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.

Savnock wrote:

puma713 wrote:

This is hilarious to me. If you want to discuss this further, let's head over to the Tactics forum and discuss why this statement is made of fail.

Uh, yeah. I'll take that one. See you over there. In fact, I'll be happy to give a demo in person. You go to tourneys? Show up with a list including Reapers to Adepticon. After the peanut gallery is done laughing, let's have a game.

My third round opponent took the same stance in 'ard Boyz. He forfeited before we finished the game. He actually did laugh at my list. Verbatim: "You take reapers!?" Then I proceeded to beat his face in with my two static units of reapers. Yes, I go to tournies. Yes, I'd take Reapers in any Eldar list I'm playing, even fast moving ones. Although, I've had even more success with them now-a-days playing Footdar. Again, your myopic point-of-view is similar to that of the BoLS article writers: Eldar are a static army and if you take x, y or z, you're asking to lose. The contrary, I'd say that Eldar are one of the most dynamic armies and you can shift focus from certain units onto other ones quite easily. In the last tournament I played in, I lost 3 reapers - the entire tournament. Why? Because there were other threats people were dealing with. The reapers didn't pose as much of a threat as other things I had. But, the reapers 10 Str. 5, AP3 from 48" away paid for themselves in every game.

Before you're certain that your experiences equate to the experiences of every Eldar player in the world, maybe you should consider others' points of view and perhaps realize that they're different from yours and from those of people that tell you what's good and what isn't.

Savnock wrote:Reapers blow, and even skillful players will have an uphill battle using them.

This is a gross overgeneralization. How many skilled players have you played in the world? 10? 20? 50? 100? Enough, I assume, to get a good general concensus of what every skilled player across all playstyles thinks of Reapers. Your comment is pretentious and rude. I am a skilled player and I do take reapers. Because you don't see their worth, doesn't mean others don't. Stop thinking inside the box that powergamers and netlists tell you you should be thinking in.

Savnock wrote:

You do realize that Eldar aren't space marines right? They're not supposed to fill every role on the battlefield. That's what makes them a unique and challenging army. I have wonderful success with Dark Reapers - because they fill a role I have taken them to fill. But, I digress.

Matching your statement, I will summarize the faults that are obvious for Reapers. Immobile T3 infantry unit that costs 35 points/wound. Far outmatched by Prisms, which compete for the same Force Org slot. Dude, everyone knows this.

Yep, which is why the Reapers work so well for me, I suppose. No one is ready for them. Everyone is ready for Fire Prisms. In the 5th Ed. world of mech, seeing very little mech can be an unsettling thing.

Attempting to salvage a fail unit will not make you look like a more skillfull player. It makes you look like one who frequently brings knives to a gunfight.

These kinds of statements are what keep new players from trying new lists and trying new things. Perhaps also the reason that you see thirty of the same army build at a tournament because some guy on some forum on the internet said that x, y, z unit was the win! I feel like I'm talking to a WoW powergamer Guild. Don't spec ice/arcane! Fire is the win! Ice is the fail! Please. Spec the way you want. Field what you want in 40K. Don't remove reapers because some guy tells you "everyone says they suck!". That's fine. You can tell me they suck. It won't stop them from shredding through the MEQ that's trying to hack its way through my Harlequins/Dragons/Avatar, etc. trying to get to them.

Sorry for the derail, OP.

Edit: Also, the e-peen measuring, "My list could beat up your list" challenging is amusing too. Even if I did "meet" you at a tournament to play and you tabled me - it wouldn't change my opinion on reapers. I've been using them for years with great success. And I've lost before. It's not something that is new or shocking or appalling or makes me question my inner core. I would question the rest of my list before I did the Reapers.

puma713 wrote:

...Your comment is pretentious and rude. I am a skilled player and I do take reapers....

..rawr, rawr rawr, etc. etc. etc.

Wow. Major misunderstand there. Perhaps your snarkometer is miscalibrated. Welcome to Dakka. This is how we discuss. A certain amount of good-natured smacktalk is forum standard. Please down-adjust your sensitivity levels and enjoy the camaraderie of strident disagreement. My statements will not "discourage new players" and should certainly not offend an experienced player. They are discussion, that's all- just like most of the posts on this forum. Agree to disagree, bud.

