite of what they should be.
I also like the idea of bringing back eldar pathfinders as elite character units. Give them a gun that's a bit more threatening to characters. Maybe let them "charge up" their shot by aiming for a turn, doing more damage on the following turn when they do shoot. It would be pretty natural to want them to be screened by rangers at that point (most other options are too valuable to use as a screen or too mobile to babysit them). So you'd be indirectly encouraging people to field more rangers in a ranger themed (Alaitoc) army.
Argive wrote: I will have to disagree I think that would make a huuuge impact to how reliable and killy these are..
The alpha strike potential in these units would be very high.
Imagine Dark reapers at BS2+ with inescapable accuracy getting a throw away reroll 1's from skytarch... That's worse than SMCM rerolls cheese... as its very close to 100% hitting.
Fire dragon also would suddenly look interesting - 5x Bs2+ fusion shots at 115 pts jumping out of a falcoln or webway ? with no need for troops.. thats pretty decent spend to fill the elite slot. Again chuck in an autarch for reroll 1's here and there and a doom and thats a lot of damage. Yes it all dies if soemthing looks at it but at least the cannon of the glass cannon part would be vaguely true.
Add some cheekey strategems ala Embark on transport after firing/ JSJ or something and you can see a very flowy mobile and lethal army on the table top.
I do agree aspect and heavy aspect armour needs to do more. Its just not enough currently.
a 2+ & -1 to wound would be decent.
yes I think reapers and hunters would be improved more than others. reapers should be 3-6 per unit though.
So I'd go something like:
Banshees
M8 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv3+
M8 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv3+
Scorpions
M7 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv2+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv2+
Avengers
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W1 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A3 Ld9 Sv3+
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Right, so the fact that an exarch in 2nd ed was S4 T4 is irrelevant? That their bodies fuse to their armour and eventually they're just a walking suit of armour with souls swirling in them? Or that Farseers get tougher the older they get because they literally turn to crystal?
Or that Exarchs in 2nd ed had 2 wounds (as much as chaplain and librarian characters and only 1 less than a marine captain) could take +1 Toughness as an exarch warrior power which describes the exarchs as simply being 'incredibly resilient', making them Toughness 5?
Did you know that the eldar had 3 characters with Toughness 6 in 2nd ed, more than all the marine codices combined?
Karandras, Maugan and Eldrad were all T6, eldrad because he was old and crystal, karandras and maugan because they both had the Tough warrior power. This meant that that power swords (s5) only wounded them on 5+.
Kung fu magic psyker powers mean that the eldar are far more than just T3 elves.
Right, an Exarch was S4, T4, but aspeocts weren't. That's my point, basic Eldar (Guardians, Aspects) are T3, 1W.
Exarchs, as you say, begin to fuse with their armour and therefore were given 2W.
Now, I'm in the camp that feels an Exarch should be S4, T4, 2W...at a minimum. I've stated elsewhere that I think they should be separated from the sqd and work like Lts where you get 2 for 1 slot, or even 0 slots if you take a unit of their particular Aspect. Doubt that will happen.
I'm not opposed to tougher Eldar (agree with your Phoenix Lord stats too), just not on guardians or aspects. I could lean for a S4 scorpion, but GW already artificially did that with a +1S chainsword.
I'm just hoping for a complete overhaul of Eldar infantry as I feel that they (outside of the wraithknight) are the only real issues in the codex. The armour and wraith constructs work just fine.
We need Pathfinders back instead of rangers, which belong in the bin now modelwise IMHO.
I would like to see a ranger type unit with 2+BS, 3+sv, maybe 2 wounds? Make them more like Aspect warriors than Guardians.
The cloak could give -1 to hit in light cover and -1 to wound in dense to show their superior hiding skills?
The rifle could have S5 -1(-4 on 6?) ignore move penalty for heavy when set up for first time from reserve.
Just spitballin but they could easily replace them with a new box that we'd all jump on.
I do like the idea of an assault/CQC variant as well.
kryczek wrote: We need Pathfinders back instead of rangers, which belong in the bin now modelwise IMHO.
I would like to see a ranger type unit with 2+BS, 3+sv, maybe 2 wounds? Make them more like Aspect warriors than Guardians.
The cloak could give -1 to hit in light cover and -1 to wound in dense to show their superior hiding skills?
The rifle could have S5 -1(-4 on 6?) ignore move penalty for heavy when set up for first time from reserve.
Just spitballin but they could easily replace them with a new box that we'd all jump on.
I do like the idea of an assault/CQC variant as well.
I think thats currently the niche occupied by scorpions. Stealthy CQC unit that likes cover
Argive wrote: I will have to disagree I think that would make a huuuge impact to how reliable and killy these are..
The alpha strike potential in these units would be very high.
Imagine Dark reapers at BS2+ with inescapable accuracy getting a throw away reroll 1's from skytarch... That's worse than SMCM rerolls cheese... as its very close to 100% hitting.
Fire dragon also would suddenly look interesting - 5x Bs2+ fusion shots at 115 pts jumping out of a falcoln or webway ? with no need for troops.. thats pretty decent spend to fill the elite slot. Again chuck in an autarch for reroll 1's here and there and a doom and thats a lot of damage. Yes it all dies if soemthing looks at it but at least the cannon of the glass cannon part would be vaguely true.
Add some cheekey strategems ala Embark on transport after firing/ JSJ or something and you can see a very flowy mobile and lethal army on the table top.
I do agree aspect and heavy aspect armour needs to do more. Its just not enough currently.
a 2+ & -1 to wound would be decent.
yes I think reapers and hunters would be improved more than others. reapers should be 3-6 per unit though.
So I'd go something like:
Banshees
M8 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv3+
M8 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv3+
Scorpions
M7 WS2+ BS3+ S3 T3 W1 A3 Ld8 Sv2+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A4 Ld9 Sv2+
Avengers
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W1 A2 Ld8 Sv3+
M7 WS2+ BS2+ S3 T3 W3 A3 Ld9 Sv3+
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Right, so the fact that an exarch in 2nd ed was S4 T4 is irrelevant? That their bodies fuse to their armour and eventually they're just a walking suit of armour with souls swirling in them? Or that Farseers get tougher the older they get because they literally turn to crystal?
Or that Exarchs in 2nd ed had 2 wounds (as much as chaplain and librarian characters and only 1 less than a marine captain) could take +1 Toughness as an exarch warrior power which describes the exarchs as simply being 'incredibly resilient', making them Toughness 5?
Did you know that the eldar had 3 characters with Toughness 6 in 2nd ed, more than all the marine codices combined?
Karandras, Maugan and Eldrad were all T6, eldrad because he was old and crystal, karandras and maugan because they both had the Tough warrior power. This meant that that power swords (s5) only wounded them on 5+.
