Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Im reading it as rules-lawyer, as in some kind of legal person.

Way to go, Banesword.  You killed the joke.  Are you satisfied?

You can order the new Eldar Codex on GW UK now, don't know if this has been brought up yet.

Posted By bigchris1313 on 10/11/2006 12:47 AM
Way to go, Banesword.  You killed the joke.  Are you satisfied?

Leave BanesWord alone.
Not everyone has a sense of humour.

HHeh, the Word of Bain.

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>hobo1430 </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

I've been following the eldar codex rumors for the last month or so. I started eldar about 9 months ago while my son did SM. I guess that makes me rather new to the game. However, having played several games, watched some local tournaments, read the forums, and worked on strategy with my son, I would like to make some newbie observations about the new codex.

Welcome to the party!

First, it seemed to me that compared to SM, the problem with the Eldar was very week troop choices (Guardians and DA), particularly given the short range of their primary weapon and poor close combat stats. I completely understand the max/min approach alluded to in other posts--either a squad babysitting a weapon platform or a large mass suicide squad of cheap troops storming across the field using as much cover as they could find. Now, the babysitting option seems gone (too expensive to field min 10). While DA seem to be able to fill the storm squad role, it seems to me the squad size is too small to hold up. With an Exach, a 10 person DA squad costs out (at 134+unknown exarch power costs) to about the same as a 10 man SM squad, but doesn't seem able to hold its own in HtH even with the charge. Moreover, since there is no option to regroup once the unit falls below 50%, they will almost surely run off the table before the game is over.

Eldar much be approached as a combined arms strategy. You simply cannot just match your dire avenger unit with your opponent's space marine unit and call it a day. Also, most that I see will not be using full 10 man units of marines (it's often 7 or less where I play). Add in the effects of guide / fortune / doom or other supporting units and you will begin to take your opponent apart. If you are worried about your troops running off the table use the new beast of an avatar as he makes all your troops within 12" fearless....

In the new codex, I thought the pathfinder looked like the most compelling troop choice, but it doesn't appear that anyone else agrees with me. I do see that the Gaurdian jetbikes may also be an option, but they were so weak in the current codex that I wonder how many people actually have the models

I like pathfinders as well especially when combined with doom! However, my particular play style may not see them be fielded. It all depends on wether or not I keep my mech theme going. Jetbikes will undoubtably be around as most people seem to have at least 3-6 of them. Veterans of 2nd edition and back should have much more than that.

Regarding the elite choices, consider me a grumbling old man, but I get the feeling that most of the existing choices were ignored so that the Harlequins could get center stage. It seems to me that many of the choices in the current codex needed small, but significant updates.
For example, why were Scorpions not given fleet of foot? The reduction to S3 made sense, but why Mover through Cover and Infiltrate? I don't get the reasoning. Moreover, I don't get why these option but not fleet of foot?

It does seem as if the harlies did get all of the attention. (I love them though). The dragons were not ignored however, they are very powerfull now and at a cheaper cost. The wraithguard got more powerful but I'll admit they fixed the wrong problems with them (lol). Scorpions did receive a nerf especially when combined with the new FAQ regarding psychic powers in transports. They have move through cover / infiltrate as it fits their fluff. Fleet of foot is not given due to their heavier aspect armour....besides, if the could fleet of foot even less people would have taken banshees in the old codex..

Wraithguard seem to be a defensive only unit providing a line of defense for more fragile troops. But 35 points each for a defensive unit? (BTW--I do see the offensive ability if mounted in a WS, but too few troops, too few shots, and too many points for a so-so offensive push.) A decrease in points (to 25 each?) rather than a gun upgrade and T6 would have made more sense. The limited range of the gun makes the upgrade nearly useless--one round of shooting and into close combat. My experience has been that Wraithguard are great at just tying up SM's for several turns in HtH since they rarely score enough wounds (after saves) to whittle away a SM unit, but usually last several turns just because they are so hard to beat up. As an elite choice at 35 points each, they should compare (roughly) to a SM terminator and there is just no comparison. Again, try a 7 man Terminator unit (280 pts.) against an 8 unit WG squad (280 pts.)

