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.

Incorporated feedback and modified the proposed change. Further detail is available on page 2.
----------

-- WS - Brightlance and Scatter Laser turret upgrades increased to 10pts (points standardized with Falcon)
-- WS - A Serpent Field may not benefit from Laser Lock. (Unconventional Weapon)
-- WS - A Serpent Field is not affected by a "Weapon Destroyed" result. However, significant damage to the Wave Serpent hull results in instability in projecting the Serpent Field. This is translated to the Serpent Field gaining the "Gets Hot" rule the first time a Wave Serpent suffers a penetrating hit. (Unconventional Weapon)

I balanced mine with a 6" range and scatter lasers only twin linking on a 6 to hit, no bonus conferred on snapshots. Works beautifully.

You'd have to completely redesign an Eldar list. What were the consequences?

Make the Serpent Shield S6, D3+1 shots ignores cover, once per game. After its use, the Serpent Shield burns out.
Add +1 to the strength and shots for each HP the Serpent lost.

That way it becomes less of an alpha strike weapon, and more of an "in extremis" emergency weapon.

Not an Eldar player, but simply changing the Serpent Shield to a 6" range would certainly be a good start. It also better represents the "in extremis" nature of the Serpent Shield as a weapon.

Also, how do you handle the fact that the WS model has two weapons mounted to the turret emplacement? I mean, if it isn't a twin-linked gun, then it'd have to be two... and I'm pretty sure that's not really a desirable change.

The 6" Serpent Shield would probably be enough. Possibly raise the cost of the to SL. But the Brightlance?

The very original serpent shield in the 6mm space marine (now epic 40k) was a 1 use per game shooting attack with an unlimited range unless it hit a super heavy vehicle - it crossed the whole table and that was in 6mm scale!

That said, it also did no damage directly as such - it pushed units out of the way of the wave which could inflict damage if they hit other things (from memory - its been a few years!)
That said, the shield was almost impossible to breach in defensive mode.

For 40k - to keep this simple...
1 per game - shooting attack, unlimited range in a straight line from the centre of the hull that is the width of the hull - every unit under the line moves as difficult and dangerous terrain in their next turn. Additionally, units must be moved as if they had been tank shocked (ie pushed out of the way).

It needs better wording but you should get the idea.

It makes the attack a tactical application rather than a straight damage effect.

I noticed that on Battlescribe, the WS gets a discount on turret weapons compared to the Falcon and a free TL. As a DT?

It really makes no sense.

Edit: I'm also trying to avoid changes that deeply alter gameplay for any faction. A 6" Serpent Field qualifies.

The thought is that you paid for it with the Serpent itself. Remember, it replaces the Shuriken Cannon.

At 115 stock, if the Serpent Shield weren't a weapon, it wouldn't be a great buy. Would still see use, but it'd be a lot of points for not a lot of shooting.

Not true Bharring. The Serpent pays 15pts for a ML, same as the Falcon. Only the SL and BL get a 5pt discount. So I think GW missed a trick somewhere, unless it was errata'd.

A lot of troops are also unpopular in the current meta. Survivable but expensive transports like the Devilfish aren't popular. I don't think a change that may turn the WS into a dust collector is going to be easy to pass.

I can krak a WS to death easily within 6", and the troops have one point to disembark. So essentially we are removing the weapon.

With my updated V.D.R. I noticed the serpent shield only cost 15 points. That's way undercosted. The drop to 6" is deliberately changing the way the army plays. Nowhere, and I mean NOWHERE in the fluff do they waste a serpents transport capacity for minimum sized squads of aspect warriors(which have no one leading them despite no shrine ever going to war without their exarch) just so they can skirt around the battlefield shooting at extreme range. The primary role of the serpent is the deliverance of troops safely to the front lines.

Sorry about the rant, waveserpents are fluffy to have in the army, it's just when I see people destroy the fluff of the rest of the army to maximize the amount of serpents to abuse their obviously broken nature that I get annoyed.

