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.

I've been whining on-and-off about the big old hit the Eldar took from the nerfbat since 5th, and I was just reading this post over at BOLS;
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/12/40k-deep-thought-place-of-eldar.html

So I figured I'd start a thread where we can discuss things that the Eldar have lost so far; either from the rulebook or from newer codexes, and perhaps sensible ideas for a 5E Eldar 'dex.

So, up on my list is:

Run: Ok, we get fleet, but I still don't like the fact that everyone in the game now gets to move in lieu of shooting. Irrespective of the post-move assault, I pretty much use fleet as a run move anyway. It's a shame we've lost that, it was a great tactical edge. Not sure how to fix this, but being able to assault is small recompense for 'losing' this almost universally Eldar USR.

Cover Saves: Playing a fragile army means I'm used to cowering in cover, wildly firing at my 3+ sv. opponents. Being in cover gave me the satisfaction of a fairly inv. save, and with a few buffs made holding objectives that little bit easier. Again, now everyone gets cover saves, all the time, I feel like my army has had something unique taken from them. Popping out of cover to fire off a few decent shots, then popping back into cover means very little when I'm firing into more cover.

Skimmers: Let's face it, everyone knows Eldar are the sneaky, mobile "surgeon's scalpel" army. Now the IG have the Valkyrie, Outflankers, Marbo and Mech-lists aplenty, again I feel something unique has been taken from us. The Valk is amazing; I'm not complaining from one perspective - I run them in my IG list. However, I do think my Wave Serpents are now super-overpriced and offer precious little in comparison.

Fire Dragons: FDs are my favourite unit. They look awesome, they perform. Whenever the Tango Men get out of their transport, I see opponent's cringe. First time I played them against 4E guard, my opponent (who hadn't seen them before) was shocked at their performance. Another player who was playing with him remarked "Oh yeah, once the Dragons are out, wave bye-bye to your tanks." That is awesome. However, IG now have things like LRBT squadrons. I get to fire at one tank, destroy it, then get blasted to bits next turn. Could FDs choose multiple targets, or get a Special Rule to divvy fire into a Squadron?
Also, I used to think the Eldar were so cool, no-one else in the Galaxy would dare take more than one assault weapon in one squad. Until 5E IG vets. Now IG get a (kind of) comparable unit to FDs. Another big hit I'm sure you'll agree.

---


I'm all out of whine now, perhaps some to cheer us all up?

So I'm thinking things we need for this edition, is something to make our opponents fear us on the battlefield, the way they used to. I still win my fair share of games with my Eldar, but I really have to rely on the dice more often than I'd like to.
Bigred suggested a boost in skill. I like this idea, but it isn't a quick fix. I think we're on the right track here. I don't want the Eldar to be tougher or stronger, becuase that's not who they are. They're elite, adept warriors known for their outrageous skill in warfare. Tau took our guns, IG took our Ships, Marines took our skillz.

So for the statlines I'm not too sure. Sure, I'd to say I'm hitting on 3s, but is that the answer?

One thing I'd love to see is a CHEAP fast skimmer, with a 6-man capacity, with a mounted weapon. My imaginings are a cross between the Vyper (I love Vypers, they should take a points reduction) and the old Harlequin Venom.

Another USR we should get is Assault after Deep Strike, and Assault after Disembark. We should treat all our vehicles like Land Raiders. This makes us far scarier. Getting 10 Banshees out the back of a Wave Serpent then having them sit there taking bolter shots to the face is not cool. 10 banshees running full pelt out the doors of a WS, whilst it turbo-boosts away, and having them dive into the line of Tacs weapons aloft is cool, and makes MEQs actually afraid of them.
Assault after DS might not work, as any Deep Striking units we field are generally rubbish in assault, so perhaps not.

Maybe we should be able to disembark after moving at any disctance, this again makes the fluff more impressive. Marines and Guard don't trust their drivers to have the same level of skill an Eldar pilot would have. Flat-Outing across the board, disembarking Fire Dragons and blasting up a few tanks early on is an exciting concept. But then, we've always been mid-to-late gamers.

Anyway, too much talking now. Please discuss.

I think maybe an extra focus on Quality over Quantity.

I say, no units under 10 points per model, so Guardians go up in cost, but shuriken catapults get better so they are worth their new cost.

Exarchs become more like multiwound heroes you attach to units, rather than Sergeants.

Aspect Armour is all improved. When they were first introduced, it was on average better than Power Armour, with 3 x 3+ saves; power armour was only a 4+ save when it was new.