I played a game last night with the new rules. A 10 man wraithguard unit with warlock & conceal closely supported by an avatar that joined the unit. Fortune the lot and you have something that's nearly indestructable to anything but lots of anti-tank weaponry. If someone wants to engage them in hand to hand that's fine (lol)  Certianly the wraihguard could have used better range or cheaper cost but I still do think that there is potential here. Want to compare terminators to wraithguard? Sure, you can try but you have to look at how the army works as whole in order to do that. You can't really compare the units just against each other.  With our abundance of ap2 weaponry we should pity the players who field terminators against us....

Firedragons are better, but were already great. (Luckily, I have several of them :-}) They kill things great, but are tough to keep alive.

The two tanks used to get them into firing posistion are now even tougher  to kill. Their new guns will instant kill most characters if given the chance. You will now wound MC's on 2+ and penetrate monoliths on a 6' With tank hunter for the unit and the str increase nearly any vehicle targeted is as good as dead even if not at the 6" range....and they are cheaper now as well. I'd say better is an understatement.....I never did understand this particular move by GW....they were already  just fine.

I haven't played banshees or spiders, but I don't see them as having been given any great boost.

Deepstriking a small unit of spiders now gives us the chance to go after peskt whirlwinds and bassiliks etc. Banshees got loads better when combined with doom and the tougher to kill transports. You always have to look at the stuff we combine things with.

The WS seems good, but again, compared to a Rhino, is it overpriced? How much value is a 24" move worth? I don't think I can answer that, but since the WS can't unload troops after moving 12" (the same as the Rhino), I can't see almost double the price. Now, mount a twin-linked weapon and it seems nicer, but so is a Razorback with lascannons.

The waveserpent is certianly cheaper with new codex...especially if you don't put the popular weapons on it....perhaps this is why GW buffed the dragons like they did. As far as to what it is worth? It may be expensive but it certianly gets your troops to where they need to go. With star engines you can now go 36" in a single turn! Also, if they allowed us to assault after moving it would bring back the serpent rush and those days are gone. Sure, landraiders can do it but they cost 250+.

More to the point, why don't the eldar have a low-cost transport especially given the fragility of their troops? Wouldn't such an advanced race find a way to get fragile troops to the front lines quickly without getting shot-up?

If we had fast low cost transports we'd be nearly the same as dark eldar...

Regarding heavy choices, the changes to the wraithlord, falcon, and fire prism all seem reasonable with just a few exceptions. First, why is spirit stone equated to additional armor? Doesn't spirit stone sound more like a Power of the machine spirit upgrade? I also don't see what was wrong with the current version. Finally, if it is extra armor, why does it cost eldar 10 pts while a SM gets extra armor for 5 pts. And if I can anticipate that the answer is how it works with holofield, then why not make holofield cost more and include the downgrade. BTW, I am very glad they didn't change the holofield (or the force shied on the WS for that matter). And finally, why twin-link weapons on the WL for the same cost as two-weapons? That is one I just don't get.

Spirit stone was made into extra armour becasue GW likes to have universal special rules / effects. I could agree that it does sound more like POTMS though. The current version was reviled by opponents of lucky rollers. Mine didn't work all that often but it's just the same effect of when playing a lucky necron roller.....not only doesn't it die but you don't even stop it from shooting you. As far as cost goes you can't compare exrtra armour to spirit stones as it is how they work on the list as a whole. As far as I know they did   make the holofield cost more. I'll agree that TL weapons on the lord seemed pretty dumb to me.

The Dark Reapers seem to have been left way short of their potential. On the stat line they are weaker than SM, but do benefit from a gun that is better than their SM equivalent (Heavy Bolter). Here, the biggest problem is their inability to add troops to the squad to allow for some extra wounds and the ability to upgrade more than one unit member to an exarch. Again, compared to a SM devastator squad, the devastator squad typically adds a few marines so their heavy weapons stay on the table longer and, if they do fail leadership, they automatically regroup the next turn (well almost automatically). On the other hand, the reapers loose big guns with the first wound and, when they fail leadership, they are likely to head straight for the edge of the table since they cannot regroup if they loose 3 units. Why can't reapers add a few guardians to the squad to act as guards for the reapers while they take aim on the advancing marines across the table?