A Wave Serpent is a $50+ model. In practical terms, an unofficial balance patch that essentially requires a player to buy $200+ dollars of new models is a bad solution.

This is the bottom line guys.

They, in no way, would be require required to do so. The waveserpents they already purchased would still be a very hard to kill DEDICATED TRANSPORT. Anyone who purchased 5 of them to take advantage of their over powered nature(which means they spent an minimum of $250 for 5 of them) should not he surprised when games workshop kicks them in the teeth. This army has a plethora of options in every slot to be competitive.

As far as I can see, they only reason they are beginning to drop in grand tournaments is because top level players can probably give you every Eldar list(point by point) that they will fight in the tournament before any dice are rolled

Most people who bought 4 Serpents just because of their current Gunboat rules are FOTM players. Anything that will balance the Serpent will make them buy a whole new army regardless.

Removing Twinlink from the turret would require a modelling change to the model, though. That would affect everyone's Serpents. And invalidate the current kit.

So changing the role it fills would be vastly preferable to changing the available armament.

Even just making the currently-standard build very overcosted (nerf or point hike) would be preferable, because at least it - and the kit it comes from - would still be valid.

The Serpent is not intended to be a full-fledged gunboat. Its supposed to have good firepower - it is a battle tank in addition to being a transport - but its current firepower makes it ridiculous. The Falcon is the primary battle tank for Eldar. But the Serpent outshoots it.

The Devilfish is overcosted. A stock Serpent is moderately better (more survivable, more mobile, comparable firepower). But Tau basic troops have 30" range. Eldar are 12"/18". So, even if they were equal, CW Eldar has more need of the transport than Tau. I could see a point cost for a nerfed-shooting Serpent (105 perhaps? Heavy weapons recosted appropriately?), but most people won't agree to that.

CW Eldar are about perfection, Dark Eldar are about excess.
This manifests in their combat doctrine in a number of ways. CWE are not the glass cannons DE are. Their doctrine is to remain safe-ish, with little firepower, until they engage. At that point, they have blistering firepower, but are exposed/vulnerable.

Ideally, this is done by getting everyone into position - where the Serpent is quite useful - first. Then everyone engaging at once in a fiery display of deadlyness.

The Serpent would be part of this in that its firepower while being hard to kill would be low at longish range (> 24". But needing to be relatively close to the enemy, where it is vulnerable, to commit its troops.

I love the idea of picking a heavy weapon for the Serpent based on need. But with the Serpent being all about shooting the Serpent Shield, anything but a SL is a waste.

The fix I stand by is a 6" Serpent Shield shooting.

Perhaps, if people weren't getting their faces bashed in by CW Eldar so regularly, a better solution might be reasonable.

I could see this being an even better fix:
-Serpent Shield 6" shooting, downgrade pens on a 3+
-Stock serpent 100(?)pts
-SL turret 15 pts
-Chin Cannon 15 pts
-EML turret 20 pts
-All other heavy turrets 10 pts
-Holo becomes a 5++

The numbers are rough/could use iteration, and its a much bigger change, but it'd probably be more fair. And should see the Serpent used as it was intended/is in the fluff.

Literally on the first page on 40k army lists I found this.

johnny_wishbone wrote:
Hi All,

I'm new to Warhammer 40k universe so to get used to the game I've lined up a couple of 500-600 point games with friends over the next few weeks. I have gone with the classic Dire Avenger + Wave Serpent combo but I can't decide which HQ to take. List is:-

5 x Dire Avenger Sqaud
w/ Wave Serpent - TL Scatter Laser + Shuriken Cannon + Holo fields
210 points

5 x Dire Avenger Sqaud
w/ Wave Serpent - TL Scatter Laser + Shuriken Cannon + Holo fields
210 points

The problem is I don't know which HQ to take... Any suggestions would be great!

I don't think it's possible to **prove** the WS is used by only FOTM or tourney players. And I'm not keen to knock out what's seen as a classic unit even by new players.

