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.

Eight Ball wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Ummm... Don't they already have heavier weapons? Prism Cannons?

Among other weapons/units, yes. But, according to Daemon-Archon Ren, they apparently need the best anti-tank weapon too (unless he means for like apocalypse units, then there'd be no problem)

Yes and no, keep in mind this one anti tank gun, while great, would cost 60 points... Even if just in apoc, 60 points is ALOT for a single str 10 lance that you can just claim obscured from and have a 4+ save.

If it seems to op make it a 0-1 thing as well (aka 1 per army)

I think its a better alternative then making BLs Str 10 ap 1 lances as suggested in other posts...

Dude brightlances shoot rainbows, of course they suck

I'll chime in, BLs do suck, due to all the other reasons posted above. Outrageous price, BS3, and EML just flat out being a better option 90% of the time.

Some days I just don't understand why the "most advanced race" has pretty much lost every edge that it had. Psychers, check, weapon options, check, close combat, check.

I liked playing the Eldar when they had the "best" of everything. Sure, it was awesome, but they were fragile as hell, one wrong move and you hand your enemy the game. Now, SM pretty much has everything better, and a hell of a lot more resilient than they are.

Not to mention that killpoints have skewed the game in a very bad way against any army that doesn't have a 3+ save basic troop choice (Jetbikes don't count!)

My biggest gripe on the Eldar however, is how the mighty Starcannon has fallen. The most advanced plasma weaponry in the galaxy, and a regular SM dude carries around a better version that's move and fire :/

The eldar really really did need a nerf. I remember playing games in 4th, and not even bothering to read the objectives til turn 5. Just playing for wipe out, and tabling people with a super elite eldar army. gak was autopilot. Unfortunately I think we got hit with a bit too big of a nerf, namely most of our stuff became overpriced.

Dark/Bright Lances are great weapons. Just because the unit using them are BS 3 doesn't say anything about the weapon itself.

The lances will pen any armor above 11 at 33%~. The better point would be, why would you aim something with those odds at a vehicle with higher armor when 2d6 pen or AP1 does a much better job?

Defiler wrote:Dark/Bright Lances are great weapons. Just because the unit using them are BS 3 doesn't say anything about the weapon itself.

The lances will pen any armor above 11 at 33%~. The better point would be, why would you aim something with those odds at a vehicle with higher armor when 2d6 pen or AP1 does a much better job?

I'll have to disagree with you on the BS 3 point, what good's an awesome weapon if you can't hit with it. Take for example, Ork Rokkit Launchas. At 10 pts a piece, they are decent even at BS2. Now take that same weapon, and put it on a model with BS 4, or even 3. It went from "hey this is cool", to "ZOMG most broken weapon in the entire game"

Also, Fire Dragons excepting, there's not a lot of AP1 weapons in the Eldar list at all. I don't really see that as a weakness, just stating a fact.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:The eldar really really did need a nerf. I remember playing games in 4th, and not even bothering to read the objectives til turn 5. Just playing for wipe out, and tabling people with a super elite eldar army. gak was autopilot. Unfortunately I think we got hit with a bit too big of a nerf, namely most of our stuff became overpriced.

Really...agreed 100%. Eldar were nasty in 3rd, I didn't really play with them much in 4th though, since I had sold all of my stuff by then. Still working on rebuilding haha.

The list as a whole now isn't too bad, it just needs a few fixes, bright lances either reduced points, or an option to make them BS4. Starcannons are in desperate need of a fix, I've NEVER seen anyone take one lately.

And I'm not sure what needs to be fixed with them, but Banshees seems in desperate need of...something. They just aren't as survivable anymore, at least like they were in 3rd.

Aramus wrote:I'll chime in, BLs do suck, due to all the other reasons posted above. Outrageous price, BS3, and EML just flat out being a better option 90% of the time.

Some days I just don't understand why the "most advanced race" has pretty much lost every edge that it had. Psychers, check, weapon options, check, close combat, check.

I liked playing the Eldar when they had the "best" of everything. Sure, it was awesome, but they were fragile as hell, one wrong move and you hand your enemy the game. Now, SM pretty much has everything better, and a hell of a lot more resilient than they are.

Not to mention that killpoints have skewed the game in a very bad way against any army that doesn't have a 3+ save basic troop choice (Jetbikes don't count!)

