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.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Compare a Canoness to a Archon (Blessed blade vs Huskblade, Inferno P vs Blast P, PfP vs AoF/MD, other supporting heroes and traits). And you'll just like me hate the Archon and wish you were playing SoB.

Yeah, and autarchs are in the same place.

In fact every craftworlds eldar character besides the psykers is extremely cookie-cutter and feels very underpowered at this point, except maybe Asurmen and that's mostly just because of his aura.

Jain Zar gets 4 attacks (along with a goofy rule your opponent can play around that might give you a few more in weird circumstances). Primaris bikers get 6. Primaris has become the punch line to every joke in 40k.

 Galas wrote:
I cannot take seriously when most eldar players complaint about stuff like Swooping Hawks or Banshee as being bad. A 55 point unit that can shut down entire enemy castles is bad and unplayable? Deep Striking saturation units that eat chaff with the capability of droping mortal wounds here and there are bad?


Eldar players live complaining about how bad their codex is when they are just soo deep into the internet dogma about whats competitive and what isn't that they lack the knowledge to actually play their armies. Is very easy to see if a player knows to play eldar or it doesnt. The ones that do rarely complaint about their codex and I have seen many of the top eldar players of Spain destroy flyer spam , dark reaper, shinning spear lists of less knowledge players with things like Fire Dragons.

Because thats the reality of this: We all are for the most part actually quite bad at this game.

We all know the theory, I know it myself, but then doing it on the table is much different. And TBH. How could we be other thing that bad or mediocre at the game? How one can be good at something he plays/Does 3-4 times a month?

Theres some bad units on the eldar codex, thats true, they have too many units to not have some. But the medium powerlevel of nearly every unit in the eldar codex is leagues ahead of many others.

Maybe that has relation also when playing ITC vs WTC. ITC makes a ton of units unusable across all of the game, WTC/ETC/CA tournaments has a much bigger variety of lists and units used.

I agree with just about everything you have stated. I think the hard truth is that the average player, like myself, probably gets about half of the total efficacy out of any particular unit. I think that its a miniatures game, and most of the time, how you play it is more important than what you are playing. That isnt to say all of the time, obvioulsy there are lopsided situations that create unwinnable game states for one player or another, but on the whole, the reason, I would wager, the biggest reason reason why people loose their games is because of themselves.

I have seen really good players play from losing positions into a win, and I have seen really bad players play the current hotshot meta list and loose to a pretty unoptimized list.

It's really funny to me when you play an army, and you play a model that "isn't competitive" and your opponents ask what it does, and when you tell them, they are like "why don't I ever see more of them?" When i see this happen, and I see it a lot in my local area (or at least i used too prior to 'rona messing everything up for a bit) it always makes me laugh a bit inside because its a wonderful example of how something can be both "not optimal" and still "better than people think" all at the same time.

Hell, id wager that most of the models in most codexes normally fit into that kind of lukewarm category. What the worst part of it is, is given the time constraints on playing, and on painting and preparing models for the table, people dont want to waste their time with something that "isnt the best", and I don't blame them for that, not at all, my time is limited, and I'm sure everyone else is too, but it does open the door for things to be dismissed out of hand far too quickly.

War walkers and Falcons are a good example in the Aeldari codex. Falcons are quite good now with their most recent points reductions, and warwalkers are way better than people i think give them credit. A local was playing with these two elements in their games just to test them and he was brutalizing people with "bad" units. He is also a better player than just about anyone in my area, so again, I'd offer that its more about how you play than what you are playing.

One of the biggest problems for DE is that the poison mechanic as currently written just doesn’t function in the current game. It’s like we’re trying to fight with muskets against armies equipped with modern assault rifles.

"Good players make bad units work" doesn't mean they aren't bad units, it just means good players are good.

But FWIW war walkers and Falcons are both good now because of the ridiculous cheese of the EC/MS combo.

Honestly, GW backed themselves into a corner here because EC/MS makes single entity units so much vastly better that they can't buff them without making them overpowered.

EC/MS needs to disappear in the new codex and be replaced with army-wide buffs, not this terrible bandaid for bad design.

yukishiro1 wrote:
"Good players make bad units work" doesn't mean they aren't bad units, it just means good players are good.

But FWIW war walkers and Falcons are both good now because of the ridiculous cheese of the EC/MS combo.

Honestly, GW backed themselves into a corner here because EC/MS makes single entity units so much vastly better that they can't buff them without making them overpowered.

EC/MS needs to disappear in the new codex and be replaced with army-wide buffs, not this terrible bandaid for bad design.

Yes, how you play is more important that what you are playing, most times. I actually think that, with the exception of specific outliers, like the IH and IF codexes, or Ynnari before rework, or AM soup with pre-nerf RIS and Castellan costs, for the typical game of CA missions, the game is a lot more balanced than people give it credit for. That's not to say that anything can beat any other army on any given Sunday, but it is to say that "junk" or "bad" units normally arent as bad as people say they are.