That's why I'm so ambivalent on changing the role. I don't think having an extra 1-2 DA per squad is going to sell anyone on losing ALL their long-range S7, as well as their AA. The first question will be "how do I get it back?", and if that requires buying new models, it's problematic. Those are the consequences I want to look at.

Its only been that way for less than two years. And its quite cheesy. The same could be said for Screamer Stars and JetSeer Stars, but their nerf seems to be widely accepted.

I see that kind of post and think, there is someone who'll either go full-on TFG or quit. Possibly taking out part of his meta with him.

Cheese is subjective. Most deathstars lost a lot of their luster when 7e updated the Psyker rules to prevent multiple castings in the same unit. Even before houserulings like "4+ max on a 2+ reroll", their days were numbered unless you're Nick Nanivati.

Rather than a flat nerf (If not Serpents, then White Scars), I prefer a lateral shift, something that has elements of buff and nerf. The main thing is keeping them from hard-countering light mech and making the use of the Serpent Shield a calculated risk instead of an alphastriker's wet dream. Serpents are still fragile if you get up close to them and don't like MSU assaulters...

I definitely agree that we need to ensure that Serpents serve a purpose in CW Eldar armies. They are far too iconic.

Look at it this way, he has 1x HQ and 2x troops choices. Isn't that what we would like to see from most armies in a 500pt game? I don't really agree with painting him as a bad guy as a new player, just because he picked a unit we don't think is fair. People want to win, it's not his fault GW has done a poor job of balancing. I don't want to do anything that might make people wish they'd bought different models.

Taking away the turret TL and leveling the cost of the SL doesn't change this guy's list. Neither does the Serpent Field change. But it means he loses 10pts for his HQ, can't ignore the penalties for Jink as easily, loses some effective firepower within 36", and has a much worse chance to take down a flyer. The Falcon maybe still can't measure up, but the Pulse Laser can benefit from Laser Lock. The Serpent Field cannot. So it's a start. I will need to run some numbers there and see how big the discrepancy is. One of my big endstates here is internal codex balance to help neglected choices. A unit like the Firestorm (Corsairs) should offer better AA than a WS. The Falcon and Fire Prism should offer better anti-AV, as they have worse protection and transport.

So you may end up seeing a mix of buff for all these units, to offset the WS nerf, in the same way we're trying to make Terminators easier to field for SM. In the end we just compile a single-source PDF for groups of friends or organizers. At the moment though I'm just teasing out opinions for different ways to address the WS.

I see him as a victim of an off-the-rails part of the meta. Not as the bad guy. That distinction is a good point: thanks for bringing it up.

Currently, at 500 points, that double serpent will just shoot most other equally-new players off the table, with the troops and HQ doing nothing.

With the 6" change, he can either remain double-serpent, and use their firepower while maneuvering the troops/HQ in for the kill, or swap one out.

Ideally, 10xDA in a Serpent shouldn't be such a trash decision. I'd prefer the meta had steered him more towards something like 10xDA w/Exarch + HQ of taste in Serpent, with TL heavy weapon of taste, along with 10 Guardians + HWP of taste. More flavorful, and much, much more fun to play either with or against.

New players that go Serpent heavy, I'm afraid, won't see this game as anything more than the big pieces exchanging fire.

By changing the role of the Serpent, but retaining the models, he now has two excellent transports to get his men into position. While offering decent supporting fire.

By removing the TL but retaining the SS, the models need to change. And people still need to put up with Serpent Spam, and the hated way it plays.

Trying to return Serpents to more of a support role still seems better. And lots of Serpents can still be useful to get guys where they need to be. Its easy to forget just how costly it can be to deposit short-range shooting where they need to be, when DS/Infiltrate/Outflank aren't an option.

The Fire Prism should be the king of range, not the Serpent.