My biggest gripe on the Eldar however, is how the mighty Starcannon has fallen. The most advanced plasma weaponry in the galaxy, and a regular SM dude carries around a better version that's move and fire :/

some days i just don't understand why the SM "most fearsome fighter" has nothing fearsome. with a 24" rapid fired AP5 main weapon, does not have CC weapon, no furious charge, only has 1A..... and so the fearless nerco would flee.

you need 3+sv? why do not we just give you an auto-win button. Eldar has one of the best range attack weaponry in the game. my TSM are easily slaughtered by scatter-laser warwalker from range, and i can not even make a shot of it. SM has everything better? has you ever read the SM codex?

dude, it is warhammer 40K not eldarhammer 40K. i do not see any disadvantages of eldar in the killpoint games, they can kill alright. and what is the point to play a game only you can kill others and others cannot kill you?

dpredator666 wrote:

Aramus wrote:I'll chime in, BLs do suck, due to all the other reasons posted above. Outrageous price, BS3, and EML just flat out being a better option 90% of the time.

Some days I just don't understand why the "most advanced race" has pretty much lost every edge that it had. Psychers, check, weapon options, check, close combat, check.

I liked playing the Eldar when they had the "best" of everything. Sure, it was awesome, but they were fragile as hell, one wrong move and you hand your enemy the game. Now, SM pretty much has everything better, and a hell of a lot more resilient than they are.

Not to mention that killpoints have skewed the game in a very bad way against any army that doesn't have a 3+ save basic troop choice (Jetbikes don't count!)

My biggest gripe on the Eldar however, is how the mighty Starcannon has fallen. The most advanced plasma weaponry in the galaxy, and a regular SM dude carries around a better version that's move and fire :/

some days i just don't understand why the SM "most fearsome fighter" has nothing fearsome. with a 24" rapid fired AP5 main weapon, does not have CC weapon, no furious charge, only has 1A..... and so the fearless nerco would flee.

you need 3+sv? why do not we just give you an auto-win button. Eldar has one of the best range attack weaponry in the game. my TSM are easily slaughtered by scatter-laser warwalker from range, and i can not even make a shot of it. SM has everything better? has you ever read the SM codex?

dude, it is warhammer 40K not eldarhammer 40K. i do not see any disadvantages of eldar in the killpoint games, they can kill alright. and what is the point to play a game only you can kill others and others cannot kill you?

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying they need a 3+ save, it's just that killpoints and objective missions (Read ALL of them) are heavily in favor of armies that have tougher troops. FWIW I play SM and Orks mainly, so yes, I have read the codex, and played quite a few games with it.

Defiler wrote:Dark/Bright Lances are great weapons. Just because the unit using them are BS 3 doesn't say anything about the weapon itself.

Exactly. Let's also not forget that there are BS4 and Twin-Linked options for the Brightlance. If one doesn't choose to use these options it doesn't mean your codex is broken.

Aramus wrote:
The list as a whole now isn't too bad, it just needs a few fixes, bright lances either reduced points, or an option to make them BS4. Starcannons are in desperate need of a fix, I've NEVER seen anyone take one lately.

I think it's the cover saves which screw Starcannons. Most people don't seem to bother with Plasma weapons these days.

Really, as a Tau player, I cringe when I hear ELDAR complaining how they suck Having said that, I do think that Eldar tanks ought to have BS4, or at least wargear which would give them BS4, like Tau has.

Backfire wrote:

Aramus wrote:
The list as a whole now isn't too bad, it just needs a few fixes, bright lances either reduced points, or an option to make them BS4. Starcannons are in desperate need of a fix, I've NEVER seen anyone take one lately.

I think it's the cover saves which screw Starcannons. Most people don't seem to bother with Plasma weapons these days.

Really, as a Tau player, I cringe when I hear ELDAR complaining how they suck Having said that, I do think that Eldar tanks ought to have BS4, or at least wargear which would give them BS4, like Tau has.

Yea, I'm not gonna say that Tau don't have it worse than the Eldar

Bright lances are too expensive for what they can achieve.
Popping a LR with a single bright lance shot?
Your kidding.

I prefer Fire Dragons if the job needs to be done.

I agree with wuestenfux, if you're paying such a high number of points for a one-shot weapon, it should be at least semi-reliable.

That being said, I think that Bright Lances could easily remain the same points cost and merely be given AP1.

wuestenfux wrote:Bright lances are too expensive for what they can achieve.
Popping a LR with a single bright lance shot?
Your kidding.

I prefer Fire Dragons if the job needs to be done.

Your chances of a penetrating hit on a Land Raider are exactly the same as a Rail Cannon. It also occurs to me that any unit in the Eldar army can be twin-linked with the Guide psychic power.

Fire Dragons have to be within 6 inches to do the job, while brightlances can shoot from considerably farther away.

You say a bright lance has the "same chance of a penetrating hit on a Land Raider." However this ignores the fact that the rail gun has a significantly better chance of destroying or immmobilizing the land raider, and that it's better against any non-land-raider vehicle in the game as well.

Not a convincing argument.