Also, what are you referring too with EC/MS? I'm sure I'm familiar with the concept, just not the abbreviation.

EC = Expert Crafts its really good on a lot of units like Wraithlords, Wraithseers, War Walkers, etc.. ones with good strong single shot guns. You can go Masterful shots for Ignore cover or if all wraiths Wrath of the Dead.

A spearhead with 2 Wraitseers and 3 Wraithlords with CE and WotD are really fun to play and IMO pretty good.

 Elbows wrote:
Gotta disagree.

Eldar have not been competitive every edition; a handful of Eldar units have been competitive every edition. Easily half of the book is pretty garbage in 8th edition. You want proof? Almost every aspect warrior outside of Dark Reapers (expensive for what they do), and Shining Spears (one of the genuinely good units) has been made cheaper every single Chapter Approved, and were then given alternate Exarch powers...and most of them are still not taken. When was the last time you saw Falcons in play? Wraithknights on the table in 8th edition? Support weapon batteries? Phoenix Lords?, etc.

Eldar armies are generally one-trick ponies with a few powerful units, and that makes people hate Eldar armies. Some Eldar players *gasp* would like to use the other 60% of their fething codex sometimes.

You find it extremely hard to take anyone's complaints about Eldar? Good for you. I find it extremely hard to put up with the "You're Eldar, you're always so good, you don't have an opinion!" kind of nonsense.

Here is an idea, maybe we get all factions able to compete with at least one list, then we can pivot to make sure every eldar unit is worthy of a five star rating. The Eldar faction spent the entire edition being awesome, and had better than a 70% win rate for several FAQ cycles, but to hear this guy talk that is not good enough for him. It's hard to parody this opinion because it is already so over the top, in an edition where entire factions have never made it to the podium, this guy is like "Wait, not every eldar unit is amazing, so that's where GWs focus needs to be". If I were to try and make a meme post that exemplifies how the community perceives eldar players, I don't think I could do better than this. It's so unselfaware that were it not for his post history I'd argue that he is a Poe trolling the Eldar haters.

The OP wasn't complaining about Eldar as a faction being underpowered, but that so much of what should be the core of their army doesn't work, the new stuff they've gotten is relatively limited, and that much of what made them unique in older editions is no longer the case. I don't think that's an unfair complaint nor is it a mutually exclusive state of affairs with Eldar being competitively broken in many respects through most editions. That can all be true.

Same way I can complain that Vanquishers are garbage while Tank Commanders are hilariously overpowered. Both can be true

 Elbows wrote:
Gotta disagree.

Eldar have not been competitive every edition; a handful of Eldar units have been competitive every edition. Easily half of the book is pretty garbage in 8th edition. You want proof? Almost every aspect warrior outside of Dark Reapers (expensive for what they do), and Shining Spears (one of the genuinely good units) has been made cheaper every single Chapter Approved, and were then given alternate Exarch powers...and most of them are still not taken. When was the last time you saw Falcons in play? Wraithknights on the table in 8th edition? Support weapon batteries? Phoenix Lords?, etc.

Eldar armies are generally one-trick ponies with a few powerful units, and that makes people hate Eldar armies. Some Eldar players *gasp* would like to use the other 60% of their fething codex sometimes.

You find it extremely hard to take anyone's complaints about Eldar? Good for you. I find it extremely hard to put up with the "You're Eldar, you're always so good, you don't have an opinion!" kind of nonsense.

Support Weapons just got a whole lot more interesting as did Wraithlords/Knights. There's also a difference between "bad" and "not as good as the best units in the codex". It is just easier to use CHEs and the like instead of Scorpions or other units, because you get those stacking modifiers and less concern about losses, but with stacking going away other units will have room to breathe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

yukishiro1 wrote:

Jain Zar gets 4 attacks (along with a goofy rule your opponent can play around that might give you a few more in weird circumstances). Primaris bikers get 6. Primaris has become the punch line to every joke in 40k.

*sigh* We're really going to be comparing apples to oranges all edition, aren't we?

Drager wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

That b.c they took away 15+ pieces of wargear away and nerf the ones that are left. Huskblades used to be INSANE, now they are weaker than everyone else's version.

Huskblades, Hex Rifles and Implosion Missiles all used to cause instant death. I miss that. Now they're all just bad.

I think a big part of the problem was that those weapons didn't just use to cause Instant Death. Rather, Instant Death was their only function.

Without Instant Death, the Huskblade is a glorified Power Sword. Without Instant Death, the Hexrifle is a crappy Sniper Rifle.

In contrast, weapons like Power Fists and Thunder Hammers could often cause Instant Death to low-T characters, but even if you take that away they've still got fantastic strength and AP.