Personally, I would raise the cost of the Scatter Laser to 15 points. Laser Lock - "If a to hit roll of 6 is rolled, raise the BS of the next weapon fired on this model by 1 until the end of the shooting phase. This does not work on Snap Shots." That would also make sense for the Wraithknight, instead of having 3 Twin-linked ap2 blasts. Because Eldar. They would just reduce scatter by 5" instead. Still seems good to me.

The Serpent Shield, I agree it should have a one use only effect, give it ignores cover still, but get rid of Pinning. S6 would be fine, and maybe D3+1, or just a D6. Then the shield is gone for the game. It would give people more of a reason to play defensively.

Also, Holo Fields should be a 5+ Invuln, not an addition to cover. That would work well with the fact that you have think before Jinking and/or use the Shield defensively.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

The Fire Prism should be the king of range, not the Serpent.

Amen.

Bharring wrote:
Ideally, 10xDA in a Serpent shouldn't be such a trash decision. I'd prefer the meta had steered him more towards something like 10xDA w/Exarch + HQ of taste in Serpent, with TL heavy weapon of taste, along with 10 Guardians + HWP of taste. More flavorful, and much, much more fun to play either with or against.

New players that go Serpent heavy, I'm afraid, won't see this game as anything more than the big pieces exchanging fire.

I like discussions like this because it gives us an endstate to shoot towards.

That said, right now the game **is** big pieces exchanging fire for a lot of people. WS, Riptide, Flyrant, Knights, etc.

I'm more of your opinion, but I think balance patching will still have to be incremental to get people to embrace it. Everyone loves diversity -- help the neglected units! People are usually less enthusiastic once we start nerfing all their favorite toys.

I'm not really clear on why you're upping the cost of bright lances here. They're a solid gun, but they're also a single shot weapon. The lance rule is nice against AV 13+, but even then, you're only glancing the heavy targets half the time. Against light vehicles, it's a less powerful lascannon. Have you been running into problems with serpent-mounted bright lances? Because upping the cost of the lance gives people one less reason to use it over a scatter laser.

I think 90% of the problems with the serpent and the eldar codex as a whole get resolved if you simply lower the serpent shield to 6". There are plenty of other good solutions, but the 6" is simple. You can still use the shield to gun down a target when you get close (probably after delivering a unit into the fray as per the fluff), but you're also likely to lose the serpent to krak grenades or some other melee on the following turn unless you succesfully wipe out all threats in that chunk of the board. Which seems appropriate for eldar. Hit fast and hard, but make sure you don't get hit back.

Scatters lasers are quite nice, but mostly only in conjunction with the serpent shield. Scatter falcons aren't really causing problems are they? Guardian platforms? Is it war walkers that people don't like seeing them on? Because at most, each SL-toting war walker is rerolling at most 3 to-hit rolls of which they're statistically already hitting with 2 of those shots regardless of laser lock. If we can agree that it's mostly in conjunction with the serpent shield that the scatter laser is a problem, then again, simply fixing the offensive power of the shield solves the problem. No need to make further tweaks. Or is it the range or number of shots of the SL that bugs people? '

The falcon needs... something. My first thought is to simply make it a dedicated transport so that people can exchange the transport capacity of the serpent for the superior fire power, but that would just encourage people to spam avengers in falcons so that they can sit back and shoot. Similar to what they're doing now with serpents. When I've used falcons, I've never really been disappointed with their firepower. It's just that they can't carry the larger squads I tend to favor, and they eat up a slot that I'd often prefer to use for a night spinner or war walkers or something.

Un-twin-linking the serpent seems sort of iffy to me. I know you want the falcon to be a superior gunboat to the serpent, but (assuming we fix the shield) 130-150 points is a hefty price tag for a single weapon.

If we take the shield-gun out of the equation or at least make it reasonable, the serpent becomes a very different creature. People like to complain about its durability, and they're right. The serpent *is* durable. It's meant to be a super-defensive transport that gets fragile, often short-ranged space elves up the table without dying right away. But without a long-ranged serpent shield, this transport packs a lot less punch. A TL lance shot or scatter laser volley isn't insignificant, but it's pretty costly for the serpent's points. Also keep in mind the following:

*Eldar are squishy. Many units are half-forced to take a wave serpent to function at all.
*The wave serpent with holofields ends up costing about 150 points which is nearly the cost of every drop pod and rhino I tend to see in marine armies.