Kung fu magic psyker powers mean that the eldar are far more than just T3 elves.
Yup. Tyranid Warriors used to be s5 t5 too, but can't have them be stronger than Astartes, they get insecure...
Hellebore wrote: Attacks are one important factor but not the only one.
eldar could have 10A each, but if they die before they can use them they're no good.
It's going to be a tough buy if they do nothing about survivability of the T3 W1 models.
Eldar survivability is called a Wave Serpent or Falcon. They really can't be anything other than T3 1W, they're elves.
Right, so the fact that an exarch in 2nd ed was S4 T4 is irrelevant? That their bodies fuse to their armour and eventually they're just a walking suit of armour with souls swirling in them? Or that Farseers get tougher the older they get because they literally turn to crystal?
Or that Exarchs in 2nd ed had 2 wounds (as much as chaplain and librarian characters and only 1 less than a marine captain) could take +1 Toughness as an exarch warrior power which describes the exarchs as simply being 'incredibly resilient', making them Toughness 5?
Did you know that the eldar had 3 characters with Toughness 6 in 2nd ed, more than all the marine codices combined?
Karandras, Maugan and Eldrad were all T6, eldrad because he was old and crystal, karandras and maugan because they both had the Tough warrior power. This meant that that power swords (s5) only wounded them on 5+.
Kung fu magic psyker powers mean that the eldar are far more than just T3 elves.
So you'll be pushing for IG Company Commanders, Commissars and Primaris Psykers to move to S4/T4, then?
From what I understand termintors back then were saving on 2d6 on +3, and chaos ones on 2d6 on +2. I fully accept elder to be str 4 and t 4 and aspects being 2W, if that happens.
Karol wrote: From what I understand termintors back then were saving on 2d6 on +3, and chaos ones on 2d6 on +2. I fully accept elder to be str 4 and t 4 and aspects being 2W, if that happens.
Terminator armor (Imperial or Chaos) was 3+ on 2d6.
The Mark of Khorne gave a 2+ armor save. So a model with Terminator armor and the Mark of Khorne had a 2+ on 2d6. I have the 2nd edition Chaos Codex in front of me and checked this.
However not very enthusiastic about just more S, T, W inflation (though it may be too late for that).
Remember that originally S3 T3 was meant to represent pretty much all normal humanity (and hence also pretty much all Eldar). S4 and T4 was like maybe Arnold Schwarzeneggar in his prime. Yes, I know there was S and T inflation almost immediately and then with the Exarch power Toughness, Exarchs could reach T5 though Exarch powers can be handwaved away as supernatural psychic specialness.
The problem is mechanically the 40k system currently has very few ways to increase survivability beyond saves, T, and W, now that to-hit modifiers are capped.
So you'll be pushing for IG Company Commanders, Commissars and Primaris Psykers to move to S4/T4, then?
Sure, because the exarchs still got the ability to be S/T 5 which was higher.
This is the point. 2nd ed reflected the relative differences between armies far better than they do now.
IMO, you could take 2nd ed, make initiative opposed to WS and BS (replacing the shooting and combat mechanics) for hitting purposes, streamline damage dice to d3 and d6s, use the 9th ed vehicle rules and you'd have a really good game.
as I've said before, GW deliberately or not keep removing components of the core rules that directly represent armies like the eldar and tyranids (initiative, modifier caps etc).
So to reflect these things in 9th ed you have to use special rules that create exceptionalism which reinforces how annoying the eldar are, rather than core mechanics everyone is equally affected by but the eldar are naturally better at.
So to reflect these things in 9th ed you have to use special rules that create exceptionalism which reinforces how annoying the eldar are, rather than core mechanics everyone is equally affected by but the eldar are naturally better at.
Special rules exceptionalism is also generally bad because any further changes to other parts of the system may have unforeseen consequences to these special rules, because nobody at GW is paying attention to the exceptions.
I mentioned elsewhere the case of Apocalypse classing holofields as invulnerables, showing the writers forgetting to realize Destroyer weapons ignored invulnerables and forcing a later revision of holofields from invulnerable saves to special holofield saves that were not negated by Destroyer weapons.
So you'll be pushing for IG Company Commanders, Commissars and Primaris Psykers to move to S4/T4, then?
Sure, because the exarchs still got the ability to be S/T 5 which was higher.
This is the point. 2nd ed reflected the relative differences between armies far better than they do now.
Yes, but also no - what it had was a fairly fixed set of progression steps from "basic trooper form" up to "major hero form".
M and I were definitely used better to differentiate the speed of races, though. Back in t'day, a Guardsman (and a Space Marine) had M4, while Eldar M values varied from 4 to 6, depending on the unit, with the average probably being 5 - a speed increase of 25% is more meaningful that 16.6%. It was something I was hoping would be reviewed when they reintroduced the stat in 8th, but they kept the baseline of human speed at 6", for some reason - dropping that back down (and adjusting other M values appropriately) immediately makes the table feel bigger, even if you then decide an edition later to shrink the minimum table size so you can sell your own battle mats...
The I stat in 2nd seemed to just get inflated by the Hero progression, rather than whether it makes sense - I'm not sure a Farseer should be I9, for example, especially if the T5 he has is meant to represent him starting to turn into crystal.
And looking through the Eldar 'dex from 2nd ed, none of the Aspect Warriors themselves are anything other than WS/BS4 (3+ in today's money), so if you're wanting to use old stat lines to justify changes, this is one where it doesn't work.
Now, before you jump down my throat, I'll point out that I do think removing I - or a similar stat; I'm a fan of having an Evasion stat to oppose BS, for example - was a mistake, and as I've pointed out above, I think they missed a trick by not reviewing M values coming into 8th and dropping them to be more in line with how they were in 2nd. Everyone having a base move of 6" was one of the things that bugged me in 3rd (and its children).
Equally, as they've not used weapon keywords as well as they could, bringing back the Avatar's immunity to certain weapon types now would be a PITA, compared to just looking for MELTA, PLASMA or FLAME in a weapon's Abilities section. Haven't got my current Eldar 'dex to hand, but giving the Wailing Doom back its shooting attack could be cool (if it doesn't have one).
And definitely increase the range on Shuricats - not sure whether to go to 18" or back to the classic 24", but the short-range current weapon makes no sense on Guardians.
And definitely increase the range on Shuricats - not sure whether to go to 18" or back to the classic 24", but the short-range current weapon makes no sense on Guardians.
GW have been incredibly stubborn on this one, even though the introduction of Dire Avenger catapults was pretty much admission that the Guardian catapults did not work. Rather than admitting their original error, GW has been resorting to all kludged work-arounds elsewhere (even though they don't address the problem). Maybe if the old M stat of 4 for humans had been re-introduced instead of everything being at 6, then maybe the range would have been a little less of an issue.
