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.

So theres really no point in the shadowseer at all if riding in the falcon? Yes take the powered weapon and drop a couple of kisses heck without the falcon they have ff. It works well trust me i just used it in a gt.
its much more than .5 of a meq with five dice on the charge. Im not here to argue i play alot of eldar and differant strategies do work you know? The falcon with harlequin is a first turn kill fest.

Of course there's a point to the Shadowseer. He gives you plasma grenades, and he helps to keep you alive if you get stuck in the open after killing one unit (this bit is just a bonus, though).



But he already has a Falcon! Why on earth would you rather add a single Harlie and slog it on foot than not add a single Harlie and ridein the safest transport in the 41st millenium?



No offence meant, but lots of people have used 6 Harlies w/ Kisses, Seer and Falcon in GTs as well, and a lot of them did much better than 2/2/1.



I didn't say he'd kill 0.5 of a MEq. I said he'd only kill 0.5 of a MEq more, which is true.



If you want to put forward a claim, be prepared to argue.



Experience tells me otherwise, but it's difficult to prove this either way, so I won't try. Instead, I'll say this: If you're convinced that this is the case, you could always deploy your Harlies outside the Falcon, and only embark them on the second turn, or on the first turn if you go first.

I think that tri-Falcon Eldar are indeed the best army in 40K, since they can deal with other min/maxed armies like Godzilla Nids fairly well, perform excellent in missions because of their movement and benefit more from escalation than any other army in the game. Falcons that have delivered their cargo but get shaken can still perform quite amazing tank shocks to make themselves useful. Additionally I think that mech Eldar is the only army that doesn't have to worry about Lash of Submission at all even in their current state (like my list) but if in doubt they can always add a Farseer with runes on a bike or in a Falcon.

Like you said Longshot even the Eldar have tougher matchups and some armies can actually provide a tactical challenge for them, but it doesn't change the fact that on paper they have the most advantages.

You could even fit Eldrad in my list but although he's a quite useful while on foot the turn he disembarks he'll only be casting Eldritch Storms and Mind Wars instead of Fortune & Doom & Guide.

HQ:

Autarch: 145p
Eldar Jetbike, Laser Lance, Reaper launcher

Eldrad Ulthran: 210p

Elites:

6 Harlequins: 162p
Shadowseer, Kiss x6

6 Harlequins: 162p
Shadowseer, Kiss x6

5 Fire Dragons: 80p

Troops:

3 Jetbikes: 76p
Shuriken Cannon

3 Jetbikes: 76p
Shuriken Cannon

Heavy Support:

Falcon: 195p
Shuriken Cannon x2, Vectored Engines, Holo-Fields, Spirit Stones

Falcon: 195p
Shuriken Cannon x2, Vectored Engines, Holo-Fields, Spirit Stones

Falcon: 195p
Shuriken Cannon x2, Vectored Engines, Holo-Fields, Spirit Stones


You're right. The Shadowseer is an essential upgrade that cannot be ignored no matter how expensive it may seem. It allows the unit to deploy in the open while they're waiting for the Falcon to show up from reserve in escalation games, and allows the unit to assault shooty units deployed in cover. You don't want enemy units hitting 22p T3 5+ save models before you can attack.

Actually people say they play gts that really dont. and 6 harlequin the way I play them dont roll well. Its apples and oranges. if you talk to some players they will laugh at you when you tell them your useing all falcons. Against other eldar players its death (ever heard of swooping hawks?) so really no its not the ultimate tourney army just talked up alot. In fact there were NON that used it that i remember seeing. its just not versatile enough against the likes of 7 to nine assault squads (blood angels) most with melta bombs. Say what you like just because a style is liked does not mean its the best. In fact most common was 3 harlequin ON FOOT and three spider units with seer council and 3 wraithlords. So please dont go and tell me especially when i just said that EVERYONE plays differant. The monster bug army is tough but against eldar and tau its not all that. And besides the games do have goals not just to kill numbers.
Last but not least you make a fleet of foot harlequin squad that ignores terrain sound like its a bad thing? its not? and id much rather put banshees or a slow moving unit in a falcon. Dont get me wrong i do like harlequin in a falcon also and it does have its place. But not three units all slammed into falcons.  