I'm not saying that the serpent doesn't need to be reigned in or or complaining that it's over costed or anything. I just think it's important to keep in mind just how much of its scary reputation is owed to the SL+Serpent Shield combo.

Also, whoever recommended holofields be a 5+ invul save is totally right. It's inkeeping with the dark eldar and harlequin stuff.

how many years has this mistake existed to be un corrected?

Wyldhunt wrote:
I'm not really clear on why you're upping the cost of bright lances here. They're a solid gun, but they're also a single shot weapon. The lance rule is nice against AV 13+, but even then, you're only glancing the heavy targets half the time. Against light vehicles, it's a less powerful lascannon. Have you been running into problems with serpent-mounted bright lances? Because upping the cost of the lance gives people one less reason to use it over a scatter laser.

I think 90% of the problems with the serpent and the eldar codex as a whole get resolved if you simply lower the serpent shield to 6". There are plenty of other good solutions, but the 6" is simple. You can still use the shield to gun down a target when you get close (probably after delivering a unit into the fray as per the fluff), but you're also likely to lose the serpent to krak grenades or some other melee on the following turn unless you succesfully wipe out all threats in that chunk of the board. Which seems appropriate for eldar. Hit fast and hard, but make sure you don't get hit back.

Scatters lasers are quite nice, but mostly only in conjunction with the serpent shield. Scatter falcons aren't really causing problems are they? Guardian platforms? Is it war walkers that people don't like seeing them on? Because at most, each SL-toting war walker is rerolling at most 3 to-hit rolls of which they're statistically already hitting with 2 of those shots regardless of laser lock. If we can agree that it's mostly in conjunction with the serpent shield that the scatter laser is a problem, then again, simply fixing the offensive power of the shield solves the problem. No need to make further tweaks. Or is it the range or number of shots of the SL that bugs people? '

The falcon needs... something. My first thought is to simply make it a dedicated transport so that people can exchange the transport capacity of the serpent for the superior fire power, but that would just encourage people to spam avengers in falcons so that they can sit back and shoot. Similar to what they're doing now with serpents. When I've used falcons, I've never really been disappointed with their firepower. It's just that they can't carry the larger squads I tend to favor, and they eat up a slot that I'd often prefer to use for a night spinner or war walkers or something.

Un-twin-linking the serpent seems sort of iffy to me. I know you want the falcon to be a superior gunboat to the serpent, but (assuming we fix the shield) 130-150 points is a hefty price tag for a single weapon.

If we take the shield-gun out of the equation or at least make it reasonable, the serpent becomes a very different creature. People like to complain about its durability, and they're right. The serpent *is* durable. It's meant to be a super-defensive transport that gets fragile, often short-ranged space elves up the table without dying right away. But without a long-ranged serpent shield, this transport packs a lot less punch. A TL lance shot or scatter laser volley isn't insignificant, but it's pretty costly for the serpent's points. Also keep in mind the following:

*Eldar are squishy. Many units are half-forced to take a wave serpent to function at all.
*The wave serpent with holofields ends up costing about 150 points which is nearly the cost of every drop pod and rhino I tend to see in marine armies.

I'm not saying that the serpent doesn't need to be reigned in or or complaining that it's over costed or anything. I just think it's important to keep in mind just how much of its scary reputation is owed to the SL+Serpent Shield combo.

Also, whoever recommended holofields be a 5+ invul save is totally right. It's inkeeping with the dark eldar and harlequin stuff.

