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.

 Xerics wrote:

Before you run around spewing your opinion all over the internet you might want to think of all the innocents you are effecting.

If only GW did the same thing!

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

Before you run around spewing your opinion all over the internet you might want to think of all the innocents you are effecting.

If only GW did the same thing!

LOL, exalted. Channel the rage where it is most deserved

Tabletop games are not immune to quality control. If this was a video game and this kind of imbalance existed you can bet the community would complain about it loudly until it was changed. Except if course those using the imbalance to their benefit. And since this game can be played at a competitive level and for prizes at our entry fee expense, not to mention traveling and lodging costs, you can bet we are not interested in the competitive scene being ruined by a book that clearly had zero play testing done solely made to pander and sell plastic.

The problem with most of the 40K community is that it would have required a severe nerf to the codex for them to even begin to be reasonable. There is just a stigma toward Eldar and Eldar players that has developed over previous editions. Even if the wraithknight wasn't made into such a beast, or that bikes had remained 1 hvy weapon per 3, or no strength D on wraith weapons, peopel would have still been complaining about cheese and typical Eldar, etc. In reality the codex didn't stand a chance. The book has so many positive aspects to it if people can get away from these particular units. The Guardian warhost is worth taking due to the rules it acquires and is great for a fluffy footdar army. The seer council is quite a force to be reckoned with but must stay as a single unit. Aspect host gives many benefits and rewards the Swordwind player. The problem is, people just can't get past the D weapons and scatbikes.

Rot.

People complain about the Eldar codex because it's so out of whack with most every other book, even if you build the strongest army from those books, that it spoils people's enjoyment of the game.

I think If the WK and bikes hadn't been so egregiously boosted, almost every thing else in the book strikes me as strong but nothing that couldn't be dealt with by intelligent list building and smart play.

It barely matters if any given player is unlikely to face Eldar or only face Eldar armies that don't focus on the strongest units in the book, any fan of 40K should see what the inclusion of scat bikes, GC WKs and non scatter DS ranged D weapons says about GW's attitude to the quality of the game they're producing and react to that, not to what happens on the table.

 Xerics wrote:

 Orock wrote:
I am voicing my opinion on an army choice, and not a specific person. You two are the ones whos whole defense for a poor product is "shut up, or you will make others think the same" which is the whole point. So no, I dont think I will stop. Try pointing out the positives of why the eldar book shouldn't be ridiculed. And if you think others should just shut up and play a game because you basically bought a car without doing research about it first, they may not have the problem.

No that's not what my whole point is. You have your opinion. I can respect that. However there is no need to go expressing your opinion to everyone and their mothers just because you don't like a product that a company put out. Most of the time it isn't the players fault. If someone goes out and buys a whole army of Eldar just because they are top tier even though they already have an army that's a whole different story. But at the same time if they want to drop an entire paycheck into Eldar that is their prerogative. Some of us enjoy getting to play our armies once in a while. I don't get many games out where I am at anyways so having some loudmouth like you run around and plaster your opinion across everyone's face doesn't help matters for me or for you for that matter. Is the codex unbalanced? Yes. Am I going to drop a paycheck into a different army because my army is unbalanced? No. Wife has already forbidden the purchase of more Warhammer until my current stuff is all painted anyway and I am pretty loyal to my faction. But I'd still like to play the game.

Before you run around spewing your opinion all over the internet you might want to think of all the innocents you are effecting.

I think the reason we're seeing so much criticism towards Eldar is that its a growing frustration. It's growing because GW isn't addressing the problem and probably don't realize that there even is a problem.
Until GW tries to ease customer's minds about this, by maybe saying "It's a new direction all codexes are going" or "This was a mistake we'll fix with FAQ's" we'll probably see such frustration grow.

I'm one to argue that the Eldar codex is not absolutely horrible, and is in fact the standard to which all other books should be built: every faction should have many choices for good units, a variety of good specialist units, and so many good options that in a typical model count game, you have to choose between them, rather than pick the "best" options and playstyle for the faction. I wish every codex was like this.

