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.

One of the benefits of the nightspinner is that you can fire from behind cover..so no you dont HAVE to be out of LOS in order to fire it. But if you arent hiding behind cover then one of the few reasons to be using the nightspinner is gone.

A 1/6 chance at immobilizing 2 to 3 vehicles a turn would be good, but there arent going to be amny armies that give you a shot at hitting 3 vehicles. Remember that the center hole has to be places over a vehcile, so unless you opponent is cooperating you just arent going to be getting multiple hits.


A spinner is going to do ok against hordes when they arent in cover. But then a fire prism will do well against them too. And against armor there is no comparison. The chance to pin does give the spinner some utiliy, but 5th edition isnt very infantry heavy so it seems like its a weapon out of place.



The last truly weird bit of fluff...the threads can cut through turrets and weapon barrels on vehicles yet the spinner is STILL ap -.

Truly wonderful thinking on someone's part there


Sliggoth

I'd say any mechanized guard will definitely allow multiple hits, as will KFF orks. Space Marines using a rhino rush or razorback spam will probably also be fine.
Most opponents I've seen keep stuff together to allow for mutual support as well as to grant cover to certain units.

I'm amazed at the amount of hatred towards a new unit for no other reason than people can not see it's use.

Yes a list with 3 fire prisms should never drop a single fire prism to go with 2 prisms and 1 spinner, but not every list uses 3 prisms for heavy support.

Some lists have 2 squads of war walkers, or 2 wraithlords. Adding a single prisms to hose lists isn't a very good idea, nor is it necessary especially if it's already stacked with anti tank.

3 Squads of fire dragons + DA for troops all in wave serpents + 2 Wraithlords= A lot of possible bright lances and a lot of fire dragons. A list like that can easily spare 1 force org slot for an anti infantry model like the night spinner.

Nothing else in the eldar codex can slow down enemy units. If a mechanized list already has enough anti tank and needs speed to outmaneuver the enemy then a unit that can slow them down has a place.

I can't be bothered reading through this whole thread, so if what I am about to say has already being said then good-o.

Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Also, when people talk about the movement reducing abilities of the Night spinner it is important to realise that the Fire Prism brings this to the table as well- but in the form of movement denial; for example you don't want to disembark a unit from a transport vehicle if the Fire prism can see you as its focussed beam will tear any units that do so apart and the Fire Prism also forces people to stick to cover more to reduce it's damage potential. The Fire Prism's greater risk forces your opponent to move in different ways already.

Move the night spinner to fast attack and then it becomes a valid choice.

Foldalot wrote:I can't be bothered reading through this whole thread, so if what I am about to say has already being said then good-o.

Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Also, when people talk about the movement reducing abilities of the Night spinner it is important to realise that the Fire Prism brings this to the table as well- but in the form of movement denial; for example you don't want to disembark a unit from a transport vehicle if the Fire prism can see you as its focussed beam will tear any units that do so apart and the Fire Prism also forces people to stick to cover more to reduce it's damage potential. The Fire Prism's greater risk forces your opponent to move in different ways already.

Move the night spinner to fast attack and then it becomes a valid choice.

Eldar don't "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take war walkers with 2 scatter lasers or star cannons.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take a wraithlord without a bright lance.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then 6 wave serpents with TL bright lances, 2 wraithlords with bright lances, & 30 fire dragons are a woefully inadequate amount of anti tank firepower.

I'll most likely give it a try and see how it fares over the course of a few games. If it sucks, well, I can set it next to my Vibro Cannons on the shelf.

But, I guess I go against the grain as I don't like Fire Prisms all that much. For anti tank, I've got Fire Dragons, Wave Serpents and a Wraithlord to cover that lane. While I think War Walkers could be a better buy than this tank, I'll still use it and see what it can do.

Am I disappointed that I can't take a battery of them or that they are a Heavy Support choice? Yeah. But, it's still a neat looking kit that I'd like to pick up.

From the sounds of it, taking one (or more) and actually winning games with it should be a fun challenge.

schadenfreude wrote:I'm amazed at the amount of hatred towards a new unit for no other reason than people can not see it's use.

No, you're not getting it. People hate it because it doesn't have a use. The Eldar already have some of the best Heavy Support choices in the game, the Night Spinner is a useless addition that's hopelessly outclassed by almost all of them. Crunch the numbers, if you want proof. Statistics do not lie.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:I'm amazed at the amount of hatred towards a new unit for no other reason than people can not see it's use.

No, you're not getting it. People hate it because it doesn't have a use. The Eldar already have some of the best Heavy Support choices in the game, the Night Spinner is a useless addition that's hopelessly outclassed by almost all of them. Crunch the numbers, if you want proof. Statistics do not lie.