Their boosting of Guardian WS and BS to what were previous Aspect Warrior levels again was an attempt to make Guardians useful again, even while the catapult issue remained unaddressed, and it just narrowed the gap further with the Aspect Warriors.
So to reflect these things in 9th ed you have to use special rules that create exceptionalism which reinforces how annoying the eldar are, rather than core mechanics everyone is equally affected by but the eldar are naturally better at.
Yeah, not like other factions which have hardly any special
Ignore All Modifiers to Attrition
Any squad that starts the game at full strength may split freely into 2 half-sized squads
+1 to Attacks if the unit charged, was charged, or performed a heroic intervention that turn
Any unit that did not move in the movement phase may double their attacks with rapid fire weapons out to maximum range
Your choice of 2 army-wide chapter tactics rules
An additional -1AP on heavy weapons turn 1, Assault and rapid fire weapons turn 2, and your choice of pistols and melee weapons or assault and rapid fire weapons turn 3
Your choice of one of those three categories gaining an additional army-wide special rule benefit on the turns it is active
I mean, compared to simplicity like that, I really wouldn't want to overload people with all the craaAaAaAzy special rules Eldar have, with their 2 army-wide craftworld traits (1 if you choose one of the canonical craftworlds, you know, because they never bothered fixing it) and infantry getting to count as remaining stationary if they advanced except with heavy weapons.
So you'll be pushing for IG Company Commanders, Commissars and Primaris Psykers to move to S4/T4, then?
Sure, because the exarchs still got the ability to be S/T 5 which was higher.
This is the point. 2nd ed reflected the relative differences between armies far better than they do now.
Yes, but also no - what it had was a fairly fixed set of progression steps from "basic trooper form" up to "major hero form".
M and I were definitely used better to differentiate the speed of races, though. Back in t'day, a Guardsman (and a Space Marine) had M4, while Eldar M values varied from 4 to 6, depending on the unit, with the average probably being 5 - a speed increase of 25% is more meaningful that 16.6%. It was something I was hoping would be reviewed when they reintroduced the stat in 8th, but they kept the baseline of human speed at 6", for some reason - dropping that back down (and adjusting other M values appropriately) immediately makes the table feel bigger, even if you then decide an edition later to shrink the minimum table size so you can sell your own battle mats...
The I stat in 2nd seemed to just get inflated by the Hero progression, rather than whether it makes sense - I'm not sure a Farseer should be I9, for example, especially if the T5 he has is meant to represent him starting to turn into crystal.
And looking through the Eldar 'dex from 2nd ed, none of the Aspect Warriors themselves are anything other than WS/BS4 (3+ in today's money), so if you're wanting to use old stat lines to justify changes, this is one where it doesn't work.
Now, before you jump down my throat, I'll point out that I do think removing I - or a similar stat; I'm a fan of having an Evasion stat to oppose BS, for example - was a mistake, and as I've pointed out above, I think they missed a trick by not reviewing M values coming into 8th and dropping them to be more in line with how they were in 2nd. Everyone having a base move of 6" was one of the things that bugged me in 3rd (and its children).
Equally, as they've not used weapon keywords as well as they could, bringing back the Avatar's immunity to certain weapon types now would be a PITA, compared to just looking for MELTA, PLASMA or FLAME in a weapon's Abilities section. Haven't got my current Eldar 'dex to hand, but giving the Wailing Doom back its shooting attack could be cool (if it doesn't have one).
And definitely increase the range on Shuricats - not sure whether to go to 18" or back to the classic 24", but the short-range current weapon makes no sense on Guardians.
Wailing doom does have a shooting attack, it's *drumroll please* one, single, old style meltagun shot.
So to reflect these things in 9th ed you have to use special rules that create exceptionalism which reinforces how annoying the eldar are, rather than core mechanics everyone is equally affected by but the eldar are naturally better at.
Yeah, not like other factions which have hardly any special
Ignore All Modifiers to Attrition
Any squad that starts the game at full strength may split freely into 2 half-sized squads
+1 to Attacks if the unit charged, was charged, or performed a heroic intervention that turn
Any unit that did not move in the movement phase may double their attacks with rapid fire weapons out to maximum range
Your choice of 2 army-wide chapter tactics rules
An additional -1AP on heavy weapons turn 1, Assault and rapid fire weapons turn 2, and your choice of pistols and melee weapons or assault and rapid fire weapons turn 3
Your choice of one of those three categories gaining an additional army-wide special rule benefit on the turns it is active
I mean, compared to simplicity like that, I really wouldn't want to overload people with all the craaAaAaAzy special rules Eldar have, with their 2 army-wide craftworld traits (1 if you choose one of the canonical craftworlds, you know, because they never bothered fixing it) and infantry getting to count as remaining stationary if they advanced except with heavy weapons...
Great how much neater and easier Warhammer is to play these days, isn't it?
With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
Bosskelot wrote: With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
You mean it only took 6 editions to notice a problem with the shuriken catapults?
Bosskelot wrote: With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
With the approach they took to Space Marines (release a replacement unit, then fiddle with the stats to change which of its options you want to use from book to book) and Necrons (release a new kit with a different weapon option) you're more likely to see Primaris Guardians or new Guardians with buffed lasblasters to push you to buy different minis rather than fixing the existing stuff, assuming they don't just ignore the issue again.
Bosskelot wrote: With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
With the approach they took to Space Marines (release a replacement unit, then fiddle with the stats to change which of its options you want to use from book to book) and Necrons (release a new kit with a different weapon option) you're more likely to see Primaris Guardians or new Guardians with buffed lasblasters to push you to buy different minis rather than fixing the existing stuff, assuming they don't just ignore the issue again.
You mean like how they gave all the firstborn marines a big boost in the new book?
Bosskelot wrote: With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
With the approach they took to Space Marines (release a replacement unit, then fiddle with the stats to change which of its options you want to use from book to book) and Necrons (release a new kit with a different weapon option) you're more likely to see Primaris Guardians or new Guardians with buffed lasblasters to push you to buy different minis rather than fixing the existing stuff, assuming they don't just ignore the issue again.
You mean like how they gave all the firstborn marines a big boost in the new book?
Enough of a buff to make Intercessors slightly less of an upgrade over Tacticals, yes, and then introducing new T5/3W Troops with S5 guns and melee Troops to compete with both. In the arena of Troops, at least, the buff to the Firstborn is a half-assed way of making them slightly less pointless while giving them an excuse to push firepower creep in other areas, not a serious attempt to fix their problems.
warmaster21 wrote: They really should just make catapults 24" again and up the avenger to 30"
Ideally, keep both at 24" but up DA cats to Assault 3.
I'd add that Shuriken Catapults should probably be -1 AP to reflect their alien tech better. For an advanced race with superior firepower it is weird to have a weapon that is technically just an inferior bolter for the most part.
warmaster21 wrote: They really should just make catapults 24" again and up the avenger to 30"
Ideally, keep both at 24" but up DA cats to Assault 3.