However, anyone who thinks the Codex Eldar Craftworlds is not, overall, a buff over Codex Eldar, is either playing a different game or not being fair-minded. As someone mentioned above, Wave Serpents were nerfed, and just about everything else was buffed.

Also:

1. Wraithlords remain junk. They are not any more playable than they were before, and no reason to take one other than fluff, except that you have to take one if you want a wraith host.

2. You are the first person I've seen who thinks warlock council (and by extension, seer council ?) is unplayable. Everyone else has said, "ZOMG I can't even use that many warp charges!"

Jain Zar is also absolutely crazy. Add her to a unit of banshees and she'll murderize pretty much any infantry unit in the game.

It's a mark of how broken the codex is, that nobody has even discussed how crazy a (relatively) cheap sc who can get through overwatch, take 5 away from an enemy's WS/I, and also adds 3 inches to their charge is.

IMO, she's the best of the PL.

I just realisted one thing. The hamlock fighter is mastery lvl 2 and isn't forced in to one school. I remember when people whined about doom being op. Now we have a faster doom, that is more resilient because he is a flyer that novas for (3d6+2)-opponent Ld with options to be invisible or +3jink. And if somehow he isn't forced to jink he is unloading two D flamer templates on top of nova.

That is crazy.

Makumba wrote:
I just realisted one thing. The hamlock fighter is mastery lvl 2 and isn't forced in to one school. I remember when people whined about doom being op. Now we have a faster doom, that is more resilient because he is a flyer that novas for (3d6+2)-opponent Ld with options to be invisible or +3jink. And if somehow he isn't forced to jink he is unloading two D flamer templates on top of nova.

That is crazy.

Reread Heavy D-Scythes. Its not flamer template. It's Blast template

SideSwipe wrote:Jain Zar is also absolutely crazy. Add her to a unit of banshees and she'll murderize pretty much any infantry unit in the game.

It's a mark of how broken the codex is, that nobody has even discussed how crazy a (relatively) cheap sc who can get through overwatch, take 5 away from an enemy's WS/I, and also adds 3 inches to their charge is.

IMO, she's the best of the PL.

I dunno- I think Asurmen is pretty good too. He'll have +1 attack (pistol/CCW), and he has master-crafted on his sword. It's also +1 S and has Soulrazor. For shooting- I really, really like Maugan Ra. However, I do like the fact that Jain Zar causes fear, and there are plentiful ways in the codex to make people roll at -2/4/6 and more Leadership Checks. The Phoenix Lords are pretty good in this codex.

Makumba wrote:I just realisted one thing. The hamlock fighter is mastery lvl 2 and isn't forced in to one school. I remember when people whined about doom being op. Now we have a faster doom, that is more resilient because he is a flyer that novas for (3d6+2)-opponent Ld with options to be invisible or +3jink. And if somehow he isn't forced to jink he is unloading two D flamer templates on top of nova.

That is crazy.

Yeah, everyone has been talking about the Crimson Hunter but I have seen very little on the Hemlock. A flyer with Invisibility would scare the crap out of me. Here you have a flyer with Vector Dancer on the table laying down two blast templetes of D-strength... that's just insane! Heck, Psychic Shriek on a unit with -2 LD... that could be devastating. There is really nothing on the Telephy table that does not make the Hemlock better in every way. To clarify, the Hemlock has heavy D-sythes that use the blast template, not the flamer template. If the Hemlock decides to jink, he doesn't get to shoot the heavy D-sythes (can't snap shot with blast weapons).

ConanMan wrote:

Warp Spiders: wow. the best infantry unit (yes, they really were) in the game just got better. str6 but not vs toughness vs initiative! wow. orks and tau are crying for sure. and the fact they can move in all three movements phases (the only unit in 40k that can) AND move in the opponents shooting phase is just berserk. they lost the str7 vs vehicles but I never once used them for that anyway. I have 20 of these guys, I will use them as I did before. 40 shuriken canon shotgun shots at point blank range.

I just feel this needs to be highlighted. If moving in 3 out of 4 of your own phases wans't enough. They can now move in one of the opponents.

I haven't had any games yet, but always love Warp Spiders, can't wait to see what new fun they can get upto.

