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'd change your problem statement just a touch: "If anti-infantry weaponry worked better than anti-tank weaponry against all infantry types, then heavy bolters and flamers would be more popular." This stupid pass/fail AP system encourages bringing AT weapons for use against infantry, and renders the apparent anti-infantry weapons useless against the most commonly-appearing infantry type.

Also, there's still something screwy about a tank that can be rendered ineffective for a turn (or killed outright) by a single hit, when a T5+ creature can shrug off multiple hits from anti-tank weapons and remain fully effective until completely dead.

So, no - I don't think we'll see more vehicles, because everyone still has a metagame reason to pack as much AT firepower into their lists as they can, in order to deal with MEQs and (T)MCs. Tanks will continue to be a casualty of the AP system.

Just give Heavy Bolters rending and it will balance out.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I weep, as I can see them doing that. And when lasguns get rending (to represent the massed firepower of the Imperial Guard), we'll finally stop hurting our heads with this stuff, and go play marbles.

I have my steelies right here. . . (Joking)

Falcons wouldn't be so bad if they didn't have Spirit Stones. I don't know why you're complaining about Vectored Engines, you can pen it the next turn and it's no longer scoring. I've only played against it once where they threw that on there. And then down it went.

If they didn't have Spirit Stones, I think it's the logical way to actually fix faclons or prisms with Holofields from being stupidly good.

Posted By Voodoo Boyz on 06/26/2007 8:01 PM
Falcons wouldn't be so bad if they didn't have Spirit Stones. I don't know why you're complaining about Vectored Engines, you can pen it the next turn and it's no longer scoring. I've only played against it once where they threw that on there. And then down it went.

If they didn't have Spirit Stones, I think it's the logical way to actually fix faclons or prisms with Holofields from being stupidly good.

Agreed Voodoo. The Extra armor on Falcons is what made them what they are now. Before they were annoying yes but aleast there was a chance to "stun and done" the falcon. With extra armor there is no chance to pen a falcon except if its out in the open on turn 1 or you happen to be playing against an Ogryn for an opponent will you ever get a chance to pen a Falcon.

  It has never really been the weapons platform that what makes the falcon powerful. Its one of 3 things: Victory Point Denial, Squad Delivery System, Objective Grabber. It can do all 3 roles very much reliably.

You'll find that its actually 1 in 9, over the course of the 2-3 turns that it takes a Falcon to drop a squad of Harlequins etc. thats not the most unfeasible thing in the world. Of course if you get that first turn penetrating hit that no-one seems to take into account, then the chance of killing or immobilising it gets a lot greater.

You could also counter the units that the Falcon is carrying once they're out of the transport by hiding from Dragons, getting in cover, using anti-harlequins tactics etc. thus reducing the dread combo into a flying scoring unit that kills nothing and has cost the Eldar player around 350 points, thats happened to me quite a few times and its crippling. But thats not what the internet wants to hear.

Granted that the VE/HF combo is too much as I agree, but if anyone can suggest a way to deliver the expensive fragile Eldar Aspect units into combat in numbers without skimmer transports and against other top tier codexes then I'm all ears. Would you really foot slog a load of T3 4+ sv. Aspect warriors against a marine army? If the transport dies, those units die expensively. Its not like they're marines; rhino dies, meh, I can't do much for a turn but I'm not going to lose many troops and I've got some ranged weaponry. If the transport dies Aspects are screwed, full stop.

As an aside, last game I played mech Eldar on Mech Eldar, 4 of 6 holo-fielded tanks died along with his wave serpent. So thats 5 out of 8 skimmers dead. His Falcon did nothing much all game apart from skulk about and not die.

Posted By anathema on 06/27/2007 1:46 AM

Granted that the VE/HF combo is too much as I agree, but if anyone can suggest a way to deliver the expensive fragile Eldar Aspect units into combat in numbers without skimmer transports and against other top tier codexes then I'm all ears. Would you really foot slog a load of T3 4+ sv. Aspect warriors against a marine army? If the transport dies, those units die expensively. Its not like they're marines; rhino dies, meh, I can't do much for a turn but I'm not going to lose many troops and I've got some ranged weaponry. If the transport dies Aspects are screwed, full stop.

