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.

Right it seems a lot of you eldar players have a reaaal dislike for pathfinders and i want to know why :-\.
And if you do like pathfinders tell me why.

What i think would be good would be to be able to talk about previous experiences where you have played them/against them were they good/bad.
Also if you played against them did you find them annoying or not.

they are not really that effective if you think about it, although they can pin enemy units there are so many special rules to stop that now that they can't stop an army moving effectively

In my experience, they're somewhat overpriced, their guns still only wound on a 4 so they don't really kill a lot. However, sticking them in cover for that 2+ save and camping an objective while pinning enemy units from across the map can be a pretty fun tactic.

I know thats what i plan take out specialist squads as on a 5-6 its ap1 and really good yeah i know fearless :-( oh well

Deuseviscerator wrote:In my experience, they're somewhat overpriced, their guns still only wound on a 4 so they don't really kill a lot. However, sticking them in cover for that 2+ save and camping an objective while pinning enemy units from across the map can be a pretty fun tactic.

One thing to remember about pathfinder is that yes they wound on a 4+ automatically, but they rend on a 5+. so you have a 50% chance to do something, and the something you do do has a 2/3 chance of rending. With BS4 and stealth, Pathfinder's are the best snipers in the game imo.


...having said that, how useful is a sniper? Not very. If I were to use pathfinders, I'd probably use them as bait. Infiltrate them a little past my 12" mark near an objective, preferably in area terrain with good open space around it. Let the enemy come to for the pathfinders, and use more mobile elements/more shooty elements (a serpent full of bladestorm DA/squadron of war walkers w/ SL's etc) to try jump the unit that took the bait.

darkhorse19 wrote:Right it seems a lot of you eldar players have a reaaal dislike for pathfinders and i want to know why :-\.

They're freakishly terrible for their cost. They are almost double what they are worth.

Trust me i have seem them in action they almost never fail

I doubt that. 1 shot a piece means that you are getting so few chances to rend. And then even that is useless if the enemy is in cover, which most are. And they are static.

All it takes is one flamer and it's all over for them.

In terms of damage output they are pretty pathetic, maybe 1 kill per turn against MEQ or a wound on an MC. Outside of Troops you can easily get twice as much firepower for the same cost without most of the downsides of the unit (i.e 2 Vypers with Scatter Lasers do twice as much damage and can hurt all the same targets the Pathfinders can). Even within your troop slots you can get more firepower, a lowly Guardian Squad with a Scatter Laser does similar damage from range and then completely outclasses them up close (and is cheaper, only slightly less survivable if you hug cover and maintains its damage output with casualties). A Serpent with Scatter Lasers is cheaper (yes you also need a 60pt Avenger unit to take it but its still orders of magnitude better overall), does more damage (similar against MCs, better against infantry, much better against vehicles) is highly mobile and much much harder to kill.

Clearly its not worth taking them to kill things , so really the only reason to bring them is to camp on an objective, which in theory is a passable (if not exactly ideal) use for a troop unit. The problem is that they aren't really very good at doing that, and when combined with the general play style of Eldar really don't work. Having a good cover save is fine, until you realise that in competitive environments Flamers and Heavy Flamers are everywhere (along with a bunch of other weapons with ignore cover). They are also going to fold the second anything touches them in assault. For most Eldar lists assault units are never that scary, because everything is mobile (and more importantly can move and shoot at full effectiveness), but as a completely static unit Pathfinders are never going to be able to avoid units which aggressively advance on them (particularly if they are mechanised) or anything which Deep Strikes or Outflanks near them. For the same cost you can get 2 units of Avengers, which can walk on from reserves to grab backfield objectives more reliably (not that that's a good idea either, but hopefully you get the point). Not being able to move and shoot pushes them from the sub par category to the not worth using category, they give an opponent an easy place to focus his advance and serve no purpose which can't be better filled by another unit.