I wouldn't say that is has no use.
An Eldar army heavily relies on synergy, and a Night Spinner can eventually contribute to the synergy of an Eldar army.
It can slow down the advance of the enemy which eventually increases the tactical flexibility of an Eldar army. If one or two enemy units are slowed down by one turn just by being hit by the Spinner, the Eldar gain time and this is invaluable in a game with only a few turns.

schadenfreude wrote:

Foldalot wrote:I can't be bothered reading through this whole thread, so if what I am about to say has already being said then good-o.

Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Also, when people talk about the movement reducing abilities of the Night spinner it is important to realise that the Fire Prism brings this to the table as well- but in the form of movement denial; for example you don't want to disembark a unit from a transport vehicle if the Fire prism can see you as its focussed beam will tear any units that do so apart and the Fire Prism also forces people to stick to cover more to reduce it's damage potential. The Fire Prism's greater risk forces your opponent to move in different ways already.

Move the night spinner to fast attack and then it becomes a valid choice.

Eldar don't "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take war walkers with 2 scatter lasers or star cannons.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take a wraithlord without a bright lance.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then 6 wave serpents with TL bright lances, 2 wraithlords with bright lances, & 30 fire dragons are a woefully inadequate amount of anti tank firepower.

I offer rational advice and I get obnoxious capslocked retorts; retorts that are also incorrect.

Fundamentally, you missed my point: If Eldar don't take ranged anti tank in their Heavy support, they deprive them selves of their strongest and cheapest long range antitank. Eldar have fantatsic anti infantry in other slots; there is no need to take more in your 3 precious HS slots.

Point by point.
-Firstly, who the hell runs warwalkers with star cannons, welcome to 5th ed cover?? This configuration is invalid.
-War walkers are fantastic ranged antitank (as well as anti infantry): Flanking + EML's/ SL's/ SC's= lots of dead tanks (a hell of a lot more then Night spinners can do). You're point of War walkers not being anti tank is invalid.
-If you field Wraithlords they should always have a Bright lance, don't waste their BS4 on a strength 6 gun half your army will be packing. Wraithlords best and most common configuration (BL+EML) is solid antitank, meaning this point of yours is also invalid.
-30 fire dragons and 6 upgraded Wave serpents. . Even this rediculous attempt to show other slots can fulfill the role of long range AT is hollow and incorrect, 30 fire dragons have short range, a good army need long range antitank fire power; fire dragons aren't even relevant to this discussion (apples and oranges). Wave serpents with 6 brightlances are fantastic- don't get me wrong- but they are hardly strong enough to do all the heavy lifting for an entire army (you're only going to see this many wave serpents in 2500 points+ games, you need more than 6 long range antitank guns at that level) And that makes the fourth invalid claim.

So yeah, in games larger than 1500 points Eldar do infact "NEED" to take some form of anti tank in their heavy support or else they are stuck taking expensive and inefficient options in smaller numbers across other units. Sadly this means their is no room for the Nightspinner in larger games as it brings only more strength 6 shots to an army already saturated in medium range Strength 6 shots. But by all means take the Nightspinner, I hope you have fun, it certainly is an awesome tank; but it simply cannot fulfill the role it is needed to in the Eldar army, given it's current FOC setup.

Foldalot wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:

Foldalot wrote:I can't be bothered reading through this whole thread, so if what I am about to say has already being said then good-o.

Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Also, when people talk about the movement reducing abilities of the Night spinner it is important to realise that the Fire Prism brings this to the table as well- but in the form of movement denial; for example you don't want to disembark a unit from a transport vehicle if the Fire prism can see you as its focussed beam will tear any units that do so apart and the Fire Prism also forces people to stick to cover more to reduce it's damage potential. The Fire Prism's greater risk forces your opponent to move in different ways already.

Move the night spinner to fast attack and then it becomes a valid choice.

Eldar don't "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take war walkers with 2 scatter lasers or star cannons.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take a wraithlord without a bright lance.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then 6 wave serpents with TL bright lances, 2 wraithlords with bright lances, & 30 fire dragons are a woefully inadequate amount of anti tank firepower.

I offer rational advice and I get obnoxious capslocked retorts; retorts that are also incorrect.

Fundamentally, you missed my point: If Eldar don't take ranged anti tank in their Heavy support, they deprive them selves of their strongest and cheapest long range antitank. Eldar have fantatsic anti infantry in other slots; there is no need to take more in your 3 precious HS slots.