I playtested these guys at 40pts each with a 3+ save and no other changes. I found that when fortuned in cover they were particularly hard to kill. The normal weapons used to kill them in the past were heavy bolters / whirlwinds / assault cannons etc. Now, all of those same weapons received a re-rollable 3+ save against. Sure, if the enemy throws enough firepower at them they can certainly be killed but then they serve the same rolls as the lord / falcon / seer council / avatar in the fact they absorb ridiculous ammounts of firepower leaving that much more of your army untouched. If we allowed them to have ablative wounds on top of that it would just be too powerfull. Now, the reapers are actually a little cheaper as well. Doom can also maximize the wounding potential of these guys if need be.

I've not played warwalkers or heavy weapon platforms that often, and I can't see any reason to start.

Beacause our other heavy choices are so good it is certianlt a problem. I think that some warwalkers will get used and if the vibro cannon doesn't need LOS it will get used...

While I get that the starcannon is the best eldar weapon, I don't think it is the best 40K weapon given the cost. If assault cannons were available to eldar, how many starcannons would be put on the sidelines to make room for them? (That's a rhetorical question--I don't want to start an argument.) I think the best way to handle the starcannon was to handle them similar to the assault cannon in that they are only available to limited units (such as WL's, vypers, and falcons). Again, this makes a lot of sense to me and meshes well with how other "super weapons" are handled.

The assault cannon is the best weapon in the game. The reason that marine players complained about the star cannon was that it was good at every task. The assault cannon is better as well as killing vehicles etc. So they nerfed our "super weapon"....but we got other stuff to make up for it didn't we?

Finally, I am looking forward to the new rules for swooping hawks since I like the models, but couldn't get much out of them in terms of gameplay.

Becasue the old unit was confused as to what it's battlefield role is. You have a light shooting / harrasemet type unit that contains a close combat monster....often reffered to as the EDS. The new rules make them harrassing again and quite dangerous to vehicles as well (especially the monolith)

I haven't played shining spears, but I have used Vypers. What were they thinking?

I don't know what they were thinking but we will certianly see less vypers in the new rules. Nearly noone played with shining spears but the new rules will change that.

OK, well this ended up a lot longer than I thought and please forgive me if my questions seem idiotic to veteran players.

No questions are idiotic if they help someone. 

Finally, after reading some other posts and looking at my own thoughts, I can't help but wonder about GW's motives. With the investment required to play this game, why turn people off by devaluing the investment they've already made? The Harlies do sound great, but why so much better than eldar squads already in the game?

It's all just marketing and the main reason why GW is not  my prefered company or game in general. When a company like GW sells you miniature you are buying them based upon the ruleset that supports them. If miniatures truly sold themelves based off of the miniature themself you would see lots more direavengers & shining spears flying off the shelves in this last edition....sadly, this is not the case. I think that it's bad practice to continually change stuff to force people to buy new stuff. Instead they should just make new units if they feel the need. In addition, if something is really broken balance wise fix it now instead of waiting 4-6 years and making us buy the fixes to a system that you sold us.

Lazarus.

Laz: Out of curiosity, your posts seem to involve lots of farseer buffs - in particular, fortune and doom. How do you aim to maximize returns from your farseers - espescially since "fortune" is a 6" power? This is very constraining if the Farseer is indeed 0-1, and annoying at best if you can have 2 "buff bubbles", since to fortune something, the Farseer is literally attached to that unit at the hip.

Can someone clarifiy if the Farseer entry is 0-1 or no restriction?

I agree 100% with Lazarus.

And that whole Falcon scoing nonsence is a result of long work hours...

I see a lot of people on this forum forgetting that when you field an Army, you are doing just that fielding an Army. Vacuum Hammer is good, but only to the extent of knowing what your individual units can do. Movement, Terrain, Flanking, Combined Arms, Synergy, and Speed, are things a lot of people seem to forget. Eldar is a combined arms finesse force, where half your victory is in your army selection.

Here are the list of things that I wished they could have changed, however:

Make Aspects Better against their entended targets, for example, Banshees should have gotten a Furious Charge Exarch skill (that affects the unit). Scorpions should have an always infiltrate rule and be immune to Rending and Choppa Close Combat effects.

Make Vipers closed top.

But that is pretty much it. I wold like people to stop comparing Eldar to Space Marines, because the playstyle is so different that points values between unit are hard to compare properly. If anything I would compare them with Tau or IG.

Whats all the fuss about Wraith Lord heavy weapons? Presumably the rule is that 2 weapons of the same type become twin linked only. With no limit to having 2 different weapons. Why is it such a big deal to have 2 seperate scatter lasers, star cannon etc. I've always fielded two seperate types of heavy weapon on my models, regardless of race.