Is a +1 on a roll "significantly" better? I think that's a bit subjective. A Brightlance has a better chance of destroying a Land Raider than a Lascannon does, and when you compare the cost to a Lascannon in a Space Marine squad it comes out the exact same thing.

10 Tactical Marines with Lascannon: 190 Points

20 Guardians with Brightlance(that can move and shoot, BTW): 190 Points

Throw in the Faseers that you are most likely taking anyway you have a twin-linked Brightlance that can move and shoot, for the same points as a Marine Squad with a less effective weapon.

EDIT---------> 10 Tactical Marines with Lascannon: 180 Points But it's close, and the Guardians have a weapon platform.

+1 on the damage table means you are 50% more likely to kill a vehicle on a penetrating hit (33% vs. 50%) and also gives you a chance to wreck a vehicle on a glancing hit. That's not subjective, that's math.

As far as guardians with a BS3 bright lance vs. marines with a BS4 lascannon, the guardians are far more susceptible to assault, have much worse leadership rules, and the bright lance is not as good as the lascannon against almost every vehicle in the game.

Bright lances are better against:

Leman Russ
Land Raider
Battlewagons.

Against Leman russes and battlewagons the bright lance does not increase your odds at all if you fire at the side armor, and is worse than a lascannon against the side armor of a battlewagon.

Lascannons and bright lances are tied against:

Predators
Exorcists
Hammerheads
Tau missile-tank-thingy
Wave serpents.

And again, against almost all of these vehicles the lascannon is better if you can get a side armor shot.

Lascannons are better than bright lances against the following vehicles:

Rhinos
Chimeras
Sentinels
Dreadnoughts
Deffdreads
Land Speeders
Piranhas
Trukks
Looted Wagons
Devilfish
Fire Prisms
Falcons
Sentinels
War Walkers
Vypers
Monoliths
Valkyries
Vendettas
Manticores
Hydras
Basilisks...

And the list goes on.

And then you consider the fact that the lascannon has a 48" range compared to the 36" range of the bright lance.

When you compare the lascannon to the bright lance in a game where every vehicle is *not* a land raider, then the bright lance comes out behind.

Everyone knows that bright lances are better than lascanons against land raiders. The problem is that there are many, many important vehicles in the game against which the bright lance is no more effective than a missile launcher. IMO Chimeras, Rhinos, and Valkyries are more important to the metagame than land raiders are.

willydstyle wrote:+1 on the damage table means you are 50% more likely to kill a vehicle on a penetrating hit (33% vs. 50%) and also gives you a chance to wreck a vehicle on a glancing hit. That's not subjective, that's math.

+1 on the damage table actually means you're 16~% more likely to kill the vehicle. Do you mean 50% of the original number, 33%? Then sure, it would result in about a 50% greater chance to cause a vehicle destroyed.

Why are you comparing the ONE toy Tau has that sets them apart from every other race in the entire game, to standard anti-tank weapons? That's a pretty hollow argument, as is the one about the quality of the "Troop" shooting the weapon.

I wasn't aware that people actually armed guardian units with Brightlances?

Look, we get it your butt hurts over eldar taking a slight hit in power due to the rules changing and their codex being over 3 years old. What's the real discussion here? You wish they were as good as Lascannons? It doesn't seem like you're factoring in what the codex does well when complaining about what it doesn't do. Why don't you just play marines if you want resilient, accurate troops and missile launchers and lascannons?

Defiler wrote:

willydstyle wrote:+1 on the damage table means you are 50% more likely to kill a vehicle on a penetrating hit (33% vs. 50%) and also gives you a chance to wreck a vehicle on a glancing hit. That's not subjective, that's math.

+1 on the damage table actually means you're 16~% more likely to kill the vehicle. Do you mean 50% of the original number, 33%? Then sure, it would result in about a 50% greater chance to cause a vehicle destroyed.

Why are you comparing the ONE toy Tau has that sets them apart from every other race in the entire game, to standard anti-tank weapons? That's a pretty hollow argument, as is the one about the quality of the "Troop" shooting the weapon.

I wasn't aware that people actually armed guardian units with Brightlances?

Look, we get it your butt hurts over eldar taking a slight hit in power due to the rules changing and their codex being over 3 years old. What's the real discussion here? You wish they were as good as Lascannons? It doesn't seem like you're factoring in what the codex does well when complaining about what it doesn't do. Why don't you just play marines if you want resilient, accurate troops and missile launchers and lascannons?

I was responding to another poster who brought up rail guns, and another poster who compared bright lances in Guardian squads to lascannons in tac squads. Are you reading the whole thread, or just looking through my post for stuff to pick out?

I'm not complaining that Eldar aren't the best, I'm simply giving supporting arguments for the idea that bright lances aren't actually very good.