My personal grief with the Scatter Laser, aside from the Serpent shield combo, is that it's 5 points on a serpent. 5 points for 4 S6 Twin linked shots is unreasonable. You kill things by forcing saves, easily. So, warwalkers packing a ton of those shots is just ridiculous. Also, the Laser Lock rule bugs me with just how it is. Why even make the rule when you have 4 66% chances to get a hit, before rerolls. It's too easy. Hence my point of making it only on a to hit roll of 6, and doesn't effect Snap Shots. And it gives +1 BS until the end of the phase, which would make it more balanced with the Wraithknight's Suncannon. That's just how I see it.

Also, this coming from a non-elder player, but I've decided my next army (After I get my Crons and most of my Nids painted) will be Eldar down the line. Which is why I want them to be reasonably powerful, not cheesy.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:
I'm not really clear on why you're upping the cost of bright lances here. They're a solid gun, but they're also a single shot weapon. The lance rule is nice against AV 13+, but even then, you're only glancing the heavy targets half the time. Against light vehicles, it's a less powerful lascannon. Have you been running into problems with serpent-mounted bright lances? Because upping the cost of the lance gives people one less reason to use it over a scatter laser.

I think 90% of the problems with the serpent and the eldar codex as a whole get resolved if you simply lower the serpent shield to 6". There are plenty of other good solutions, but the 6" is simple. You can still use the shield to gun down a target when you get close (probably after delivering a unit into the fray as per the fluff), but you're also likely to lose the serpent to krak grenades or some other melee on the following turn unless you succesfully wipe out all threats in that chunk of the board. Which seems appropriate for eldar. Hit fast and hard, but make sure you don't get hit back.

Scatters lasers are quite nice, but mostly only in conjunction with the serpent shield. Scatter falcons aren't really causing problems are they? Guardian platforms? Is it war walkers that people don't like seeing them on? Because at most, each SL-toting war walker is rerolling at most 3 to-hit rolls of which they're statistically already hitting with 2 of those shots regardless of laser lock. If we can agree that it's mostly in conjunction with the serpent shield that the scatter laser is a problem, then again, simply fixing the offensive power of the shield solves the problem. No need to make further tweaks. Or is it the range or number of shots of the SL that bugs people? '

The falcon needs... something. My first thought is to simply make it a dedicated transport so that people can exchange the transport capacity of the serpent for the superior fire power, but that would just encourage people to spam avengers in falcons so that they can sit back and shoot. Similar to what they're doing now with serpents. When I've used falcons, I've never really been disappointed with their firepower. It's just that they can't carry the larger squads I tend to favor, and they eat up a slot that I'd often prefer to use for a night spinner or war walkers or something.

Un-twin-linking the serpent seems sort of iffy to me. I know you want the falcon to be a superior gunboat to the serpent, but (assuming we fix the shield) 130-150 points is a hefty price tag for a single weapon.

If we take the shield-gun out of the equation or at least make it reasonable, the serpent becomes a very different creature. People like to complain about its durability, and they're right. The serpent *is* durable. It's meant to be a super-defensive transport that gets fragile, often short-ranged space elves up the table without dying right away. But without a long-ranged serpent shield, this transport packs a lot less punch. A TL lance shot or scatter laser volley isn't insignificant, but it's pretty costly for the serpent's points. Also keep in mind the following:

*Eldar are squishy. Many units are half-forced to take a wave serpent to function at all.
*The wave serpent with holofields ends up costing about 150 points which is nearly the cost of every drop pod and rhino I tend to see in marine armies.

I'm not saying that the serpent doesn't need to be reigned in or or complaining that it's over costed or anything. I just think it's important to keep in mind just how much of its scary reputation is owed to the SL+Serpent Shield combo.

Also, whoever recommended holofields be a 5+ invul save is totally right. It's inkeeping with the dark eldar and harlequin stuff.

My personal grief with the Scatter Laser, aside from the Serpent shield combo, is that it's 5 points on a serpent. 5 points for 4 S6 Twin linked shots is unreasonable. You kill things by forcing saves, easily. So, warwalkers packing a ton of those shots is just ridiculous. Also, the Laser Lock rule bugs me with just how it is. Why even make the rule when you have 4 66% chances to get a hit, before rerolls. It's too easy. Hence my point of making it only on a to hit roll of 6, and doesn't effect Snap Shots. And it gives +1 BS until the end of the phase, which would make it more balanced with the Wraithknight's Suncannon. That's just how I see it.