For example crisis suits have the same rule...

But does that make them tactically useless? No not at all. Far from it they are some of the most useful units in the Tau army.

Theres more than one kind of weapon for dealing with one kind of situation, and i find it better to have two different weapons for 2 kinds of situations. If I'm kitted up to fight only tanks how will i deal with a huge mob of light infantry?

Like wise, if I'm beefed up to slaughter soft fleshy things, how am i going to handle that steel bohemouth ahead of me?

Eldar have always been a weaker army in respect to armour etc. They are a dying race hanging onto their tattered realm, the glory of the eldar is long gone and I think the changes in the new codex reflect this perfectly.

And come on HBMC the old eldar codex was a joke! And the craftworld supplement was a total waste of time. Your  seriously telling me that you'd prefer this rubbsih and the old models to whats been provided now. That maybe fine for power gamers and tourny nuts but I'd rather have something that is character driven and balanced.

As to your comment about all GW codexs being rubbish, have you not read Codex Space Marines, or Tau Empire. these are two great examples of recently made codexes that are lovely books to read, and good rules.

 

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>keezus </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Laz: Out of curiosity, your posts seem to involve lots of farseer buffs - in particular, fortune and doom. How do you aim to maximize returns from your farseers - espescially since "fortune" is a 6" power? This is very constraining if the Farseer is indeed 0-1, and annoying at best if you can have 2 "buff bubbles", since to fortune something, the Farseer is literally attached to that unit at the hip.

I'm under the impression that farseers are not 0-1. However, I'm not even sure if I'll field more than one seer as the avatar looks very promising (not to mention I'm getting the forge world model)

I mention doom / fortune / guide as the designers have this foremost in their mind when adjusting / creating new units and abilities.

my seer will likely  be bike mounted and he'll be assigned a specific  task to accomplish. With spirit stones he'll be tossing a fortune and doom each turn. In my old list the seer was assgined to the scorpion unit thus making the maximum benifit of fotune each turn. Since the new rules make spirit stones actually affordable I could then doom their target for example.

There is also nothing wrong with "attaching a farseer at the hip" to a unit. Many people attached a seer on a bike to babysit their innacurate prism in the old codex....I see no difference here. 

You need to figure out where your seer will serve you best and utilize him in that role.

Lazarus.

GW has put lots of handy roadblocks in the way of specialized "tactics" based armies:

1.  Build a tank heavy list - get penalized with 50% hull-down, only L3 terrain blocks LOS, inconsistent deployment 1/3 of games due to Escalation.  Transports do not count as scoring units.

2.  Build an elite infantry list - get penalized with no screening.  Target priority is a joke, with vehicles automatically ignoring it and Ld10 failing tests less than 8% of the time.  Too slow if on foot, and penalized with Escalation and non-scoring taxis if mounted.

3.  Normal mounted assault army - penalized by the "wait a turn" syndrome as well as the usual vehicle shenanigans (only L3 blocks LOS, non scoring, escalation etc)

4.  Fast mounted assault army - penalized by 3/4 wounds on destruction of their taxis as well as the usual vehicle shenanigans.  Skimmer mounted armies get the added bonus of not being able to shield your own troops.

5.  Foot based horde army (i.e. 80+ bodies) - unless they infiltrate en-masse, penalized by no-screening, shoot the best ones, general lacklustre toughness (sisters aside), brutalized by enemy rapidfire.

Other mechanics that are interesting but just don't work in V4 are:  Pinning, tank-shock and "No Escape" - which would be interesting tactical choices, if they actually accomplished anything - all of them happening once in a blue moon.  Pinning seems to be almost universally overvalued by GW across all codecies.

Mechanics which are absolutely busted in V4 are:  Ordinance due to the auto-place and scatter - which means that there is always a 1/3 chance of perfect result, and a better than even chance of doing 'something' - which is lacking in every other gun type.  As well, deepstrike seems to be almost a "free" or "rebate" style upgrade compared to infiltrate - which is also too readily available, and not restricted to models on foot!

So getting back to the topic at hand, the Eldar codex wouldn't seem to be so one-trick-pony if the basic ruleset didn't make the use of the "fluffy" units a fool's errand.