 Talys wrote:
I'm one to argue that the Eldar codex is not absolutely horrible, and is in fact the standard to which all other books should be built: every faction should have many choices for good units, a variety of good specialist units, and so many good options that in a typical model count game, you have to choose between them, rather than pick the "best" options and playstyle for the faction. I wish every codex was like this.

But the reason so many options are viable in Eldar isn't because Eldar is better balanced than other codices, it's because the overall power level is higher. It's just the mid-level units in Eldar are more powerful than the mid-level units in other codices so you have more options.

It's not that Eldar is better balanced than other codices, they are just on the favourable side of the unbalance.

 Talys wrote:
I'm one to argue that the Eldar codex is not absolutely horrible, and is in fact the standard to which all other books should be built: every faction should have many choices for good units, a variety of good specialist units, and so many good options that in a typical model count game, you have to choose between them, rather than pick the "best" options and playstyle for the faction. I wish every codex was like this.

This is where you and I disagree strongly talys, I wish NO codex was like this. Eldar and Necrons have broken the game. Today at my FLGS A Necron player tabled his DE opponent by turn 3 and the player left in disgust, (Necron player used decurion) Eldar player bought his new codex and stopped playing for the day because he was to amazed at how stupidly buffed his army had just gotten. 2nd Eldar player flat out told everyone he was no longer playing Eldar and was rehashing his Chaos army because and I Quote "Eldar are just completely Broken now"

Everything in the game needs a balance of sorts, every faction should have a handful of things they are better at then anyone else. Eldar have taken it about 10 steps to far and at this point, if every following codex attempts to match even 1/2 the buffs this codex got then everything is going to be GC and Super heavy by 9th edition. D weapons should be REMOVED from 40k completely. The occasional "Ooops" thing is fine, a Single Vortex grenade that costs stupid high points, or a SAG that rolls Box cars thats fine. But having Flyers, walkers, jump GC and other nonsense running around with strength D weapons is just stupid.

I understand that GW is a for profit company but jesus christ, tournaments are going to ban half the eldar formations and even my FLGS already limited Eldar players to having 1 WK at tournaments.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Talys wrote:
I'm one to argue that the Eldar codex is not absolutely horrible, and is in fact the standard to which all other books should be built: every faction should have many choices for good units, a variety of good specialist units, and so many good options that in a typical model count game, you have to choose between them, rather than pick the "best" options and playstyle for the faction. I wish every codex was like this.

But the reason so many options are viable in Eldar isn't because Eldar is better balanced than other codices, it's because the overall power level is higher. It's just the mid-level units in Eldar are more powerful than the mid-level units in other codices so you have more options.

It's not that Eldar is better balanced than other codices, they are just on the favourable side of the unbalance.

Exactly. Some of the codex defenders like to claim that the Eldar are internally balanced, but even that isn't true. They have clearly superior units (scatbikes, WK, warlock council) and clearly inferior ones (WL, guardians) to where, from a pure performance standpoint, there is virtually never a reason to take certain units. The problem is the book is so externally broken that even the internally subpar units are relatively strong performers, compared with the cross section of 40k as a whole.

 Orock wrote:
Sorry sir, I put my money where my mouth is. I had tau since they first came out, when they were average to poor choices for power. I too liked the look of the army. But then 6th rolled around, I found my games to be far too easy and frustrating for my opponents, and retired them for a good long time. I wouldn't even consider them games, 9/10 I won.

Good for you. A couple things though.

1.) That's fine that you feel the only acceptable thing to do in that situation is to "retire" your army, but it's not what every Tau player should have to do by any means. If it makes you feel better, great, I can certainly understand not finding the army fun to play with anymore and wanting to put it away willingly (since that's kinda what's happened to me, but in my case it wasn't really the Tau codex but 40k in general since the 6th edition BRB dropped), but it's not the only option. You could just try toning your list down, for one, instead of running the same riptide/broadside spam list and after ten games going "Welp, they're broken, guess that army's going on the shelf for 10 years." The Tau codex in particular is not so good that you can run a trash list and still win every game on turn 2 with one arm tied behind your back like everyone claims.