As an aside, last game I played mech Eldar on Mech Eldar, 4 of 6 holo-fielded tanks died along with his wave serpent. So thats 5 out of 8 skimmers dead. His Falcon did nothing much all game apart from skulk about and not die.

Thank you Anathema for bringing some actual facts and real experience to this rather redundant discussion.

Janthkin, you continue to prove your total lack of any tactical sense or gaming experience with your statements. Anathema explained why trip-Falcon builds are less-than-optimal, and once you learn to deal with them they're really quite a pushover, since your army is facing minimal retaliation.

The mere idea of your opponent simply "hiding and grabbing objectives with 6 units on the last turn" is inane and completely misinformed...do you examine your own statments critically? Unless you play with a "marine gunline" type of army (why do I get this vibe from you?) all you need to do to screw-over trip-falcon builds is simply close and overwhelm. It's that simple. Once again, if you can't build a list that's capable of dealing some decent damage in the course of six turns to at least two of your opponent's Falcons, you're using a sub-optimal list.

So... because Anethema agrees with you Ellios, he's brought 'facts', whereas everyone else has brought... what exactly? Care to enlighten us?

BYE

I actually thought Colonel Ellios was being sarcastic with his first sentence.  His post sounds an awful lot like Warseer's cry of, "Just use tactics!".

And remember, the plural of anecdote is not data.

I can definitely regale you with tales of my glorious victories and woeful defeats, but they'll just be my own experiences and opinions.

The 1 in 9 glancing hit thing is the probability that I've hopefully calculated correctly though and I can describe ways my opponents have countered my own grav tanks as I'm sure most Eldar players can.

One such opinion is that a lot of Eldar Aspects cannot function very well at top tournament level without reliable transports. Harlequins can be used on foot in some circumstances, but to try to use them offensively on foot in an all-comers list is cruising for a bruising against a mobile opponent so ideally they need to be in a Falcon. While people may get hung up on the difficulty in taking holo-fielded grav-tanks down, the Falcon and Wave Serpents needs to be pretty hard in order to allow many other (expensive, fragile and short-ranged) units to achieve their full potential.

The Falcon doesn't work well as a gunship due to its poor BS and the altered spirit stone, hence its multi-role nature. The Fire Prism is a good gunship with decent BS, range and weaponry, but is glanced with relative ease by most weaponry that isn't small arms and so rendered useless often if not used with care. Without the protection of their upgrades (and considering that they lack high front AV like the Hammerhead and Predator), what use are these tanks? The Falcon becomes too unreliable to be a transport and the Prism too likely to lose a weapon or die to be a good gunship.

Would anyone actually take Falcons or Prisms without holo-fields and get usage that befits their point cost from them? I doubt it, everyone would choose Wraithlords as the default heavy choice and we'd be back to the old codex. Hell, no-one used Prisms before in 4th ed. anyway, despite their objective grabbing potential, so its not just that.

While the level of protection may arguably be too high when you can only kill them on a double 6, I've yet to hear an alternative that wouldn't make them mostly unviable.

Curious about your math, here. 36 possible 2d6 results; exactly 3 of them (6-6, 5-6, 6-5) result in an immobilized or destroyed result.



In a large number of missions, preserving 6 scoring units untouched until the end of the game pretty much equates to a win. Victory point denial + multiple highly-mobile scoring units is an extremely viable approach to almost every mission out there.

Look, it's not internet panic. I took Eldar to the Adepticon Gladiator (though, admittedly, only 1 Falcon & 2 Fire Prisms). I have played both with and against the current and the old incarnation of the Falcon. It requires luck, not tactics, to prevent a Falcon from surviving until the end of the game, and swooping down on an objective during turn 6. Holofields/Spirit Stones (in 4th Ed, either codex) makes for an exceedingly frustrating experience.


Shhh, HBMC. Ellios is busy mocking my lack of tactical knowledge and my SM army tactics. Let's not distract him.

