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.

AnomanderRake wrote:@Shuriken cannons: This may not be a primary consideration, but I'd just like to throw out there that if you drop Shuriken Cannons to S4 you have just made the Nightwing virtually useless. The primary reason it was so cool is that you got 6 S6 AA shots at BS 4, giving it about a 60% chance to obliterate an enemy fighter (more if you're targeting an AV 10 ground vehicle) in one turn of shooting; with your modification you've cut that in half.

Another vote for leaving the SC where it is at. Sure the eldar have a glut of S6 weapons but cost can be the determining factor.

SC = Free
SL = +10
StC= +15 (+20 if ROF 3)

The shuriken cannon should be the baseline. Short ranged lower ROF but free. SC on EJB gives them some punch reducing it to S4 also reduces the impact of EJB units as well as a vehicle upgrade.

Personally I would prefer the Star Cannon to be str 7. I mean I thought Eldar were masters at harnessing plasma, why should it be so low powered? Failing that ignoring cover would be a suitable alternative

A Shuriken Cannon at S4 Assault 5 or 6 have significantly increased fire power over the twin-Catapult, increasing the average kill frequency of a jetbike by approximately half again, it's range by double and it's maximum killing power by up to three times!
As a vehicle upgrade, such a weapon is, again, a straight upgrade where the S6 Shuriken Cannon is simply situational. You don't know if you will actually have a use for a S6 Cannon, since your main weapon is likely always going to be preferable when moving, while a S4 Cannon you will always have a use for unless you can't shoot at all.
Add to this that the Eldar already have an obvious S6 weapon, and that the only consideration between the two are "do I want to have +12" range or penetrate 4+ and 5+ saves?"

Another approach is to change the Scatter Laser, of course. It's purely bad design to have so many weapons with near identical stats, especially when the only practical difference between Scatter Laser and Shurican is that the Shurican, while worse, is the only one that can be under-slung.

Same basically goes for the Star Cannon. Poor design to have it high rate of fire S6, which is why it's been suggested it should be Heavy 1 Blast. (This would also serve to separate it as a poor man's anti-transport)

Mahtamori wrote:A Shuriken Cannon at S4 Assault 5 or 6 have significantly increased fire power over the twin-Catapult, increasing the average kill frequency of a jetbike by approximately half again, it's range by double and it's maximum killing power by up to three times!
As a vehicle upgrade, such a weapon is, again, a straight upgrade where the S6 Shuriken Cannon is simply situational. You don't know if you will actually have a use for a S6 Cannon, since your main weapon is likely always going to be preferable when moving, while a S4 Cannon you will always have a use for unless you can't shoot at all.
Add to this that the Eldar already have an obvious S6 weapon, and that the only consideration between the two are "do I want to have +12" range or penetrate 4+ and 5+ saves?"

Another approach is to change the Scatter Laser, of course. It's purely bad design to have so many weapons with near identical stats, especially when the only practical difference between Scatter Laser and Shurican is that the Shurican, while worse, is the only one that can be under-slung.

Same basically goes for the Star Cannon. Poor design to have it high rate of fire S6, which is why it's been suggested it should be Heavy 1 Blast. (This would also serve to separate it as a poor man's anti-transport)

If I have to separate the three my vote is:

Shuriken Cannon left as is ROF3 Rng 24" AP 4 S6
Scatter Laser Rof 4 Rng 36" AP 5 S6
Starcannon ROF4 Rng 36" AP2 S4

Make the starcannon a non-vehicle killer and a pure anti-MEQ/TEQ choice.
Leave the shuriken cannon where it is as it provides flexibility to Bikes and vehicle upgrades.
Leave the scatter laser as a starcannon upgrade in both range and ROF.
Perhaps make the starcannon a dual purpose by allowing ROF 1 Sm Blast Rng 36" AP2 S6 or S7

I'm sorry but starcannons cannot be that low of strength. They are Plasma Wapons. they should be fitting the role as light vehicle or heavy infranty killers.

Oriallis wrote:I'm sorry but starcannons cannot be that low of strength. They are Plasma Wapons. they should be fitting the role as light vehicle or heavy infranty killers.

The DE disintegrator of the last codex had rof 3 low strength and rof 1 sm blast high strength. But you illustrate the problem - while having a choice of 3 S6 weapons is nice, it is also weak if you don't get the points correct otherwise you will end up with a default best choice.
Previous Eldar codex - starcannons
Current codex - scatter laser

I still believe the right choice is to properly cost them out.

Shuriken cannon - free (+5 pt to upgrade TL-shuriken catapult)
Scatter Laser - +10 pts
Starcannon - +10 pts (+15 or +20 if ROF increased back to 3)

With the predominance of cover saves, the power of AP2 is lessened. So with the current high cost of starcannons the scatter laser with the ROF of 4 and the 36" range has become preferred over
ROF 3 rng 24" or ROF 2 rng 36".

