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.

Just Dave wrote:
I don't deny for a second, if you had been more respectful/considerate (IMHO)

I try my best, but because of my rather... uhm... limited English knowledge i often sound harsher than i actually want to be (y'know, not too often... only 99% of the times ). Sorry if i offended you, it wasn't my intention.

Just Dave wrote:I may have likely incorporated more of your ideas, but again we simply disagree on what is either balanced or suitable for the Eldar and I accept that and I'd rather you did too.

I dunno Dave, but as far as i can remember, you mentioned somewhere that you don't play-test your fandex. And this is (as i feel) the main "conflict point" between us. Because in my gaming club, our veteran Eldar player plays with your fandex instead of the official one (and i mean it - he plays all his battles with the fandex!), and hell, he already has lots of real from-the-battlefield experience with it. And i only deliver his experiences: the army needs safety belts (the Kustom Armour Upgrade is just one example that could solve this), the Exarch/Autarch weapons are "needless" and unfluffy and of course his newest whim, the self-crippling HQ selections (i will explain this later, in another post).

And the real source of our annoyance is that these things are simply soooooo stupidly simple and so easy to correct, but each time they (either the problem or the solution) come up, you say "NO" and that's all folks.

Again, i respect your work and greatly appreciate what you did here, but it feels that all the time we spend in the club brainstorming about your codex is wasted.


On the Shining Spears/Tank Hunters: this is simply a matter of unprofitableness. They cannot really kill anything with it (even with 10 shots, they only cause ~1 Wrecked result on a Rhino) so ultimately, it just eats up the place of something more useful (like Scouts - these guys really need Scouts!). Not to mention that i you want to open transports then you can take much more effective units to do the job (like War Walkers with Star Cannons and Power Diversion Matrix).

No, it's true. I haven't play-tested this Codex, nor my Chaos Space Marine one, I simply don't have the time to play 40K anymore.
I do obviously see the benefit of play-testing and if i could, I would, and as I said before, I have listened to/considered ALL feedback. However, lets be fair 80% or so of the Codex has not needed changing; the foundations and the vast majority of the Codex has been usable from the get-go. So it would seem I'm doing something right, without needing to play-test.
Again, to clarify, I'm all for play-testing and value all feedback, particularly play-tested, but much of the time, I simply haven't needed it to make balanced or competitive units and I feel I can say this when analysing most Codices/40K rules and tactics.

And again, I have considered ALL feedback you and your gaming group/Eldar player have posited, but some of it simply wouldn't work IMHO. As examples, merging Guardians with Support Platforms would make Guardians immobile and little more than extra wounds for platforms - which themselves are now largely viable choices, increasing the Wraithlords price would've potentially crippled the units effectiveness, whilst reducing the price of the Falcon, Avatar and Waveserpents so substantially would have made them far too cheap.
And again, I have also incorporated much of your feedback where I feel it would work; such as increasing the price of Warlock/Farseer jetbikes, improving the Farseer (see next change), making Warp Spiders AP5 (see next change) etc.

As for the claim that I 'say "NO" and that's all folks', I've explained why I haven't accepted some changes before, and for clarity I'll do it again:

Exarch/Autarch weapons:
- On the tabletop, it works: they are potent and exotic weapons and are often selected as the Autarch's wargear, instead of his other choices.
- The Autarchs have access to the best equipment of the Craftworld, these can be assumed to have the same abilities or be on par with the Exarch weapons, therefore rather than having a 'Striking Scorpion Biting Blade', you could just say he's got a 'freakin' fancy chainsword'. As Mahtamori said "he's using weapons which are functionally the same" and I'm not intending to create a load of gimmicky weapons that have the same/similar effects as pre-existing ones.
- There are only so many Exarchs and Shrines active, this means that either through their Exarch only using one of the shrines weapons, or the shrines currently being inactive, there are 'spare' Exarch weapons available.
- Ultimately, there are loads of ways you can swing this either within the current fluff, or with new fluff that would come with a Codex.
- Ultimately, I can't imagine your resident Eldar player uses my 'dex for it's fluff (there isn't much), so he can ignore the exarch weapons if he wants.
- Ultimately, I really like the idea of an Autarch running around with a pseudo (or actual) Executioner/Broadblades or whatever, modelling-wise it has huge advantages and as an image, I really like it.

Armour Upgrade:
- This would give Eldar the same or better armour saves as Space Marines - the guys that are supposed to have amongst the greatest armour in the galaxy - throughout the Eldar Codex.
- Instead of simply making Eldar tougher through an armour save, I've made them tougher and more mobile through Eldar fleet, allowing them to withdraw out of harms way/range, or close in to harm the enemy, whilst simultaneously benefiting foot-slog.
- As Amanax said "You should be using your higher mobility to win fights, not the "Stand here and take it" mentality of the Space Marines. It's what the Eldar are about. True, they aren't as fragile as their dark kin, but that's already true"
- A 4+ armour save is surprisingly common and potent; Ap4 weapons are relatively rare, whilst Ap3+ weapons are usually anti-tank. Combine this with Conceal, Fortune, 5th Edition Cover and even using cheap-Guardians or not-so-cheap Harlequin or Wraith units as shields and there's plenty of means to improve toughness.
- This change was yourself described as a "lazy fix". I've tried to fix the Eldar through non-lazy means.
- As an example, combining your proposed change to things, a Howling Banshee with a 3+ save would be 18pts. Compare this to a Wolf Guard with a Power Weapon for 28pts. For 10pts LESS the Howling Banshee loses: 1 attack, 1 toughness, 1 strength & counter-attack/acute sense, but gains In10, ignores cover, Fleet, Eldar fleet, -1 enemy WS, -1 enemy Ld and +1 initiative.
Or, a Warp Spider would have a 2+ armour save for 23pts. Compare this to a Assault Marine for 17pts (17 because they're fairly weak at 18). For 6pts MORE the Warp Spider loses: 1 Strength, 1 Toughness & 1 attack in close combat, but gains 3 12" Str5, AP5 shots that inflict difficult terrain, Fleet, Warp Jump Generator's assault move, initiative 5 and all-importantly, a 2+ armour save.