You forgot the double 5 as well, so 4 in 36 equals 1 in 9. I tried to work out the probablility of killing a penetrated Falcon but ran out of fingers, so if anyone can do that it would be interesting.



Looking at this from a 1500 point perspective, putting 1100 points for example (blinged Falcon+6 Harlequins x3) and just flying them round the board won't win many games. With this army you can get a couple of troops, an HQ and not much else in there. With th ease of glancing Falcons, they won't be firing much and without much of an army apart from this you won't kill much.

The embarked troops need to get out of the tanks to do damage, flying around all game isn't much use. Your opponent then claims the objectives while pinging your tanks and the rest of your army and the best you can do is contest objectives, not win them outright. It takes one lucky glance from that relatively unmolested firepower from your opponent to bring down 300+ points (they should be able to cause 9+ glances over 6 turns) and then you lose on VP's killed. The best use of such a list is to let the Halrequins go into asault, which can be countered to some degree depending on the army, they will get touched but will allow the tanks a better chance of objective claiming.



Everything requires luck to some degree, I've had 6 Fire Dragons fire at a Hammerhead for 3 turns in a row and not brought it down. I've also brought one down with a pistol shot to the rear. There are still tactics and weapon options that can be used to maximise your chance of killing a Falcon and its cargo, just like the tactics people use to take down other tanks. It can indeed be frustrating and I know that, but so can trying to take down 3 Russ with no lance weapons and Fire Prisms that can't combine shots as one keeps getting shaken. I then have to work around the problem.

If people think that Falcon lists are going to dominate tournaments then they need to build with that in mind, I know some of my teammates here in the UK are doing this with their GT lists, just like everyone tools up vs. marines already. Maybe less lascannons and a few more autocannons and tank-hunting assault cannons are needed for the percieved metagame.

Posted By anathema on 06/27/2007 9:21 AM
 Maybe less lascannons and a few more autocannons and tank-hunting assault cannons are needed for the percieved metagame.

Hehe, just what tournaments need, more Assault cannons....

On a more serious note, yeah, tank hunting ACs seem to be pretty much the best option for dropping falcons.  Autocannons get twice the shots as a lascannon, but the LC glances twice as often (If my math is correct).  Tank hunting autocannons are great, but only chaos can get those, and it seems only for a few more months.

And I don't think many folks will claim that falcons can win a game for the eldar player, any more than 9 assault cannons will win a game for IG or 11 russes for armored company.  What people are claiming, at least what I'm claiming, is that the falcon is currently the most durable vehicle in the game, from a take on all comers perspective.  There are about 4armies that can reliably drop them: IG SAFH, Necrons,  tank hunting ACs of doom, and tank hunting havocs w/ autocannons.  Orks have almost no chance to drop it.  Sisters need to get lucky with their Exorcists early on.  Barring a geniunly bad beat, 1 or 2 of your falcons are going to survive.

Additionally, while 1100 pts are tied up in falcons and their cargo, that cargo can get out when/where it is safe and accomplish something.  Harlies can rip up shooting squads, dragons nuke tanks, etc.  the remained of point can be taken in Eldard and Pathfinders.  Is that an unbeatable list?  No.  Will the list have a large amount of success due, at least partially, to the durability of the falcons?  Yes it will.  And that's the problem: GW writes rules assuming the average player takes one of each option, not three. 

All right, this thread has meandered a bit from my original question, but I think I can summarize the general opinion of the group:

1) Any increase in treaded vehicles after CSMs lose small las/plas squads will be minimal.
2) Most vehicles right now are pretty balanced, assuming they are used properly and in the correct method.
3) Counter examples to the above statement are:
a) C:SM rhinos are too pricy
b) The eldar falcon is slightly too durable
c) Landraiders are probobly too expensive
d) SM landspeeders are a little too cheap

Does this sound about right? I orignally posted because I felt that vehicles weren't bieng used enough, but after thinking about it, nearly every vehicle in 40k has a place/time to shine.

That seems to be a very good, nice summation.

Thank you!

I'd add a 4) Aside from durable skimmers, the current Transport Rules discourage use of transport vehicles as transports.

