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.

 Argive wrote:


Hawks are an excellent example of an Aspect Unit. Highly specialised unit very good at doing one thing. I don't get the complain. Its the eldar way. Highly specialised tools for the right job. Even though some aspects fail at that due to reasons. E.g Banshees not being killy in melee, scorpions not actually able to infiltrate etc. I don't want units all become generically good at everything..

Yes and a hyper-specialized unit to fight a moderate amount of T3, low save models is such a hilariously quaint concept in a game where Rapid Fire 6 hurricane bolters exist

Having them drop all the grenades on whatever unit they choose all the tie would probably be a bit OP and make them good at killing single entities with MW though. I think they are an awesome unit (not awesome for marine meta, but then again what is?). If they weren't crappy finecast Id build me a squad of 10 for sure.

lol for a full squad that comes out to 3-4 MW average with the new aspect trait. But apparently that would be "a bit OP" in the fight twice, shoot twice, hit on 2s with rerolls meta

Are you the guy who wrote the Ynnari rules and Phoenix Rising?

 Argive wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 Imateria wrote:
Problem with Hawks is that they are over specialised. Really good at doing damage to chaff units and lightly armoured T4 units like Boyz but not much good against anything else, at that point you're better off going with Shuriken weapons because they're good at both.

Imo hawks are an example of the terrible design of aspect warriors. It's a unit that's locked into fighting one extremely specific profile, so bringing them to tournaments is too much like flipping a coin

It's worth noting that the best aspects are still specialists at heart (spears as short-ranged cavalry, reapers as weapon squad), but they're not limited to hunting only one specific unit type

Hawks are an excellent example of an Aspect Unit. Highly specialised unit very good at doing one thing. I don't get the complain. Its the eldar way. Highly specialised tools for the right job. Even though some aspects fail at that due to reasons. E.g Banshees not being killy in melee, scorpions not actually able to infiltrate etc. I don't want units all become generically good at everything..

The only thing that bugs me is that you can only drop x amount of grenades per enemy model... So if 5 hawks fly over a single model entity, you only roll one dice. So the other 4 guys just don't bother throwing their grenades? Having them drop all the grenades on whatever unit they choose all the tie would probably be a bit OP and make them good at killing single entities with MW though. I think they are an awesome unit (not awesome for marine meta, but then again what is?). If they weren't crappy finecast Id build me a squad of 10 for sure.

Sadly the problem is that those units are not good at their specialty. Those units should be so good that be able to do it even without support.

Hawks lack AP, so even with the amount of shoots without extra support they are not effective about clearing cheap guardsman.
I expect 13 pts model to be able to kill average 2 guardsman per shooting, 5 man hawks to be able to eliminate squad of guard, but usually they cant(and mathematically they should not).

Banshees can`t kill elite units, because of their lack of strenght and attacks.
Scorpions cant charge from deeepstrike without investing CP or support characters(new option that was lacking.
Fire dragons lack range, cant shoot from deepstrike and are to damn expensive, also the 1 shoot is nothing to be impressed. I have seen how full squad of 10 could not kill single russ tank.

I hate to tell you, but even 5 intercessors cant kill 2 IS on turn 1.

There is no way a single SH should kill 2.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I hate to tell you, but even 5 intercessors cant kill 2 IS on turn 1.

There is no way a single SH should kill 2.

I'm pretty sure they do...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I hate to tell you, but even 5 intercessors cant kill 2 IS on turn 1.

There is no way a single SH should kill 2.

I'm pretty sure they do...

They kill 3.7 if they're in Rapid Fire or stood still.

 Argive wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I plan to use the Ynnari HQs in Aeldari armies other than Ynnari
such as Harlies with a battalion (troupes in starweavers, outrider detachment (lots of skyweavers) and Yncarne.

Doesn't this stop the detachment be battle forged?
I got my copy of the book at home but I cant remember what the ynari rules are. Always been pure CWE.

The new(ish, they've been out since May) rules let you take the Ynnari characters in any type of Aeldari detachment and not break the detachment bonus requirements (Battleforged is just meeting the min requirements of a detachment and every unit having at least 1 faction keyword in common), so you can slot them into a Craftworlds detachment no problem. Just remember that you can't include them in a detachment with any other named characters.

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 Argive wrote:


Hawks are an excellent example of an Aspect Unit. Highly specialised unit very good at doing one thing. I don't get the complain. Its the eldar way. Highly specialised tools for the right job. Even though some aspects fail at that due to reasons. E.g Banshees not being killy in melee, scorpions not actually able to infiltrate etc. I don't want units all become generically good at everything..

