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.

Really not a fan of the new models. The turret looks like someone glued a cutoff Vyper on top and the Prism cannon is ridiculously large. If they were changing the prism cannon focused shot into a single shot weapon it might make sense. Nightspinner has always been rather meh in my eyes, one thing we lack is viable AP3 and we aren't really lacking in the High Strength crap AP boat... nor heavy options.

I think the way to get people to use them over the Prism is to give them Squadrons. Take two Prisms, and a Squadron of Night Spinners.

Aduro wrote:I think the way to get people to use them over the Prism is to give them Squadrons. Take two squadrons of Prisms, and a Squadron of Night Spinners.

Fixed that for ya

Well, I doubt the Prism will get new rules, just the new fig. The Night Spinner on the other hand being the whole new vehicle with brand new rules is more open to it, plus you need the reason to take it over a Prism. If you can take Prisms in Squadrons then people will just take three Squadrons of Prisms.

Aramus wrote:I think that rending does capture the flavor of the weapon fairly effectively, and the dangerous terrain test is cool too. I would have liked to see it ignore cover though.

I doubt they will see use over the Prism unless they are significantly cheaper, and I believe someone above me posted that they are the same points cost.

They also cause a difficult terrain test. I think that's the really big deal here. Imagine the following - a unit of assault marines is hit by the Nightspinner. If the owning player moves the unit every model receives an auto-hitting rending attack (dangerous terrain), and after that it might fudge it's difficult terrain roll anyway and only move 1 or 2 inches! Hit a really expensive unit and you might tempt your opponent not to move at all! Either way it's win-win for the Eldar player.

Let's do the mathhammer for 2 Fire Prisms (1x twin-linked large blast, S6 Ap3) vs 2 Nightspinners (2x twin-linked large blast, S6 Ap- rending, dangerous terrain test) shooting at squads of 10 MEQs, assuming they hit 5 marines per large blast on average (which I think is fair considering it's twin-linked);

MEQs out of cover

Fire Prisms
5 hit
4.16r wounds (5 * 0.83r)
= 4.2 killed

Night Spinners
10 hit
6.6r regular wounds (10 * 0.6r)
2.2r failed armor saves (6.6r * 0.3r)
1.6r rending wounds (10 * 0.16r)
= 3.8 killed

..the remaining 8 marines in each squad hit by the Nightspinners take a dangerous terrain test;
2.6r failed dangerous terrain tests (16 * 0.16r)
= 6.5 killed (3.8 + 2.7)


MEQs in cover

Fire Prisms
5 hit
4.16r wounds (5 * 0.83r)
2.083r failed cover saves (4.16r * 0.5)
= 2.1 killed

Night Spinners
10 hit
6.6r regular wounds (10 * 0.6r)
2.2r failed armor saves (6.6r * 0.3r)
1.6r rending wounds (10 * 0.16r)
0.83r failed cover saves (1.6r * 0.5)
= 3.1 killed

..the remaining 8 marines in each squad hit by the Nightspinners take a dangerous terrain test (no cover save!);
2.6r failed dangerous terrain tests (16 * 0.16r)
= 5.8 killed (3.1 + 2.7)


Sorry about that, that was grossly generalised and inaccurate even by the usually poor standards of mathhammer.

The Nightspinner beats the Fire Prism against infantry, and it forces difficult terrain tests, and it doesn't lose it's oomph against MEQs when one explodes (one dead Fire Prism = no more Ap3). Of course, the Fire Prism still has the versatility as anti-tank so I suppose the use of the Nightspinner is determined by how many Fire Dragons you spam in your list!

/unnecessarily long answer

Kudos Rube on the Mathhammer, opens the eyes a bit. That is of course if the marines move vs just standing there next turn and it that is even part of the rules for them.

Any truth to the rumors that Nightspinners can carry 6 models? If not, no big loss, but if it's true it gives your Dire Avenger transport something to do while it waits out of LoS.

Bummer if the rumors are true. Did the Eldar really need another S6 weapon? (I'm deployed and don't have an Eldar codex handy). Isn't a Deathspinner AP - ? The BS of the tank will also be another deciding factor BS3 or BS4?

All in all, not really getting all that excited by the rules.

If it's a blast weapon then WS won't be that important, and if it's S6 Rending then that's Assault Cannon territory.