However, Huskblades and Hexrifles lost their ability to cause Instant Death and instead gained . . . nothing.

Oh no, I apologise, the Hexrifle did gain something - the Heavy rule.

Also, in spite of the fact that Instant Death used to be the core ability of the Huskblade, it only inflicts d3 wounds, whilst a Thunder Hammer inflicts a full 3.

I don't mind losing Instant Death as a mechanic, but in that case weapons like the Huskblade and Hexrifle needed a full redesign, not just a tiny tweak.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
EC = Expert Crafts its really good on a lot of units like Wraithlords, Wraithseers, War Walkers, etc.. ones with good strong single shot guns. You can go Masterful shots for Ignore cover or if all wraiths Wrath of the Dead.

A spearhead with 2 Wraitseers and 3 Wraithlords with CE and WotD are really fun to play and IMO pretty good.

Gotcha, ok, sorry, i had to have someone spell that out to me but I'm with ya. (though I did have to go re-read it in the book, I don't play aeldari so it wasn't on the top of my head)

Ok pet Primaris favourtism aside why does a being the best part of 10000 years old with 100s of lifes of combat only has the same A value as a basic ninja clown, because having twice as many attacks as your Aspect isnt that great if said Aspect is way behind the stat curve for fistcuffs, its almost as if nobody bothered noticing power swords arent very scary in the hands of s3 model

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Jain Zar gets 4 attacks (along with a goofy rule your opponent can play around that might give you a few more in weird circumstances). Primaris bikers get 6. Primaris has become the punch line to every joke in 40k.

*sigh* We're really going to be comparing apples to oranges all edition, aren't we?

The only way this is apples to oranges is in the opposite direction. A melee phoenix lord should be vastly better in melee than a stock primaris biker. She is better, but not by nearly as much as she should be. A white scars stock primaris biker on turn 3 and beyond puts out 6 S4 -2AP 2 damage hits, probably with rerolls. A BA one has 7 attacks at +1 to wound.

It's just stupid. Eldar in general have been hugely left behind by the inflation in the number of attacks most other factions *cough* SPACE MARINES *cough* get. Primaris bikers are the worst, but they're not the only example.

This is just bad game design. The greatest warriors of a race that were ruling the galaxy when humans were still poking each other with sharpened sticks should not get totally dunked on by the Imperium in the way they are.

Outriders have 5 attacks base?

Martel732 wrote:
Outriders have 5 attacks base?

2 base + 1 for charging/being charged + 1 for chainsword + 2 from some special rule or something I can’t find anywhere, may have been in a stream.

+2 attacks when charging (in addition to shock assault) was a rule from the stream.

Most Phoenix Lords don't even get an invuln save. They are so behind the curve it's comical at this point.

The marine fapfest that people erroneously claimed existed for years has finally arrived. It's just as bad as they feared. Marines spent a long time as target practice for Eldar, but this is not the appropriate fix.

 Galas wrote:
I cannot take seriously when most eldar players complaint about stuff like Swooping Hawks or Banshee as being bad.

What happens when Banshees charge a unit of Intercessors? They've spent their turns somehow getting past the Intercessor Bolt Rifles and gotten into a nice ambush position and are assaulting. What happens? Is the result what you'd expect?

2nd edition, Power Swords have a S 6, a -3 save mod, and they can parry. Banshees have an initiative of 5 or 6, I forget their Mask bonus. They have 2 attacks because they hold a pistol and CC weapon, and possibly a 3rd attack because they charged (or it's a +1 to the result, I forget). Their target, a Tac marine has 1A and 1W.

8th Edition. . . S3, 1A? What else do they get? Intercessors are hitting back with 3A and have 2W in defense.

2nd ed was too far one way. Now it's too far the other way. Marines were 30 ppm in 2nd and died in droves while doing almost no damage in return.

Mask bonus was that opponent their die rolls or their WS; I can't recall which. Either way, it was NUTS.

It is truly pathetic how far aspect warriors have fallen in comparison to marines.

GW had game designer's version of AD/HD. If it's not the current hotness, they forget it exists.

yukishiro1 wrote:
It is truly pathetic how far aspect warriors have fallen in comparison to marines.

To be fair, it's amusing how far Marines have fallen in comparison to Marines looking at a Tactical Marine and an Intercessor next to each other

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I cannot take seriously when most eldar players complaint about stuff like Swooping Hawks or Banshee as being bad.

What happens when Banshees charge a unit of Intercessors? They've spent their turns somehow getting past the Intercessor Bolt Rifles and gotten into a nice ambush position and are assaulting. What happens? Is the result what you'd expect?