Gundammecha:  You're not paying full price for that second gun on the crisis suit.

5 man reaper squads can take on the ubiquitus 6 man tac squads now quite easily, close to wiping out one a turn, while with their range and armour saves fearing little in return. It made them better by degrees now that ap4 can't wipe them out.

And it has to be a little hard to create a codex that can take on the marines, and yet still be balanced against the other armies that sometimes show up. We do all of our comparisons against marine types, but look how much better DAs are against all other opponents now. Shuriken storm will average 13 gaunts or 9 orks dead in one round of shooting if I figured that right. Eldar definately are going to be an interesting and hard army to face on the tabletop, with a lot more options that are viable in games.

I think harlequins as a best unit are a knee jerk reaction. They are very expensive to field, and can be a bomb. I will still field Banshees and Scorpions as they have their uses and in a lot of situations can be more survivable. Once the codex has been played for awhile I can see them dropping off in popularity. But for a lot of us it is the return of a very awesome and characterful part of the Eldar race. The models are great, the rules fitting.

I don't like the cost of twin-linking because it doesn't make sense to me. Twin linked doesn't make the weapon twice as good. Do Marine dreads pay twice the points for the twin linked las-cannon? or autocannon? Do they figure the cost this way across the board? It doesn't seem so.

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>Mahu </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

And that whole Falcon scoing nonsence is a result of long work hours...

Completely  understood. I pulled two doubles this last week.

I see a lot of people on this forum forgetting that when you field an Army, you are doing just that fielding an Army. Vacuum Hammer is good, but only to the extent of knowing what your individual units can do. Movement, Terrain, Flanking, Combined Arms, Synergy, and Speed, are things a lot of people seem to forget. Eldar is a combined arms finesse force, where half your victory is in your army selection.

It's certianly a hard habit to break.

Make Aspects Better against their entended targets, for example, Banshees should have gotten a Furious Charge Exarch skill (that affects the unit). Scorpions should have an always infiltrate rule and be immune to Rending and Choppa Close Combat effects.

I'll agree with the furious charge....however, now that we have doom it's not needed. As far a scorpions go.....that would make them just plain sick when combined with fortune....I can't agree there.

Make Vipers closed top.

I was seriously hoping for some type of vyper improvements in this new dex. Clos topped as you suggest along with a deepstrike option perhaps? However, the changes made will only serve to put them on the shelf I'm affraid.

But that is pretty much it. I wold like people to stop comparing Eldar to Space Marines, because the playstyle is so different that points values between unit are hard to compare properly. If anything I would compare them with Tau or IG.

Everything  is compared to marines as it is the yardstick that everything  gets compared to. MEQ's account for such a huge percentage of the playing field that it's not even funny. I didn't even know how to act at the last RTT when my avengers got to fire at some storm troopers....wow, I actually wound & kill some of those things (lol)

No matter what you compare things to you must at least take the rest of the list into consideration when doing so. Look at dark eldar warriors compared to guardians. They have bs4 as standard and 24" guns for the same price. Thre can pack crap loads of darklances and splinter cannons into the list.....but you can't really look at it that way can you?

Lazarus.

Keezus, I think one of the main problems is that marines are so played. Most of the special rules benefit them the most. Target priority can be a problem in a lot of other army lists, but since marines are the standard, we don't see it often. It's the same with pinning and a lot of other rules.

Is anyone actually thinking of fielding warwalkers? I'll be getting the new models just for completions sake but I can't really see myself using them...

3 walkers w/ scatter lasers is what I'd likely try just for fun if I had to.

3 walkers w/ shuriken cannons has got to be super cheap but I'm affraid that the weapon's low range will help to kill off the walkers....

Any thoughts? Point costs etc?

Lazarus.

Posted By Lazarus on 10/11/2006 9:15 AM

Make Vipers closed top.

I was seriously hoping for some type of vyper improvements in this new dex.

They improved the points cost... uh...  wait... 

Posted By Lazarus on 10/11/2006 9:24 AM

Is anyone actually thinking of fielding warwalkers? I'll be getting the new models just for completions sake but I can't really see myself using them...

3 walkers w/ scatter lasers is what I'd likely try just for fun if I had to.

3 walkers w/ shuriken cannons has got to be super cheap but I'm affraid that the weapon's low range will help to kill off the walkers....