Nurglitch wrote:If it's a blast weapon then WS won't be that important,

No kidding, Weapon Skill won't be important.

With Blast auto-hit 1/3 of the time, even mediocre Ballistic Skill isn't a huge deal.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:If it's a blast weapon then WS won't be that important,

No kidding, Weapon Skill won't be important.

With Blast auto-hit 1/3 of the time, even mediocre Ballistic Skill isn't a huge deal.

They're twin-linked, so auto-hitting 55% of the time. It has no transport capacity, according to rumor.

One quick thing- The Fire Prism is gone on the website.

For Aussies maybe, but GW website updating hasn't got round to this side of the planet yet...

just been on the aussie website, no mention of the fire prism anywhere, not even listed


link please

EDIT: Oh you mean its gone, not its gone on the site

New models won't pop up for pre-order until the 10th of May, so there's still some time to get an old model.

ruminant wrote:EDIT: Oh you mean its gone, not its gone on the site

Oops, my mistake too. Bloody English language

Yeh, us Australians are very confusing.

Glad you aware of it


10th May is that a confirmed date or just a guess

Confirmed.

large blast rending would rather see double shot than twin link though. might have to actually bust out my forgeworld one.

but god couldnt they give it ap 6 rending instead of ap- rending i'm sure most engines wouldnt like a bunch of super strong monofiliment wire in the air intakes.

I'm gonna pick up at least one of the kits. One thing that I've been thinking about the Fire Prism though, is I really liked how the gun was "offset" to the side of the turret, and this one looks like it's a lot closer to centerline. Not 100% sure if I'll like that, will have to see more pictures of it.

Gonna be getting one, that's for sure though.

I've been out of the loop for awhile, but isn't AP - a penalty on the vehicle damage chart?

Twin linked could be interesting, but again, did the Eldar really need another S6 weapon?

I like the model, just not sure how useful it will be. At least the kit also contains the Fire Prism which is a popular tank. I think it will sell, but just disappointed with the Night Spinner rumors.

It's probably going to be a long while before I can get back to Eldar, but if the rumours about being able to force a difficult terrain test are true, then that makes the Night Spinner a quite interesting option. That's a very characterful way to open up a lot of strategic possibilities.

Sarigar wrote:I've been out of the loop for awhile, but isn't AP - a penalty on the vehicle damage chart?

Twin linked could be interesting, but again, did the Eldar really need another S6 weapon?

I like the model, just not sure how useful it will be. At least the kit also contains the Fire Prism which is a popular tank. I think it will sell, but just disappointed with the Night Spinner rumors.

Yes, it's an additional -1 to your roll. Agree on the S6/ no/crap AP or stupid expensive for what they do (looking at YOU starcannons!) weapons

I still wanna build one just for the looks, looks to be fairly easy to magnetize and swap out the options.

The NS looks good against infantry, but in this day and age where everything is mounted the versatility of the Fire Prism means it's more useful.

Especially as Eldar ooze anti-infantry from every bodily orifice, while the Anti-vehicle is pretty much Fire Dragons or go home, with the expensive Bright Lance. The Prism at least has the option.


I'll get one anyway, for the model.

As i said over in TO, I hate both of them. The Prism might not be too bad with some modifications, but that Night-Spinner is an abomination. The FW version looks wayyy better and probably won't cost much more. I'm betting they'll charge £30, which means i'll just buy the version that looks twice as good for £5 more.

I don't play Eldar, but my buddy's tanks look like pimp mobiles because of their funny tilt backward. Too top heavy. The longer turret should keep them from tipping back.

Eldar are not supposed to be "Kickin' it, old school. West side!"

west sigh-eede

My eldar kick it old school, in their bright pink grav tanks

Don't want to derail this thread but aren't there supposed to be other tanks in the Spearhead release? Why have only the eldar stuff been leaked?

Kroothawk wrote:

olympia wrote:Of course this is a disappointment. A new turret does not make a new tank.

Tell that an IG player looking at the "new" models for Chimera, Basilisk and Leman Russ

Yo!

Though at least the new Chimera now has all the codex turret options in the box; ditto the new Russ & Demolisher kits giving you all the variants between the two kits (and being excessively modular, by all accounts).

I can't excuse the Basilisk, however.....