I'd add that Shuriken Catapults should probably be -1 AP to reflect their alien tech better. For an advanced race with superior firepower it is weird to have a weapon that is technically just an inferior bolter for the most part.
they could roll that extra -1ap within 12" trait into all shuriken weapons would be nice. or make the ap scale the closer you get to the target instead of fishing for 6's but I doubt we would see something like that, which would probably lead into too many measuring arguments.
personally I hope we see a complete model line redone like with sisters, except not with a giant price inflation. one of the main things that have kept me out of making an eldar army despire how much i like the aspect warriors are how god awful and old the sculpts are.. but that probably wont be until 15th edition at the earliest
I'd add that Shuriken Catapults should probably be -1 AP to reflect their alien tech better. For an advanced race with superior firepower it is weird to have a weapon that is technically just an inferior bolter for the most part.
24" assault 3, shot twice with -1AP and strenght would be kind of a strong on units with good resiliance and high BS. Specialy if they had the inv from the shimmer shield and some sort of dodge save stacking with 2Ws.
I'd add that Shuriken Catapults should probably be -1 AP to reflect their alien tech better. For an advanced race with superior firepower it is weird to have a weapon that is technically just an inferior bolter for the most part.
24" assault 3, shot twice with -1AP and strenght would be kind of a strong on units with good resiliance and high BS. Specialy if they had the inv from the shimmer shield and some sort of dodge save stacking with 2Ws.
Good resilience? Dodge save? High BS?
are we talking about Eldar right now?
BS3+, T3, 4+ ? With an invuln on the exarch ONLY if you forfeit its gun?
And dodge saves do nothing except let your opponent's heavy/assault weapons move/advance with no penalty.
And S4 -1 1 shots is nothing, thats what Intercessors get on their base guns... at 30" instead of 24".
Bosskelot wrote: With the way they're designing the new Codexes it's really not out of the realm of possibility that Shuricats are changed.
Generally the changes in the new books are clearly mindful of common complaints and design issues people have/had with the way the old units used to be.
With the approach they took to Space Marines (release a replacement unit, then fiddle with the stats to change which of its options you want to use from book to book) and Necrons (release a new kit with a different weapon option) you're more likely to see Primaris Guardians or new Guardians with buffed lasblasters to push you to buy different minis rather than fixing the existing stuff, assuming they don't just ignore the issue again.
You mean like how they gave all the firstborn marines a big boost in the new book?
Enough of a buff to make Intercessors slightly less of an upgrade over Tacticals, yes, and then introducing new T5/3W Troops with S5 guns and melee Troops to compete with both. In the arena of Troops, at least, the buff to the Firstborn is a half-assed way of making them slightly less pointless while giving them an excuse to push firepower creep in other areas, not a serious attempt to fix their problems.
Their core statline and nearly every single possible weapon upgrade they have got tweaks! How can you call that half assed? Heres the list of weapons tacs can take that saw changes:
Flamer
Melta
Grav
Plasma gun
Grav pistol
Plasma pistol
Power sword
Power maul
Power axe
Power fist
Thunder hammer
Heavy boltgun
Grav cannon
Multi melta
The tactical marine weapon list got more stats changed than the adeptus mechanicus codex from the index.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Drukhari, Eldar, Tau, and post-codex necrons all have inferior technology to the imperium now and its hilarious.
Necrons have massive "HEAT RAYS" mounted on their giant spider walkers that amount to one (1) multimedia.
Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
Edit:
Just to expand on this line of thought....
Warlocks could have an aura that allows evasion re-rolls of 1 for everyone within 6 inches. Fluff would explained by the psychic attunement that Warlocks have with the ebbs and flow of battle and enhance those around them.
Farseers could have a psychic power that adds +1 to the evasion save. And evasion would stack with all the other saves but given that invul saves are not all that common for craftworld eldar I don't see it being too over the top, even with Phoenix Lords that do have an invul.
Evasion would be for infantry and bikes only, but would have a strat to give to a skimmer type vehicle, not a monster
And it would make sense that Dark Eldar do not have this ability as they are not psychically attuned at all... (meaning the Dark Eldar book is already written so it doesn't have to be explained why they don't get it)
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
it would pretty much be better than a regular feel no pain and would make eldar one of the tankiest armies in the game.
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
it would pretty much be better than a regular feel no pain and would make eldar one of the tankiest armies in the game.
I don't disagree. It's basically an invuln that you can roll right into another invuln or armor save. The irony is that at 5++++++++ it's really really good, at 6+++++++ it's not worth rolling (not really) except against single target huge damage hits, and at 4++++++++ it's probably broken as feth. Talking army wide here, of course.
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
it would pretty much be better than a regular feel no pain and would make eldar one of the tankiest armies in the game.
I don't disagree. It's basically an invuln that you can roll right into another invuln or armor save. The irony is that at 5++++++++ it's really really good, at 6+++++++ it's not worth rolling (not really) except against single target huge damage hits, and at 4++++++++ it's probably broken as feth. Talking army wide here, of course.
lost track of how many pluses we're at now.
I don't entirely disagree... however... given that we are not seeing a stat improvement (assumption based on the shadow specters) and that very few Eldar units have invul saves or FNP, and probably won't get them, they need something to adjust the numbers. Especially as Eldar won't get an additional wound, as based on the earlier assumption.
Also... there are a lot more things (in QTY) out there that are STR4 than STR5
And to ease your plused mind... we can always call an evasion save a "-" so a 5- to represent the save before the wound roll
According to GW Community Metawatch article, Harilquins have over a 60% win rate. So what do they have that Craftworld Eldar don't?
I concur with what I read on this thread earlier. We're more likely to see a "Greater Guardian Aspect Warrior" with some kind of "Soul gem Lasblaster" or "Soul Witchblade" new model, with all the sweetness making players rush out to buy them. And then a small bump to regular Guardians.
A Toughness 3, wound 1 5+ armor save model is pretty useless in the Space Marine meta. Even if that model can move, shoot, run, and assault in the same turn. Unless it has a fantastic shooting assault weapon or mega melee Blade of DooooooM (Trademark), it's just gonna bounce off Space Marines.
They also have great stratagems and weaponry to handle the Primaris heavy meta with their weight of attacks and ability to ignore the issues of terrain with their flip belts. The small profile of their units also makes it easy for them stay out of LoS.
Grimskul wrote: They also have great stratagems and weaponry to handle the Primaris heavy meta with their weight of attacks and ability to ignore the issues of terrain with their flip belts. The small profile of their units also makes it easy for them stay out of LoS.
Ive asked before and never got an aswer:
Do flip belt actually do anything for them that they couldnt do if they were only infantry?