If you have any other method of moving your troops across the battlefield (assuming they need to), it's better. Drop Pods are great; jump packs are great; fleet of foot is great; bikes are great. All these things are great, because a single hit isn't going to immobilize the troops, a single penetrating hit isn't going to force them to hop out of a (moving) vehicle; and a single destroying hit isn't going to cause the afore-mentioned bailing out, PLUS leave them entangled for a turn.

Shooty armies like transports more. Chimerae (and razorbacks) are firepower-supplements, rather than transports. Wave Serpents and Devilfish are fairly durable, given the upgrades available for the respective armies and the "skimmers moving fast" rule.

Ahh. Sorry - usually I use that number for "chance to kill a Falcon on a glance", and assume Vectored Engines for the soft landing.

The problem with killing the Falcon on a pen isn't the pen table - it's GETTING to pen in the first place. Aside from assuming a stupid opponent who leaves his Falcons exposed during deployment (and doesn't have/use Eldrad to fix that), or a barren wasteland of a table, it's a rarity to get a shot at a Falcon before it moves.



Try it some time - you'll be (un)pleasantly surprised. Falcons are tanks - they can tank-shock opponents off objectives on the final turn. Or they can position to deliver their cargoes on turn 6, from whatever angle is optimal, and you eat 18 Aspect warriors with no chance to reply.

Heck, if the other 400 points is Avatar + guardian gun squads in cover, they'll do some damage while the Falcons flit about at range and snipe at targets of opportunity; those Pulse Lasers have decent range, and are on a move-12"-and-fire platform.

Now, it's possible our metagame situations are fantastically different - I've played on exactly one table too barren to hide skimmers in the past 4 years. And if that's the case, then yes - a barren table offers more chances to (luckily) drop a Falcon, just because you can bring most of your firepower to target it. The usual scenario for me, however, involves refusing a flank with the skimmers, which drops available enemy firepower substantially, and then using terrain to whittle down the opponent, until it's time to rush in.

Janthkin it amazes me that you continue to post in this thread as if you know what you're talking about. Not only did you make use of blatantly wrong statistical proofs, but it's obvious you don't play very competitively. Please don't vomit nonsense and confuse the discussion.

Try it some time - you'll be (un)pleasantly surprised. Falcons are tanks - they can tank-shock opponents off objectives on the final turn. Or they can position to deliver their cargoes on turn 6, from whatever angle is optimal, and you eat 18 Aspect warriors with no chance to reply.

If you have "no chance to [retaliate]" then you got stuck with first turn against a skimmer army. If this situation you describe actually arises, you either a) had a terrible turn of luck for an entire game; or (much more likely) b) are incompetent at the use of proper tactics to counter your opponent, and can't put together a competitive army list.

GT-quality terrain usually provides just enough cover to hide two (three if you're lucky) falcon-sized vehicles completely. Often, the best you can hope for is to get "hull down" against enemy guns if you go second. If we are talking about Mech Eldar, the chances of getting to shoot at a Falcon before it moves goes up some more--your opponent has other, more fragile units to worry about hiding.

Heck, if the other 400 points is Avatar + guardian gun squads in cover, they'll do some damage while the Falcons flit about at range and snipe at targets of opportunity; those Pulse Lasers have decent range, and are on a move-12"-and-fire platform.

"Some damage" is probably an exaggeration. Exactly how much damage do you expect to be caused by a handful of guardian "gun squads" with their amazing BS3, and the incredible, awesome might of the Heavy 2 BS 3 pulse laser on a Falcon? Please.

Posted By Iorek on 06/27/2007 8:00 AM
I actually thought Colonel Ellios was being sarcastic with his first sentence.  His post sounds an awful lot like Warseer's cry of, "Just use tactics!".

And remember, the plural of anecdote is not data.

It's obvious you have no business being here. If "just use tactics" is all you've gotten out the rebuttals to this Falcon-hate whining session, you need to seriously reassess why you are even on this message board.

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 06/27/2007 6:23 AM
So... because Anethema agrees with you Ellios, he's brought 'facts', whereas everyone else has brought... what exactly? Care to enlighten us?