HQ Choices; they were designed with the following intentions in mind:
- Farseers are self-explanatory and currently all-out dominate the FoC in the official Codex(and will soon be getting the ability to cast 3 powers).
- To counter this, Autarchs have improved force-multiplier abilities, better CC potential & wargear and can be used to really specialise or theme your army.
- The Avatar is much tougher, hits much harder and can compete with the toughest the enemy has to offer. And this is before he is augmented by a Farseer or shielded by a tank or wraithlord.
- Phoenix Lords are powerhouses; themselves being close combat beasts equal to that of Space Marines, as well as improving all units of their aspect and a select unit they lead. I've already explained why they are good value, but despite this I'm still considering decreasing their cost.
- Yriel is a close combat hard-ass, particularly adept at taking down monstrous creatures, walkers or anything expensive, he's better than an autarch in basically every way, save his flexibility, price and Doomed.
- Eldrad is even better than he was before.
- Athairiel is an aggressive Farseer; benefiting Warlock or Exarch-led armies and favouring an aggressive play-style, whilst being able to take of himself in CC.


I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.

On the Shining Spears/Tank Hunters: this is simply a matter of unprofitableness. They cannot really kill anything with it (even with 10 shots, they only cause ~1 Wrecked result on a Rhino) so ultimately, it just eats up the place of something more useful (like Scouts - these guys really need Scouts!). Not to mention that i you want to open transports then you can take much more effective units to do the job (like War Walkers with Star Cannons and Power Diversion Matrix).

I don't deny it's not the most effective or obvious way to improve anti-tank within the Codex, but it is aimed to give an extra level of flexibility to an otherwise specialised unit (such as with Reapers/Tank Hunters or Avengers/Defend) and help a Swordwind army which may otherwise lack anti-tank.

Just Dave wrote:I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.

After looking back, i realized that i only mentioned this problem, but never explained it. Whooooops... So here it comes:

Back in the good ol' days (before the Kustom Armour Upgrade) our Eldar player had a lots of trouble because you designed this codex to be tacitcal and "smart". This isn't a problem, and it fits the Eldar, but tactics isn't the key part of a 40k game (so to say). It is important, but too much dice rolling and too much stuff your opponent can throw into your face. So the question was: what happens when you make your big plan with your army, but the plan fails because of bad luck/enemy counter-plan/random botch? With your codex, the answer was usually "You lose!" because it lacked mechanics to avoid damage (and lets be honest, for an Eldar army, any damage could be cricitcal). Yeah, Eldar Fleet is funny, but it doesnt protect much (it is effectively a poor man's Jet Packs rule) and in some cases, it doesn't protect at all (close-combat, vehicle explosions) and more importantly, its use is limited (often limited when the player needs it, like after disembark or Deep Strike). Oh, and the most funny part: if you want to save a unit with EF because you've just screwed up something then you should pray for the Dice Gods - because you can screw up EF too !

All in all: the army was super sensitive, because of the specialized units and low numbers without a reliable method to counter this. You can say that with the Kustom Armour Upgrade, we took the simplest but the most reliable way. Because good saves can... well... save stuff. We were brainstorming about other stuff (buffing Eldar Fleet, some sort of army-wide Dodge save) but each time we had something, someone always hit us with a Dark Eldar codex ... So its hard to come up with something that works and doesn't turn the Eldar into a "Different Dark Eldar" (Army/gameplay wise. Fluff wise, the Eldar is a different Dark Eldar though ).

And here i come with the HQ problem: It is strongly tied to the safety belt problem, because the (maybe only) reliable unit that can make other units fool-proof is the Farsser. So optimally, you need, like one of them in each squad. Éacking this, you just fill the 2 HQ slots with Farseers and forget the other selections. The solution could be the reintroduction of the Warlock psychic power 'Augment': it is a passive power that adds +6" to the range of the Farseer's psychic powers (affects one Farseer in the same squad as the Warlock and it is also comulative).

Attaching support weapons to Guardians will make them immobile (unless the grav platform removes the no-move requirement, of course), but the only thing making the Guardians (weak) ablative wounds is that they do not have compatible equipment. This has always been the case with Guardians and platforms when you bought them for the platforms (and in order to get rid of the poor troop choices).

After all, when you buy support weapons in HQ you make the choice to have a static army without the AV14 to hide behind, so...

AtoMaki wrote:

Just Dave wrote:I do think this is the only 2nd-ish time you've mentioned the safety belt thing, so I shall look into that a bit more (albeit that was somewhat intended to be helped by Farseer & Autarch abilities and Eldar Fleet) - however, I will not be using the armour-save boost to fix it, but as ever, from anyone, any ideas are welcome.

After looking back, i realized that i only mentioned this problem, but never explained it. Whooooops... So here it comes:

Back in the good ol' days (before the Kustom Armour Upgrade) our Eldar player had a lots of trouble because you designed this codex to be tacitcal and "smart". This isn't a problem, and it fits the Eldar, but tactics isn't the key part of a 40k game (so to say). It is important, but too much dice rolling and too much stuff your opponent can throw into your face. So the question was: what happens when you make your big plan with your army, but the plan fails because of bad luck/enemy counter-plan/random botch? With your codex, the answer was usually "You lose!" because it lacked mechanics to avoid damage (and lets be honest, for an Eldar army, any damage could be cricitcal). Yeah, Eldar Fleet is funny, but it doesnt protect much (it is effectively a poor man's Jet Packs rule) and in some cases, it doesn't protect at all (close-combat, vehicle explosions) and more importantly, its use is limited (often limited when the player needs it, like after disembark or Deep Strike). Oh, and the most funny part: if you want to save a unit with EF because you've just screwed up something then you should pray for the Dice Gods - because you can screw up EF too !