Theoretically costing them correctly can be done, the problem is that the weapons themselves are similar and it kills the diversity of the weapons choices by large. This means that you'd need more weapons to do the job, and right now we've got 3 weapons for the anti-MC/anti-transport segment, 1 weapon for anti-infantry, 0 weapons for anti-MEQ/anti-TEQ, 0 weapons for anti-GEQ, and 1 missile launcher.

I know this is drawing the lines pretty damned harsh, but we've got a bunch of vehicles that cost 110+ points that need to somehow earn their points back. Ironically we've got a single vehicle that fills the role of anti-tank, anti-GEQ, and anti-MEQ/TEQ all at once - Fire Prism.
Empire have more diverse weapons than Eldar and generally solves the problem with being able to carry more (and cheaper) weapons. While Eldar only have one and a half weapon per tank, those weapons need to perform. As a side note this can cause an interesting vulnerability - very power weapon that is easily destroyed, versus the Empire's several weapons.

I simply propose that the weapons be more clean-cut.
Star Cannon should excel at killing MEQ while being limited in use against vehicles and GEQ - this means that each shot must count, but be limited in effect so that the average GEQ killed be similar to average MEQ killed.
Scatter Laser or Shuriken Cannon should be deadly to GEQ, but limited against MEQ - here is the problem, though, in that GEQ are generally so low cost that the required ROF to make a shot-weapon good against them automatically makes that same weapon extremely good against MEQ by virtue of Death-By-Saves. Or TLDR: MEQ usually require 3x as many shots to kill, but usually cost more than 3x the points of GEQ.

And then we have the problem of the Bright Lance either being poor in strength or simply grossly over-costed. Remember that Eldar can't take several the way Empire can.

I agree - the old DE disintegrator model would move the starcannon into an anti-MEQ/TEQ model

ROF 3 AP2 S4 or 5
or
ROF 1 AP2 S6 or 7 small blast

The problem I have with the bright lance is it apparently is the same as a dark lance so it apparently is locked in at
S8 AP2 with armor being maxed at 12 due to lance. I think it needs to be left as is but the cost should be adjusted down. Compare the cost of a wave serpent with TL bright lance to a DE raider. One to one the wave serpent is definitely superior but I know my DE is going to spam 5 of them plus 3 ravagers. That is 14 dark lance shots at a BS of 4 for that same price perhaps an eldar may field 4 or even 5 wave serpents that is 5 shots that are slightly more accurate than the DE but they are losing out on the fact that the DE are almost putting 3 to 1 shots down range. Cost a bright lance cheaper OR give it a S9 plus lance to improve its lethality.

The other factor is the costing of eldar vehicles in 4th ed where a moving skimmer meant your opponent was only glancing versus 5th ed where you can pen it. Think of it this way a SW with 3 long fangs putting out 15 missile shots hit 10 times. In the old days that meant 5 glances. Now days it is @ 2 glances and @ 3 pens. Eldar vehicles are overpriced at their base cost.

To put it another way, a Tau devilfish has the same base AV and has a weapon similar to a shuriken cannon mounted on it. It is about 25% cheaper and for a mere 5 points has better survivability than an eldar vehicle at range. A razorback with as much lethality as a wave serpent (or more due to BS) costs about 30% less. A raider costs about 50% for as much lethality. So is AV 12 and fast speed worth 30%? Is AV 12 vs AV 10 worth 50% more? Is fast worth 25% more? I think a base wave serpent with TL shuriken cannon should be costed at about 80 to 90 points with the cost increasing with the weapon upgrades.

Now the holofield generator - it is crap for what it does in 5th ed. - it was undercosted for what it did in 4th ed. With 5th ed meaning it now does not autoglance, the holofield should be reduced to about a 3rd of its current cost. While I used to lament being forced to take the wave field in 4th ed, now I wish I could take that as a falcon upgrade instead of a holofield. I absolutely am envious of the tau 5 pt upgrade and almost wistfully wish eldar would get off their high-tech horse and put smoke generators and searchlights on their vehicles. (Personal rant - What race is touted as the most advanced technology but can't see in the dark? The eldar.)

Don't forget transport capacities, fire points, and open topped. The Wave Serpent truly loses in comparison to most of these due to lacking fire points and assault ramp.
Serpents are dedicated transports, however, and as such they really can be dropped in price - as much as it galls me since I hate the mech-meta.
Falcons on the other hand lives and dies by how the weapons perform, and the question is whether firing both/all weapons as it is moving at cruising speed will actually solve it. Similarly the relatively weak heavy weapons are starving the Guardian squads due to lacking significant punch. Improving the basic performance of the weapons may be a round-about way of improving the performance of the Falcon, Vyper, and Guardians - although it should be said that significantly increased power in heavy weapons leads to some serious issues with Wraithlords.
With Wraithlords we see, though, that two of the current weapons is a good deal... at least in the 100pts area. Maybe the Falcons will be alright with the new Matrix?