You mean that when someone says they just played a GT, maybe they're lying and they really didn't? You're right, I never thought of that before. I guess I'm going to have to assume you're lying and didn't really play a GT, then. You know, just to be safe.



What, you have a special way of playing that makes you roll badly? Teach me, please! No, actually, teach my opponents.



I've done the math and I've seen the tabletop results. It's a lot less impressive than it seems.



Seer Council? Three Spiders? Are you kidding me? What tourney was this? I'd very much like to see these players' placings. I doubt it was anywhere near the 3 Falcon/6 Serpent mech list that won Best General at LV GT.



It's not bad. It's just not as good.

(Edit: Um, I'll come back later and edit something in that will pertain to the actual army list posted and make this post not horribly OT.

Edit 2: Actually, I have nothing to add. It's a jet-tarch, Eldrad, two units of Harlies, FDs, and three Falcons; what more is there to say? It can't get much more scary than this.)

Yeah it is a solid all purpose list, it is so solid that my mates live in fear of me running a similar one and have banned me from using it (I understand it is bloody harsh). And I gotta agree with teagus harlies need a shadow seer and work better from a falcon. Plus hawks don't work that well against holoed up unkillifalcons. And as for how it works against the new chaos well I am 3-0 up, all have been massacres and I have faced the duel lash prince list twice now, and that is my current mech army without the benifit of harlies. As for people gobbing off about playing in GT's well I played in the 1st GT in Oz in brisbane and got 2nd with eldar, and unlike others Oz WD 258 is all the proof i need .

Since you're pretty vell versed on the 40K rules as they are written, could you tell me if Eldrad can cast two Eldritch Storms and a Mind War in the same turn (all in the same shooting phase.) I checked the psychic power rules in the rulebook and I can't say I found anything that says he couldn't.

I've always played it that he can. Both are used "instead of firing a weapon", but don't "count as a shooting weapon" the way certain Chaos powers do, so I see nothing preventing him from doing so. You can do two things "instead of" doing the one thing you could otherwise have done.

Some will argue that Eldritch Storm has a weapon profile and as such, counts as shooting a weapon, but this is pure inductive reasoning, and not RAW.

Look at it this way there 100 and some people you are playing against with sooo many differant armies. Many times its more advantages to have more troops than those three falcons plus a pricey eldrad. Thats all i was trying to say before. They are limited in fire power they are expensive after adding whats needed to make them so nasty. And yes hard to KILL but not hard to make useless with glances. Takeing differant options with eldar makes them very capable of takeing out the three falcon army and even better at takeing out monster bugs (there were alot of those). So yes it gets much more scary than that. Heck for what its capable of doing ill mount wraithgaurd in a wave serpant and dish out alot more damage. So go actually play before you bad mouth and actually know what your talking about. Three falcons loaded up against the likes of all assault squads(BA) or even raven wing first turn charge,or even shrike. Heck the tank and passengers will be dead before you even get to do anything. Lets see you have not moved everything hits on sixes still but penetrates also.  

Look, mate, we're not idiots, and you're not the only person who has seen Eldar on the tabletop. If you had convincing arguments for why what you claim is correct, that would be one thing, but you've basically ignored all arguments in favour of simply telling us, "I've played in a GT (and lost as many games as I won. . .) and I know what works in a real game, and you don't, just trust me on this." Well guess what, I don't trust you on this, because I've seen with my own eyes what mech Eldar can do, both on the tabletop and in the results of tourneys. Mech Eldar may not be the only configuration that works, but it sure as hell is as tried and tested as any other configuration.

As a follow-up question, does he have to target the same unit/model with all three spells, or can he select his three targets freely from those that are in his line of sight?


My Eldrad list was simply an example of tri-Falcon Eldar bringing a powerful anti-Lash of Submission psyker to the game even at relatively low points values like 1500 points. A Farseer on a bike with Runes of Warding, Singing Spear and Doom is only 60 or so points cheaper than Eldrad so I can see arguments in favour of either choice.


That's quite funny actually. Harlequins are point for point the best assault troops in the game, and Falcon is the best tank in the game. No matter how expensive they may seem they will earn their points back and more. Approaching 40K army list creation is very simple. You take a unit that is underpriced or otherwise very points effective and you maximise their number in your force. Why take only one Falcon if you can take three? Why take only one Dakkafex if you can take three? Why take only one las/plas SM squad if you can take three to six? Why take only one Daemon Prince if you can take two, and so on...