All in all: the army was super sensitive, because of the specialized units and low numbers without a reliable method to counter this. You can say that with the Kustom Armour Upgrade, we took the simplest but the most reliable way. Because good saves can... well... save stuff. We were brainstorming about other stuff (buffing Eldar Fleet, some sort of army-wide Dodge save) but each time we had something, someone always hit us with a Dark Eldar codex ... So its hard to come up with something that works and doesn't turn the Eldar into a "Different Dark Eldar" (Army/gameplay wise. Fluff wise, the Eldar is a different Dark Eldar though ).

And here i come with the HQ problem: It is strongly tied to the safety belt problem, because the (maybe only) reliable unit that can make other units fool-proof is the Farsser. So optimally, you need, like one of them in each squad. Éacking this, you just fill the 2 HQ slots with Farseers and forget the other selections. The solution could be the reintroduction of the Warlock psychic power 'Augment': it is a passive power that adds +6" to the range of the Farseer's psychic powers (affects one Farseer in the same squad as the Warlock and it is also comulative).

Since you seem to be hard pressed to push your ideas, no matter how many times you are told no, could you do some battle reports of both the unmodified Dave codex, and then with the modifications? It would allow all of us to better understand where you are coming from other than what we're seeing now, which looks like a bad excuse for poor tactics.
- If you do decide to do battle reports, remember that as of right now, Dave has requested that the modified version not be represented as his Fandex, so just remember to clarify which battle has his and which does not.

Battle Report 01 (original version)

1750 points, Pitched Battle, 4 objectives (scattered around the middle of the battlefield), opposing Space Marines

Eldar Army:

Farseer (Doom, Fortune, Spirit Stones, Runes of Warding)
Farseer (Guide, Fortune, Spirit Stones, Runes of Witnessing)
Fire Dragons 9+Exarch
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Howling Banshees 9+Exarch (Acrobatics, War Shout, Executioner)
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Dire Avengers 9+Exarch (Bladestorm)
Wave Serpent (Twin-Linked Scatter Laser)
Guardian Defender Squad x10 (Bright Lance)
Guardian Jetbike Squad x3 (Shuriken Cannon)
Guardian Jetbike Squad x3 (Shuriken Cannon)
Dark Reapers 4+Exarch (Tank Hunters)
War Walkers x2 (4x Star Cannons, 2x Power Diversion Matrices)
War Walkers x2 (4x Star Cannons, 2x Power Diversion Matrices)

Space Marine Army:

Vulkan He'Stan
Librarian (Null Zone, Vortex of Doom, Terminator Armour, Storm Shield)
Assault Terminators x5 (5x TH+SS)
Land Raider
Ironclad Dreadnought (Meltagun, Heavy Flamer)
Drop Pod
Tactical Squad 9+srg (Missile Launcher, Meltagun, Power Fist)
Razorback
Tactical Squad 9+srg (Lascannon, Flamer, Power Fist)
Razorback
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)
Attack Bikes x2 (2x Multi-Melta)

The battlefield was rather open, with one big LOS blocking building complex occupying its left side (with some ruins), some craters in the middle and a few patches of forest on the right.

The Space Marine player won the roll-of for deployment and decided to go first. He placed much of his stuff around the center of his deployment zone. He combat squaded the Tac squads, putting the heavy weapon halves into a slightly elevated position (so cover+good LOS). Vulkan went with the flamer squad, the Librarian accompanied the Termies.

The Eldar player placed his army on the left side, utilizing every bit of cover to gain some concealment for his vehicles. He also used the Dark Repaers and the defenders to bubble-wrap his main army from the Ironclad Dread. Both jetbike squadrons were placed into Reserve to Outflank. The DoomSeer joined the Avengers. The GuideSeer was placed behind a LOS blocking terrain place - out of sight, out of mind!

The Eldar player failed to Seize the Initiative.

Turn 1 (SM):
The whole SM army turned towards the Eldar. The SM player took the risk, and dropped the Ironclad into the midst of the Eldar force (dangerously close to the table edge) - and his risk paid off, the Ironclad arrived just behind the Fire Dragon's Wave Serpent. In the Shooting phase, the Attack Bikes blew the Fire Dragon Serpent sky-high, and the dazzed survivors were quickly obliterated by the Ironclad Dreadnought and the Razorbacks. The HW Tacs also destroyed a War Walker (the other was spared by cover).

Turn 1 (Eldar):
The remaining two Wave Serpents darted out towards the SM deployment zone. Everything else held its ground. The Dark Reapers and the War Walkers killed two Attack Bike Squads, and the Defenders Stunned the Ironclad (it was in fact a Shaken, but we always forget that the IC Dread has EA).

Turn 2 (SM):
Just some positioning: the bulk of the SM forces moved towards the center/left side of the battlefield. After some awful shooting, one War Walker finally bit the dust. The remaining Attack Bike Squad assaulted the Defenders (this combat will last until the end of the game).

Turn 2 (Eldar):
One Jetbike Squad arrived at the right side and turbo-boosted into safety (but close to an objective). The Wave Serpents continued their advance, targeting the Tac Squads (both the HW and the Razor squads, as they were pretty close to each other). Combined War Walker and Dark Reaper fire wrecks Vulkan's Razorback but do little damage to the other (multiple Shaken).

Turn 3 (SM):
The Land Raider moves into a defensive position against the Wave Serpents. Some shooting later the Avenger Serpent loses its Scatter Laser. The Ironclad assaults and wipes out the Dark Reapers.

Turn 3 (Eldar):
The Banshees target the HW Tacs and the Avengers go for Vulkan's Tacs. from these, only the Banshees succeed, as they wipe out the HW Tacs easily.

Turn 4 (SM):
In a nutshell: the Termies assault the Avengers, and the Avengers die a sad and horrible death.

Turn 4 (Eldar):
The other Jetbike Squadron arrives, but they do it at the bad left side (they turbo-boost into safety). The Banshees re-embark, and goes for the undamaged Razor Tacs. The other Jetbike Squad tries to do something with the Razor using their Shuriken Cannon... but no effect.

Turn 5 (SM):
Vulkan and his remaining pals secure an objective, and the Razor Tacs secure another. All SM firepower (LR and the Razor) goes to the Jetbike Squad on the right side, killing two.