The "e-peen" challenge was neither rude nor pretentious: it was a sporting challenge. I'd be happy to play you in either tourney or Vassal format. Playing toy soldiers tends to dispel ridiculous interwebs disagreements quickly.

Back on Reapers (and thus kinda relating to the Spectres, and thus vaguely OT): You're right, a good player can use any unit to do okay. Reapers can fit in a certain playstyle, especially in friendlies. That's why I mentioned Blackmoor, who does well with a mixed footdar that most Eldar players find impossible to keep alive. I maintain, and most Eldar players will probably back me, that static high-price infantry are an easy target, and that 5th ed. really favors hordes of mech.

Yes, mech-free can be refreshing. And great, you've used it well. As I have used Prisms to wipe out units of Reapers reap-etedly (pun intended). Anecdotal evidence from one of your games (or mine) does not prove anything. In fact, it's sort of futile to attempt to prove anything in an internet discussion. What is not futile is playing games against each other and seeing how things turn out (aka playtesting). Mathhammer can also come in somewhat handy when discussing this stuff, rather than strident disagreement. Against most of the competitive builds out there, I'm guessing mathhammer favors the Prisms on both survivability and hitting power- especially in a list with 8-10 other identical hulls on the table. Should we really hash this out on the tactics forums, it would be good to corral one of the mathharmmer geeks to help us.

Anyways, what we do NOT need is another Heavy Support choice for Eldar. And most of the FA choices are marginal at best (yes Spiders are okay, but if anyone starts whiteknighting Hawks I give up). Spectres are very mobile jetpack units packing firepower probably not superior to what a Vyper with EML/SC throws out. So putting them in FA would be a good idea.

Can I ask a slightly tangential question:


Does every Aspect need a Phoenix Lord?


In my mind - and I might be wrong here - the Phoenix Lords represent the first of the first Aspect Shrines ('cept Karandras, because Arhra was first), and that there weren't any Warp Spider/Shining Spear/Slicing Orb/Leaping Marshmellow Phoenix Lords because they weren't old enough to have them.

Is this not correct?



Oh, and make War Walkers Fast Attack. That would be a nice change and stop HS from being so clogged up.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Can I ask a slightly tangential question:


Does every Aspect need a Phoenix Lord?


In my mind - and I might be wrong here - the Phoenix Lords represent the first of the first Aspect Shrines ('cept Karandras, because Arhra was first), and that there weren't any Warp Spider/Shining Spear/Slicing Orb/Leaping Marshmellow Phoenix Lords because they weren't old enough to have them.

Is this not correct?

That's basically my take. Most Phoenix Lords are aspect founders, but not all aspect founders are Phoenix Lords. To become a Phoenix Lord you have to be nigh unto a creature of legend. The Slicing Orbs of Zandros may be an old aspect, but they aren't very popular and their exarchs simply haven't accumulated the generations of experience and legends needed to embody their aspect as completely as the Phoenix Lords do.

Oh, and make War Walkers Fast Attack. That would be a nice change and stop HS from being so clogged up.

I could go with that.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Can I ask a slightly tangential question:


Does every Aspect need a Phoenix Lord?


In my mind - and I might be wrong here - the Phoenix Lords represent the first of the first Aspect Shrines ('cept Karandras, because Arhra was first), and that there weren't any Warp Spider/Shining Spear/Slicing Orb/Leaping Marshmellow Phoenix Lords because they weren't old enough to have them.

Is this not correct?

That's my understanding of the set up.

Oh, and make War Walkers Fast Attack. That would be a nice change and stop HS from being so clogged up.

Agreed.

Or maybe even make them a support unit for units of Guardians/aspect warriors/whatever. So you can buy a unit of 1-3 of them for each Guardian squad you have or similar.

By my understanding the founder of an Aspect is the Phoenix Lord for that Aspect (notable exception being Arhra/Karandras who took over following that minor hiccup) which means by definition every Aspect has a Phoenix Lord. I always thought the whole 'not old enough to have a PL' argument was more to do with GW not wanting to do a PL for that particular Aspect (for whatever reason). There is no real reason why they can't add PL's for the Aspects currently missing them if they decide to and given the changes that 40k design ethos has undergone since the last Eldar update I almost expect the next Eldar codex to have Phoenix Lords for every Aspect. In the case of Forgeworld there is an added complication. They generally do a leader type character for many of their units, usually at least one per side per book, but a standard Exarch isn't really going to work (due to the trapped in the Path thing among others) which means making new Phoenix Lords if you are doing a Aspect character. Aside from maybe a unique Autarch character pretty much all the other leader options are well are truly covered by GW and Forgeworld already (they have ruled out Jetbike characters for the moment I think).