Speaking of Searchlights... The fluff pins the Eldar helmets down to psycho/bio-mechanical marvels that increases sound, decreases noise, provides perfect audio communication, magnifies light without blanking out due to sudden sharp increases, as well as providing some serious friend or foe system.
Yes, it's decidedly odd that a mere flash-light mounted on a tank provides better augmentation (it should be noted that a flash-light increases vision only in it's cone, and practically kills it outside the cone. The trade off is such that flash-lights and searchlights in general are just plain stupid, pretty much like night-vision goggles are).

This is kinda off topic but why are night vision goggles useless?

Mahtamori wrote:Don't forget transport capacities, fire points, and open topped. The Wave Serpent truly loses in comparison to most of these due to lacking fire points and assault ramp.
Serpents are dedicated transports, however, and as such they really can be dropped in price - as much as it galls me since I hate the mech-meta.
Falcons on the other hand lives and dies by how the weapons perform, and the question is whether firing both/all weapons as it is moving at cruising speed will actually solve it. Similarly the relatively weak heavy weapons are starving the Guardian squads due to lacking significant punch. Improving the basic performance of the weapons may be a round-about way of improving the performance of the Falcon, Vyper, and Guardians - although it should be said that significantly increased power in heavy weapons leads to some serious issues with Wraithlords.
With Wraithlords we see, though, that two of the current weapons is a good deal... at least in the 100pts area. Maybe the Falcons will be alright with the new Matrix?

Speaking of Searchlights... The fluff pins the Eldar helmets down to psycho/bio-mechanical marvels that increases sound, decreases noise, provides perfect audio communication, magnifies light without blanking out due to sudden sharp increases, as well as providing some serious friend or foe system.
Yes, it's decidedly odd that a mere flash-light mounted on a tank provides better augmentation (it should be noted that a flash-light increases vision only in it's cone, and practically kills it outside the cone. The trade off is such that flash-lights and searchlights in general are just plain stupid, pretty much like night-vision goggles are).

The cost of falcons is a bit touchy but lets compare it to a fire prism.

FP = 115 cost = 1 shot out to table width range, S9 AP2 with the ability to link it into a S10 AP1 shot. BS4
Falcon = 115 cost = Plus weapons. 2 S8 shots. Awesome at killing light vehicles. Avg cost @140 BS3

My argument would be that a falcon with an EML should cost about the same as a prism AND they both should have BS 4.
So assuming Shuriken cannon Free, Scatter laser 10, EML 15, Starcannon/Brightlance 20. A base falcon should cost about 100 pts.
Agreed in the days of 3rd and 4th edition, with the addition of a holofield, you could make the arguement that a falcon for @ 200 pts was the eldar equivalent of putting a landraider on the table. (autoglance and holofield made so that your falcon almost never fired in a game but it also meant your falcon almost never died.) But 5th edition changed all that now your AV of 12 leaves you too open to penetrating hits so the value of the holofield is lessened and certainly you could be accused of playing an "old school" eldar army if you fielded 2 or 3 falcons.

Don't forget that a Land Raider's spirit allows for shooting when stunned/shaken, so the Falcon will loose out on that comparison a bit. I fully agree that the Falcon should be significantly cheaper, and your estimate sounds about right, DAaddict, although this is working under the assumption that the Fire Prism is accurately priced. What I mean is that I think that for the sake of making a fan 'dex it's a good estimate, but if GW made the 'dex for 5th edition with that cost on the Falcon+EML as well as Fire Prism, it'd probably be a bit on the expensive side. Conservative is good for fan creations.

Oriallis wrote:This is kinda off topic but why are night vision goggles useless?

Gives you tunnel vision, dampens resolution, kills your sense of vision when you remove the goggles, and they are very prone to over-exposure. They make sense in some cases, but they're not the be-all-end-all solution to seeing well in the dark, and in many if not most cases getting your eyes accustomed to the dark is better. Don't know if more modern NV has fixed the most glaring problems, though.

Some ideas:

- All Forgeworld Eldar units added

- All Aspect Warriors have Acute Senses

- As much as a I hate the GK close combat weapon bonuses the cat is out of the bag now, so maybe all 'sword' close combat weapons wielded by Aspects give +1 invulnerable save in CC, and halberd type weapons give +2 I

- Autarch to have the same stat line as an Exarch but with 2W

- As mentioned elsewhere a Warseer; an Exarch equivalent for Warlocks. Not as great a stat increase, but due to increased psychic mastery have a 3++ save and witch weapons gain rending.