Turn 5 (Eldar):
The Jetbikes jump at their objectives, the one on the left side goes for Vulkan's objective, and the other goes for a free objective. The Banshees jump out to contend the objective of the Razor squad. In assault, the Banshee Exarch tries to wreck the Razor, but his efforts are all, but futile.

Turn 6 (SM):
What can i say? The turn where the SM won. The LR killed the lone jetbike on the "free" objective, and Vulkan destroyed the other. Some Banshees also died, and i guess this was the turn when the Avenger's Wave Serpent finally succumbed to the might of the Termies.

Turn 6 (Eldar):
The Banshees and their Serpent wipes out the Razor Tacs. TROLOLOL . As it later turned out, the Serpent needed only +2" to contend Vulkan's objective!

Oddly enought, the dice wanted a Turn 7 too, but the players agreed in a Game Over. 1-0 to the Space Marines!


We choosed this battle because it pretty much represents the whole sensitivity thing: the SM won the battle because he screwed up the Eldar plan (take out the LR with FDs, charge everything with Banshees, PROFIT!) and the Eldar player could only make faces, because he couldn't do the same with the SM player.

To be fair though, that's not exactly an optimized list... His entire army was screwed from the get go because his army was, in my opinion, all over the place.

So, in total... Your friend only brought 7 realistic targets to the field. I mean, it's pretty hard to say the codex is bad when the design of the list isn't exactly great. Dave can correct me if I'm wrong here, but Daves' codex improves upon the current codex, while keeping the same mentality to play style. So old styles of play are still something you'll want to look at as a good base line. He's just made the models that were a little too good (Fire dragons and fire prisms) a bit more expensive to show their worth, while making other units that weren't as good have better options for a bit cheaper. So yes, you have more reliable choices in the codex, and the units are more balanced, you can't just throw together some random units into a list without any cohesion and pray they work together! They aren't space marines

Personally, I would suggest a list more like what you would see out of the modern day codex. Something like...

****HQ - 225****
Farseer - 145
Guide
Fortune
Runes of Witnessing
Runes of Warding
Spirit Stones

Autarch - 80


****Troops - 660****
10x Guardian Storm Squad + Warlock - 205
- 2x Flamer
- Destructor (Warlock)
- Dedicated Wave Serpent
- - Scatter Laser

10x Guardian Storm Squad + Warlock - 205
- 2x Flamer
- Destructor (Warlock)
- Dedicated Wave Serpent
- - Scatter Laser

5x Dire Avengers (w/ Exarch) - 250
- Dedicated Falcon
- - Spirit Stones
- - EML
- - Holo-fields

****Elites - 370****
5x Fire Dragons (w/ Exarch) - 185
- Dedicated Wave Serpent

5x Fire Dragons (w/ Exarch) - 185
- Dedicated Wave Serpent

****Heavy Support - 480****
Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields

Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields

Fire Prism - 160
- Spirit Stones
- Holo - Fields

**** Total - 1735***

Use the last 15 points to move around some wargear, or maybe give the autarch some weapons (Honestly though, he's just there so if you reserve to hide from an alpha strike, your force comes in more reliably).

This list has 8 vehicles on the field, each with weapons that can damage vehicles, and each of their paylouds is a threat in some way or another. You have answers for infantry in the storm guardian squads and fire prisms, a solid home objective holder in the falcon (w/ dire avengers and farseer). If anything in here but the falcon dies, there is another to take it's place.

The only thing I didn't bring an abundance of to the field, was AP2 weapons. So your prisms might have to spend some turns hammering termis after their transport is dead.

This isn't a real new list, but it is a tried and true list and has been updated as per Dave's fandex. Go ahead, give it a try. I bet he'd be surprised at how effective it can be. I would be shocked if my standard footdar list isn't in the same boat as this one (Which looks like my current mechdar list, minus a few units as I play at a little higher points for more wiggle room).

On a side note - I'll try to come up with a list later that uses some of the newer features of the codex, as it looks like I might get a chance to pull my Eldar out of the box in the upcoming weeks, and I'd love to try the new dex out, personally.

AtoMaki wrote:

We choosed this battle because it pretty much represents the whole sensitivity thing: the SM won the battle because he screwed up the Eldar plan (take out the LR with FDs, charge everything with Banshees, PROFIT!) and the Eldar player could only make faces, because he couldn't do the same with the SM player.

Amanax wrote:To be fair though, that's not exactly an optimized list... His entire army was screwed from the get go because his army was, in my opinion, all over the place.

Exactly this.

The list had a grand total of two units that could hurt a Land Raider, and only one that would do the job effectively, but ironically, too well. Between the excessive amount of Fire Dragons, odd mix of troop choices, poor vehicle and infantry target saturation, the list wouldn't do well against any remotely optimized list. The SM list is by no means some sort of A++ tournament fisting list, but its a lot more cohesive and focused than the Eldar list.

Dave's codex provides a number of very viable builds that would have fared a lot better. I'll post a few for the 1500pts level that I feel take advantage of the multiple options available and do anti-infantry and anti-tank very reliably across a number of units.

Note that I've never been a fan of psychic powers (I'm a Guard player, we just use more bodies), so these lists are Autarch led and take advantage of the FOC modding.

Standard Competitive Mech-dar


Armoured Consort (Eldar MSU)


Swift Strike (Bikes, Vypers, and Skimmers)


The Sword Wind (Fluff, mix of everything)


I think that regardless of the ultimate competitiveness of this codex, the sheer number of equally viable builds (or close enough anyways) is to be commended. While I in no way believe the lists I posted above to be some sort of end-all be-all, I do believe they are all solid and would stand up well to just about any list shy of the hardest SW, GK and IG lists.

Wow, guys, i think you totally missed the point . The Eldar list was anything, but optimized, but only because it was an all-arounder casual game list. So a list against everything and not against super-optimised tournament lists. The point of the BR was the "and then, the enemy screws you up, and you are screwed up for the rest of the battle". This can easily happen with those lists you guys posted (some of them will show up, especially the Armoured Consort and the Swift Strike): just some smart play on the other side (like focus firing the Fire Prisms) or simply some fast, hard-hitting close-combat units and the Eldar player will face a very tough match.