BYE

Anethama is not the only one to have brought facts to this discussion. But assuredly you and plenty of others have brought nothing but their whiny opinions, or worse--blatant fallacies. (I hope you don't take that too harshly--most of your "game development" ideas are quite good)

EDIT:

Posted By Polonius on 06/27/2007 9:58 AM
And I don't think many folks will claim that falcons can win a game for the eldar player, any more than 9 assault cannons will win a game for IG or 11 russes for armored company.  What people are claiming, at least what I'm claiming, is that the falcon is currently the most durable vehicle in the game, from a take on all comers perspective.  There are about 4armies that can reliably drop them: IG SAFH, Necrons,  tank hunting ACs of doom, and tank hunting havocs w/ autocannons.  Orks have almost no chance to drop it.  Sisters need to get lucky with their Exorcists early on.  Barring a geniunly bad beat, 1 or 2 of your falcons are going to survive.

Polonius thank you for  providing yet another  mostly realistic perspective. My only beef with your statements is that Falcons do not guarantee a "good, safe" position do deploy their troops. With over 600 of your points invested in three Falcons and another good chunk invested in their cargo, there isn't much dangerous stuff left to include in your army list to thin out the enemy for your transported troops. That is to say, if you're using three Falcons full of cargo, you'll be hard pressed to find a spot to drop your cargo and do decent damage without being overwhelmed and counter-attacked by the enemies swarming everywhere, since you don't have enough active firepower to reliably suppress the key targets that need suppressing to ensure that your Falcon's cargo simply gets to run amok in the enemy lines. This doesn't happen every time, but it happens with enough regularity that I gave up playing Mech Eldar for the time being. The only good match-up for a Falcon-abuse list is one in which the enemy has just as few models on the board as the Falcon abuser.

My own experience speaks volumes about the end of the glory days of the Falcon army: in the last local tournament, I was the only Eldar general out of the four present that wasn't using any tanks, and I was the only one that placed within the top three for battle points. The other Eldar players were serious GT competitors, excellent hobbyists and excellent generals, and the performance of my list compared to theirs assuaged any of my misgivings about giving up the Eldar tanks. Fourth Edition is all about the infantry and the monstrous creatures, but that said I haven't seen any decline in the average turnout of vehicles in army builds. If anything, Fourth edition has caused a polarizing affect in that those who tend to take tanks, now take lots and lots of tanks, and those that favor infantry, stick almost exclusively to infantry (or MCs).

You know, I wondered if you were a troll. Now, I'm certain of it.

(Aside: did anyone else think Adepticon's Gladiator was a non-competitive environment?)

Posted By Janthkin on 06/27/2007 2:54 PM

Janthkin it amazes me that you continue to post in this thread as if you know what you're talking about. Not only did you make use of blatantly wrong statistical proofs, but it's obvious you don't play very competitively. Please don't vomit nonsense and confuse the discussion.

You know, I wondered if you were a troll. Now, I'm certain of it.

With a highly-developed tone of condescension no less.

Posted By ColonelEllios on 06/27/2007 1:19 PM
Polonius thank you for  providing yet another  mostly realistic perspective. My only beef with your statements is that Falcons do not guarantee a "good, safe" position do deploy their troops. With over 600 of your points invested in three Falcons and another good chunk invested in their cargo, there isn't much dangerous stuff left to include in your army list to thin out the enemy for your transported troops. That is to say, if you're using three Falcons full of cargo, you'll be hard pressed to find a spot to drop your cargo and do decent damage without being overwhelmed and counter-attacked by the enemies swarming everywhere, since you don't have enough active firepower to reliably suppress the key targets that need suppressing to ensure that your Falcon's cargo simply gets to run amok in the enemy lines. This doesn't happen every time, but it happens with enough regularity that I gave up playing Mech Eldar for the time being. The only good match-up for a Falcon-abuse list is one in which the enemy has just as few models on the board as the Falcon abuser.

Posted By bigchris1313 on 06/27/2007 3:05 PM
With a highly-developed tone

I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks!

of condescension no less.