Also, this coming from a non-elder player, but I've decided my next army (After I get my Crons and most of my Nids painted) will be Eldar down the line. Which is why I want them to be reasonably powerful, not cheesy.

Ah, that makes sense. It still doesn't seem ridiculous to me against infantry, but I can see how the SL would be a pain for MCs and light vehicles. Your proposed changes sound reasonable to me.

In regards to not wanting eldar to be cheesy, I personally have been enjoying havin the option to use previously craptastic options (hawks, rangers, etc.) to reasonably good effect thanks to 7th edition and the 6th edition codex. Currently, I find that I can easily play with whatever I want and pull my punches as necessary to have a good game. As opposed to 5th edition where I was being actively punished for refusing to run davu falcons and seer councils. Even if I want to field a bunch of serpents these days, I can be a gentleman about it and simply not take SLs or not use the shield as a gun. They're still solid transports even if the shield isn't shooting. So buck up. You can play eldar without having to shave off a new layer of cheesebeard each morning.

The mistake has existed for less than 2 years, to answer that question.

I do like the idea of +1BS instead of twin linking. Outside snapshots, twin linking is better than +1bs. I would have it still have effect on snapshots, though. (The idea is its a *scatter* laser. Firing snapshots *should* count towards laser lock.)

I'm not sure Laser Lock really needs the only-on-6 nerf, once the Serpent is fixed. Are there other places where its really a problem? Especially if its +1bs instead of twin-link?

Just make the serpent gun d3+1. Now it's balanced. Reduce range to 36.

Wyldhunt wrote:

Ah, that makes sense. It still doesn't seem ridiculous to me against infantry, but I can see how the SL would be a pain for MCs and light vehicles. Your proposed changes sound reasonable to me.

In regards to not wanting eldar to be cheesy, I personally have been enjoying havin the option to use previously craptastic options (hawks, rangers, etc.) to reasonably good effect thanks to 7th edition and the 6th edition codex. Currently, I find that I can easily play with whatever I want and pull my punches as necessary to have a good game. As opposed to 5th edition where I was being actively punished for refusing to run davu falcons and seer councils. Even if I want to field a bunch of serpents these days, I can be a gentleman about it and simply not take SLs or not use the shield as a gun. They're still solid transports even if the shield isn't shooting. So buck up. You can play eldar without having to shave off a new layer of cheesebeard each morning.

Well, I've already decided what I would be playing if I start Eldar before a new codex. I would use Starcannons and Bright Lances everywhere possible, and I like a lot of the units like Warp Spyders, Guardians, Falcons, non-SL Warwalkers, and the Hemlck Wraithfighter. And I'd use my Wave Serpents defensively, to get my Guardians with Starcannons up the board quickly and safely. Heck, I'd probably always take the upgrade to let my Serpents Turbo boost and shoot in the same turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
The mistake has existed for less than 2 years, to answer that question.

I do like the idea of +1BS instead of twin linking. Outside snapshots, twin linking is better than +1bs. I would have it still have effect on snapshots, though. (The idea is its a *scatter* laser. Firing snapshots *should* count towards laser lock.)

I'm not sure Laser Lock really needs the only-on-6 nerf, once the Serpent is fixed. Are there other places where its really a problem? Especially if its +1bs instead of twin-link?

It's not that it is specifically an issue, I just hate having a rule were it takes 0 effort to have it work. Why even have the ruling in the first place then. Just make it "When you shoot the thing, this happens".

Then have it do something more/different when you roll a 6?

Something like, if you roll a 6, 'One other to-hit roll from this model hits on a 2+'.

Better when pairing SL with low-ROF weapons, but worse with the high-ROF ones. So more like using Laser Lock to ensure you hit your target.