Any thoughts? Point costs etc?

Lazarus.

I thought I remember folk talking about using 'em for COD, but I could be mistaken. That might be an interesting choice, though...  

Laz:  I used twin scatterlaser walkers in V3 - while they threw out a mean amount of firepower the first turn they step into shooting position (avg 21 shots), the lack of guaranteed hull down and the BS3 med-strength and low AP value of the shots means that:  (a) you aren't killing enough infantry to save the squad from an a$$-raping on your opponent's turn or (b) you didn't glance that tank.

Also, a squad of warwalkers is overkill against skimmers, and while absolutely disgusting against lightly armoured troops, shuriken catapults are only fractionally less effective...

While scout and closed top helps, they suffer from a lack of focus since:  "range too short at the best price" (shuricannon), "weapon not strong enough for the cost at the middle price", (scatterlaser)  and "too few shots, and too expensive at the highest price" (all other options).

I usually field one or two war walkers armed with either scatter and bright lance or scatter and starcannon. I am not sure I will use the second load out anymore and would go with twin scatter. They usually sit back in the back and provide support for the rest of the army. I use them quite a bit in softening up large units and shooting at land speeders and other light vehicles.

Posted By Toreador on 10/11/2006 9:59 AM
I usually field one or two war walkers armed with either scatter and bright lance or scatter and starcannon. I am not sure I will use the second load out anymore and would go with twin scatter. They usually sit back in the back and provide support for the rest of the army. I use them quite a bit in softening up large units and shooting at land speeders and other light vehicles.

Interestingly, the question seems to be geared more towards:

5x Reapers = ~200 vs 2 twin Scatterlaser War Walkers = ~200

Both are obviously non-starters compared to the falcon in terms of flexibility. 

Scatterlaser Warwalkers Pros/Cons

The warwalkers are more mobile than reapers.
Scout
S6 vs S5
2 glances on speeders at 8 shots
50% hull down at best
Low AV and easy to shake/stun
Low BS

Dark Reapers Pros/Cons

Can get cover saves and benefit from fortune.
Have 48" range vs 38"
AP3 vs AP5
BS4
2 2/9 glances vs speeders on 10 shots
Can't be shaken/stunned
Each casualty degrades firepower
No move and fire
May flee

Yeah I remember remarking on the viability of walkers in COD.

But because of the environment, its a whole new ballpark and different units come to light.

That said, its a tough call what to take HS wise in COD, as all options are viable as far as wraithlords, warwalkers, falcons.

I still think that walkers are the weakest choice, but they do have their uses. I think in an all comers list for COD, it would be foolish to discount walkers out of hand without serious consideration.

As a rule, infantry are better for survivabilty than vehicles, but walkers reward the careful player who chooses their fights with a high rate of fire.

Though, I would mot pay any more points for a walker than the scatter laser, as you know they will fall anyways, so why spend even more points on a unit that will fall in short course.

maneuvering in city fight will be a pain though, as three large bases will be stupid to form right in dense terrain. I think that the same will hold true for warwalkers as does crisis suits. 2 models in the unit being optimum for maneuvering purposes.

Though I have to say in Keezus example is a bit off if the rumors are true.

If the rumours are true, then you will be able to field 3 warwalkers with twin scatter at 180 points. But only slight adjustments need to be made for calculations which any 2nd grader should be able to do without keezus modifying his post.

I'll be fielding twin scatterlaser warwalkers as replacements for my single scatterlaser vipers. I like to get a few heavy weapon platforms in the enemy flanks if I can, to take out indirect fire weapons and/or long range weapons protected by terrain, which the vipers were ideal for. However with the vipers points increase and the fact that the warwalkers now have the scout rule they can perform that role in a comparable way. Also the warwalkers are closed topped and three can put out can put out 24 S6 shots per turn. I'm won over. The volume of fire is arguably the most important factor though because with the new rules 24 shots will average out to about 10 wounds which will force your opponent to roll seperate armor saves for their heavy/special weapons, leaders, etc. Also the problem with the shuriken cannon is that it will pull you into range of most small fire weapons which will bring trouble.

With regards to the arguement that the other heavy choices are better I don't necessarily agree. Arguably the falcon is the best tank in the game and the best heavies choice, but I still don't like to use more than two leaving myself with one more choice. The wraithlord doesn't appeal to me as much as it used to. It needs to be babysat, costs more, and there are too many rending weapons running around now. Dark reapers are the other Heavy choice I still like but for a different role. For me they're MEQ killers and that's about it.