Grimskul wrote: They also have great stratagems and weaponry to handle the Primaris heavy meta with their weight of attacks and ability to ignore the issues of terrain with their flip belts. The small profile of their units also makes it easy for them stay out of LoS.
Ive asked before and never got an aswer:
Do flip belt actually do anything for them that they couldnt do if they were only infantry?
Yes. Flip Belts are better than fly because you can ignore other models on the charge - not to mention being better than normal infantry. They also ignore verticality (can charge a unit above them in terrain without needing the distance required, which normal infantry cannot do).
Grimskul wrote: They also have great stratagems and weaponry to handle the Primaris heavy meta with their weight of attacks and ability to ignore the issues of terrain with their flip belts. The small profile of their units also makes it easy for them stay out of LoS.
Ive asked before and never got an aswer:
Do flip belt actually do anything for them that they couldnt do if they were only infantry?
Yes. Flip Belts are better than fly because you can ignore other models on the charge - not to mention being better than normal infantry. They also ignore verticality (can charge a unit above them in terrain without needing the distance required, which normal infantry cannot do).
wait, fly doesn't ignore models on the charge? i thought they reverted that change with 9th lol. As for verticality, this means that quins can get a 0" charge basically?
Grimskul wrote: They also have great stratagems and weaponry to handle the Primaris heavy meta with their weight of attacks and ability to ignore the issues of terrain with their flip belts. The small profile of their units also makes it easy for them stay out of LoS.
Ive asked before and never got an aswer: Do flip belt actually do anything for them that they couldnt do if they were only infantry?
Yes. Flip Belts are better than fly because you can ignore other models on the charge - not to mention being better than normal infantry. They also ignore verticality (can charge a unit above them in terrain without needing the distance required, which normal infantry cannot do).
wait, fly doesn't ignore models on the charge? i thought they reverted that change with 9th lol. As for verticality, this means that quins can get a 0" charge basically?
It's not exactly clear but the way I've seen it played is that they can have a 0" charge from below an enemy unit, yes. And no, fly does not ignore models on the charge, only terrain. (so they half reverted it with 9th).
Yeah, it's kinda weird with the wording, but a lot of what makes Harlequins successful is that they get to ignore a lot of the basic rules restrictions (i.e. the terrains stuff with flip belts, advancing and charging, falling back and still being able to shoot/charge, AP not mattering to their army).
Unit1126PLL wrote: And no, fly does not ignore models on the charge, only terrain. (so they half reverted it with 9th).
Based on the "as if they were not there" in the core rules and the "Moving through models" core rulebook FAQ entry, I don't think this is accurate. In addition the core rules specifically state that models with fly have to move over terrain normally during a charge move.
WarhammerFAQ wrote:
MOVING THROUGH MODELS
Some models have a rule that enables them to ‘move through/over models’, or ‘move through/over models as if they were not there’. Sometimes such a rule will only apply to specific types of movement (e.g. Normal Moves, Advance moves, charge moves etc.) while other times it will apply to all types of movement. In any case, when moving a model with such a rule, it can be moved within Engagement Range of enemy models, but it can never finish a move on top of another model, or its base, and it cannot finish a Normal Move, Advance or Fall Back move within Engagement Range of any enemy models, and it can only end a charge move in Engagement Range of units it declared a charge against that phase).
So models with fly can move in engagement range of any enemy models, but can only end their move in engagement range of models they declared a charge against.
VladimirHerzog wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
I don't disagree. It's basically an invuln that you can roll right into another invuln or armor save. The irony is that at 5++++++++ it's really really good, at 6+++++++ it's not worth rolling (not really) except against single target huge damage hits, and at 4++++++++ it's probably broken as feth. Talking army wide here, of course.
lost track of how many pluses we're at now.
The "Evasion Save" is basically the "Ward Save" I was pitching a couple pages back. I'd probably roll it after wounds and before saves (for the same logistical /time saving reasons we roll saves after to-wound rolls). My suggestion is to have it replace Battle Focus. Make it a 5+ that improves to a 4+ if you charge and/or advance. So you can either ignore 1/3rd of the wounds coming your way with no downside, or you can can give up 1/4th of your successful ranged to-hit rolls to ignore 1/2 of the wounds coming your way.
It seems fluffy, works in melee, and doesn't impact BS4+ armies more harshly than BS3+ armies the way to-hit modifiers do.
Modifying the evasion save with psychic powers is an interesting thought. Eldar don't really have a lot of sources of FNP at the moment. Just the Ulthwe trait and Fortune (ignoring Crusade Battle Honors, the Avatar, Fuegan, and Ghost Helms). So maybe those could just be changed to interact with the evasion saves to cut down on the number of dice rolled to resolve an attack. So in theory, you'd almost never roll a FNP after rolling an evasion save. You'd actually end up rolling fewer dice overall because you'd be rolling one ward save per failed save rather than one FNP per damage taken.
Even then, a 4+ evasion save is proooobably too good. So maybe you do something like...
Fortune = the target unit can reroll up to X evasion saves before your next psychic phase.
Enhance = As-is, but also reroll Evasion saves of 1 in the fight phase.
Ulthwe Trait = Reroll Evasion saves of 1 while within 6" of an Ulthwe psyker model.
I feel like it's okay for eldar to be "tanky." We just shouldn't be blocking bullets with our faces. Craftworlders take steps to try and stay alive. They're known for generally being relatively lightly armored, but they aren't known for high casualty rates. You can make us durable enough to compete and price us accordingly without it breaking fluff.
I do not see GW adding an extra layer in the attack sequence. You've got to hit, to wound, save (armour or invuln) and in some cases, a FNP. Last thing we need is another type of save in the game.
bullyboy wrote:I do not see GW adding an extra layer in the attack sequence. You've got to hit, to wound, save (armour or invuln) and in some cases, a FNP. Last thing we need is another type of save in the game.
Wyldhunt wrote:
Eldar don't really have a lot of sources of FNP at the moment. Just the Ulthwe trait and Fortune (ignoring Crusade Battle Honors, the Avatar, Fuegan, and Ghost Helms). So maybe those could just be changed to interact with the evasion saves to cut down on the number of dice rolled to resolve an attack. So in theory, you'd almost never roll a FNP after rolling an evasion save. You'd actually end up rolling fewer dice overall because you'd be rolling one ward save per failed save rather than one FNP per damage taken.
Even then, a 4+ evasion save is proooobably too good. So maybe you do something like...
Fortune = the target unit can reroll up to X evasion saves before your next psychic phase.
Enhance = As-is, but also reroll Evasion saves of 1 in the fight phase.
Ulthwe Trait = Reroll Evasion saves of 1 while within 6" of an Ulthwe psyker model.