I adopt a tone of condescension towards those who persevere in their ignorance via possessing deaf ears to all but themselves.

It's not the first time I've been called a troll for being right... :S

Posted By ColonelEllios on 06/27/2007 1:19 PM
It's obvious you have no business being here. If "just use tactics" is all you've gotten out the rebuttals to this Falcon-hate whining session, you need to seriously reassess why you are even on this message board.

That's it, take the bait.  Good boy!

Every rude remark degrades your credibility that much more.  You're about two posts away from being the next General Hobbs.

Posted By Iorek on 06/27/2007 7:41 PM
You're about two posts away from being the next General Hobbs.

He's even picked the correct rank, then.

Posted By ColonelEllios on 06/27/2007 4:30 PM

I adopt a tone of condescension towards those who perceive my actual ignorance from me posting anything on the internet.

Fixed!

I adopt a tone of condescension towards those who persevere in their ignorance via possessing deaf ears to all but themselves.

It's not the first time I've been called a troll for being right...

It also appears that you have a keen sense of irony as well.



BYE

I thought I'd take a look at the Falcon's usage for objective claiming in the 5 standard missions at 1500 using the 3 Falcon list of doom. First off, we all know that it can zoom 24" to claim stuff which is extremely powerful so I won't keep referring to this much.

Cleanse: It can claim a quarter, however with the nature of the Cleanse set-up, so can most other units. Its main advantage is the ability to get from one side quarter thats contested to another that isn't. Doesn't help if your opponent has contested both though or has similarly mobile units like Speeders, other vehicles or Deep Strike/infiltrators. Overall, no massive advantage for this mission compared to other mobile and/or rugged units.Can claim and contest, but relatively more difficult for the Harlequins to get much use.

Secure and Control: This is one where it shines. The rule about having the entire unit within 6" of the Loot Counter means that the Falcon can zoom 24", tank-shock a unit off the onjective and claim (or just claim an uncontested counter) in an ideal world.

However being a big model, you have to get your measurement right. Also, if you take the 3 Falcon list of Doom, you can only realistically claim/contest 3 counters. In a mission with 4 or 5 you have so little else that you may well be giving away 600 points. What a lot of people also forget is that other vehicles can tank-shock the Falcon off the objective as well if they have AV13/14. However I won't deny that its speed makes it ideal for this mission.

Recon: Again, very useful as it can utilise cover to hide then dash into the score zone for the last turn, especially with a unit embarked. Downside to the 3 Falcon list is that there is little to stop your opponent doing the same for a no-score bore draw due to the lack of firepower. You'd have to trade off the kills your cargo would make vs. their scoring potential and loss of VP's if/when they die. However in a balanced list one allows a great deal of flexibility and is undeniably very useful.

Seek and Destroy: All about the kills and points conserved. The Falcon conserves points extremely well as we all know. However it also doesn't kill that much. If it does go down, its a 400 point swing for the tank alone and whatever cargo it holds possibly up to a 720 point swing with Harlequins in there. I assume that this is the mission mentioned where you hide the 6 scoring units, but again you're not likely to kill much potentially leaving it too close for comfort. My Falcon going down on the last turn cost me a game at the UKGT this year and that was just for the 175 VP's it gave up, so in this mission paradoxically they can be a liability. Agains the trade off for the cargo is a real consideration.

Take and Hold: A mission where they can try and all score in the last turn again, however with the objective so easily reachable and without the unit being required to be all within 12" the tricks usable in Secure and Control aren't as useful. Also the opposition can get plenty of their units into the score zone as it only takes a few turns of movement even for ground pounders to score. The Eldar player can bomb their Harlequins into this heavily populated area, but a canny vehicle/skimmer wall or plethora of bunched enemy units can drag them down. I wouldn't want to bomb my Quins into a couple of mobs of bucnhed slugga boyz/gaunts or guard even on the objective for example. A more balanced army with more shooting is probably more suited.

Overall, the 3-Falcon list will be great in a couple of these, but not uber in the rest IMO. I think a balanced army is more suited to doing missions rather than getting harlequin kills. Feel free to disagree with my analysis!