Points cost adjusted, so it looks more like an elite force.

Quit ur whining...filthy xenos...

Run: Yeah, you lost a little something to everybody else here. On the other hand, widespread Fleet sucks not at all, and run isn't that big a deal for Eldar anyway. It's more of a tweak than a nerf-deal with it.

Cover saves: I'm...not sure what you're talking about here. Cover saves are easy to get, so this hurts the armies more dependent on cover saves how, exactly?

Skimmers: Gimme a fraking break. Just because somebody else gets a neat toy, you whine? Wave Serpents are still unmitigated awesome that you get to take as dedicated transports. NO SYMPATHY!

Fire Dragons: Ummm, they're awesome. You said so. What's the complaint again? Also, if you're firing at a squadron, you allocate the penetrating and glancing hits through the squadron just like you allocate wounds to members of a normal unit. 3 penetrating hits to a 3 tank Leman Russ squadron is one penetrating hit to each. And, they're destroyed if they get an immobilised result. Squadrons don't make vehicles harder to destroy-they make them easier to destroy. Also-cool IG vets doesn't equal a nerf to you.

...

As to your suggestions-

Light cheap skimmer with a little transport capacity? Good idea, fills a definite hole in the army.

Eldar don't need assault after disembark in general. Why do you want to turn your "surgeon's scalpel" army into a screaming assault army? Getting an option for a vehicle with that ability would be cool, though.

Disembark at any speed? I kinda like that one, actually.

+1 to all skills? *Loud, wet raspberry* No, no way in hell. Eldar are already the "skilled" army. Every unit of Aspect Warriors has access to additional skills through the Exarchs. Most of these skills kick butt. This isn't an area you need help in.


I'm sorry to come across as negative, but you're asking for a lot here. First of all, while I understand wanting to preserve your army's special "feel" none of the stuff you're complaining about treads on Eldar territory much at all. You're still the only army with widespread access to fast skimmers (well, except DE-I'll grant you that). You're still the fastest army on the ground assaulting. And you've still got access to the most usefully specialized units in the game.

You're also still competitive. You say you're having to depend more on luck than you like-welcome to the game! How often do you think you ought to be able to beat an opponent of roughly equal skill? If you're winning half of the time against equally skilled players, that's not a problem. That's a working game.

^Could've guessed you'd have something to say EF...

Daba, good points all round. I'd love to see an elite force of Eldar, the way we're described in fluff.
That said, if we're going by fluff, 10 MEQs could take on dozens of us and win...

My eldar are mostly in wave serpents, so I'll talk about what I know:

Eldar skimmers are overpriced. They were probably underpriced in 4th edition. (especially the HS options where you could get holofields) But now, skimmers are less of an advantage compared to normal tanks, and all the more recent codexes have got very, very cheap transports. A wave serpent only has 1 significant gun, it has the considerable disadvantage of a single hatch (at the back) and no fire-points.
Vypers are the other example I have experience with. Compare them to SM landspeeders, they are open-topped, with lower BS and less destructive weapons (often for a greater cost).
All eldar skimmers, and especially the points to put the better heavy weapons on them, need to go down significantly.

GTG, will write more presently about the fragility of eldar close-range units.

@Ordzink: That's what I wanted to say, but was too tired to right...I mean write...

@Tek: If this was going by Fluff, then the galaxy has already been destroyed by Mulitlazors and Land Raider-Razorback transformers.

Eldar has three glaring problems in the 5th edition:
1. Low toughness troops.
2. Skimmer nerfing.
3. Random game length.

1. Low toughness troops: I'd think that would be a valid describption of the Eldar race...

WRaithguard are pretty durable... if expensive.

No, I don't think the 'toughness' is the issue. I believe Eldar are supposed to be durable in 2 regards: mech/scalpel like deployment and usage to minimise casualties/usage of psychic powers to mimc being 'tougher', but not actually being tougher.

That last part is IMO, what GW should focus on. You don't have to up the durability to MEQ standards for Eldar...which makes no sense...but up the durability in other indirect ways.

2. It's not so bad.
The only thing to complain about is that the Wave Serpent may be a bit overcosted, and some more interesting Vehicle gear could be done.

3. Random Game Length...I disagree that this is a problem. This is more about risk management for Eldar... even with Farseers, the old adage of a plan not suriviving contact with the enemy holds with the inclusion of Random Game Length.

If we didn't have it, every Eldar game would end the same.../yawn.