Given that we're talking about a special ability for a single faction that doesn't have a ton of FNP floating around to begin with, it would be pretty easy to avoid adding "an extra layer in the attack sequence." Eldar would just have a unique step that they'd always be taking in place of the FNP step. Assuming you replaced Fuegan and the Avatars' FNP rules that is. If GW is going to avoid USRs for the sake of being able to customize rules to fit an army, then this seems like a good example of a place where that could apply. Instead of using the page space to write down Battle Focus, you write down the Evasion Save rules.
QUins have lots of good cheap transports that are surprisingly tanky and are fast and troops they protect are in turn really good.
We have a 200pt wave serpent that you going to put what inside exactly ? 6 wraiths at the most.. which is already 1/3 of your army..If WS gets popped those wraiths are walking the rest of the game with 5" movement..
Harlequins are massively undercosted compared to craftworld. And actually every other codex in the game (marines included)
A starweaver is a mere 80 points. Troupes get base 4 attacks with power weapons for a measly 19-20 points. Troupe masters are 70 points. It's crazy, they're playing with 8th edition points while everyone else is in 9th edition.
If everything in the Craftworld codex was 20% cheaper, i'm sure they'd be doing better.
On the subject of Evasion saves... What if you forced your opponent to re-roll successful hits instead. That would be interesting, and frustrating for them! Perfect for eldar.
On the subject of Evasion saves... What if you forced your opponent to re-roll successful hits instead. That would be interesting, and frustrating for them! Perfect for eldar.
or what if they denied re-rolls and buffs to hit them instead of forcing penalties / re-rolls. would keep the whole weight of fire weakness while making them more resiliant to small elite armies focused on buff stacking.
what exactly needs to be buffed?
Wave Serpents and Falcons have decent durability as transports, and you should be keeping your serpents closer to 150/160pts, not 200pts.
The other armour options and aircraft are also decent, but by all means we could make a few changes to the special equipment to improve some of them.
It's really only the infantry that need to be improved to a great degree (and the wraithknight too I guess).
Harlequins aren't winning because of their transports, that's for sure.
bullyboy wrote: what exactly needs to be buffed?
Wave Serpents and Falcons have decent durability as transports, and you should be keeping your serpents closer to 150/160pts, not 200pts.
The other armour options and aircraft are also decent, but by all means we could make a few changes to the special equipment to improve some of them.
It's really only the infantry that need to be improved to a great degree (and the wraithknight too I guess).
Harlequins aren't winning because of their transports, that's for sure.
Pretty much every living eldar on foot, including characters (and special characters).
There should be more options for characters, aspects should be very good at the role they have taken and guardians should be great as support units for an aspect assault, but not as a stand alone force (unless you take the trait ala ulthwe black guardians).
bullyboy wrote: what exactly needs to be buffed?
Wave Serpents and Falcons have decent durability as transports, and you should be keeping your serpents closer to 150/160pts, not 200pts.
The other armour options and aircraft are also decent, but by all means we could make a few changes to the special equipment to improve some of them.
It's really only the infantry that need to be improved to a great degree (and the wraithknight too I guess).
Harlequins aren't winning because of their transports, that's for sure.
Pretty much every living eldar on foot, including characters (and special characters).
There should be more options for characters, aspects should be very good at the role they have taken and guardians should be great as support units for an aspect assault, but not as a stand alone force (unless you take the trait ala ulthwe black guardians).
that was my point...the vehicles are good, it's really just Eldar footsloggers that need serious help.
Argive wrote: QUins have lots of good cheap transports that are surprisingly tanky and are fast and troops they protect are in turn really good.
We have a 200pt wave serpent that you going to put what inside exactly ? 6 wraiths at the most.. which is already 1/3 of your army..If WS gets popped those wraiths are walking the rest of the game with 5" movement..
Pedantic fact checking:
* Harlequins have a single transport.
* It's misleading to make it sound like wave serpents can transport six models "at the most. " You can potentially fit 6 units in there if you really want to (3 reaper squads and 3 characters.)
The wave serpent is worth its points. It's durable. It can hold a lot of dudes (twice as many wraith guard as a raider can hold grotesques by comparison), and its shooting isn't awful. It even has the serpent shield's mortal wound generation. The wave serpent is good for its price. It's just that that price is (reasonably) very high, and many eldar units depend on transports for survival. The falcon isn't cheap enough in comparison to the serpent to really be the cheap alternative craftworlders would like to have. Having access to something like a venom or starweaver or even a raider (rougly half the cost of a wave serpent) might help out squishy infantry units in our codex by lowering the competition for seats. Not that I'm advocating for a craftworld venom.
Kind of depends on where you want armies in general to look like. Right now lots of marine units are more effective than lots of craftworld units. If we were to nerf marines down closer to our current level, I'd say we mostly just need some fixes for our melee units, a price reduction for our warlock conclave, and an update to/replacement for Battle Focus that makes our space elves feel fast again.
If we're accepting that marines are where all armies should be, proooobably most of the codex is lagging behind a bit. Compare war walkers to dakka dreads, avengers to tactical marines, falcons to those new primaris predator things, autarchs to captains, scorpions to assault marrines (or let alone assault intercessors), etc.
Not trying to drag the discussion into marine bashing, but the question kind of calls for an establishment of what a reasonable level of cost-effectiveness looks like.
footfoe wrote: Harlequins are massively undercosted compared to craftworld. And actually every other codex in the game (marines included)
A starweaver is a mere 80 points. Troupes get base 4 attacks with power weapons for a measly 19-20 points. Troupe masters are 70 points. It's crazy, they're playing with 8th edition points while everyone else is in 9th edition.
If everything in the Craftworld codex was 20% cheaper, i'm sure they'd be doing better.
On the subject of Evasion saves... What if you forced your opponent to re-roll successful hits instead. That would be interesting, and frustrating for them! Perfect for eldar.
I don't actually know if it's their melee power that's making them such a competitive force. Most lists I'm seeing do well in tourneys are based on the 5-fusion troupe in a weaver and the haywire bike.
Kind of depends on where you want armies in general to look like. Right now lots of marine units are more effective than lots of craftworld units. If we were to nerf marines down closer to our current level, I'd say we mostly just need some fixes for our melee units, a price reduction for our warlock conclave, and an update to/replacement for Battle Focus that makes our space elves feel fast again.
If we're accepting that marines are where all armies should be, proooobably most of the codex is lagging behind a bit. Compare war walkers to dakka dreads, avengers to tactical marines, falcons to those new primaris predator things, autarchs to captains, scorpions to assault marrines (or let alone assault intercessors), etc.
Not trying to drag the discussion into marine bashing, but the question kind of calls for an establishment of what a reasonable level of cost-effectiveness looks like.
I would take a Falcon over the new marine Gladiator variants anyday. They are very pricey.
bullyboy wrote: Harlequins aren't winning because of their transports, that's for sure.