I dont like pathfinders, i love rangers. simple a small group of rangers is taken to be an objective holder and thats about it. (if they go to ground they get that 2+ cover anyways). simply put pathfinders involve spending points that could be used else where. However with good placement and use of the rest of your army the enemy shouldnt be able to advance on them that easily without having pieces of their army taken apart piece meal by the rest of your highly mobile army.

So pathfinders imo just arnt worth their points though if you ask me rangers are worth a look into as a scoring unit. (and in anihalation still usefull for that potential pinning test on enemies, and being durable as long as they are not assaulted or flamered/templated)

delete

aidobmac wrote:I like how everybody instantly assumes that these are eldar pathfinders we are talking about.

darkhorse19 wrote:Right it seems a lot of you eldar players have a reaaal dislike for pathfinders and i want to know why :-\.

I wonder why?

24 Points.

BS3, hits on a 3+. Sniper wounds on a 4+. You have a 30% chance to cause a wound. If you have a squad of 5, which is 120 or so points, your causing 2 wounds per turn which are savable.

Pathfinders are cool. If your opponent shoots them in cover and lets you roll your 2+ armor save all game, then power to you. The problem is that most good players will flamer them, or assault them in close combat very quickly.

Eldar armies are based on speed and effective fire power. Pathfinders are a static unit that isnt mobile, and they dont have synergy with alot of lists.

If you want to play with pathfinders, go ahead. I personally have 60+ ranger models that I use for an alatioc fun army I play, I doom with eldrad and watch as 50 pathfinders mollest space marines. Is the list competitive? No its not. Is it hilarious? Yea.

I love pathfinders, and Ill show you the Alatioc Pathfinder Batlion I have if you want, but overall in competitive games they arnt fantastic, but if you want to use them go ahead.

Doesn't it say on a roll TO HIT of 5 or 6 they count as AP1? for 36 range it's not great but it's not terrible. They also get rending on top of that i believe.

Yh they get that move through cover, infiltrate, scout, 2+ cover save. And yes we are talking about pathfinders not rangers technically its an upgrade but if you check the fluff then you will understand the difference. By the way pathfinders are bs4 not 3

I always use them against my 'Nid buddy. They are perfect for taking down monsterous creatures. Park them in cover for the 2+ save. Guide and doom where appropriate and if possible. Nidzilla goes bye bye.

Yes, they are overpriced. But when you're not playing competitive, just for fun, this should not be a huge problem.

Tried to use them several times before giving up on them. I have to agree with everyone else here. I find there damage output for their points isn't great. They are good for camping on an objective until a flamer drops besides them or a rapid assault unit eats them for breakfast.

I would agree that they are the best snipers in the game however how good are snipers in the game these days?

Not very good these days it seem that all snipers are well overlooked the only thing thats good is there cover save is improved and the pinning

Like anything else... depends on their uses.

I'd say YAY! for the simple fact that they're not to be used as the main firepower of the army... they excel in a support/obj camper role.

My brother brings an Wraithguard/Lord, with Eldrad and Avatar list with 3 squads of pathfinders...

It's a much tougher list than folks anticipate and it excels in obj based games and nice low killpoints in anniliation games.

My DE venom/blaster-spam list is basically one of the few hard-counter that can take this list down...

I'll pay 120 points for a unit that can sit on an objective, in cover, unmolested with a 2+ save. I may not shoot with them the entire game, but one thing I know as I send my entire army forward, is that my home objective (or my placed objective in Sieze) is covered. I may be a little more cautious if they have drop pods or very fast units, but Eldar are all about synergy and 1 unit of Pathfinders fits into my build.

Well this is my point over priced is what most say look at space marine sout snipers with cloaks 23 poins loower bs worse gun ours turn ap1 and rend theres dont we get better cover and more rules and we are only 1 point more sorry but if anything is overpriced its them.

Rangers are more cost effective.

I'd rather have 5 space marine scouts with cloaks and a missile launcher. Cheaper, can threaten tanks better, have atsknf, and can go to ground for 2+ if needed.

Yeah bit then you sacrafice your chance of shooting to get a better cover where we dont have to :-/.