Point by point.
-Firstly, who the hell runs warwalkers with star cannons, welcome to 5th ed cover?? This configuration is invalid.
-War walkers are fantastic ranged antitank (as well as anti infantry): Flanking + EML's/ SL's/ SC's= lots of dead tanks (a hell of a lot more then Night spinners can do). You're point of War walkers not being anti tank is invalid.
-If you field Wraithlords they should always have a Bright lance, don't waste their BS4 on a strength 6 gun half your army will be packing. Wraithlords best and most common configuration (BL+EML) is solid antitank, meaning this point of yours is also invalid.
-30 fire dragons and 6 upgraded Wave serpents. . Even this rediculous attempt to show other slots can fulfill the role of long range AT is hollow and incorrect, 30 fire dragons have short range, a good army need long range antitank fire power; fire dragons aren't even relevant to this discussion (apples and oranges). Wave serpents with 6 brightlances are fantastic- don't get me wrong- but they are hardly strong enough to do all the heavy lifting for an entire army (you're only going to see this many wave serpents in 2500 points+ games, you need more than 6 long range antitank guns at that level) And that makes the fourth invalid claim.

So yeah, in games larger than 1500 points Eldar do infact "NEED" to take some form of anti tank in their heavy support or else they are stuck taking expensive and inefficient options in smaller numbers across other units. Sadly this means their is no room for the Nightspinner in larger games as it brings only more strength 6 shots to an army already saturated in medium range Strength 6 shots. But by all means take the Nightspinner, I hope you have fun, it certainly is an awesome tank; but it simply cannot fulfill the role it is needed to in the Eldar army, given it's current FOC setup.

Eldar need anti tank, but they don't need all 3 heavy support slots. Eldar players who think they absolutely need 3 heavy support slots and their army can't function without all 3 heavy support slots are like chaos players who think they absolutely need 2 lash princes and their army can't function without 2 lash princes. What they really need is to learn how to win games with 2 heavy support slots (or 1 lash prince). It is very much possible, and the simple act of attempting it enough times will strengthen a player's overall game.

The main use of the night spinner isn't in providing STR 6 hits, it's in forcing a unit into difficult & dangerous terrain. As you said an an earlier statement "Welcome to 5th ed cover" you just can't count on killing units in cover anymore. The spinner allows the eldar to slow a dangerous unit that is screened by other units, and then ignore it for a turn focusing fire on targets that are not in cover. Once a unit is hit with the night spinner shooting it with any further firepower only lessons the damage that will come from dangerous terrain tests. The night spinner helps split up enemy forces so that eldar can use superior mobility to focus firepower on isolated units. In many eldar lists the night spinner is a complete waste of points, but in other lists it's well worth the points. Mech Eldar with EML/BL wraithlords is one of those lists that could use the spinner. It's already fast and mobile with plenty of anti tank fire power. The loss of wraith lord #3 won't single handedly break the army, and it's a trade off for a mobility increase. What we are left with is a debate between mobility and firepower. That leaves the question of which is better for the final purchase in an eldar army more mobility or more firepower. The answer depends on the player. Some players can Capitoline on a firepower increase more than a mobility increase, and thus would not benefit much from a nightspinner while other players can fully capitalize on the mobility increase making a night spinner well worth while. It all depends on playstyle and what the eldar player is good at doing.

Sanctjud wrote:@Irdiumstern:
Yea, but a foot army is not really a good competitive gauge IMO.

Kan Wall Orks
Foot Eldar
Tyranids
Hybrid IG (sorta footslogging... no really though. Still the Spinner can wreck havoc on the blob/line units)
Daemons

Those came off the top of my head in less than 5 seconds of thought, and they're all competitive armies. I'd say that these foot based armies merit consideration and are definitely part of the "competitive" theatre.

Maybe it's just me, but I can see the Nightspinner as a vehicle squadron killer. Seeing how whenever the NS hits a unit, the entire unit counts as being in difficult and dangerous terrain, even if you don't glance or penetrate the vehicle, and therefore the entire unit of vehicles will have to make a dangerous terrain test. With immobilized results counting as destroyed for squadrons in 5th edition, this will hurt a lot Just so long as the Eldar player tries to kite the enemy around by playing with cover saves. If they want to try to get a good shot, they have to take the risk of being destroyed. With the NS's indirect fire and twin linking this can make the likelihood of being able to take out the NS difficult at best.

Foldalot wrote:
I offer rational advice and I get obnoxious capslocked retorts; retorts that are also incorrect.

Fundamentally, you missed my point: If Eldar don't take ranged anti tank in their Heavy support, they deprive them selves of their strongest and cheapest long range antitank. Eldar have fantatsic anti infantry in other slots; there is no need to take more in your 3 precious HS slots.