Ordznik, I'm not asking for anything, I'm instigating discussion.
I said myself my post was full of whine; I am under no illusions that my post represents a fair, balanced army - Just throwing out some ideas.

Getting an option for a vehicle with [assault after disembark] would be cool, though.

Disembark at any speed? I kinda like that one, actually.

Thanks! Just some things I've been formulating. I could imagine some cool synergy with those two, pretty much in the same way the IG have benefitted from the Valk. But without Deep Striking ;-)

It all comes from seeing the Venom online and thinking that it would be a really useful vehicle these days.

Totally agree with you Sanctjud, low T is kinda par for the course for the Eldar, I'm happy where they are.

I'm not sure the Tau took Eldar's guns. Tau weapons, burst cannon excepted, is long range while Eldar tend to have much less range. I will concede that both armies tend to have high strength, high AP (5+) attributes.

I could see some assaults from vehicles that have moved, but I think having it be an exarch upgrade would be the best way to handle it. That can limit it to certain aspects and add a variable cost if desired. That would prevent the transport from allowing any unit such as guardians or harlequins to assault out of a transport if the transport itself had the ability.

The main issue I see with cover saves from units for the Eldar is the low T, high points cost. For many other armies they have either high T (MEQs, Ogryn, etc) units, cheap units for screening (guard, gaunts etc), good armor saves (termies, MEQ, etc) or cheap vehicles that do the same. Eldar don't have any of those so screening units for a cover save is not as effective.

A Wraithlord or a unit of Wraithguard don't make a viable screening unit. One needs to have a spiritseer nearby to ensure any movement and they simply don't cover enough space to provide reliable cover saves.

I think Eldar players should get used to their 'unique' playstyle appearing to various extent in other armies. That seems to be the way GW is doing Codexes now. Just look at the proliferation of S10 guns since 5th edition.

Sanctjud wrote:1. Low toughness troops: I'd think that would be a valid describption of the Eldar race...

WRaithguard are pretty durable... if expensive.

No, I don't think the 'toughness' is the issue. I believe Eldar are supposed to be durable in 2 regards: mech/scalpel like deployment and usage to minimise casualties/usage of psychic powers to mimc being 'tougher', but not actually being tougher.

That last part is IMO, what GW should focus on. You don't have to up the durability to MEQ standards for Eldar...which makes no sense...but up the durability in other indirect ways.

2. It's not so bad.
The only thing to complain about is that the Wave Serpent may be a bit overcosted, and some more interesting Vehicle gear could be done.

3. Random Game Length...I disagree that this is a problem. This is more about risk management for Eldar... even with Farseers, the old adage of a plan not suriviving contact with the enemy holds with the inclusion of Random Game Length.

If we didn't have it, every Eldar game would end the same.../yawn.

Well, Sanctjud, I'm not here with you.

Wraithguard requires a dedicated army build around them.
Toughness is an issue, since troops like DA can hardly hold an objective if the enemy puts pressure on them.

Its not only that Serpents are overpriced. Falcons are overpriced too. They were such reliable tanks in the 4th ed.
Now almost nobody plays them.

Random game length is an issue, since you eventually want to tank shock in the last turn, not earlier.

My poor Harlequins got nerfed with 5e, mind you, at least they are still around, when they first appeared they were so good they got rid of them altogether!
Mick

1. True, WG needs an army around them, but I did note they are expensive.
But to say the troops as a whole are not tough, it's a bit over simplified.

GJB: are MEQ defensively.
WG: toughest troops in the game if I recall correctly. T6...

It can be said that anything important enough to a player needs a list to be built around it.

/shrug.
What do you suggest?

Dire Avengers who are T4 with power armor?
Jetbikes with T5 so they can be like the Smurfs?
Guardians with 4+ armor and camo cloaks loaded with sniper rifles a la SM Scouts...?

The only thing I can think of is throwing around more fortunes...but that in itself sound really bad.
__________

Serpents: they are a bit overpriced, IMO not by a crazy much.
It's still a large capacity, very fast, versitle weapon loadout, defensive vs. melta rule transport. it's now around 100 (EA included).

The closest thing to it would be like a Valk who is similar in points.
It loses out on those special deployment options... so around 10ish points. /shrug.

__________________

Random Game length:
You don't see how that's really boring when every game you play against MEch is tankshock galore on the last turn?

It's a good mechanic, making the game more about risk/reward, making the commander manage his resources making sure he has backup plans after turn 5.

Etc.

I think it's a wonderful thing, but not everyone will be satisfied with it, just like everything else...