Balancing Wraithguard

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.

**ShieldBrother**

Galef wrote:
What makes a unit balanced is more than just how much it can kill vs it's durability and points cost. It also has to do with how it does it and can it repeat that action more than once per game. WG are far from a "guaranteed delete button", unless, of course, the opponent facing them has
A) never heard of them and thus will get surprised,
B) is incompetent and needs to L2P or
C) is unfortunate enough to be playing one ot the codexes that are in sore need on updating (like Orks, Dark Eldar or CSM)

They are, at best, a 1-trick pony. Granted that 1 trick is a dang good trick, but they pay for it.

Give me any average power lever army vs WG with D-scythes in a Serpent and 9 out of 10 games, I can minimize the damage potential of those WG by simple tactics.
Kill the serpent (it's AV12, surely you can do 3 HPs to AV12 at range). But their using an Archon you say? Easy, spread out your forces and bublewrap your big targets. they drop, kill less than half of their 300+ pts cost, then you either move away, or kill them. In any case, they aren't using those flamers again in this game.

I'm not trying to say they are a not a great unit, but they are much closer to balanced in practice than they appear to be in imagination-hammer. A further -1 to all Distort weapons is all that would be needed to balance WG, WK, etc. AP2 Flamers that wound on 4+ are basically what they did in 6th ed, and no one took them.

--

What if I'm playing khorne daemonkin? What shooting will I have to take out that wave serpent before it deletes my bloodthirster? Admit it, it is only balanced in the Eldar book. Every other codex would love for something like that, but only eldar have it, so it doesn't seem like a big deal when you've got WK and Scatbikes to choose from.

And no answer to game balance should just be "l2p lol".

**Galef**

If you are playing KDK, D-flamers aren't a big threat to you. Your FMC either won't be on the table when they drop, or it will be in the air, thus cannot be hit with the flamers. Everything else in your army should have invul saves, or should be cheap, or should have big bases to minimum how much damage can be done.

The point I am trying to make is that WG with D-scythes may be good against a wide variety of units, but in practice their preferred targets are actually hard to get to if their owning player knows how to play against them.

But I will agree that the issue with WG is a broader issue then how balanced they are. It is an issue with Eldar in general. Distort being D -1 (scythes being D -2) and 20ppm Scatter lasers on Bikes would pretty much take Eldar down to (or maybe just below) Marine, Tau and Necrons power levels. So still good, but much more palatable to the masses.
I wish we could "even out" all the armies by toning down the powerful ones and buffing up the not-so good armies, but there are just too many variables and no one will every agree on what nerfs are ok ro what buffs are too good, etc.

--

**pm713**

Why all this D - X stuff? Seems needlessly complicated/effortful to still have all the D weapons.

**nou**

I use the following D-table for Eldar D weapons:
1. nothing happens
2. target is moved 2d6 in random direction (per model basis, with stopping at impassable terrain)
3-5. D3 wounds
6. 2xD3 wounds

D-Scythes treat '2' as '1' instead. This reduces the chance of doing D3 wounds by 1/6, reduces maximum damage to 6 wounds at best (and only when being extremely lucky) while keeping the '6' result better and the displacement result brings back 2nd edition feel to Eldar D-weapons and creates interesting in-play effects of uncoherent units or unexpected dislocations (as it has in 2rd ed).

As for wraithguards being unbalanced or not - everything depends on type of scenarios you're playing. I play exclusively modified mealstorm without deathstars and they are at the edge of being unusable due to limited range/speed/delivery issues...

**Galef**

pm713 wrote:
Why all this D - X stuff? Seems needlessly complicated/effortful to still have all the D weapons.

Scythes are already D -1, so I'm not suggested anything that GW hasn't already done, I'm suggesting they take it 1 more step in that direction. D-weapons perfectly represent what Distort weapons should do in their fluff (opening small momentary warp-rifts). Yet spammable access to straight D is not good for the game (aside from discouraging death-stars)

The 6th ed rules for them were bland and the rules before that had their own "snow-flake" chart. By making "Distort", D -1 (scythes -2) you can have your fluff cake and eat it too. It's also much easier for the opponent to understand than having to show them a chart that is specific to the Eldar book. D-table is in the BRB, so everyone has access. Everyone can understand what D weapons can do without access to the '6' result and having a 33% chance to do nothing every shot. Still good, but not broken if spammed

--

**pm713**

Galef wrote:
pm713 wrote:
Why all this D - X stuff? Seems needlessly complicated/effortful to still have all the D weapons.

Scythes are already D -1, so I'm not suggested anything that GW hasn't already done, I'm suggesting they take it 1 more step in that direction. D-weapons perfectly represent what Distort weapons should do in their fluff (opening small momentary warp-rifts). Yet spammable access to straight D is not good for the game (aside from discouraging death-stars)

The 6th ed rules for them were bland and the rules before that had their own "snow-flake" chart. By making "Distort", D -1 (scythes -2) you can have your fluff cake and eat it too. It's also much easier for the opponent to understand than having to show them a chart that is specific to the Eldar book. D-table is in the BRB, so everyone has access. Everyone can understand what D weapons can do without access to the '6' result and having a 33% chance to do nothing every shot. Still good, but not broken if spammed

--

The 6th ed rules were way better. None of this table rubbish. Simple and easy to do. I have my fluff cake, my simplicity cake and my balance cake.

**Galef**

I agree they were simpler, but it had a useless side rule, since a "6" already cause penetrating hits with str10. meaning the Distort rule only ever applied to the Scythes.

D -1 doesn't even need to refer to the chart: 3+ causes D3 wounds or HPs. That's even easier than having to roll for armor pen, or rolling to wound (which is a chart by the way)

**pm713**

Galef wrote:
I agree they were simpler, but it had a useless side rule, since a "6" already cause penetrating hits with str10. meaning the Distort rule only ever applied to the Scythes.

D -1 doesn't even need to refer to the chart: 3+ causes D3 wounds or HPs. That's even easier than having to roll for armor pen, or rolling to wound (which is a chart by the way)

It also applied to everything T6+.

6th rule - Roll to hit, roll to wound. End.

7th - Roll to hit, roll on table, roll d3. End.

Notice how has one has an extra and pointless step.