Point by point.
-Firstly, who the hell runs warwalkers with star cannons, welcome to 5th ed cover?? This configuration is invalid.
-War walkers are fantastic ranged antitank (as well as anti infantry): Flanking + EML's/ SL's/ SC's= lots of dead tanks (a hell of a lot more then Night spinners can do). You're point of War walkers not being anti tank is invalid.
-If you field Wraithlords they should always have a Bright lance, don't waste their BS4 on a strength 6 gun half your army will be packing. Wraithlords best and most common configuration (BL+EML) is solid antitank, meaning this point of yours is also invalid.
-30 fire dragons and 6 upgraded Wave serpents. . Even this rediculous attempt to show other slots can fulfill the role of long range AT is hollow and incorrect, 30 fire dragons have short range, a good army need long range antitank fire power; fire dragons aren't even relevant to this discussion (apples and oranges). Wave serpents with 6 brightlances are fantastic- don't get me wrong- but they are hardly strong enough to do all the heavy lifting for an entire army (you're only going to see this many wave serpents in 2500 points+ games, you need more than 6 long range antitank guns at that level) And that makes the fourth invalid claim.

So yeah, in games larger than 1500 points Eldar do infact "NEED" to take some form of anti tank in their heavy support or else they are stuck taking expensive and inefficient options in smaller numbers across other units. Sadly this means their is no room for the Nightspinner in larger games as it brings only more strength 6 shots to an army already saturated in medium range Strength 6 shots. But by all means take the Nightspinner, I hope you have fun, it certainly is an awesome tank; but it simply cannot fulfill the role it is needed to in the Eldar army, given it's current FOC setup.

Well you obviously right, if I had 30 fire dragons, mounted in transports which can move 18" (I think) a turn, I am never going to get in firing range of my opponets vehicles. And those 6 anti-tank configured wave serpants are going to do nothing to enemy armour.

I must buy 3 fire prisms just so I have a slither of hope in those higher points games where the majority of armour can be pened by S6 on the rear armour. I must have higher than S8 lance shots to destroy those Av12 vehicles.

And every army is going to have so much armour especially with GW's cheap cheap tanks priced around a mesly £30 a tank.


I honestly don't think people use as much armour as your sugesting.

schadenfreude wrote:

Foldalot wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:

Foldalot wrote:I can't be bothered reading through this whole thread, so if what I am about to say has already being said then good-o.

Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Also, when people talk about the movement reducing abilities of the Night spinner it is important to realise that the Fire Prism brings this to the table as well- but in the form of movement denial; for example you don't want to disembark a unit from a transport vehicle if the Fire prism can see you as its focussed beam will tear any units that do so apart and the Fire Prism also forces people to stick to cover more to reduce it's damage potential. The Fire Prism's greater risk forces your opponent to move in different ways already.

Move the night spinner to fast attack and then it becomes a valid choice.

Eldar don't "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take war walkers with 2 scatter lasers or star cannons.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then no Eldar list should ever take a wraithlord without a bright lance.

If Eldar "NEED" 3 heavy support choices dedicated to the role of tank hunting then 6 wave serpents with TL bright lances, 2 wraithlords with bright lances, & 30 fire dragons are a woefully inadequate amount of anti tank firepower.

I offer rational advice and I get obnoxious capslocked retorts; retorts that are also incorrect.

Fundamentally, you missed my point: If Eldar don't take ranged anti tank in their Heavy support, they deprive them selves of their strongest and cheapest long range antitank. Eldar have fantatsic anti infantry in other slots; there is no need to take more in your 3 precious HS slots.

Point by point.
-Firstly, who the hell runs warwalkers with star cannons, welcome to 5th ed cover?? This configuration is invalid.
-War walkers are fantastic ranged antitank (as well as anti infantry): Flanking + EML's/ SL's/ SC's= lots of dead tanks (a hell of a lot more then Night spinners can do). You're point of War walkers not being anti tank is invalid.
-If you field Wraithlords they should always have a Bright lance, don't waste their BS4 on a strength 6 gun half your army will be packing. Wraithlords best and most common configuration (BL+EML) is solid antitank, meaning this point of yours is also invalid.
-30 fire dragons and 6 upgraded Wave serpents. . Even this rediculous attempt to show other slots can fulfill the role of long range AT is hollow and incorrect, 30 fire dragons have short range, a good army need long range antitank fire power; fire dragons aren't even relevant to this discussion (apples and oranges). Wave serpents with 6 brightlances are fantastic- don't get me wrong- but they are hardly strong enough to do all the heavy lifting for an entire army (you're only going to see this many wave serpents in 2500 points+ games, you need more than 6 long range antitank guns at that level) And that makes the fourth invalid claim.