- Warlocks can be taken as a standalone unit in the Elite section

- Wraith units gain "Wraith Construct"
+ FNP (on a 5+ or 6+)
+ Immunity to all grenade effects

- Wraithguard "Wraith warden" option. Swap wraith cannon for wraith glaive. Functions as per Wraithlord's wraithsword, plus inflicts instant death on a to-wound roll of a 6.

- Wraithlords can have 3 main hard points. Max 2 swords. Max 2 heavy weapons. Support battery weapons are available as a '2 slot' heavy weapon.

- EML either becomes a Reaper Launcher, or loses the Krak shell firing option (it's a bit out of place) and gains a Haywire shell instead

- Starcannon ignores cover saves (AND/OR counts as Ordnance for rolls on the vehicle damage table)

- Shuriken Catapult becomes 18". Dire Avenger catapults are twin linked.

- Reaper Range Finder: Ignores cover saves granted by speed (i.e. moving flat out), and counts as an AA mount

- Fire Dragons swap their melta guns for heat lances. A drawback in some ways, a benefit in others, but better integrated with the DE armoury and moves away from having the same weapons as the IoM. 3+ armour saves.

- Swooping Hawks swap their gun for a sniper rifle. Gain a 'grenade drop' attack if they fly over a unit in their movement phase. This one definitely needs more thought

- Warp Spider jump generator: count as jump infantry + may move 6" in the assault phase

- Each Farseer psychic powers has a passive and active mode. The active mode works as now. The passive mode is short ranged / local in effect, and is always on and always works as like Warlock psychic powers do. This does not count towards casting limitations. E.g. Fortune automatically applies to the Farseer and the unit he is attached to. A Farseer with Eldritch Storm exerts a GK Warp Quake effect.



- War walkers & support weapon platforms can be bought as a 'support detachment' for a guardian squad, in which case they do not take up a FOC slot

- Full set of Phoenix Lords

- HQ choice that is an intermediate character between an Exarch and a Phoenix Lord that has access to full range of Exarch powers and Eldar armoury.

- Avatar immune to melta, flamer, and plasma weapons. Wailing Doom: For every unsaved wound the Avatar causes in CC -1 from the LD of enemy units within 12". Counts as a psyker for purposes of wraith sight (on the basis that the Avatar would be a psychic beacon).

Splog wrote:Some ideas:

- All Forgeworld Eldar units added

I like this idea. Although... I wouldn't want to include Super Heavy tanks and Titans in regular 40k.

Splog wrote:- As much as a I hate the GK close combat weapon bonuses the cat is out of the bag now, so maybe all 'sword' close combat weapons wielded by Aspects give +1 invulnerable save in CC, and halberd type weapons give +2 I

I don't really get the huge initiative boost from a halberd. Sure, it gives you long range, but that is easily avoided and given that Eldar are described as moving so fast humans can barely follow (hence the I5 on Aspect Warriors), I would not say that they would in any way have a problem getting around a puny stick. And let's not forget that the GK codex was written by Matt Ward. I mean 2 initiative is the difference between an Imperial Guardsman and an Eldar Aspect Warrior. Even an increase of 1 sounds ridicule, seeing as one is the difference between an Imperial Guardsman and a bloody Space Marine. Just saying, the initiative intervals represent a big ing increase in reflexes.

Splog wrote:- Autarch to have the same stat line as an Exarch but with 2W

Why, oh why would an Autarch need a worse stat line? Why?

Splog wrote:- Shuriken Catapult becomes 18". Dire Avenger catapults are twin linked.

I actually like this idea a lot. It would take the fun out of a Doom/Guide Farseer + Bladestorm (by making it easier to do), but it seems more logical than merely upgrading the strength on it.

Splog wrote:- Fire Dragons swap their melta guns for heat lances. A drawback in some ways, a benefit in others, but better integrated with the DE armoury and moves away from having the same weapons as the IoM. 3+ armour saves.

What on earth is wrong with their weapons as they are now? Fire Dragons are still one of the best units in the game. Sure, as they are now they remind of human ones but there's no need to copy stuff that's already out there, Eldar or otherwise.

Splog wrote:- Each Farseer psychic powers has a passive and active mode. The active mode works as now. The passive mode is short ranged / local in effect, and is always on and always works as like Warlock psychic powers do. This does not count towards casting limitations. E.g. Fortune automatically applies to the Farseer and the unit he is attached to. A Farseer with Eldritch Storm exerts a GK Warp Quake effect.

I like this idea. I like it a lot. However, it sounds like it could have pretty overpowered potential.

Wooly wrote:

I like this idea. Although... I wouldn't want to include Super Heavy tanks and Titans in regular 40k.

Ah yes *cough*. I didn't have those sorts of units in mind. More along the lines of the Shadow Spectres, Warp Hunter, Wasp Walkers, etc.