But if anything has "hit a nerve" with me, it's the idea that people out there think it's my responsibility to put my army away because the rules are overpowered, because it's somehow my fault that the rules are overpowered because it's my chosen faction (regardless of when I chose that faction), and that I somehow deserve to be "punished" for GW's fething incompetence. This hobby costs too much to tolerate that kind of childish crap. If there are legitimate problems with an army then I'm sure two fething adults can come to some kind of compromise before commencing with a game, and still have a good time with it. I guess all I'm trying to say is that there are options, but the internet only ever thinks in black and white apparently; you either give up the army for good, throw the gak on eBay and beg the community for forgiveness, or you're obviously a WAAC TFG who intends on cheesing everyone out and ruining everyone's fun just to be a dick, and thus no one could ever possibly play a game with you.

2.) Speaking of which, 40k is really fething expensive, and it's not unlikely that most people will only have the one army. So in this case you would be "retiring" from 40k altogether, and for god only knows how long at that, since codices can apparently go anywhere from one year to 10+ years before getting an update now. Will the new Tau book come out in a month or a year or 3? When it does will it actually be an improvement or will it be even more obscene like Eldar? Who fething knows anymore. And during all that time you have a massive investment sitting there gathering dust and not being used for it's intended purpose.

 Orock wrote:
If I want to voice my opinion that some things are broken and in need of fixing, or in this case ignoring to make the rest of the game function better I can.

But you're not doing that, that's the thing. There's a difference between simply voicing your opinion about what needs fixing in the Eldar codex, and deliberately trolling everyone who appears to be an Eldar player and telling them how you'll never play a game with them simply because they brought Eldar, without even really looking at their list. Or in this thread specifically, misinterpreting someone's post and screaming about someone spamming 5 wraithknights when they were talking about a different unit entirely, ironically one that was almost unchanged from the previous book and was a pretty sub-par choice.

Even when you're not directly addressing an Eldar player to tell them about how they're not worthy of being your opponent, your "opinion" doesn't seem to amount to much other than "It's broken!", with your suggested fixes being "Ban everything!". If I'm wrong about that I apologize, but that's what it looks like to me, anyway.

 Orock wrote:
In the end only you can keep yourself from looking like a a psycho who has to personally attack an individual because they strongly disagree with your own beliefs.

I don't disagree with you, I'll tell you right now the Eldar codex is broken. I literally called it an abomination when I was out earlier today. I'm not too happy about how GW seemed to be "blandifying" everyone and then randomly decided to amp up the power level of one of the strongest armies in the game at the last second for no discernible reason...it's almost exactly the same gak they did when 5th edition came out; everyone was getting bland books, but then all of a sudden here comes Space Marines with all the flavor that they ripped out of the CSM codex not long before, and then some.

I'm not even trying to insult you, I'm just saying stop being a dick to Eldar players because it's not their fault the book is broken.

 Orock wrote:
I am voicing my opinion on an army choice, and not a specific person. You two are the ones whos whole defense for a poor product is "shut up, or you will make others think the same" which is the whole point. So no, I dont think I will stop. Try pointing out the positives of why the eldar book shouldn't be ridiculed. And if you think others should just shut up and play a game because you basically bought a car without doing research about it first, they may not have the problem.

I'm not trying to defend a poor product, you walnut! If that's seriously what you're getting from my post then you need to read it again. Maybe three times just for good measure.

Seriously, how in the hell does "Stop being a dick to Eldar players because they didn't write the damn rules!" equate to "Stop gaking on the Eldar book because it's awesome!"?

The Eldar book most definitely should be ridiculed, but that's the problem, you don't seem to be ridiculing just the book.

As for buying cars without doing the research, one could argue that if you had done your research you wouldn't have started 40k in the first place. Game's been broken for a long time now.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
I only have Eldar and while I have only been playing since 2007 my first models were a wraithlord and 4 howling banshees. I didn't "bandwagon" just because they were powerful. Heck at the time I didn't even know how powerful they were. I liked how the tanks looked and I liked the smooth head of the wraithlord. I still have those models to this day and have not picked up a different army since. Should the blame be put on me that my codex is overpowered? I picked an army that I liked the look of. It just so happened to be Eldar. .