So yeah, in games larger than 1500 points Eldar do infact "NEED" to take some form of anti tank in their heavy support or else they are stuck taking expensive and inefficient options in smaller numbers across other units. Sadly this means their is no room for the Nightspinner in larger games as it brings only more strength 6 shots to an army already saturated in medium range Strength 6 shots. But by all means take the Nightspinner, I hope you have fun, it certainly is an awesome tank; but it simply cannot fulfill the role it is needed to in the Eldar army, given it's current FOC setup.

Eldar need anti tank, but they don't need all 3 heavy support slots. Eldar players who think they absolutely need 3 heavy support slots and their army can't function without all 3 heavy support slots are like chaos players who think they absolutely need 2 lash princes and their army can't function without 2 lash princes. What they really need is to learn how to win games with 2 heavy support slots (or 1 lash prince). It is very much possible, and the simple act of attempting it enough times will strengthen a player's overall game.

The main use of the night spinner isn't in providing STR 6 hits, it's in forcing a unit into difficult & dangerous terrain. As you said an an earlier statement "Welcome to 5th ed cover" you just can't count on killing units in cover anymore. The spinner allows the eldar to slow a dangerous unit that is screened by other units, and then ignore it for a turn focusing fire on targets that are not in cover. Once a unit is hit with the night spinner shooting it with any further firepower only lessons the damage that will come from dangerous terrain tests. The night spinner helps split up enemy forces so that eldar can use superior mobility to focus firepower on isolated units. In many eldar lists the night spinner is a complete waste of points, but in other lists it's well worth the points. Mech Eldar with EML/BL wraithlords is one of those lists that could use the spinner. It's already fast and mobile with plenty of anti tank fire power. The loss of wraith lord #3 won't single handedly break the army, and it's a trade off for a mobility increase. What we are left with is a debate between mobility and firepower. That leaves the question of which is better for the final purchase in an eldar army more mobility or more firepower. The answer depends on the player. Some players can Capitoline on a firepower increase more than a mobility increase, and thus would not benefit much from a nightspinner while other players can fully capitalize on the mobility increase making a night spinner well worth while. It all depends on playstyle and what the eldar player is good at doing.

You raise a number of good points, but I still don't think the added utility the Nightspinner brings against footslogging armies compensates for the loss of versatility and killing power in the Fire prism, and given they both take up the same slot its essentially one or the other. We have both stated our views on the matter quite clearly now; and I can see your arguements and indeed the reasoning behind them, but in my mind it comes down to the fact the Nightspinner is either redundant or vulnerable- as well as wasting an very cheap antitank slot- in almost any eldar list. Either:

1. You run Mechdar--> You have Fire dragons and DA's in waveserpents and Falncons supported by Vypers/ bikes, and maybe a couple of Fire Prims. Replacing any of your falcons or fire prisms means that you lose a sizable amount of your antitank (and gain no noticable anti infatry power)and gain some movement control, but sadly this movement control is redundant in a list already loaded to the gills with fast skimmers, so the nightspinner doesn't really fit in such a list.

2. You run Footdar, it is likely that you are taking either Wraithlords or warwalkers for your Heavy Support, lets assume for simplicity (and consistency with your example) that you have three anti tank Wraithlords (BL+EML), now imagine you sacrfice 1 wraithlord for a nightspinner. The upside of this is you gain some movement control in a list that is not as mobile as it's mounted equivelant, you also get a bit more anti infantry but lose some very powerful antitank. The big downside, aside from taking away one of your few antitank units away, is that the nightspinner will be the only tank in your army and will cop every single antitank weapon that can see it (Yes, you can hide behind some solid terrain if your lucky enough to have some in your deployment zone but deepstrikers/ mounted melta guns will be big risks.)

3. You run Semi Mech/ Hybrid. There are too many regular variations of semimech out there as to objectively analyse; but as I have already highlighted- ad nauseum- you will always lose anti tank power and as semi mech armies typically only have a handful of long range AT units this loss will be felt even more keenly than armies that are full mech.

@Wizard12 Let me reiterate for your benefit.
-Melta Guns don't kill backfield enemy tanks turn one and will only get to them turn two if they aren't screened, and thats only if your tanks are moving fast (that means no brightlance shots from that tank) and is assuming your own tanks aren't shot out from underneath you.
-6 strength 8 lance shots at 2500 is not enough to even tickle a mech army, especially when they are mounted on tanks that will be moving fast to transport the unit inside of them. I'm afraid it is you who is misinformed in just how much mech is out there- go look at the 'Ard Boyz games if you want to see just how much mech your army will have to be able to deal with. (As I said 6 waveserpents will only really be seen in games of 2.5k+ points, therefore the comparison is logical).

