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.

Davicus wrote:Player 's problem.

Haha, despite being a dick about it, you make a good point. Me getting knocked out of Ard Boyz by Eldar with my missile wolves doesn't prove anything definitively. My point was that my completely optimized Wolf Army was unable to chew through what would be considered a non-optimized Eldar army. Mortetvie and I are players of roughly equal skill, and as such, you could extrapolate from that that Eldar are not sub-par in a highly competitive setting, at least not on a solely army based comparison.

@Billinator
Give it a try! I mean, if you roll 1's it stinks, but obviously when rolling average you will get in 5/6 units. That is why when running a reserves army, redundancy is critical so that you get what you need when you need it. Dual Autarch Mechdar is a great army, seriously effective. Most people get hung up on Faseers/Avatar/PLs and don't run it. It isn't uncommon by any means, but it is a really fun army that always gives you the Alpha Strike, no matter who wins the role to go first. I think with Bugs it wouldn't work as well unless you ran a very mobile list (harpies/spods/gargoyles/etc). Eldar with their speed, can be in the other player's deployment zone the turn they come in.

@Augustus
Ah yeah, I am not an authority either! I think I come across like I think I am sometimes, but we are all still learning new things everyday with this game which is what makes it so engaging. I love the complexity of it, there is always new things to be done, even with old books that people might think have been completely explored.

I agree with your points, Eldar can be terrible and some bad luck and they go down in flames quickly. I totally agree that they need some changes in troops. The troops either all need to go down 2 points per model, or they need something to justify their cost. In the new book I would love to see PLs make a squad of their aspect troops (not all troops as then we would have 60 FD armies) and things of this nature, messing with the FoC. That among a number of changes, but I have faith they will kick ass when they get redone. Every book that has come out lately has been excellent.

As notabot said in another thread, playing tournament Eldar is like playing the game on hard mode. You can still do it but it takes a lot of skill and luck. They still do have their super skimmers though, that is what knocked me out of Ard Boyz, he had two skimmers that were invincible! I had some absurd amount of heavy weapons in my list and no matter how much I shot them I could not get them off of the objectives they were on and he tied me by game's end. Those skimmers can still be game winning, as you pointed out.

I find the Eldars in the Tabletop game alot like the Dawn of War (pro mod) ones; A balanced army, that isn't easy to pick off.

As i haven't played Eldar in the Tabletop game, i can't speak my case very well, but i do see the resemblence although; a squishy army, that excels in speed and great hard-contering abilities (hard coutering refeers to superb ability or damage against a certain type of unit). Of course, every armty has to include certain tools, and redundancy of those aswell. But unlike 'nidz, for example, i get the feeling that your units is much, much more crucial in each their roles, and the lack, or loss from those can be devastating for the final outcome.

Recalling my 'nidz games, compared to Eldars, it feels like the 'nidz are more capable of filling out roles, and to a certain degree, can borrow from each other to obtain a certain goal. I am sorry if i am all off here, about these claims, but, while these units may not be all superb solid, they do hold some potential. Some may outshine them, but then again; You don't pick them up and master them from day one. They need tweaking and alot of thinking - luck from dice aside!

I think my point in all this is, that reckless play is alot more risky as Eldar, as i find it to be as 'Nidz. You need to through out think about every choices in your list, and to some degree have a good idea of how you're going to incorporate each of these choices on a tactical level, aswell as a strategic level. On the other hand, as to 'nidz, with a little reading up on Dakka, some test games, and some idea of the role every creature has, they seem alot easier to pick up and have succes with, than i feel Eldar does. If this is from having a lesser variety of ways to play them, i don't know.

If i were to pick up Eldar, as i did with 'nidz, i'm much sure i'd lose alot more games than i am doing as with 'nidz (eg a respectable win-ratio). Eldar surely are a very flexible army, despite being alot harder to master. But that is the exact same thing, i feel, makes them so darn appealing, and haves me read thread after thread on a race i don't even own a single miniature of.

Exactly, I REALLY WANT my Eldar to work, because they are so dang cool. I have been spending a ton of time getting them painted up and will post some pics when I am done.

I may just stick with them at the 1500 to 2000 point level. My LGS runs trny's like that, and I can be very competitive in those. The 3000 point games happen with my garage buddies. That is where I tend to suck wind. It might be time to pull out the 6'x8' table again, or dust off my SM.

Probably I will go SM at the higher point levels.

@ArmyC
Totally, Eldar don't scale that well. Like CSM, they are best at 1500. Above 2,000 they can really struggle.

@Billinator
You hit the nail on the head, dude. Bugs require a lot of skill to win with in a competitive environment, but like you said, they overlap in roles whereas Eldar mostly do not.

Eldar are an awesome army though, cool background, models, style. They just take a skilled hand to play well and like you said, mistakes cost you big time.

Reecius wrote:@Billinator
You hit the nail on the head, dude. Bugs require a lot of skill to win with in a competitive environment, but like you said, they overlap in roles whereas Eldar mostly do not.

Eldar are an awesome army though, cool background, models, style. They just take a skilled hand to play well and like you said, mistakes cost you big time.

I'm actually right? Wow, that DOES happen once in a while, i guess. I might even be able to run a little DOW-style into the TT. Or at least give it a try, with a proper mindset towards the tactic elements.

But you're absolutely right, that Eldar is one awesome army. I was considering an Iyanden army, actually, as i find their background much appealing. Unfortunately, i can't afford Eldars atm, but i am looking much forward to getting some miniatures at some point.

@ArmyC
As you might've guessed by now, i don't play Eldar myself, but for whatever it's worth, the way i'd counter this S/T problem, is to fully utilize their strength's. Eldars seems very fragile. Really! They've got the exact same profile as my Gaunts, and... Honestly, without the FnP + cover, those gaunts just piles up to most fire in the game. Same goes for Eldars, if you don't utilize them, i think.

The best way of getting around this issue is by preventing the enemy from taking advantage of your weakness - (i.e. by killing them). Don't think you're at your best, if you go toe-to-toe with them. Utilize your speed to gain a good map control, or to flank, and your ability to throw down massive damage in a extremely short amount of time!
- That's how i'd play my Eldars, i think...