And i don't think that JD designed this codex as something that can only win with 2(3) Fire Prisms, some MSU Fire Dragons and min/maxed Troops. In a good codex (and i think Dave's Eldar codex is a good codex) every army setup should have around the same power, so the player won't be stuck with one or two effective build(s) (example: Chaos Space Marines).

AtoMaki wrote:Wow, guys, i think you totally missed the point . The Eldar list was anything, but optimized, but only because it was an all-arounder casual game list. So a list against everything and not against super-optimised tournament lists. The point of the BR was the "and then, the enemy screws you up, and you are screwed up for the rest of the battle". This can easily happen with those lists you guys posted (some of them will show up, especially the Armoured Consort and the Swift Strike): just some smart play on the other side (like focus firing the Fire Prisms) or simply some fast, hard-hitting close-combat units and the Eldar player will face a very tough match.

And i don't think that JD designed this codex as something that can only win with 2(3) Fire Prisms, some MSU Fire Dragons and min/maxed Troops. In a good codex (and i think Dave's Eldar codex is a good codex) every army setup should have around the same power, so the player won't be stuck with one or two effective build(s) (example: Chaos Space Marines).

I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets (redundancy). The point your trying to make is true for many codices, and particularly true for every codex when you bring a non-optimized list.

As to the lists I posted having Fire Prisms; I just personally prefer them. I could easily run a pair of war-walkers with scatter lasers or starcannons with power diversion matrices for the same cost. Similar effect really. In today's meta, min/maxed/optimized troops are what wins, and this codex does that nicely. MSU is what works, and again, this codex does that nicely. You can run non-MSU or foot lists, and I'm sure they'd be better with this codex than with the actual one. The point I'm trying to make is that to properly analyze a codex and find the problems so they can be properly assessed and fixed is to try and break the codex; run the hardest lists possible against a variety of opponents at various points levels.

The codex is by no means on the level of GK/SW, but its certainly better than the current 4th ed codex. Sure, a smart opponent can ruin you, but the same could be said of any codex/list really.

Blacksails wrote:
I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets

Ghosh, frankly, the last thing i was ready for is problems with the army list ... For the next battle report, we've chosen a better (anti-Meta centered) army.

I'll comment on this in more detail later (never gonna get the updates or next Codex done at this rate! ), but for now I'll say that I think both sides have credence:

- The list was flawed and this was the main cause for the loss (not the lack of a safety net); having only 1 unit that could realistically take down a Land Raider made it an obvious target and the loss of this unit was no surprise and decided the game IMHO, leaving over 400pts to roam around un-phased. It would be the same for any army that only brought (and then lost) just one unit capable of stopping a Land Raider.

- However, the safety net argument may also have credence; I had after all rarely reduced the cost of units, but made them better - as was the right thing to do IMHO as they are Eldar after all. This is something I have and will consider more.
- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?

Just Dave wrote:
- The list was flawed and this was the main cause for the loss (not the lack of a safety net); having only 1 unit that could realistically take down a Land Raider made it an obvious target and the loss of this unit was no surprise and decided the game IMHO, leaving over 400pts to roam around un-phased. It would be the same for any army that only brought (and then lost) just one unit capable of stopping a Land Raider.

I guess the actual problem wasn't really the loss, but its ease. It was like 4 Attack Bikes busted the WS, some other stuff took a bad stare at the Dragons and *puff* a key unit gone. And there was no way to counter this, or at least soothe the damage. Even if he would take two FD squads in two WS-s, the SM had enough firepower remaining to blast the other WS and it would take less to finish off the surviving passangers. Other armies have built-in mechanics to counter this (numbers (IG, nidz, Orks), versatility (SM), durability ('crons) or annoying special rules/wargear (DE)).

Also, he had two anti-Av14 units: the Fire Dragons and the Defenders (just trollin' ).

Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?

I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.

AtoMaki wrote:

Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?

I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.

In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?

Just Dave wrote:

AtoMaki wrote:

Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?

I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.

In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?

Uh, i'm not an Eldar player, but i'll try:
So, because of the many-many nice tricks the units in your codex can employ, the playstyle of the Eldar changed a bit towards "finesse" over "brute strength". I'll risk it: the army is pretty much unplayable in "brute strength" mode. But "finesse" is more vulnerable than "brute strength" (for obvious reasons) and there is little compensation in the codex for this. Not to mention that "finesse" is not something that the Warhammer 40k rule mechanics always reward.

AtoMaki wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

AtoMaki wrote:

Just Dave wrote:- But, if the safety net is truly lacking, then why isn't this a problem with the existing Eldar Codex, which itself lacks Eldar Fleet AND a plethora of viable units?

I think it is a problem, but only a minor one. In your codex though, it appears much stronger because... well... everything else is much better.

In all honesty I simply disagree with the 1st part, but this bit doesn't make sense to me, could you elaborate?

Uh, i'm not an Eldar player, but i'll try:
So, because of the many-many nice tricks the units in your codex can employ, the playstyle of the Eldar changed a bit towards "finesse" over "brute strength". I'll risk it: the army is pretty much unplayable in "brute strength" mode. But "finesse" is more vulnerable than "brute strength" (for obvious reasons) and there is little compensation in the codex for this. Not to mention that "finesse" is not something that the Warhammer 40k rule mechanics always reward.

See, that's where this point doesn't make sense to me; that the units becoming better have somehow made them worse? It's still just as finesse, but it's better at it and actually more capable of killing stuff, but this improved capability doesn't necessarily make it more "brute strength", it can, but it also makes it better at finesse.

Again, I'm aware you're not an/the Eldar player and I appreciate that, and I will/have look into the safety belt concept/lack, but this idea doesn't make sense to me. It suggests that the units becoming better have somehow made them worse, which also goes back to the previous point of the safety belt part if anything more lacking in the current Eldar Codex; which lacks the good units and Eldar Fleet (and improved Ld on Warlocks).