Fire prisms' aren't the be all and end all of anti tank. There are 4 solid anti tank choices in the heavy support slot. Pick one. All of them are better choices than the Nightspinner in certain armies.
Also, Eldar tanks can move 24" a turn, which goes up to 36" in one turn if they have star engines. This is the only reason your point is even semi-logical. If you were in a 12 or 18" move vehicle your melta would be doomed. Also you seem to think that your Nightspinner will be hitting against rear armour? Go read the rules.

1. You run Mechdar--> You have Fire dragons and DA's in waveserpents and Falncons supported by Vypers/ bikes, and maybe a couple of Fire Prims. Replacing any of your falcons or fire prisms means that you lose a sizable amount of your antitank (and gain no noticable anti infatry power)and gain some movement control, but sadly this movement control is redundant in a list already loaded to the gills with fast skimmers, so the nightspinner doesn't really fit in such a list.

Well, Falcons lost an edge in the 5th ed. They are now at the bottom line when compared with Serpents and Prisms. Moreover, Vypers are just there as point fillers.
I think that a correctly built mech Eldar army makes use of two Fire Prisms these days. This would leave you with one free HS slot. The Night Spinner gives some versatility to the army for the reasons discussed above.
I'm going to buy one next week...

While I agree that Falcons aren't as indestructible as they were in 4th edition, I've still found utility with mine with the EML with Pulse Laser. Combined with Guide, it's putting out 3 S8 shots with 48" range. Combined with utilizing cover/vehicle shielding, Fortune makes it fairly resilient. Is it the ultimate, must have vehicle in an Eldar army? Not in 5th edition. But, I like it and still get use out of one or two.

Granted, I'll get a Night Spinner as it looks cool and I like the challenge of winning with less than optimal armies. However, I don't think anyone is really arguing that the Nightspinner is such a great buy for an army. Rather, folks are trying to figure out ways to make it work as it really does compete with already very useful Heavy Support choices.

Falcons lost an edge certainly, but they are still just as good if not better than Serpents. You have more firepower and better survivability, you can avoid the bulk of melta fire by hanging back and using it to capture backfield objectives with DAVU. Assuming my first two HS slots are Prisms (usually the case) I would far rather take either War Walkers (mass S6 shooting, mostly for anti-infantry but often more helpful than the Spinner for anti-tank purposes as well), another Prism (redundancy is good) or a Falcon (plenty of firepower and a pain in the ass to kill) than add a Night Spinner to give me more anti-infantry firepower I don't really need.

As mentioned Eldar have no issues with dropping 2-3 tanks if they can get in close due to Fire Dragons, they just usually won't get much more than that because they get flattened asap once outside the transports. The issue is that the number of tanks in a mech army (and everyone is moving towards mech or semi-mech) is conservatively going to be 7+ armoured targets in anything over 1750pts, you have to be able to drop them from range and while plenty of Bright Lances are going to help, they won't be enough most of the time, you still need as much help as you can get to pop armour.

Calling the Night Spinner versatile is a bit of a stretch, its an anti-infantry tank with a very unreliable/situational anti tank ability. Compared to the Prism, which has good anti tank ability, good heavy infantry (Terminators etc) and decent light infantry abilities you certainly can't call it versatile, the Prism is much better.

Vypers sure as hell aren't points filler, they are the best way for Mechdar to get bulk S6 shooting as all your HS slots are filled with Prisms or Falcons already so you can't add War Walkers (they don't really fit in any case because they are slower). They also provide a much more reliable form of movement control than the Spinner by moving out in front of the rest of your army and physically blocking movement towards your other vehicles.

Powerguy wrote:Falcons lost an edge certainly, but they are still just as good if not better than Serpents. You have more firepower and better survivability, you can avoid the bulk of melta fire by hanging back and using it to capture backfield objectives with DAVU. Assuming my first two HS slots are Prisms (usually the case) I would far rather take either War Walkers (mass S6 shooting, mostly for anti-infantry but often more helpful than the Spinner for anti-tank purposes as well), another Prism (redundancy is good) or a Falcon (plenty of firepower and a pain in the ass to kill) than add a Night Spinner to give me more anti-infantry firepower I don't really need.

As mentioned Eldar have no issues with dropping 2-3 tanks if they can get in close due to Fire Dragons, they just usually won't get much more than that because they get flattened asap once outside the transports. The issue is that the number of tanks in a mech army (and everyone is moving towards mech or semi-mech) is conservatively going to be 7+ armoured targets in anything over 1750pts, you have to be able to drop them from range and while plenty of Bright Lances are going to help, they won't be enough most of the time, you still need as much help as you can get to pop armour.