Somewhat off topic, but I'm hoping for War Walkers move to Fast Attack with enclosed/bigger weapon type options to move them to back to Heavy. Vypers should be upgrade options for Jetbike units (as well as being available as separate units). They could possibly change to being Attack Bike style multi wound heavy weapon platforms but I expect the Venom to show up in the Eldar codex as well so I'm not sure how that would work (having a multi wound model and a transport vehicle both based off the same chassis in the same army would be incredibly confusing).

Powerguy, I think 40k, like most fantasy from Tolkien onwards, obeys the general 'older is better' idea. Part of why the phoenix lords are the Phoenix Lords is that they've been around for successive lifetimes. So presumably if new ones were introduced, the writers would replace the previous background and say that there had been 8-9 or whatever all along.

I agree with both comments, that war walkers should be fast attack and that vypers should be available to jetbike units as upgrades. At any rate they need some sort of points break or rules change, currently they're too fragile to justify their points cost. At BS3, and without any of the most destructive weapons that you usually see taken on SM landspeeders (which are all-around better units, pisses me off) they aren't great now.

I think dark reapers can be very good. Although they get killed more easily than a vehicle, and cost more, there's no denying that especially with a tempest launcher exarch they go through marines like a dose of laxative. No other eldar unit can really equal them in that area. I can see how taking plenty of tank cracking options in troops/elites, and including 2 units of reapers, could be a viable strategy.

Yeah I realise that, among other examples the Eldar have been on the decline since the Fall and the Imperium still looks backwards for new technology rather than forwards. The Phoenix Lords in the codex are obviously the founders of their respective aspects, and as such older and more widespread Aspects are represented. All I'm saying is that by my understanding the founder of each Aspect is a Phoenix Lord and as such there is nothing really stopping GW adding the missing ones in if they decide to. Certainly the Phoenix Lords for these Aspects might not be as powerful as the founding group (Asurmen etc) but that doesn't mean they won't be powerful warriors in their own right. From a fluff perspective you can justify them being missing from the current codex because of this (less of their Aspect so less likely to show up, possibly not as strong as the other main aspect PL's etc) but equally you could also say that GW just didn't put the effort into designing (rules wise and model wise) and fleshing out the background for these aspects in the update from 3rd to 4th.

Back up topic though, I quite like the idea of these Shadow Spectres tbh. There are still quite a few gaps in the Aspect range as far as specialisations go and long ranged anti tank is certainly one of them (and one which is very important in this edition). I don't have any real issue with them being Heavy though actually despite the crowding in that slot. I'm not expecting them to be jump packs, more likely to be jet packs ala Tau, so they won't be particularly mobile. It lets Dark Reapers become the long ranged infantry killers and the Spectres can be the long ranged vehicle killers. Ignoring the fact that the both struggle atm, both Banshees and Scorpions have existed in the Elites slot for a while with a similar kind of specialised focus (which is what Eldar is all about after all).

Assuming you aim to cover everything, from a gameplay perspective that leaves a close range shooting anti infantry aspect (to complement Fire Dragons, Avengers are supposed to be allrounders), a pilot/vehicle based aspect (a bit hard to represent), a psychic aspect (really this is Warlocks but they need fleshing out) and perhaps a slower heavy assault aspect (the opposite of Shining Spears but they overlap a bit with Scorpions). So far we have seen a couple of new units in pretty much every 5th edition codex, so I'm hoping to see at least some of this next time Eldar role around.

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2010/09/27/games-day-2010-report/

Little report there.

..5,000 attendees eh ...? Hmm..

I find it amusing that that article states "Of course, it was the announcements being made about the Ultramarines movie and games that were of the most interest"

I know that the article has a footnote that states that it was written by a wargamer, but really? Surely the DE would have been considered the most important new release.

hehe, nerdragers in the comments section "Beyond this there were the usual displays of concept art and the like, which while interesting were much the same as in previous years."