Most people who use Harlequins and Falcons really need them to win, otherwise they would not need them... hence these units are for the gaming challenged.

- G

Therion, since he isn't shooting anyone, he ought to be free to target who he pleases. Some will claim that he can't, because psychic powers follow shooting rules unless otherwise stated, but I think the quite detailed account of how to target and resolve the power certainly qualifies as "otherwise stated".

Green Bloater, they are also for people who expect to face opponents of an equal skill level who will also be bringing cheesemonger armies.

@ tegeus-Cromis

That is very true. There are a lot of different kinds of cheese out there. The main reason I said that is there is a plethora of nice units available to eldar now that the new codex is out and I think it is too bad we don't see more of these units in play.

- G

So far, my thinking is that the Eldar list is the best overall because there isn't an army out there that has better than a 50/50 outlook against it, and it soundly defeats a lot of very common armies - including foil armies such as Godzilla.

All the other power lists have at least one major foil out there - Tau have IG and Nidzilla, Necrons have Nidzilla, Nidzilla has Eldar and Dark Eldar, and so on. I'm sure there're better examples, but it doesn't seem like there're a lot of games where Eldar doesn't have a very good shot.

There certainly are Eldar foils, but they're dependent on matchup + mission rather than just bad matchups (e.g. no one wants to play your list against IG on a bad board when they go first).

Posted By Green Bloater on 08/15/2007 11:51 AM
Most people who use Harlequins and Falcons really need them to win, otherwise they would not need them... hence these units are for the gaming challenged.

- G

why would you play your 2nd string when you can play your first?   This is a game right?  Your telling me you would intentionally handicap yourself when playing a competative game against another person?  Or do both of you bring sub-optimal lists?

Really needing them to win?  Is your ego that huge that you really think that YOU can always bring a sub optimal list and win?  

Im sorry, I dont normally get worked up but thats a pretty ignorant statement...

Posted By KAELZ on 08/16/2007 8:27 AM

Your telling me you would intentionally handicap yourself when playing a competative game against another person?  Or do both of you bring sub-optimal lists?

"Yes, but I'm for a toned down air of competitiion"; and "In the most enjoyable games, yes."

But I'll step back out of this, don't have much to add to the "Eldar = über" debate

- Salvage

Posted By KAELZ on 08/16/2007 8:27 AM

  This is a game right?  Your telling me you would intentionally handicap yourself when playing a competative game against another person? 

Absolutely, why play a cruise control list when you can enjoy the challenge of playing a "sub optimal" list. Recheck the first part of that quote - this is a game. Did you never play historical wargames and take charge of the underdog/histical loser, I could never understand why one would want to play the better side/historical winner, where is the challenge (unless of course the winner won against the odds). 

Maybe the challenge could come from your opponent's skill? I mean, he's supposed to have some. . . .

Of course, if your opponent handicaps himself with a sub-optimal list, then it only makes sense to bring a sub-optimal list yourself, but otherwise, I don't see what the point is. After all, your opponent surely wants a challenge as well.

In 40k, I always bring my best list. why? You never know how much your opponent is going to gimp his list.

Almost everyone has a different idea of what sub-optimal is, and just how sub-optimal they ought to be. What if I gimp my list down to brain-damaged gorilla level and you only dumb yours down to preschooler level? Who's having fun?

The only way to insure an unbiased game in 40k is to bring your best list all the time. Otherwise someone's going to be saying "you only beat me because I gimped my list for fluffiness" and that just starts all kinds of crap.

I'm not saying a sub-optimal list has no place in 40k precisely, so much as that if you bring a sub-optimal list you shouldn't whine about it and should expect to get smoked. If that's fun for you that's fine.

Just my philosophy, as to why I always bring the best list I can field (within the confines of what I have a good time playing).

I hate it when they pull the gimp.

- G

- G

Posted By KAELZ on 08/16/2007 1:22 PM

No, I never played historical mini games, Im too competative for that...its a waste of time imo.  

historical 'mini' games, lol the sort of historical games I used to play could take several weekends. Unfortunatly I don't have that sort of free time anymore, which is a pity cos they were all far superior to 40k, but 40k being a somewhat shorter game fits in better and isn't to bad a game. Or do you mean 'miniatures' - I never played them, I was on about board games - longest day, third reich, empire in arms, squad leader, battle bulge, waterloo, gettysburg etc.