Uh, the problem is not with the units but with the army/gaming experience. It is simply so easy to make a 1+1=3 combo (like the 10 Dragons + 10 Banshees <- these guys can wreak insane ammount of havoc!), but the enemy can break this combo on so many points that the risk begins to overshadow the reward.

Again, I'm afraid the 'gaming experience'/1+1=3 thing doesn't make sense to me. If you could elaborate, that'd be appreciated, because it still seems as though the suggestion is that making the units better has somehow changed things negatively...

Although, I do think splitting the Fire Dragons into 2 five-man squads and reducing the banshees to 7/8 (wo)men would be more efficient, game and points wise, but that's a separate point to the whole changed-from-finesse thing.

Just Dave wrote:Again, I'm afraid the 'gaming experience'/1+1=3 thing doesn't make sense to me. If you could elaborate, that'd be appreciated, because it still seems as though the suggestion is that making the units better has somehow changed things negatively...

So the 1+1=3 is something like this:

Unit A can kill Stuff X. Unit B can kill Stuff Y. But when working together, they can kill Stuff X,Y,Z and even seriously damage Stuff V. We fell that your codex is all about this. To make Unit A and Unit B work together and kick ass (finesse!). But it is simply easy to knock out Unit A and/or Unit B, maybe a bit too easy according to the importance. Other armies have various solutions to this: maybe they have numerous Unit A's and Unit B's (numbers!), or they have a Unit C that can take the place of unit A and/or Unit B (versatility!), or Unit A and/or Unit B are simply dead hard to kill (durability!). Or they simply don't rely on cooperation that much, because Unit A/B can kick ass on their own too (special rules/wargears!). Your codex has some versatility and some special rules/wargears but they are often insufficent.

Rightyhoo, so the ol' safety net/arguably weak list thing:

I agree that the list was not a good representation of the safety net thing; the list itself lacked any safety net by only having one unit that could realistically damage a Land Raider (this one unit in itself is probably a bit overkill). This meant that the opponent did the logical thing and went straight for the Fire Dragons, getting through any castling that may or may not have been there to land an Iron Clad right next to them, before prompty dispatching the only unit in the army that had any real chance of stopping 450+pts of his.
There could have been several solutions to this; better castling to protect the Fire Dragons, replacing one or both Warwalker Squadrons with Wraithlords with 2 Bright or 1 Nova Lance (which have featured in a list of his before), Warlocks with Singing Spears and Runes of Anaris in the Jetbike Squads, giving some of the Waveserpents Bright Lances or splitting the Fire Dragons into two squads. There's so many ways that this could've been fixed.
I don't think the list itself was weak, but I would never have rated its chances with only 1 real anti-AV14 unit, let alone after that 1st turn and/or when facing an army with a Land Raider.


As for the 1+1=3 idea, I don't entirely agree with the logic here. Little requires the attention of both Fire Dragons and Howling Banshees (minus a Land Raider full of Termies), whilst I think simply having 1+1+1=3 is a better solution. The other armies solutions can apply here too:
Numerous A's and B's: simply split the Fire Dragons into 2 5-man units. Little requires 10 meltaguns (including a BS5 one) and this achieves 2 solutions: more targets for you, more targets for the enemy.
Unit C that can take the place of A and B: An example: Shining Spears; give them tank-hunters and they can take out the Land Raider or its contents. Or a Wraithlord can operate as ranged anti-tank and assault anti-anything.
Unit A and/or B are simply too hard to kill: Fortune, target saturation (splitting the Fire Dragons), castling, LoS blocking. Trueborn being fragile doesn't make Trueborn a bad unit as there is ways around this and it's the same with the Eldar, but even more-so.
Unit A/B can kick ass on their own too: These are 10-man squads equipped with Power Weapons or Meltaguns, I'm struggling to think of a single target that requires such concentrated force.
Furthermore, and crucially for the idea of the 'safety net', the 1+1=3 thing does not explain why this problem is not existent in the existing Eldar Codex.


However, despite my lack of consensus with the above points, I do feel the safety net idea could have credence.
As I said before, one of my key designs with the Codex was to, rather than simply reduce their cost, make units more deserving of their price tag; Howling Banshees are a key example of this. This means that the army retains its emphasis on tactics, rather than simple application of force (Space Marines) or numbers (Imperial Guard); this does however mean that some units retain their arguably high points costs (which I believe are fair, the 'high' refers to the 'safety net' concept) which can be crippled by simple bad luck.
One 'safety net' of sorts that was introduced is itself not wholly reliable (intentionally); Eldar fleet.

However, there are 3 key flaws to the safety net idea IMHO:
1) Is it existent in the existing Eldar Codex? Apparently not.
2) If not, then why is it suddenly existent by units being made better?
3) There are ways around this in itself; unit redundancy, target saturation, application of psychic powers, you name it.
And...) There were some 'safety net' aspects included within the Codex from the start: Eldar Fleet, increased Shuriken Range (without decreased damage output), making units more reliable, increased Ld (Warlocks), Warlock psychic powers (need safety? Cover/Go-to-ground and Conceal. Need speed? Expedite and Fleet.) and Master Strategist (allowing reserving to avoid Alpha Strikes - your Eldar player could've done with this - and granting flexible special rules such as Stubborn, Counter-Attack and Hit and Run).

However, as I have said, the 'safety net' idea could have credence (although I'm not sold, I admit, for all the above reasons, which there are a fair few of) and I have considered ways around this.
1st, Autarchs (with any Autarch Power) could allow any unit within LoS to re-roll a single Eldar Fleet D6.
2nd, An ability similar to Athairiel's Skien of Command could be implemented; with a rune allowing this to work with Warlocks within LoS, whilst Autarchs could get the above ability and the Avatar makes all units within LoS fearless. But then Athairiel would need a boost of his own, which could be it applying to Exarchs and not requiring LoS.