I don't want to give a blow by blow response to disagreement/criticism of any ideas, but I thought it'd seem a bit rude to clarify the above point and not touch on some of the others. The suggested changes for the Autarch and the Fire Dragons aren't intended to be all round improvements as such, rather a theme tweaking that would also change their role somewhat.

The lesser stat line for the Autarch I see as being more appropriate. I've never seen how the background material should equate to the Autarch being so much better than an Exarch. The Autarch stat line is like a missing link between the Exarch and a Phoenix Lord and that doesn't really stack up. It feels a bit shoe-horned in to have a 'Major Hero' class generic character. The Exarch stat line is a very good one, and to my mind sufficient for the role. In current codex terms I'd see the Autarch stat change linked to a drop in points (about 55) and given extra 'strategic powers'.

Fire Dragons - yup they're great. Yup, they don't need (much) improving in battlefield utility. There is nothing wrong with them currently. But.. the melta-gun just doesn't really seem to fit with the rest of the armoury. 3rd edition moved the races to having their own distinct set of weapons. Fire Dragons got the bum end of the deal with the letdown of having Fusion Guns (which were S6 melta guns). I think the intent to give them something a bit different was a good one, but the execution was a bit duff. The Heat Lance is a ready made eldar technological addition to the eldar armoury. Giving them a Heat Lance is a way of following through with changing the Eldar armoury. Heat Lances are just as good against MEQ, but with a 50% increase of range, for a tradeoff of not causing instant death to MEQ characters. Against vehicles things are a little bit more mixed: 0-6" Melta wins; -9" Heat Lance wins; -12" Melta for AV10-13, tied for AV14; -18" Heat Lance wins (though performance is far from being super at this range..).

But.. yup. In terms of both battlefield impact, and personal interoperation, I can see why people might not like these changes! I thought them worth a punt for feedback though

If anything the aurarch needs to be improved, considering the archons of the Dark Eldar. I would want to see those 2 units duelling head to head with a fair chance. Not just the DE trouncing the Eldar.

I like the wraith warden option, lets Iyanden have a more varied selection of troops.

The guardian detachment confuses me, I'm going to take a guess here and say it's a way to convince people to use guardians in order to get access to extra heavy support units, and make the Eldar force look like a large scale engagement in general.

Still mostly confused on the heat lance thing, but I feel like I can't put in any feedback on it as I don't know the heat lance stats

The main problem with the shrinekeepers is that they suffer from the same problem phoenix lords do, being not vvery good except for their own aspect. In general I believe phoenix lords should be unit upgrades.

On a side note on HQ choices, wouldn't it be interesting to have A Solitaire HQ spec that would let you take Harleys as troops? That way clown armies would appear again.

Something to pick dissect! Yay!

Splog wrote:Some ideas:

- All Forgeworld Eldar units added

Pretty much, yes. Vypers do need a once- or twice-over due to Hornets simply being better, though I can't remember their current v3 incarnation.

- All Aspect Warriors have Acute Senses

Something that pretty much all Eldar should have, inherited from their helmets, and other visual aids.

- As much as a I hate the GK close combat weapon bonuses the cat is out of the bag now, so maybe all 'sword' close combat weapons wielded by Aspects give +1 invulnerable save in CC, and halberd type weapons give +2 I

Not certain about this one. I do hate this approach on a codex level, but I'm fine with it on a BRB level.

- Autarch to have the same stat line as an Exarch but with 2W

I'm curious, why should they receive -1BS, -1WS, -1W and -1LD? Autarchs are nearly obsolete with the statline they have.

- As mentioned elsewhere a Warseer; an Exarch equivalent for Warlocks. Not as great a stat increase, but due to increased psychic mastery have a 3++ save and witch weapons gain rending.

The risk here is to further make Autarchs obsolete. Warseers are fine, but I think they should focus on PSAs rather and leave weapons to Autarchs.

- Warlocks can be taken as a standalone unit in the Elite section

I fully support this idea.

- Wraith units gain "Wraith Construct"
+ FNP (on a 5+ or 6+)
+ Immunity to all grenade effects

Hmm... immunity to grenades. That's new. The problem with FNP is that the highly expensive wraiths have a problem with weapons that ignore FNP, not the other way around, but it can be used to further specialize them and it does make sense. It's been hashed previously, but I suppose it can be discussed again.

- Wraithguard "Wraith warden" option. Swap wraith cannon for wraith glaive. Functions as per Wraithlord's wraithsword, plus inflicts instant death on a to-wound roll of a 6.

Do you mean that it's a Powerweapon with 2D6 penetration or that it's a normal CCW that allows you to re-roll melee misses?

- Wraithlords can have 3 main hard points. Max 2 swords. Max 2 heavy weapons. Support battery weapons are available as a '2 slot' heavy weapon.

That's an interesting idea. I like it.