As others had pointed out, they sort of are. The main strength of Harlequins is their troupes because they:
1) can all have good close combat weapons
2) can all have fusion pistols
3) have an invulnerable save
4) have excellent movement rules
5) are cheap for what they do
6) can be delivered in a fast, cheap, open-topped transport
So you have a unit that it is extremely dangerous to multi-wound models, can't be tied down, and is somewhat durable. Their only weaknesses are that their weapons are short-ranged and they might get shot up on the approach. The transport perfectly mitigates those weaknesses.
Now, the underlying problem is that it's bad game design to let every member of the troupe take a fusion pistol, but that wouldn't be as much of a problem if they didn't have a transport to get them into fusion range.
bullyboy wrote: Harlequins aren't winning because of their transports, that's for sure.
As others had pointed out, they sort of are. The main strength of Harlequins is their troupes because they:
1) can all have good close combat weapons
2) can all have fusion pistols
3) have an invulnerable save
4) have excellent movement rules
5) are cheap for what they do
6) can be delivered in a fast, cheap, open-topped transport
So you have a unit that it is extremely dangerous to multi-wound models, can't be tied down, and is somewhat durable. Their only weaknesses are that their weapons are short-ranged and they might get shot up on the approach. The transport perfectly mitigates those weaknesses.
Now, the underlying problem is that it's bad game design to let every member of the troupe take a fusion pistol, but that wouldn't be as much of a problem if they didn't have a transport to get them into fusion range.
I mean the box comes with 2 of them. You could just limit them to 2/5 4/10+, there's no reason that ALL members of the squad HAVE to be able to take the upgraded pistols.
Also Soaring Spite represents some of the problem as well. There is a difference between your transport being able to fly 16" and you can shoot your pistols vs it being able to fly 24".
Argive wrote: QUins have lots of good cheap transports that are surprisingly tanky and are fast and troops they protect are in turn really good.
We have a 200pt wave serpent that you going to put what inside exactly ? 6 wraiths at the most.. which is already 1/3 of your army..If WS gets popped those wraiths are walking the rest of the game with 5" movement..
Pedantic fact checking: * Harlequins have a single transport. * It's misleading to make it sound like wave serpents can transport six models "at the most. " You can potentially fit 6 units in there if you really want to (3 reaper squads and 3 characters.)
The wave serpent is worth its points. It's durable. It can hold a lot of dudes (twice as many wraith guard as a raider can hold grotesques by comparison), and its shooting isn't awful. It even has the serpent shield's mortal wound generation. The wave serpent is good for its price. It's just that that price is (reasonably) very high, and many eldar units depend on transports for survival. The falcon isn't cheap enough in comparison to the serpent to really be the cheap alternative craftworlders would like to have. Having access to something like a venom or starweaver or even a raider (rougly half the cost of a wave serpent) might help out squishy infantry units in our codex by lowering the competition for seats. Not that I'm advocating for a craftworld venom.
Kind of depends on where you want armies in general to look like. Right now lots of marine units are more effective than lots of craftworld units. If we were to nerf marines down closer to our current level, I'd say we mostly just need some fixes for our melee units, a price reduction for our warlock conclave, and an update to/replacement for Battle Focus that makes our space elves feel fast again.
If we're accepting that marines are where all armies should be, proooobably most of the codex is lagging behind a bit. Compare war walkers to dakka dreads, avengers to tactical marines, falcons to those new primaris predator things, autarchs to captains, scorpions to assault marrines (or let alone assault intercessors), etc.
Not trying to drag the discussion into marine bashing, but the question kind of calls for an establishment of what a reasonable level of cost-effectiveness looks like.
I said transports because you take plural. As in more than one transport.. therefore they are cheap transports...
I disagree that its durable now. Post imperial melta and upcoming fusion update its damage reduction simply doesn't matter when you are being shot at by Str 8 -4 2+d6dmg weapons on units that cost a fraction of what the serpent costs...
I don't quite like what you are implying about me being misleading regarding transport capacity... If you really want to be pendandic. You can actually technically transport 10 UNITS! You could take 4 warlocks, 3 spirit seers, 2 farseers and 3 dark reapers... But does it matter? Are you ever going to do that? (because that would mean taking 3 battalions) I meant that optimally youd stuff maybe wraiths /aspects in there if you'd actually take one. And if you go bare bones the only output is peashooter 2 shuri canon shots.. So again..
Don't get me wrong, Its is a really good unit for CWE as its very utilitarian. But by no means is it what it used to be, and simply doesn't really cut the mustard anymore simply becasue of the cost of it and the infantry bodies you would then pay pts to take.
By comparison the quin transports are very spammable, and opened top, transport good units, are actually more durable pt for pt to hit penalty, to wound penalty and invuln as well as range penalty? That is extremely good protection against alpha strike. The serpents 3+ and reduce damage by 1 just doesn't really compare.
We may have different philosophies here but I kinda have to disagree about taking seprents bare bones cheap. Whats the point you are paying pts for maybe some MW output, at which pints you sacrifice the durability you pay pts for.. Might as well take a falcon if you want cheap transport and at least it will lay down some dakka from range with EC it will do some serious hurt.
Quins are doing very well because:
They excel at mobility which allows them to objective capture They are very efficient for their points thanks to outpur across all of the phases and relative durability. The pts are very generous. Meanwhile CWE pay what ? 15 pts for a ranger ? Its dumb...
However you make one mistake, get really unlucky and their fragile nature will unravel the army.
I think you might be mixing up your responses to different posters there Argive.
Quins are indeed good, but they are far more than just the transport, and I believe some of the successful lists have been mostly foot quins. Harlies are good, and it ain't the starweavers that make them good, but they do give them some good board control.
I still don;t think you invest a ton of points in a serpent. If you want a tank, take a tank. Shuricats in hull over cannon (unless you have leftover points) to save 10pts. Turret weapon can be upgraded but i wouldn't add many upgrades. Twin starcannon gives you a 160pt vehicle, which is still pretty durable, unless it's your only one.
Of course, until the models inside are buffed to make them worthwhile, why bother with a transport?
Eldar don't need a cheap transport, they do armour over nimble raiders. They just need to make the contents worthwhile. IMHO at least.
I said transports because you take plural. As in more than one transport.. therefore they are cheap transports...
Ah. I straight up misread what you were trying to say then. By, "Lots of good cheap transports," you were just referring to their cheapness twice. Fair enough.
I disagree that its durable now.
Post imperial melta and upcoming fusion update its damage reduction simply doesn't matter when you are being shot at by Str 8 -4 2+d6dmg weapons on units that cost a fraction of what the serpent costs...