No, people like you are the real casualties of a horribly balanced book like this. As is often said, poor balance probably hurts fluff and casual players more than competitive.

Exactly.

And not only is GW gaking on you with a book like this, but the community gets mad at you for it, and vilifies you for having the "OP" army and treats you like you're some kind of sad, troglodytic scum whose only purpose in life is to ruin their fun...all the while adding $800 worth of Ad Mech to their cart on GW's online store. And Orock's solution to Tau being seemingly OP was to say "Oh well, feth it!", shelve his Tau indefinitely and buy another damn army to keep playing the game that is so clearly busted, despite "doing the research", apparently, and being perfectly content with all that time and money going to waste.

How does that make any sense? Keep supporting the ones who are deliberately putting out the broken rules as a cheap ploy to get sales, and blame the broken rules on the players, who not only had no say in how the rules were written but weren't even the ones asking for a fething Eldar update in the first place! And don't forget that if you don't throw your Eldar models in the trash immediately after the revelation that they're busted then you're an awful person.

 Orock wrote:
Tabletop games are not immune to quality control. If this was a video game and this kind of imbalance existed you can bet the community would complain about it loudly until it was changed. Except if course those using the imbalance to their benefit. And since this game can be played at a competitive level and for prizes at our entry fee expense, not to mention traveling and lodging costs, you can bet we are not interested in the competitive scene being ruined by a book that clearly had zero play testing done solely made to pander and sell plastic.

If it were any other company but GW they wouldn't have even let that go to print. Tabletop games aren't immune to quality control, it's just that GW in particular doesn't give a gak.

I'd say that Eldar have very good internal balance. It might be up a notch than other codexes. Overall it is very well done. Tournys are always there and will always be abused

Too good, is Wraithknight, Jetbikes. Wraiths with D weapons. But most codexes have something too good about them.

Good units, Warp Spiders and Swooping Hawks, already good last book, strange that they got buffs to there movements. War walkers, always shooty, noting changed really. Farseer, got better, but they are meant to be great pyschers. Dark Reapers got better. Fire Dragons, better, but it wasn't really needed. Wave Serpent is still a good transport, they fixed it being a stupidly good gunboat. These units are good, but not over the top.

Decent units, Howling Banshees, Striking scorpions, could actually see some use in non tourny games. Fire Prisms, Falcons, Night spinners all got small buffs, again makes them decent and viable. Dire Avengers are half decent, same as they have always been. This is what makes the book have good internal balance, the stranger units that would not normally be seen can come out to play.

Bad units, guardians, they always fill weird spot. Wraithlord, isn't that great. The book is good, so these units are still playable, just not best in slot.

Formations make things interesting. The two that can be abused are, the allowing multiple wraithknights, but so what, if that happens, you are playing against a spanker, don't blame the codex for that one. and BS5 shooting aspects might be a bit much, easy to abuse. Ws5 aspects is kinda cool though, and isn't over the top.

The book over all is great. If you play someone who is WAAC well then unlucky, prepare to lose. In this case, hate the player not the game.

Goatseer your right to a degree when you say that every army has something broken about it. again I would point out that my orks really don't. but whatever.

With that said, the things you listed as "Too Good" are exactly that too good. And the things you listed as Good Units are actually better then most armies BEST units and the units you listed as Decent are the equivalent to the better units of most armies. Thats the biggest downfall of this current codex?

I'm still laughing that he said storm gaurdians are good. Amiright??

 Cheebs wrote:
I'm still laughing that he said storm gaurdians are good. Amiright??

Still cracks me up too. Anyone who says that loses all credibility regarding their judgment of the power level of the codex.

I'm a bit confused by people saying that the Eldar codex is a great representation of balance and other Codexes should hope to be like it.

It has a unit suitable for most situations because all their units are good. If you take another codex and randomly give them buffs across the board to be comparable, suddenly the paradigm shifts and many units are no longer as comparably useful and strong.