- EML either becomes a Reaper Launcher, or loses the Krak shell firing option (it's a bit out of place) and gains a Haywire shell instead

Again, an interesting idea. If it simply fires plasma missiles, it needs to be improved. It should be noted, though, that Star Cannons absolutely must be a cost effective anti-MEQ/MC option in that case and the Brightlance must be a very cost effective anti-vehicle.

- Starcannon ignores cover saves (AND/OR counts as Ordnance for rolls on the vehicle damage table)

I'd rather it not count as anti-tank. We need it as anti-MEQ.

- Shuriken Catapult becomes 18". Dire Avenger catapults are twin linked.

That is also an approach.

- Reaper Range Finder: Ignores cover saves granted by speed (i.e. moving flat out), and counts as an AA mount

- Fire Dragons swap their melta guns for heat lances. A drawback in some ways, a benefit in others, but better integrated with the DE armoury and moves away from having the same weapons as the IoM. 3+ armour saves.

It is not the Fire Dragons whom use the same weapons as IoM, it is IoM who use the same as Fire Dragons. Unless I am sorely mistaken, 3rd edition had IoM melta tech Gets Hot!, though this has sadly changed.

- Swooping Hawks swap their gun for a sniper rifle. Gain a 'grenade drop' attack if they fly over a unit in their movement phase. This one definitely needs more thought

As others have pointed out to me when I suggest the fly-by: they lack the movement range.

- Warp Spider jump generator: count as jump infantry + may move 6" in the assault phase

- Each Farseer psychic powers has a passive and active mode. The active mode works as now. The passive mode is short ranged / local in effect, and is always on and always works as like Warlock psychic powers do. This does not count towards casting limitations. E.g. Fortune automatically applies to the Farseer and the unit he is attached to. A Farseer with Eldritch Storm exerts a GK Warp Quake effect.

Like Wooly wrote, sounds interesting but risks being over-powered. Here's a few ways of implementing them that I can think of off the top of my head.
Fortune - Passive; The Farseer may re-roll any saves. Active; Well... as now, really.
Guide - Passive; The Farseer's weapons count as twin-linked may re-roll any rolls to hit. Active; The unit affected by the Farseer within 6" has their weapons count as twin-linked and may re-roll any rolls to hit. (Note that this is intentionally including melee hits)
Eldritch Storm - Passive; the area within 18" of the Farseer count as dangerous for units deep striking into it or if they move as jump infantry into, out of, or through this area. Active; R(inf) S5 Ap5 Assault 1, Barrage, Large Blast Marker
Mind War - Passive; the Farseers attacks count as Force Weapons. Active; Psychic Shooting Attack. Targets one enemy model in line of sight. Causes 1 wound which inflicts instant death. May only take invulnerable saves.
Doom - Passive; Any unit the Farseer is joined with may re-roll their rolls to wound in melee. Active; Well... as now, really.

- War walkers & support weapon platforms can be bought as a 'support detachment' for a guardian squad, in which case they do not take up a FOC slot

Not certain of this one. I absolutely love my War Walkers and am building an army based entirely on them.

- Full set of Phoenix Lords

- HQ choice that is an intermediate character between an Exarch and a Phoenix Lord that has access to full range of Exarch powers and Eldar armoury.

Sounds like an Autarch that's lost himself on all paths of Khaine. Goes against the fluff quite a bit. It's like a Commisar that is also a psycher.

- Avatar immune to melta, flamer, and plasma weapons. Wailing Doom: For every unsaved wound the Avatar causes in CC -1 from the LD of enemy units within 12". Counts as a psyker for purposes of wraith sight (on the basis that the Avatar would be a psychic beacon).

Makes sense, although should be noted that the Avatar, extrapolating from the latest GK FAQ, would be immune to all fire-based weapons based on their fluff - i.e. including Scorchas even though it's not on the list.

@wraith constructs: I would love to see a little individualization of the craftworlds. Now a lot of what I've been imagining of late has been the Wraithguard/Wraithlords and Iyanden. I've seen the aspect warrior Wraithlords and that gave me an idea. Iyanden uses so many wraith constructs because they don't have many fighters left. The greatest of heroes and champions are placed in the Wraithlords, so Exarchs most likely, and even in the fluff they talk about those Wraithlords being fitted out in close combat or with distance weapons depending on the personality that inhabits the Wraithlord. How about continuing that with the Wraithguard. I imagine that they would have the base aspect warriors inhabiting them. So each could be outfitted with the equipment of the aspect. Imagine a wraithguard kitted out as a striking scorpion. It would open up a pretty easily created model range that would excite people about buying Eldar. It would also help with splitting up the Eldar into craftworlds again.

Striking Scorpion wraithguard with str 6, 3-4 attacks, make them 40 points or so and they are still worth taking I think.

Howling banshee wraithguard: Power weapons that ignore armor and str 5? Yes please.

Dire avenger wraithguard: Carrying shrieker cannons instead of catapults?