Just one more point for Janthkin, one of the best ways of getting first turn pens vs. Eldar Skimmers is infiltrate. I fear infiltrating Chaos lists much more than Iron Warriors so have taken measures in my list to try and limit them.

The issue isn't whether the eldar are too overpowered... but if the falcons are.

And the math just doesn't lie, it has been shown over and over. It is just damn hard to take one down. Yes I have seen it done, hell I saw one get immobilized by a Last Stand. But realistically, you can have most all of your army try to take it down, and you will only be able to get it to not shoot.

Trying to move away from harlis...?? with fleet, and ignore terrain? Good luck

Don't worry, GW has solved that problem for you. Infiltrate is gone.

Most of the (US) tournaments I attend don't limit themselves to the Gray Tome missions; the Adepticon approach is becoming more prevalent, with several objectives to complete in each game. Similarly, most tournaments have embraced the 25% terrain rules, meaning there is no shortage of terrain (unless your're on the lava tables at the LVGT).

Also, there is an underlying assumption that the Falcons (and the rest of the Eldar army, for that matter) won't kill much of anything during the game. While AV 12 is (relavitvely) easy to glance, it still requires heavy weapons to do it. For many armies, heavy weapons have only limited mobility; that, coupled with the Falcon's high mobility, offers the optimal situation for terrain-sniping. "Poor" BS or not (Guardsmen have been dealing with BS 3 for a while), it's going to be hard to prevent those tanks from hitting a few things, over the course of the game. If, as is most desirable, you focus on the enemy's most mobile assets first, it becomes an increasing advantage over time.

A couple comments on your mission analysis, though:
Cleanse: Each Falcon ends up claiming/contesting 2 quarters at the end of the game - drop the passengers, then move. As an added bonus, your dropped passengers may be in a position to prevent your opponent from contesting the original quarter (by killing them).

Secure and Control: similar thoughts apply here - on turn 5, stop close enough to an objective marker to drop your passengers on turn 6, then go tank-shock a different marker. Your passengers can at least go contest the objective, and the 13"-18" assault reach of Harlies gives you plenty of leeway for using terrain to minimize risks (where possible).

Recon: They are very useful here, as you noted. Of particular note: any army that includes a substantial portion of their points in infantry is going to be hard-pressed to make up the difference, even if no killing occurs - it'll take 5 turns of walking (and not shooting heavy weapons) to cross the table, irrespective of any Eldar fire that makes it through.

Seek and Destroy: While a Falcon can be killed, they are still the optimal unit for such a mission, exactly for the reason you noted - they conserve points better than pretty much anything else in the game (self-Fortuning Eldrad comes close). If a Falcon gives up zero points, and over 6 turns manages to score even a couple, it's a net win. Do that 3 times, and maybe add the passengers for targets of opportunity, and it might not be a massacre, but it's fairly hard to lose.

Take and Hold: Even with the easier objective rules, 2 or 3 tank-shocking Falcons at the end game is rough. It can be prevented - Chimerae are great for that, as even in death they can't be pushed out of the way by Falcons - but not by every army. In this mission, more than the others, the Eldar might actually have to do some real fighting.



Multi-falcon Eldar are an evasion army. There are some similar armies in Fantasy (MSU Dark Elves/Wood Elves, Tzeentch Flying Circus, RAF, Slaaneshi Daemonic Legion), but the only comparable forces I can think of in 40k are the Eldar bike forces, and suit-heavy Tau. It's an army designed to deny your opponent the opportunity to engage your army in any meaningful way, and let you pick and choose where and when you want to fight. Tends to lead to defeat in detail, but usually without enough turns to completely kill everything on the table. What this gains for you depends on the environment you're in. If it's an old-style GT, where pure VP differential is used to rank wins, it may not secure you many Massacres. If, however, it's an Adepticon-style event, it's probably enough to let you complete the primary and secondary objectives reliably, and with enough confidence to consider how to deal with the Tertiary. It was enough to win the Gladiator, and an Eldar skimmer team took Best Team Tacticians (most battle points) in the Team tournament.