Yeah... Sure...

@Goliath - geez, not everybody plays Dark Eldars, but surely everybody is interested in Moar Spaz Marinz! HURR!!!

Im still looking for Golden Demon pics besides the ones on the GW site!

And JHDD, not everybody plays DE.... yet

Til the next flavor of the day comes along anyhoos

OoieGoie wrote:

I always hear "ka-ching$" when I hear "Forge World".

I always hear " awe-sum" when I hear FW...

Savnock wrote:

Wow. Major misunderstand there. Perhaps your snarkometer is miscalibrated. Welcome to Dakka. This is how we discuss. A certain amount of good-natured smacktalk is forum standard. Please down-adjust your sensitivity levels and enjoy the camaraderie of strident disagreement. My statements will not "discourage new players" and should certainly not offend an experienced player. They are discussion, that's all- just like most of the posts on this forum. Agree to disagree, bud.

True, but to say, 'You will get laughed at, then I'll show you why your choices are poor.' (not in so many words) is not a measure of the camaraderie of a strident disagreement. It's more of a measure of 'I'm right, you're wrong.' Which is not a discussion for either of us. I suppose I took the same stance, which will got both our points-of-view and the argument nowhere. Most of your statements didn't offend me - it's how you wrote them that was offensive. Hence, I do agree to disagree.

Savnock wrote:
What is not futile is playing games against each other and seeing how things turn out (aka playtesting). Mathhammer can also come in somewhat handy when discussing this stuff, rather than strident disagreement. Against most of the competitive builds out there, I'm guessing mathhammer favors the Prisms on both survivability and hitting power- especially in a list with 8-10 other identical hulls on the table. Should we really hash this out on the tactics forums, it would be good to corral one of the mathharmmer geeks to help us.

Again, I'd agree with you here. Unfortunately, mathhammer doesn't take multitudes of factors into account and is, therefore, hypothetical at best. As you said, playtesting (which apparently we've both done with opposite results) is the best way to glean any information from a discussion such as this. But, I disagree that one game versus you will prove much of anything. If I win, it doesn't prove much about reapers or my history with them. If you win, it doesn't prove much about the opposite. What would prove the mettle between the two, I guess, would be a three-game neutral tournament against varied lists. That would provide the proof in the pudding, I think.

Savnock wrote:Anyways, what we do NOT need is another Heavy Support choice for Eldar. And most of the FA choices are marginal at best (yes Spiders are okay, but if anyone starts whiteknighting Hawks I give up). Spectres are very mobile jetpack units packing firepower probably not superior to what a Vyper with EML/SC throws out. So putting them in FA would be a good idea.

And now, we're going to start agreeing with the topic at hand. I agree - we don't need another Heavy Support choice. A start would be to move the Warwalkers into the FA slot (imo) as well as what you're suggesting. I don't use or like Vypers particularly, so I can't comment on them, but there definitely needs to be some shifting in the Eldar FOC for the next Codex, and I'm sure there will be.

Alpharius wrote:I love that Phantom, but IF I'm ever insane and/or wealthy enough to buy one... I'm holding out for the Warlock version!

Agreed - I've got the (very similar, at least at this stage) Armorcast version, so will definitely be waiting for the Warlock.

My only gripe at the moment with this prototype Phantom is the "hands" incorporated into the weapon - perhaps only a "style" thing to tie in to the current wraithlord, but I really don't belieive it's necessary in a Titan.

Padre^.

What if they get an itch in the wraith cup? Fingers could come in handy...

gorgon wrote:

Goliath wrote:

Reecius wrote:One of the sculptors (the one on the left of Mark Bedford) said that they have no plans to relalease Thunder armour or MarkII Armour, as they were only largely in use in the age of strfe and the unification of earth, so it doesn't fit in.

GRRR! Gorgon is angered!!!


Ah well. Kinda of expected it.

New aspect looks nice. Sounds like no Ad Mech in sight though, which disappoints me a bit. Although now that I think about it, FW is saving me a lot of cash with these announcements.

But look on the bright side Gorgon... When you finally get around to converting your Thunder Armor army, then you'll have an absolutely unique one!