Fire dragons wraithguard: Give them heavy fusion guns, think multi-melta.

Dark Reaper wraithguard: EML with the upgrades below on a mobile platform.

Swooping hawks wraithguard: jump infantry all with grenade launchers or star cannons?

Warp spider wraithguard: Teleporting wraithguard, perhaps with increased chance of rolling doubles for vanishing and either template death spinners or spinneret rifles?

Have spirit seers that can join of course. Maybe in the jump infantry you could outfit them the same for an increased cost? If like an autarch they were once in that aspect they could use the same systems again?

@Dire avenger shuriken catapults. I love the suggestion to make guardian version 18" and Dire avenger version twin linked. Makes a lot of sense and really helps fix the guardians.


@Eldar technology: It really frustrates me that the supposedly superior eldar tech is so average in comparison to IoM. For instance no multi melta? Why can't they hook up a pair of fire pikes and use them on a wraithlord or a falcon, an anti grav platform?

EML should be changed, not just frag and krak, I like the suggestion of haywire missiles, and maybe with plasma missiles that ignore cover?

Okay, I think that's it for now.

The problem i find with aspect wraiths is that it doesn't fit when you consider the fluff. Wraiths exist in an almost dreamlike state that would also probably make them incapable of the fervor required by an aspect warrior.

Plus the only concepts that I can see on a wraithguard without it looking silly are dragons and reapers. Stealthy or Fast assault doesn't fit with slow pacing constructs. A Flying wraith is just plain silly. And you'd think a guy who had spent his life exsposing himself to the warp could get a break from that in death. Really the whole problem is that this adds too much customization to wraiths when they are supposed to be last resort forces for everyone but Iyanden.

My ideas for the eldar codex are

1. All Eldar tanks should be BS4 (Maybe not the Vyper and the War Walker)

2. Guardians should be cheaper 6pts per model i think is resonable but 8? too much

3. Prism cannons, Brightlances and Shadow specres guns should be AP1

4. Shadow specres standard guns should be 18" no 12"

5. Eldrich Storm needs a more destructive profile (S5 AP4 Large blast)

Ridealgh wrote:My ideas for the eldar codex are

1. All Eldar tanks should be BS4 (Maybe not the Vyper and the War Walker)

2. Guardians should be cheaper 6pts per model i think is resonable but 8? too much

3. Prism cannons, Brightlances and Shadow specres guns should be AP1

4. Shadow specres standard guns should be 18" no 12"

5. Eldrich Storm needs a more destructive profile (S5 AP4 Large blast)

1. Agreed - make the vyper an attack bike (W2 T4 instead of AV10 open topped)
2. This goes around the argument of avoiding the eldar hoard army. (6x 20 guardian armies) I like the proposed limits on guardians, the idea that guardians don't take up FOC slots but require other selections, etc.
3. BL should not be AP 1 however I could accept them being S9. (Better than a dark lance but not technically different.) I could easily accept prisms being native AP1 - that would provide them with a true AT ability.
4. Shadow spectres - not sure what they are armed with but it sounds like we are talking a fast attack anti-tank unit. I think AP2 sounds good enough or we are going to see these instead of fire dragons.
5. Agreed - I would like to proliferate the use of the dangerous terrain modifier. So the next time a targeted unit or vehicle moves, it has to make a dangerous terrain role.

As far as the heat lance vs the melta gun for fire dragons - I understand and do like it. Giving them range is important and 18" range makes sense. Also leaving the firepike as S8 but adding the lance rules would make the desire to have an exarch greater.

Shadow Spectres have prism rifles don't they? Not sure what those do though, pretty sure they're jet pack heavy support units.

I'm not sure Wave Serpants need BS 4 with twin-linked weapons, they're already some of the best dedicated transports around even if they are pretty exspensive.

The problem with increasing Bright Lance strength is that it leaves Dark Lances behind, the only way I see to justify this is if while DE can take more lances (Squad leader weapons, and Ravagers of course) Eldar have better ones.
It also completely outmatches las cannons as well.

I can't make a decision on heat lances vs fusion guns until I know what the precise difference is.

Oriallis wrote:Shadow Spectres have prism rifles don't they? Not sure what those do though, pretty sure they're jet pack heavy support units.

Rules here: http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/S/shadow-spectres.pdf

Rumoured to be changing before publication, including a range increase.

FYI they do this.
In my opinion vastly inferior to Fire Dragons due to all the same problems as with Dark Reapers. 35pts for T3 4+ unit is just strange. 202 points for a single S10 AP2 shot is way too much.
The idea is very cool but the execution is lacking.
Edit: Damn you Splog

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Oriallis wrote:Shadow Spectres have prism rifles don't they? Not sure what those do though, pretty sure they're jet pack heavy support units.

I'm not sure Wave Serpants need BS 4 with twin-linked weapons, they're already some of the best dedicated transports around even if they are pretty exspensive.