AtoMaki wrote:

Blacksails wrote:
I don't think we missed the point at all. You can't judge a codex by using un-optimized lists and then claiming it doesn't have any safety nets

Ghosh, frankly, the last thing i was ready for is problems with the army list ... For the next battle report, we've chosen a better (anti-Meta centered) army.

I just spend a lot time reading through fan dexes and what-not, and the only real test of their power is to break them. Space Wolves aren't considered one of the strongest codices because people brought fun lists all the time. It became top because people found the strongest combinations and beat face with them.

The same should be attempted with this codex to really see what isn't working, what is working, and what could price tweaks.

Now, that all being said, I do realize I come off a touch harsh in my posts due to my wording, but that is not my intentions. Then again, Ato, you know full well how I go about critiquing fandexes, seeing as how I did it to you. We also disagreed on you and your groups perceived weakness of the Troop Crawler which I would LOVE to have for my IG list.

I'll come up with some lists using units I probably wouldn't use myself, but I still think are useful, such as warwalkers, wraithlords, dark reapers and swooping hawks.

Just a quick thing that I feel safe with my current state of exhaustedness: if the Eldar codex is still overly reliant on Fire Dragons for AT, why not make a Space Marine? No, not Power Armour, but give all Eldar Aspect Warriors Haywire Grenades. Space Marines get Frag and KRAK and I'd argue that Haywire are worse than Krak most of the time, but safer for Eldar's lower-save/T units. Maybe even give ALL infantry Haywire (obviously not Fire Dragons and most likely not Reapers and maybe Krak is more appropriate for Scorpions)

It's a subtle thing, but it does make (nearly) all infantry have a Plan B. Fire Dragons and/or Bright Lance is still Plan A.

Now, I'm too tired to know if the units already have viable grenades for this, but plasma grenades are not really worthy a back up for such expensive units as Eldar.

Mahtamori wrote:Just a quick thing that I feel safe with my current state of exhaustedness: if the Eldar codex is still overly reliant on Fire Dragons for AT, why not make a Space Marine? No, not Power Armour, but give all Eldar Aspect Warriors Haywire Grenades. Space Marines get Frag and KRAK and I'd argue that Haywire are worse than Krak most of the time, but safer for Eldar's lower-save/T units. Maybe even give ALL infantry Haywire (obviously not Fire Dragons and most likely not Reapers and maybe Krak is more appropriate for Scorpions)

It's a subtle thing, but it does make (nearly) all infantry have a Plan B. Fire Dragons and/or Bright Lance is still Plan A.

Now, I'm too tired to know if the units already have viable grenades for this, but plasma grenades are not really worthy a back up for such expensive units as Eldar.

An interesting idea. If I recall ,and I'm at work so I can't check, but only the swooping hawks really ahve access to haywire grenades. They aren't really game breaking piece of wargear, not even realiable. But, as Mahtoamori stated, it would give a viable plan B.

What do you think Dave? Would you be willing to throw the Haywires on a few other units? If not, would you mind explaning?

Without trying to come from nowhere, (slow work day) I kind of (more yes than no) agree that the small addition of haywire grenades as wargear would be a nice addition to a few other units as an upgrade or even as base equipment.

Sorry guys, but Haywires aren't going to be included everywhere. The reason for this is simple:

I'm kidding. I think its a good idea and will be included for the next update; nice suggestion Maht' and spot on with the feedback guys. I'll probably price it the same as Wyches.
I'll also change intercept (for the Hawks) to make Haywires count as AP1.


@Runna, you're welcome to come in from nowhere, its fine man.

@Blacksails, whilst I don't think its the definitive conclusion, I agree that trying to break a Codex is important and a good test. I'd welcome people to try here, I know I have.

@Blacksails and Amanax, thanks for the lists you posted above, I'll look through them and see if they suggest any unwanted imbalance within the 'dex. Cheers gals.

Ok, time for a bit less tired feedback: one of the problems with grenades on Eldar (and other T3) is when you get a penetrating hit - it hurts to get an explode result. Maybe Intercept would be better off making the grenades more reliable and safer?

Essentially, 1d3+2 would be ideal. This means that on a penetrating hit you reliably destroy the vehicle's functionality with a 5+ to safely dispose of it. On a glancing hit you reduce it's ability to shoot.

Problem is, it doesn't make much sense. "Suddenly, instead of rolling 1D6 you now roll 1D3+2". Maybe this would be a good piece of wargear somewhere.

In either case, the functionality of Vehicle Destroyed - Explodes! is why I dislike having anti-vehicle grenades as a unit's primary function.

Mahtamori wrote:Ok, time for a bit less tired feedback: one of the problems with grenades on Eldar (and other T3) is when you get a penetrating hit - it hurts to get an explode result. Maybe Intercept would be better off making the grenades more reliable and safer?

Essentially, 1d3+2 would be ideal. This means that on a penetrating hit you reliably destroy the vehicle's functionality with a 5+ to safely dispose of it. On a glancing hit you reduce it's ability to shoot.

Problem is, it doesn't make much sense. "Suddenly, instead of rolling 1D6 you now roll 1D3+2". Maybe this would be a good piece of wargear somewhere.

In either case, the functionality of Vehicle Destroyed - Explodes! is why I dislike having anti-vehicle grenades as a unit's primary function.

Well it isn't ideal. But that would be the point.
You would still primarily rely on your other anti-tank options, like you were saying, but this would be a last ditch effort idea. If all else fails, you can always have squad "X" blow it up.

I mean, I don't know about you... but if *&$# hit the fan, and all my anti-tank was destroyed, in most situations I would gladly sacrifice a 100-150 point squad (Not even fully sacrificed either) to destroy that land raider. But again, I would rather not send any of my units to their death, the Eldar are too few in number to do that

Dave:
I think you misunderstood the "1+1=3". It isn't about numbers or safety (as i mentioned before, this tactic is vulnerable than say, MSU or Zergling Rush), but about efficiency saturation. The 10 men Fire Dragons with the Howling Banshees are a good example: they can take even large quantities of MEQ, TEQ, they can kill tanks/vehicles for sure (without fear from the passanger's punishment) and even seriously damage hordes. And they do it at a nice cost. 2x5 Fire Dragons can't really do the same, because they need more attention, and its harder to keep them together and much harder to support them with psychic powers. And they come at a greater cost. Yeah, its safer, but it is no longer 1+1=3 but MSU with Howling Banshees support.