Yes and a hyper-specialized unit to fight a moderate amount of T3, low save models is such a hilariously quaint concept in a game where Rapid Fire 6 hurricane bolters exist

Having them drop all the grenades on whatever unit they choose all the tie would probably be a bit OP and make them good at killing single entities with MW though. I think they are an awesome unit (not awesome for marine meta, but then again what is?). If they weren't crappy finecast Id build me a squad of 10 for sure.

lol for a full squad that comes out to 3-4 MW average with the new aspect trait. But apparently that would be "a bit OP" in the fight twice, shoot twice, hit on 2s with rerolls meta

Are you the guy who wrote the Ynnari rules and Phoenix Rising?

Didint realise eldar have acess to hurricane bolters...

They pump out a lot of shots to clear t3 screens. Thats what they do so you can direct SC at other stuff. Im not saying they are SM intercessor amazing. They aint. But as a unit they fit their nieche pretty well for their point.

I get what you mean without you being snide.. the meta /sm codex creep is undeniable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Imateria wrote:

 Argive wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I plan to use the Ynnari HQs in Aeldari armies other than Ynnari
such as Harlies with a battalion (troupes in starweavers, outrider detachment (lots of skyweavers) and Yncarne.

Doesn't this stop the detachment be battle forged?
I got my copy of the book at home but I cant remember what the ynari rules are. Always been pure CWE.

The new(ish, they've been out since May) rules let you take the Ynnari characters in any type of Aeldari detachment and not break the detachment bonus requirements (Battleforged is just meeting the min requirements of a detachment and every unit having at least 1 faction keyword in common), so you can slot them into a Craftworlds detachment no problem. Just remember that you can't include them in a detachment with any other named characters.

I guess their psychic powers/strats are locked into ynnari keyword.. need to cast my eye over their rules

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I hate to tell you, but even 5 intercessors cant kill 2 IS on turn 1.

There is no way a single SH should kill 2.

I'm pretty sure they do...

They kill 3.7 if they're in Rapid Fire or stood still.

Right, I should clarify - my brain was 1 shot from each, which results in half of that 3.7. Even with RF they don't come close to killing 2 IS per model.

Meanwhile SH are...

16 * .666 * .5 * .666 = 3.5
4 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 1.2

On M14 with BF, assault weapons, fly, and grenades. They're good at their job. They just aren't typically needed.

I don't know to laugh or cry, but I choose laugh. Are we really talking about how units designed to be specialized somehow don't measure up to tasks they should handle ?

I only find it funny as we often talk about how more mundane aspects of this game are handled so poorly, to expect them to get specialist units to excel in a certain area they are supposed to when they can't even get a clear grasp on what makes a unit good or bad in the first place seems to be a little crazy.

Getting these units to function well and not be OP, would be fundamentally a hard thing to do and I wouldn't really feel like GW will get it done without a lot of trial and error if they ever do it in the first place.

Many books suffer this fate, I give you guard Vanquisher tank, specialist AT vehicle, ever see them really ? Ever fear them ? Yeah, didn't think so. Tau Sniper drones, you know, snipers, good at taking out characters, yeah, not really, they are one of the worst snipers in the game easily.

There are many victims of this difficulty, Eldar aren't alone and honestly to play this game you need to except that some stuff just isn't handled right and just hope they eventually care enough to figure it out and fix it.

I don't know why anyone would be either surprised GW can't do that, or not expect it by now. If it turns out good, it's a miracle and lets not forget they do a pretty bad job with generalist units as well, speaking from the past. Despite marines current lime light, they have suffered from that for awhile. The basic tac marine being so ho hum forever, bikes have changed so much for so long to try and make them better and perhaps why they'd changed in just about every edition, assault marines.

The eldar PA book is pretty crap, but if I played eldar I'd just try and be happy they've seemed over all to be at the better end of the power curve for as long as they have.

there's also the fact that specialsit units may be designed with legacies of old editions that are no longer the case. for example, in 7th edition and earlier STR 8 (or higher) was great for dedicated character killers as it'd inflict instant death.

So a heavy 1, STR 8 weapon that could snipe a commander in a infantry squad would have been terrifying, but if it was translated as a S8 D2 heavy 1 sniper weapon in 8th... yeah the once terrifying weapon is now... pretty meh (this is a obvious case and is a fictional extreme case, I don't think any weapon is exactly like that in 8th ed) the 7th to 8th conversion was the biggest but I bet even as the editions went along we saw a degree of this.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Right, I should clarify - my brain was 1 shot from each, which results in half of that 3.7. Even with RF they don't come close to killing 2 IS per model.