Calling the Night Spinner versatile is a bit of a stretch, its an anti-infantry tank with a very unreliable/situational anti tank ability. Compared to the Prism, which has good anti tank ability, good heavy infantry (Terminators etc) and decent light infantry abilities you certainly can't call it versatile, the Prism is much better.

Vypers sure as hell aren't points filler, they are the best way for Mechdar to get bulk S6 shooting as all your HS slots are filled with Prisms or Falcons already so you can't add War Walkers (they don't really fit in any case because they are slower). They also provide a much more reliable form of movement control than the Spinner by moving out in front of the rest of your army and physically blocking movement towards your other vehicles.

Right on the money, I 110% agree. This post sums up exactly why Nightshields are not a replacement for Eldar's current heavy support choices.

The_Malcontent wrote:Maybe it's just me, but I can see the Nightspinner as a vehicle squadron killer. Seeing how whenever the NS hits a unit, the entire unit counts as being in difficult and dangerous terrain, even if you don't glance or penetrate the vehicle, and therefore the entire unit of vehicles will have to make a dangerous terrain test. With immobilized results counting as destroyed for squadrons in 5th edition, this will hurt a lot Just so long as the Eldar player tries to kite the enemy around by playing with cover saves. If they want to try to get a good shot, they have to take the risk of being destroyed. With the NS's indirect fire and twin linking this can make the likelihood of being able to take out the NS difficult at best.

That is downright evil. Hit a 3 vehicle squadron and you have a 1/2 chance of killing a tank. Leman Russ squadrons are going to hate this

Irdiumstern wrote:

The_Malcontent wrote:Maybe it's just me, but I can see the Nightspinner as a vehicle squadron killer. Seeing how whenever the NS hits a unit, the entire unit counts as being in difficult and dangerous terrain, even if you don't glance or penetrate the vehicle, and therefore the entire unit of vehicles will have to make a dangerous terrain test. With immobilized results counting as destroyed for squadrons in 5th edition, this will hurt a lot Just so long as the Eldar player tries to kite the enemy around by playing with cover saves. If they want to try to get a good shot, they have to take the risk of being destroyed. With the NS's indirect fire and twin linking this can make the likelihood of being able to take out the NS difficult at best.

That is downright evil. Hit a 3 vehicle squadron and you have a 1/2 chance of killing a tank. Leman Russ squadrons are going to hate this

This 1/2 chance requires to fail the dangerous terrain test.

I would like to promote the idea that the Nightspinner is utter bunk and should never be taken, ever. Anything anyone has ever said bad about it is absolutely right, no matter what they said. I would hope everyone who plays 40K everywhere would read this thread and beleive all the naysayers about the Nightspinner because frankly I would not like to play against one or two in a game. I know the good players will overlook the theory hammer and bring the Spinner of Death to the table, but maybe enough midling players will leave it at home.

DarthDiggler wrote:I would like to promote the idea that the Nightspinner is utter bunk and should never be taken, ever. Anything anyone has ever said bad about it is absolutely right, no matter what they said. I would hope everyone who plays 40K everywhere would read this thread and beleive all the naysayers about the Nightspinner because frankly I would not like to play against one or two in a game. I know the good players will overlook the theory hammer and bring the Spinner of Death to the table, but maybe enough midling players will leave it at home.

Really depends on the army, doesn't it?

Vehicle armies that move are going to hate this one. 1/6 chance to have your vehicle made a sitting duck isn't fun. Sure, the vehicle is in most cases not destroyed utterly, but a Mechdar force, for instance, will hurt from this one.
Foot armies are absolutely crippled. Even if you survive the shot, you get your movement cut and risk losing extra models later.
The only armies which aren't really affected in any huge way are the vehicle armies which sit still, and there aren't a lot of them.

In either case, I don't think people will fit the Nightspinner with too many upgrades, making them relatively low points investments. The only real problem here is that the Troop and Fast Attack choices Eldar have are unattractive - a large part due to an outdated codex. If the 150 points extra a War Walker squadron cost could be spent in Fast Attack without having a feeling you were making a bad trade off, then this particular choice could be a budget-harasser tank.
Eldar lists aren't really built as Mech or foot as such, it's more a case of Minimize troop, ignore fast attack, maximize either elite or heavy support or both.

P.S. I can't really see how 45 points plus a weapon on an OT AV 10/10/10 model is points effective. They're a much better target for drop troops than Nightspinners are.