And currently, i guess the only armies that do 1+1=3 effectively are Space Marines (LR, AssTermies and Attack Bikes) and Imperial Guard (Hydras + Plasma/Meltavets). And no, MSU =/= 1+1=3, it is quite the opposite actually.

A full squad of Banshees would have about 1-in-6 chance of Exploding a generic vehicle on assault and 2-in-6 to destroy it. Generously speaking (10 grenades, roughly 5 hits on Combat Speed, roughly 0,8 chance of penetrating). Add to this a whole bunch of glancings.

On an explodes, generally speaking 25% of the Banshees will die.

I suppose these are acceptable odds as a back up plan. Maybe I'm a bit stuck with the Codex way of thinking, but I feel Eldar's biggest current drawback is that there are no plan A options to Fire Dragons. (This is part of the reason I love Corsair, since the Nightwing are a brilliant Plan A against tanks)

I'm afraid I'm with Amanax here:

Amanax wrote:Well it isn't ideal. But that would be the point.
You would still primarily rely on your other anti-tank options, like you were saying, but this would be a last ditch effort idea. If all else fails, you can always have squad "X" blow it up.

More prevalent haywires will make great back-ups and add versatility, but it will have its risks on account of being back-up. I don't feel I can really explain my opinion much better than Amanax has, above.

That said, there are many more options than Fire Dragons for anti-tank; Asps w/ Nova Lances (awesome), Support Platforms, Wave Serpents, Fire Prisms, Falcons, Wraithlords, War Walkers, Tank-hunting Reapers, Tank-hunting Spears, multiple Bright Lance Guardians, Singing Spears w/ Anaris on Jetbikes and more.
That said (again), there are relatively few anti-tank infantry; should a longer-ranged anti-tank infantry squad be added?
(Dawn Guardians - below - can somewhat provide this however)

AtoMaki wrote:Dave:
I think you misunderstood the "1+1=3". It isn't about numbers or safety (as i mentioned before, this tactic is vulnerable than say, MSU or Zergling Rush), but about efficiency saturation. The 10 men Fire Dragons with the Howling Banshees are a good example: they can take even large quantities of MEQ, TEQ, they can kill tanks/vehicles for sure (without fear from the passanger's punishment) and even seriously damage hordes. And they do it at a nice cost. 2x5 Fire Dragons can't really do the same, because they need more attention, and its harder to keep them together and much harder to support them with psychic powers. And they come at a greater cost. Yeah, its safer, but it is no longer 1+1=3 but MSU with Howling Banshees support.

And currently, i guess the only armies that do 1+1=3 effectively are Space Marines (LR, AssTermies and Attack Bikes) and Imperial Guard (Hydras + Plasma/Meltavets). And no, MSU =/= 1+1=3, it is quite the opposite actually.

I'm afraid, outside of cost (which technically is only 15pts/Exarch more - although depending on your preference also another Waveserpent, which has it's own benefits) and the fact they would require 2 Psychic Powers for the same effect, that I think MSU is superior.

-----------------------

As it stands, the rules for the proposed Battlesuit Unit/'Dawn Guard' are basically this:

Dawn Guardian - WS: 4 | BS: 4 | S: 4 | T: 4 | W: 2 | I: 4 | A: 1 | Ld: 9 | Sv: 3+/5++
Warlock - WS: 4 | BS: 4 | S: 4 | T: 4 | W: 2 | I: 4 | A: 2 | Ld: 9 | Sv: 3+/5++

About 32pts each.

Wargear:
Twin-linked Shuriken Repeater - 24", Strength 3, AP 5, Assault 4, Rending.
Wraithbone Battle Armour - Confers the changes you see & Psychic Shielding (below), would be an option for an Autarch also.

Special Rules:
Psychic Shielding - 5++ invulnerable save, requires psychic test to activate, but cannot be nullified etc.
Fleet.

Options:
Replace Twin-linked Shuriken Repeater with:
- 2 Power Weapons - Free
- Twin-linked Fusion Gun - 5pts
- Twin-linked Sunblaster - 10pts (36", Strength 6, AP 2, Assault 2)
- Dawn Laser - 10pts (36", Strength 8, AP 1, Assault 1)

- Upgrade 1 dude to a Warlock for ~18pts.
Who has the same options and:
- 2x Witchblade Free
- Singing Spear and Shuriken Repeater - 5pts

And normal psychic powers with an additional one, Enhanced Aegis, which improves the invulnerable save to 4++.

Might include an option to replace Psychic Shielding w/ Jump Infantry or Mind Link, but these upgrades may be more trouble than they're worth including.

The basic fluff is that they are basically Eldar who have previously trod the path of the warrior, but do so no more. They have overcome their bloodlust and battle urges (which is required as a war-mask-like state feths about too much with the delicate psychic uplinks within the suit), something an Autarch has also done. They use these advanced technologies and training to protect the Eldar, as Asuryan once did - who they effectively revere - working towards the 'Dawn' of a new age, or preventing the setting of the sun that once was the Eldar race, hence the 'Dawn' in their name.

The Wraithbone suit is effectively a complex Battlesuit that provides a level of protection and firepower unparalleled to Eldar infantry, using dense Wraithbone material for protection and a psychic uplink with the suit, moving as if wearing little more than a body-glove. The Shuriken Repeater is a scaled-down Shuriken Cannon or scaled-up Shuriken Catapult, depending on your optimism, that converts the generated heat into sporadic plasma bursts, hence rending.

Basically, do peoples think they should be included?
I'm not sold on them to be honest, they're a neat concept and unit all-in-all and definitely something different, but they'll require 2 pages within the 'dex and may not really be needed overall. Thoughts?