Just one side note. With the Eldar I think that talking about survivability is an interesting issue. In the previous edition with a combination of fortune and the fact that so many of my opponents tend to focus thier heavy weapons trying to take out my more survivable units, such as the falcon and wraithlord, and have a tendency to ignore my more vulnerable dark reapers and vipers despite the fact that they are putting out more firepower overall and have done more damage to their army .

In CoD, it's the Wraithlord hands doen. A toughness 8 monstroud creature taking a building? Priceless.

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>Mahu </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

In CoD, it's the Wraithlord hands doen. A toughness 8 monstroud creature taking a building? Priceless.

I did that last night....fortune the lord if you want to be mean (lol)

Yeah, my assessment of the walkers is that I won't buse them much....not sure why I buy them though...lol

Lazarus.

OK, I'm trying to get this whole "it's the whole army thing", but I've tried many, many combinations and I just don't see it. It still comes down to lists (1850 pts) with either:
1) all of the same killer type (farseers, 3 falcons, 2 harlies/1 FD in falcon or FD in WS/1 max harlie w/ WS, DA or Gaurdian bikes just enough to be legal and live a turn or two)
or
2) an army with mixed units that just doesn't hold-up.

I find the first incredibly boring (as well as expensive since most of those units didn't exist or were poor choices before) and the second--well why field an army that is going to just get kicked around.

The other thing I don't get is there is a constant mention of this unit or that unit being great with fortune or doom, but how are you getting all those farseer's into the list with the points restriction? Again, while at first glance the Eldar seem incredibly rich in choices, analysis seems to say just the opposite--take from very few choices or get hammered.

Now, my apologies to those who don't like comparison to SM. I've very little experience with other armies. So, the point is, again, compared to SM, they just seem predictable whereas SM are incredibly diverse and still playable in lots of configurations. So, if the eldar are predictable to the people who know the armies, how can they not be predictable to our opponents. Granted, that doesn't make them weak, but does make them boring. And, more to the point, is this how GW does business? If so, maybe it's time to shelf 40K and go with another game.

Please, someone tell me I'm wrong (with examples).

Hobo1430 - You hit it right on the head. - Then, I could be wrong as well.

I find it very telling that on the eve of GWs triumphant return to Q4 profits that they release the long anticipated Eldar codex...

...complete with repackaged products pushing competitive tournament armies running anywhere from $700-$1000 cdn (due to the requirements of bikes, tanks and harlequins)...

...that maybe veteran players are somewhat underwhelmed with the fact that they could conceivably rebuy a significant portion of army (for many times the cost of what a tournament sized army costs for their erstwhile competitor), only to produce an army made up of a small cross section of the total armylist...

Hopefully kids will buy this up. I already rebought a huge chunk of eldar stuff during V3 (I'm sure I own over 150 various aspect warriors). I have plentiful amounts of everything in the codex other than support batteries, bikes, spears and prisms... With such a diverse cross section, you'd think that I could put a diverse list together...

Of firedragons in falcons

Thanks GW.

Fool me once... shame on you.
Fool me twice... shame on me.

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>hobo1430 </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

OK, I'm trying to get this whole "it's the whole army thing", but I've tried many, many combinations and I just don't see it. It still comes down to lists (1850 pts) with either:
1) all of the same killer type (farseers, 3 falcons, 2 harlies/1 FD in falcon or FD in WS/1 max harlie w/ WS, DA or Gaurdian bikes just enough to be legal and live a turn or two)
or
2) an army with mixed units that just doesn't hold-up.

I disagree. You have said that you haven't played Eldar that long....could that have something to do with it? They do not play in the same fashion that a marine army would for example. I have been playing eldar for a very long time and have won with them in numerous configurations over the years.

I find the first incredibly boring (as well as expensive since most of those units didn't exist or were poor choices before) and the second--well why field an army that is going to just get kicked around.

What your opponents are fielding could have much to do with this. There are many factors to consider when trying to figure out why your list is not performing to satisfaction...

The other thing I don't get is there is a constant mention of this unit or that unit being great with fortune or doom, but how are you getting all those farseer's into the list with the points restriction?