DarthDiggler wrote:I would like to promote the idea that the Nightspinner is utter bunk and should never be taken, ever. Anything anyone has ever said bad about it is absolutely right, no matter what they said. I would hope everyone who plays 40K everywhere would read this thread and beleive all the naysayers about the Nightspinner because frankly I would not like to play against one or two in a game. I know the good players will overlook the theory hammer and bring the Spinner of Death to the table, but maybe enough midling players will leave it at home.

Care to enlighten us as to why the Nightspinner is good exactly? Just implying that you're a good player and I can therefore see it's value, and the only reason us plebs can't see it's value is because we are bad players- whether you are correct about our playing level or not- breeds a really deconstructive atmosphere. It's like the Emperors Clothes story, soon some people will be espousing the virtues of the Nightspinner just to try to appear to have a grasp on it's tactical power. Not to mention it adds nothing to the units evaluation.

Now, if you could tell us why exactly the Nightspinner is such a great vehicle I would love to hear it- I would like to think it is a valid choice- but I can't justify fielding it to myself.

Foldalot, please read the thread.
Night Spinners are not useless.
However, there is no consense about this.

Foldalot wrote:Care to enlighten us as to why the Nightspinner is good exactly?

Nope.

wuestenfux wrote:Foldalot, please read the thread.
Night Spinners are not useless.
However, there is no consense about this.

Ok, I will reread the thread for a second time...doubt much has changed since I last read it.
I am not saying Nightspinners are bad, I am just saying they are (IMHO ofcourse) not as good as other choices.
However, I would love to see a strong arguement otherwise. I was honestly hoping Darthdiggler would sway my mind but that doesn't seem likely to happen

Bought mine today. It seems like a fun unit to include (fun doesn't necessarily outlaw competitive). The range and dangerous terrain are the main benefits.

Most people seem to be saying "oh no, dangerous terrain, how terrible" in that nice sarcastic tone of text. However, this is more of a problem when it is knocking off a few extra terminators. In addition it provides massed (to an extent) S6 shots against infantry (by this I mean you will get a good number of hits, especially against infantry heavy enemies, and come on, not everyone always spreads their infantry to the 2" limit. 2 dual scatter laser war walkers should get about 8 hits, which is probably, in my experience with large blasts, about 3 more than you'll get with the spinner. Not a big difference against infantry, especially if you account for rending and the range boost).

I'm going to see what I can do with it, and probably get in some test games this week(end).

I think running them them in pairs will be the ticket. I am going to run mine with war walkers as my third heavy. I have other units for anti tank. To be honest, the armies that give me the most trouble are the ones that massively outnumber me. IG and Orks are the toughest. With IG, hits on the blob squad will get so many guys that even with cover they will quickly be reduced. Orks will be even better since they have to move to be effective. A 30 boy squad will lose 5 or 6 on the blast and then when they move another 5 or 6 by the numbers minimum. Night Spinners allow you to shoot them twice. It's like throwing your killer assault unit into a larger unit to hurt during your turn and then theirs... Clip 2 or 3 of those boys squads and you are really going to hurt them over a coulple of turns of them moving around.

I plan to get some test games in with them, pretty soon. I'll probably run 2 prisms, and one Night spinner. I never run 3 prisms, so this won't be that big of a change, just a little point shuffling.

Foldalot wrote:Eldar armies need their heavy support choices to provide their long range anti tank. The Night Spinner is not as good as a Falcon/ Fire prism or even a Wraithlord at killing tanks so by taking a Night Spinner you hurt a really important part of your army that can't be replaced well by other slots.

Fundamentally, you missed my point: If Eldar don't take ranged anti tank in their Heavy support, they deprive them selves of their strongest and cheapest long range antitank. Eldar have fantatsic anti infantry in other slots; there is no need to take more in your 3 precious HS slots.

So yeah, in games larger than 1500 points Eldar do infact "NEED" to take some form of anti tank in their heavy support or else they are stuck taking expensive and inefficient options in smaller numbers across other units. Sadly this means their is no room for the Nightspinner in larger games as it brings only more strength 6 shots to an army already saturated in medium range Strength 6 shots. But by all means take the Nightspinner, I hope you have fun, it certainly is an awesome tank; but it simply cannot fulfill the role it is needed to in the Eldar army, given it's current FOC setup.

I've seen eldar armies do just fine with 3 small squads of dragons inside serpents. If you "need" longer ranged firepower (my demons make due without long ranged anti-tank) you can slap lances on your DA serpents. You can even take some vipers with lances as well. I think that there is definatly room to experiment with three night spinners in 1500+ lists. These tanks can fulfill an anti-infantry roll as well as pop tightly packed together transports commonly seen in guard/mech marine/KFF armies.