The problem with increasing Bright Lance strength is that it leaves Dark Lances behind, the only way I see to justify this is if while DE can take more lances (Squad leader weapons, and Ravagers of course) Eldar have better ones.
It also completely outmatches las cannons as well.

I can't make a decision on heat lances vs fusion guns until I know what the precise difference is.

prism rifles are 12" S7 AP3 which i think is amazing but it's too short range as i said earlier. 18" would be much better.

As for the Wave serpent being TL i still think BS4 would help it alot. It happens too often that you miss once and then miss again.

In terms of brightlances i think the AP1 is better than having more strength. It doen't leave the Dark lance behind but it has that little extra oomph and it kinda would e AP1 considering it's a specifice AT weapon.

Stick to fusion guns.

I think i read somewhere that tl BS 3 hits more often than flat BS 4

Oriallis wrote:I think i read somewhere that tl BS 3 hits more often than flat BS 4

It does. TL BS3 is 75%. Normal BS4 is 66,(6)%.

I thought so, that's why I always figured Wave Serpents didn't need BS 4.

Aha, Oriallis did what I didn't dare do.

Pre-emptively: read the bold part for TL/DR

I've been thinking about the use of Guardians and how it essentially do not quite fit the Eldar way of life (bear with me, it is actually to do with ballistics skill). Essentially, Khaine had his bloody hand in the making of the Eldar soul and psyche, and as such there is always bloodlust dormant within all Eldar. To deal with this bloodlust, the Craftworld Eldar formed the path of the warrior (prior to the Fall, citizens of the Eldar Empire were free to indulge in the cravings of their soul, and many were inevitably lost to Khaine) which teaches the donning of the war mask.
The war mask can be removed, and it can be put away completely, but it is knowledge that stay with each Eldar after he has tread the path, just like a former master artist will reflect on aesthetics and inevitably follow a slightly different line of thought should they tread a more practical path.
Craftworld Eldar who have not donned the war mask risk their soul should they be exposed unprotected to the horrors of war - and no I do not say they would go mad or craven, it is far more likely they will succumb to the darkness and anger since the Eldar soul is not a gentle fragile thing like a human soul generally is.

And now to the more hands on thing of my musing: why are Guardians a) considered an ad hoc militia and b) significantly worse than Aspect Warriors?
Ad hoc militia would doom a significant portion of the craftworld's population to join the path of the warrior or outcast - essentially a large scale engagement where Guardians are necessitated would push a craftworld's population to an extremely unbalanced point towards martial. This would further question the sanity in having Guardians represent Eldar bread-and-butter troop choices.

In short, the basic WS/BS of a Guardian ought to be 4. Aspect Warriors are a martial match to their dark cousins, especially the case of Striking Scorpions versus Incubus, and as such merits a +1 in their BS or WS depending on aspect.
However, the pilots inside the Eldar skimmers aren't necessarily Guardians or even Aspect Warriors, but rather just that - pilots. It is entirely conceivable that the pilot inside a Wave Serpent takes no part in the actual gunnery of his vehicle, and he is further insulated from battle by his vehicle.
As such, proposition:
Vyper, Hornet, Wave Serpent - BS 3
Walkers, Falcon hulls, Guardians, Rangers - WS/BS 4
Banshees, Scorpions, Spears - WS 5 BS 4
Dragons, Hawks, Reapers - WS 4 BS 5
Avengers and Spiders are an odd bunch. Spiders have the armour for close combat and are constantly portrayed as a melee/assault unit (see DOW2 intro). Avengers are misrepresented by large, they are the versatile aspect (read the codex!) representing Khaine in his pure warfield aspect and capable of adapting to their surroundings, but oddly enough it feels like Avengers are the Aspect Warrior least receptive to change of all aspects.

Oh, and Eagle Pilot could be a vehicle upgrade to increase BS by +1.

To avoid a wall of text, I'll save heavy weapons for later, but I'll say this much: Eldar have three weapons which do the same thing, one weapon which is fine but expensive, and one weapon which doesn't do it's job at all.
Oh, and I do think that Pulse Laser should be available as a general weapon as it fills a gap on the high-end.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
P.S. with higher over-all BS, the Eldar army's reliance on Farseers become that much smaller - especially since they're not able to field volume of fire. A Farseer with Guide would become a boon, not a necessity for fielding War Walkers, for instance.

My only question on that is what does that make the stat line for Exarch's like? What is the Klaivex (or whatever Incubi squad leaders are called) stat line? It just seems a tad odd to have squad leaders with 6s on their statline. The other thing is this stat line makes Aspect Warriors overall better than standard Space Marines, not that I'm saying this a bad thing just that it seems unlikely.

PS: I mostly posted to try and save this thread from plunging towards extinction. But thank you for your appreciation.