You doom an enemy  unit. From what I understand anything shooting at it will get to re-roll wounds.....that sounds like good coverage to me and goes along with that whole combined arms strategy doesn't it? Fortune will be used on what needs it most. Obvioulsy you can't have it everywhere and I never meant to imply that. You can't fit every  unit into your list every time anyways right? With the ability to take 2 seers you could be using 2 dooms and 2 fortunes a turn. Currently I use a single seer who casts fortune and most of my opponents hate that already....you put it on the right unit and it becomes very effective.

Again, while at first glance the Eldar seem incredibly rich in choices, analysis seems to say just the opposite--take from very few choices or get hammered.

We have more viable choices now than before. Sure, some choices will be better but the others are certianly more playable than in the last codex. At least that's my opinion...

Now, my apologies to those who don't like comparison to SM. I've very little experience with other armies. So, the point is, again, compared to SM, they just seem predictable whereas SM are incredibly diverse and still playable in lots of configurations. So, if the eldar are predictable to the people who know the armies, how can they not be predictable to our opponents. Granted, that doesn't make them weak, but does make them boring. And, more to the point, is this how GW does business? If so, maybe it's time to shelf 40K and go with another game.

Eldar are predictable  compared to space marines? Predictable in which way? I don't think my army is any more predictable than anyone else's army. I can pretty much look at your army that you put on the table and tell you what you will try and do with it. That's just a matter of knowing everyones codex and what it is capable of....

If I had to compare eldar to marines about which one was more "boring" it would certianly be marines....they all look to much alike (lol)

Most of the reasons people compare Eldar (or anything) to marines is that it is the most common opponent you will be facing. People get soo hung up on this that they sometimes can't see the game as a whole anymore....

Lazarus.

it really depends on your environment and opponents Hobo. GT tournies can be a lot different than RT tournies and even local games. Your opponents can dramatically change your play style.

I have never really played much of a mech force. I usually do well against my opponents. I always use Dire Avengers, Banshees and usually Scorpions. WarWalkers show up in my list from time to time. I have taken some local tournies with a mostly infantry list. I can number crunch all I want, but I choose my armies based more on what happens after games. I switch things around and adapt to what happens.

Theory is great, but your mileage may vary a lot. The internet is more of a top level discussion of the armies. How would army do against the best of the best army B. You may never encounter said army in normal play, but that is what we compare it against. I have absolutely no luck with some units other people find very affective, on the other hand I really like some units people find bad. (some units like the old shining spears were just horrible no matter)

So really, pick and choose your own way. Until we see Harlies in action, or new Fire Dragons we won't know how they will actually do in games. People adapt and respond to changes in lists to make their own armies better.

And every game has it's issues with people taking what is efficient. Take Warmachine for example and Hordes. You see a lot of the same armies with little changes here and there form different factions. There are some solos you see in almost all armies, the only reason some people don't take them is because "everyone" does. There is a lot of cookie cutter in all games. People gravitate to the better performing units in any list that is effective against the opponents in their area. Almost any game is that way.

And really, everything is opinion. Have fun playing what you like, not what others tell you to.

So really, choose your own way.

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal">Posted By</td> <td>keezus </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

I find it very telling that on the eve of GWs triumphant return to Q4 profits that they release the long anticipated Eldar codex...



...complete with repackaged products pushing competitive tournament armies running anywhere from $700-$1000 cdn (due to the requirements of bikes, tanks and harlequins)...

This is nothing new.....you don't think it was just a coincidence that the assault cannon got great new rules along with new plastic terminators do you? Do you think that Lysander was put in the codex to seel terminator armies to people to use? Old news from GW....I dpn't like their practices in this regard but I'm certianly not surprised by them anymore....

...that maybe veteran players are somewhat underwhelmed with the fact that they could conceivably rebuy a significant portion of army (for many times the cost of what a tournament sized army costs for their erstwhile competitor), only to produce an army made up of a small cross section of the total armylist...

Some of us have huge collection and so will not have to buy alot of this stuff. (bikes / spears / prisms / avengers etc.) However, take heart in knowing we had to already pay for this stuff and then watch it sit on the shelf for years & years (lol)

Also, not everyone plays in tournaments. To those players this codex is truly awesome. Most seem to forget that this is supposed to be a fun game where you play with little toy soldiers....it doesn't always have to be serious. 

Lazarus.