It's been a while since I went to any competitive events, so maybe my grasp of the modern optimized landscaping is lacking. Aren't we mostly talking about multi-meltas and eradicators? If I'm not mistaken, most of the guns that got the new melta rule are are too short-ranged to be in half range coming in from reserves, and my serpents are generally happy to give ground if there's a dedicated anti-tank unit coming towards them. In my recent (pretty casual) games, my serpents have been reasonably durable against low-volume d6 damage weapons like lascannons and very frustrating against 2 and 3 damage weapons. They're definitely not unkillable (nor should they be), but they certainly absorb more shooting than my raiders do.
Basically, they still seem pretty durable against most things to me. No vehicle looks durable when eradicators are shooting at it. I may be objectively incorrect, but I'm still under the impression that a wave serpent is durable for its cost.
I don't quite like what you are implying about me being misleading regarding transport capacity... If you really want to be pendandic. You can actually technically transport 10 UNITS! You could take 4 warlocks, 3 spirit seers, 2 farseers and 3 dark reapers... But does it matter? Are you ever going to do that? (because that would mean taking 3 battalions)
I meant that optimally youd stuff maybe wraiths /aspects in there if you'd actually take one. And if you go bare bones the only output is peashooter 2 shuri canon shots.. So again..
Don't get me wrong, Its is a really good unit for CWE as its very utilitarian.
But by no means is it what it used to be, and simply doesn't really cut the mustard anymore simply becasue of the cost of it and the infantry bodies you would then pay pts to take.
My bad. I misunderstood what point you were making. Your post made it seem like you were arguing that having a transport capacity of 12 was somehow a mark against the wave serpent. I see now that you were arguing that the best units you can put inside a wave serpent are wraith units/the usefulness of a serpent is diminished by the lack of efficient infantry units that could benefit from riding in a serpent. That's pretty fair. Most of our infantry units could use a boost. However, I'd point out that that's really more of an issue with units other than the serpent rather than with the serpent itself. If fire dragons were as good as eradicators, the wave serpent would get them in position to do their thing pretty reliably. If banshees were scary good at melee, our opponents would be frsutrated by how much shooting they have to put into the serpent before they can take a crack at the banshees.
We may have different philosophies here but I kinda have to disagree about taking seprents bare bones cheap. Whats the point you are paying pts for maybe some MW output, at which pints you sacrifice the durability you pay pts for.. Might as well take a falcon if you want cheap transport and at least it will lay down some dakka from range with EC it will do some serious hurt.
Not sure if this part is in response to me or someone else. My wave serpents usually come in around 190ish points. I like to give them spirit stones, anti-tank guns, shuricannons, and maybe CTMs. Or else I take vectored engines, spirit stones, and 9 shots worth of shuriken cannons. So I'm not one to tell people to go cheap on their serpents. I was saying that neither of the craftworld transports are cheap, and that a lack of cheap transports really changes how said transports can be used in lists. We can't really do mechanized MSU in transports the way drukhari or harlequins can because each of our transports costs twice as much as a weaver or raider. And while the serpent has as much transport capacity as two weavers, you're still concentrating your threat (and points) into one place (and making yourself susceptible to effects that are good at killing tough units efficiently) rather than spreading out your presence.
If my craftworlders had something like a venom, I might be tempted to run a bunch of mounted aspects like fire dragons and dark reapers and dire avengers in them. I could spread them out across the table and reliably make use of their offense. Maybe I even have the points to spare to field some banshees or what have you in a vaguely incubi-esque role. But because three wave serpents is about 600 points, I can't really spread myself out like that. Each of those three serpents has to be carrying units that want to be going in roughly the same direction.
Does that make any sense? I feel like I'm rambling. tldr; I don't disagree that there are things in the meta that give wave serpents a rough time. The things that want to ride in serpents could stand to be better. But I still feel that wave serpents are pretty good for their cost.
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
Or you could just bump the game to be based on a D8 or D10 and give non-Wraith Infantry a natural -1 to hit, which is a lot easier.
SaganGree wrote: Why couldn't you have an Evasion save? Something unique to Eldar and other highly twitchy gitz... I'm thinking a 5+ (adjustable) that you would roll before the wound roll happens...
I could see that representing the agility of the race, leave open the rule for other factions, like maybe assassins, and increase their durability without having to adjust the stats
That is statistically indistinguishable from an invuln save (except if you're saying you could take it IN ADDITION TO an invuln save or any normal save).
That is exactly what I am suggesting... given the fact that the save would be taken before the wound roll is made. And given that there are more dice to save against hits, while similar to an invul, it wouldn't be as efficient because the attacker can use strats, rerolls, etc more effectively as the defense would already have been rolled. It's actually more similar to a preemptive FNP
Or you could just bump the game to be based on a D8 or D10 and give non-Wraith Infantry a natural -1 to hit, which is a lot easier.
Is it though? SaganGree's suggestion is basically just:
* Roll a d6 after you fail a save. On an X+, you save against the attack after all.
Your suggestion is...
* Replace everyone's d6 collection with a presumably similarly-sized d8 or d10 collection.
* Presumably rewrite the rules/chart for determining what number needs to be rolled to wound a target.
* Change a bunch of statlines and special rules to account for the change in die size.
* Give non-wraith infantry a -1 to hit special rule.
I feel like the Evasion Save approach is actually quite a bit easier to implement.
Also, does increasing the granularity of our random number generation rocks really help with the issue at hand? Like, say you expanded the die size to d12s so you have twice as many faces that players can potentially roll. A 3 on a d12 is sort of like rolling a 1.5 on a d6. Rolling a 4 is like rolling a 2. Rolling a 5 is like rolling a 2.5. Etc. Is making it possible for eldar to have a -1.5 to hit modifier instead of a -2 really a fix for the durability and speed issues being discussed? Like, is giving IG a -1 to hit too little, a -2 too much, but a -1.5 would be the perfect to-hit penalty if only our dice could roll a 1.5?
Or maybe the added granularity isn't used to bring back bigger to-hit penalties. Maybe we just give the eldar slightly better WS and BS than marines and armor that lies somewhere between a scion and power armor. Is that going to make eldar feel sufficiently fluffy, durable, and fast?
I am open to having my mind changed, but I don't see how it would address the issues at hand.
From my understanding the design paradigm has fundamentally shifted to much higher volumes of fire from basic units, so low toughness and low armour armies are always going to get hosed. Even medium toughness armies like Orks get shredded.
This adds to the fact that Eldar have always been fast and short ranged, meaning they need to be within the threat range of the enemy before they can attack, but they are also very fragile to any counter attack.
Dark Eldar used to have the ability to attack at night, and there were night fighting rules that effectively limited the range of the enemy shooting in response. It was a bit janky in practice and I remember that it was not used very often, but it is potentially an interesting avenue to explore - eldar could limit the range of enemy shooting perhaps. Though that would really, really mess up Tau as a side effect.
I've been thinking about our future codex after the few updates/snippets on WarCom that we've got so far. Ie wraithseer (