As to being competitive, if those other games are a waste of time purely due to your competitive nature then what are you doing playing 40k? I'm sorry I just do not follow that logic at all.

I play "Sub-optimal" lists all the time. Partly for fun, as I like certain units that suck rules wise but that I've converted, and partly to learn how to be a better General. There are players at my local store who are all out power gamers. One always takes min/max'ed lists like the ones Theron is trying to build, even if he's facing people who are a decade younger and still new at the game. I've beaten him twice with my very sub-optimal lists (Jungle Fighters anyone?) and lost several times. That doesn't bother me at all, I knew it would be hard before I put the first mini on the table. What bothers me is that this guy has no clue about half the rules, lies about the other half, and whines incessantly as soon as he starts to lose. So I don't play him anymore.

That is the main difference. Maxed out lists don't ruin the game as much as the majority of players who use them are jerks of one form or another. You can always bring your own optimal load out and fight on even (or close to even, this is GW) odds, but if your opponent is of the sort that believe they should win just because they brought 9 obits and a siren prince, then it isn't worth playing them.

I imagine Theron isn't that sort, so it would be very interesting to see how well I could do against such a good list with a expert player behind it.

I've always played somewhat optimal lists in both 40K and FB and I've done well with them. I'm highly competitive and try to play each new army up to their potential. If I've played like this for little over 15 years now and have had nothing but fun I'm not going to change my attitude now.

Has anyone heard anything about the Cloudstrike Squadron datasheet for Apocalypse? The box set is only 40-50£ (depending on who you're buying from) and includes 3 Falcon Grav-Tanks so it's a great deal, but naturally in Apocalypse you'll also get some nifty special rules on top of that for using the 'squadron'. I'm really psyched about it actually. You get rewarded for fielding tanks that you'd field in any case. I'm thinking of buying three or four of those Cloudstrike Squadrons for Apocalypse, and filling all of them with Dragons and Harlequins. I'd also like to get a Revenant Titan but I'm not so sure about the quality of the Forgeworld resin kits, for example if they're solid enough to withstand transportation and gaming. If anyone has one let me know.

my vampire is fine to transport and my mates revenent was ok, big unweildy but ok..

Yes it is a copout to say you must bring ALL the crutch units to compete. A real tactican can make do with all the usual stuff.

- G

A real tactician would not bring one-legged soldiers and toothless dogs into a fight unless he had to.

Posted By Durandal on 08/16/2007 5:21 PM
That is the main difference. Maxed out lists don't ruin the game as much as the majority of players who use them are jerks of one form or another. You can always bring your own optimal load out and fight on even (or close to even, this is GW) odds, but if your opponent is of the sort that believe they should win just because they brought 9 obits and a siren prince, then it isn't worth playing them.

Well said, that I guess is what Im trying to say...our gaming group is a great group of guys, no jerks play with us and we all are power gamers.  We sometimes play around with sub-optimal, non-powergaming lists but its usually hey, you wanna try out some new lists, ive got one with like 50% infantry in it...ok, ill try out some new stuff I just painted up...and that way its fair.  Standard games for us on Weds nights (the night we play) is down and dirty 1500....if its legal bring it, type of competition.  We also dont just sit there and destroy new players...we teach them how to play.  We help them with their lists, we help them play the games but we still bring competative lists...we just arent jerks about it.   We recently had a guy start putting together an ork army, he lost about 10 games in a row but now hes going about 50% over the last 3 weeks...why?  because he learned to play against good and nice players playing good solid lists.  

Well said longshot, I like my troops to have both legs and teeth, since I bought and painted them, no reason not to.

Posted By Longshot on 08/17/2007 10:02 AM
A real tactician would not bring one-legged soldiers and toothless dogs into a fight unless he had to.

The real tactician often has little choice, and fights with what he is has. Politicians, high commands, simply what is in the theatre or 'random' events beyond your control determine what you fight with.

Hannibal fought zama against numidian cavalry , rather than allied with it as usual , Henry V fought agincourt with his dysentry ridden, force marched, outnumbered army,  Rommel fought normandy unable to get major armored reserves deployed due to Hitler and high command decisions, as with countless other battles commanders fight with what they have, not what they want.