Or at least until I catch up with you!

Valete,

JohnS

H.B.M.C. wrote:Can I ask a slightly tangential question:


Does every Aspect need a Phoenix Lord?


In my mind - and I might be wrong here - the Phoenix Lords represent the first of the first Aspect Shrines ('cept Karandras, because Arhra was first), and that there weren't any Warp Spider/Shining Spear/Slicing Orb/Leaping Marshmellow Phoenix Lords because they weren't old enough to have them.

Is this not correct?



Oh, and make War Walkers Fast Attack. That would be a nice change and stop HS from being so clogged up.

Actually, according to the current Eldar Codex, it implies that there might be more than one Phoenix Lord per aspect. It merely states that they are extremely ancient exarchs, who have been incarnated over and over and are not bound to a particular shrine.

The Asurya are those Phoenix Lords who were the first of the Aspect Warriors and initiated the path of the warrior.

And yeah, Warwalkers = FA fo sho.

Did anyone that attended hear of when those new Brass icons were planned for release?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I certainly hope its not a punsiher, a thunderfire makes more sense.

An artillery piece on a fixed mounting with (seemingly) no ability to traverse up or down? Makes about as much sense as the Land Raider Confused (ie. Helios).

I think the gun looks as if it could traverse at least about 35 degrees elevation. Its not fixed its just mounted in a recess, with its carriage internal. Its not a turret weapon, but if its more artillery it really doesn't need to be. Much more elevation and it'd be a howitzer and not a cannon; if it were a thunderfire "cannon" than it shouldn't need to elevate more.

If its a punisher, it doesn't make sense, since a weapon like that has to be able to strafe for effectiveness and it would run into bigger problems being hull mounted than any artillery.

Why am I quoted as putting that on there?

Anyways...I've got a sneaking suspicion we'll be seeing the Land Raider Achilles as a creation of the Carcharadons, who in their original "Space Shark" incarnation, are supposed to be pretty damned good at siege warfare and cityfighting.

Makes a certain kind of sense that they came up with the Land Raider Achilles, which looks like it'd do a great job as a siege vehicle breaking through Huron's defenses.

TyraelVladinhurst wrote:

Alpharius wrote:I'm still hoping for a Warp Spider Phoenix Lord too!

don't forget the shining spears phoenix lord as well

I'm sad to admit - I did!

But I'[m glad YOU didn't!

So, yes, that one too!

Come on Slicing Orbs squad plus exarch with Phoenix Lord at a later date

It would definitely make sense to see the shadow aspect as a heavy support choice with a re-organization of the codex. But as it stand and as several people have pointed out, it is the most bloated section of the book besides HQ. (Gogo useless 7/10 HQ choices.) Hopefully FW will recognize that it will be unlikely for people to field them as HS with no CW Eldar codex on the horizon.

Or... If they are really as under-powered as they are suggesting, maybe they will be troops and we could have a choice that is barely competitive with a DE warrior squad

Kanluwen wrote:Carcharadon Astra, no less.

As for the Aspects...there's always been no "set" number of them. There's just some that are more popular than others. So it very well could be that the Shadow Spectres are going to be explained an Aspect that guards these Eldar "deep storage" colonies, or that infiltrate human held planets and stalk the settlers to try to scare them off the planet.

How do you say Sheppard in eldar?

Seeing as I'm about to strip and repaint my old eldar, no harm in a hornet or 2 and some of those aspect warriors

I keep looking at the LR Achilles and in all honesty it does resemble a certain world war 2 tank.



Seeing as how this sturm tiger is designed to blow bunkers up by firing point blank at them with it's massive short barreled artillery piece I can assume that the Achilles when it's released with it's twin linked multi meltas and Thunderfire cannon is pretty much designed to do the same thing. After all the Badab war if I remember is one massive seige battle

Trevak Dal wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Carcharadon Astra, no less.

As for the Aspects...there's always been no "set" number of them. There's just some that are more popular than others. So it very well could be that the Shadow Spectres are going to be explained an Aspect that guards these Eldar "deep storage" colonies, or that infiltrate human held planets and stalk the settlers to try to scare them off the planet.

How do you say Sheppard in eldar?

Crap he's in chest high cover we're doomed there no way we can kill him.