2nd edition, Power Swords have a S 6, a -3 save mod, and they can parry. Banshees have an initiative of 5 or 6, I forget their Mask bonus. They have 2 attacks because they hold a pistol and CC weapon, and possibly a 3rd attack because they charged (or it's a +1 to the result, I forget). Their target, a Tac marine has 1A and 1W.

8th Edition. . . S3, 1A? What else do they get? Intercessors are hitting back with 3A and have 2W in defense.

Why are you charging with your banshee at the intercessors?

What happens when khorne berzerkers charge a unit of imperial guard infantry? They kill a unit that costs 40 and unless they tri-point it they die.

Banshee are not there to kill anything, they are one of the best tools in this edition to shut down shooting units. TBH I don't really care about other editions, and I'm sad that you would like for them to kill intercessors in combat. I would like for my kroot to be actually usable in HTH but they aren't, and I use them to what they are actually very good for.

I'm a pretty mediocre player, but the reality is that the one that wants to improve at the game adapts and learns, the one that don't just complaints why things don't work when he tries it instead of understanding why that happens. Is legitimate to complaint about balance problems, in 40k there are many, but not as many as most people thinks: People mistakes their perception in how things should work on the tabletop with a unit not working or not being worth taking.

The issue isn't whether banshees are useful or not. It's that there's been a complete inversion of the power pyramid. Eldar aspect warriors used to be elite warriors who dumpstered MEQ. They still are in the lore.

Now eldar aspect warriors are cheap chaff that gets dumpstered by intercessors, marines who aren't even combat focused.

It would be like if leman russ tanks went to T6 5 wounds in 9th edition. With enough points cuts they might still be good...but people would still rightly be annoyed to have their iconic unit totally gutted.

 Galas wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I cannot take seriously when most eldar players complaint about stuff like Swooping Hawks or Banshee as being bad.

What happens when Banshees charge a unit of Intercessors? They've spent their turns somehow getting past the Intercessor Bolt Rifles and gotten into a nice ambush position and are assaulting. What happens? Is the result what you'd expect?

2nd edition, Power Swords have a S 6, a -3 save mod, and they can parry. Banshees have an initiative of 5 or 6, I forget their Mask bonus. They have 2 attacks because they hold a pistol and CC weapon, and possibly a 3rd attack because they charged (or it's a +1 to the result, I forget). Their target, a Tac marine has 1A and 1W.

8th Edition. . . S3, 1A? What else do they get? Intercessors are hitting back with 3A and have 2W in defense.

Why are you charging with your banshee at the intercessors?
. . .
Banshee are not there to kill anything. . .

Oh.

Oh I see.

So the elite CC troops shouldn't possibly be any sort of a threat in their specialty against elite generalist troops. Ok.

I think I've spotted the problem.

It's the same reasoning as to why marine players complained about being Eldar target practice for four editions.

Intercessors also outshoot Tau Fire Warriors and out meele ork nobz. The only troop I believe they don't win against point per point are saggitarum guard from Custodes (I have not done the math, purely from personal experience) but the moment you factor rerolls auras things become insane.

But thats what happen when you have people wishing for masturbatory fantasy with their space marines armies. Horus Heresy became so popular for a reason. I hate what the horus heresy has done to normal 40k, and I hate primarchs, but what can I do? They are here to stay. They have been here for 3 years, and they are gonna be for many more. I played my dark angels when they were trash for the two first years of 8th and stopped after the new marine codex because I knew how they would end. Thats why I learned to play agaisnt space marines, with a ton of loses in between (And even today).

The reality of Primaris, we can defy it or we can accept it, but we can't deny it.

Right. Primaris were a big mistake, but they're here to stay. So GW needs to pull its head out and start updating other factions so their elites don't feel like dumpster trash in comparison to generic space marine troop choices.

Aspect warriors aren't troops (except DIs). They are supposed to be elite, highly specialized choices. The combat specialized aspect warriors shouldn't be cheap trash the way they are now. Scorpions are nine points a model now. Nine! And they still don't see use because they get 2 S4 AP 0 attacks in combat, which is a joke. It's crazy how far aspect warriors have fallen.

I still think primaris are appropriate, but lots of other changes needed to happen as well.

 Vaktathi wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
It is truly pathetic how far aspect warriors have fallen in comparison to marines.

To be fair, it's amusing how far Marines have fallen in comparison to Marines looking at a Tactical Marine and an Intercessor next to each other

Those basic Tac Marines are looking pretty phenomenal when compared to most aspects these days.

Dire Avenger: S3 T3 4+, 18" Assault 2 AP0-ish gun. 1A

Tac Marine: (UM Doctrine) S4 T4 3+ 24" Assault* 2 AP-1 gun. 2A in the first round of CC.

*The constant buffing to Rapid Fire has removed the majority of it's downsides in comparison to Assault weapons. UM Marines are now moving and firing twice up to 24, and are able to assault afterwards.