Assault bolter Intercessors kill 4.4 guardsmen. If they shoot with CM/LT buffs in the tactical doctrine, that's 8.64 dead IS from 5 Intercessors. IF will kill 10.8..

Hell, give 5 Assault IF Intercessors no buffing characters, only tactical doctrine, and they kill 6.94 guardsmen, which is squad wipe with morale.

With the ease and cheapness and sheer spamminess of SM buffs, I really don't think we get anywhere by running numbers in the void anymore.

Marin wrote:

Hawks lack AP, so even with the amount of shoots without extra support they are not effective about clearing cheap guardsman.
I expect 13 pts model to be able to kill average 2 guardsman per shooting, 5 man hawks to be able to eliminate squad of guard, but usually they cant(and mathematically they should not).

Banshees can`t kill elite units, because of their lack of strenght and attacks.
Scorpions cant charge from deepstrike without investing CP or support characters(new option that was lacking.
Fire dragons lack range, cant shoot from deepstrike and are to damn expensive, also the 1 shoot is nothing to be impressed. I have seen how full squad of 10 could not kill single russ tank.

Scorpions might be better in a Wave serpent now, and are worth a look with the 5+ mortal wound output.
Banshees are a little sad for sure, especially with new models. Decapitating Strikes should have been for each model, not just the Exarch. The lack of attacks they have would then make the 6s do mortal wounds in addition far more dangerous.
Fire Dragons are indeed sad (which is a shame as I like the models so much). Compare 1 fire dragon at 24pts to a wraithguard at 38pts. You go from T3 to T6, add 2 more wounds, can fall back and shoot without penalty, and can actually punch something in combat (although lacks the attacks to be dangerous). It's hilarious really.

even with the current sadness, I am tempted to give the old mechanized Swordwing a try. banshees and Scorps in Serpents, Dragons in falcons, and Dire Avengers in serpents, plus Prisms, Spinners and CHEs (depending on points for numbers).
I currently have more wraith units, including hemlocks, and won't buy any CHEs until I see the point changes in CA2019.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 grouchoben wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Right, I should clarify - my brain was 1 shot from each, which results in half of that 3.7. Even with RF they don't come close to killing 2 IS per model.

Assault bolter Intercessors kill 4.4 guardsmen. If they shoot with CM/LT buffs in the tactical doctrine, that's 8.64 dead IS from 5 Intercessors. IF will kill 10.8..

Hell, give 5 Assault IF Intercessors no buffing characters, only tactical doctrine, and they kill 6.94 guardsmen, which is squad wipe with morale.

With the ease and cheapness and sheer spamminess of SM buffs, I really don't think we get anywhere by running numbers in the void anymore.

5 dire Avengers with Hail of Doom and Shredding Fire on twin cat Exarch kills 4.7 Guardsmen a turn, which ain't too shabby (and that was not accounting for any 6s rolled to wound on regular DAs which would bump the number slightly)

edit: And just to respond again to the OP, I really don't think it's a crap book, at least for Craftworlders. I wouldn't go back to playing any of the original Craftworlds at this point except for narrative. The downside is that I don't have a singular Craftworld for my whole force as it makes no sense not to break it up to get the different bonuses. I think fluff wise I plan to get around that by calling them "Houses" instead. So a singular Craftworld, but each "house" has a varied fighting style and is what is used to replace the <Craftworld> entry.

Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

It's been over a month since release and some very obviously incorrect rules haven't been FAQed yet (particularly looking at Focus Will here). Even if you disagree that the book itself is crap, it's clearly not been given much care by GW.

 Argive wrote:
Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

When it comes to quality, the measure is always "compared to what?"

I really wish there were some other things addressed in Psychic Awakening, but overall it does what it does. Black Templars are a little better, people can play their army in a slightly better way. Chaos Legions are a little better - while I question whether there's any good mono-Legion builds, there's certainly some decent Supreme Command Detachments to pull from there.

Anyone who was hoping to get NuMarines for their faction will be disappointed. I don't know if it's useful to wish for that, I have a lot more fun figuring out how to tear them down with what we have.

That said, let's hope Grey Knights get more than a superficial treatment.

 Burnage wrote:
It's been over a month since release and some very obviously incorrect rules haven't been FAQed yet (particularly looking at Focus Will here). Even if you disagree that the book itself is crap, it's clearly not been given much care by GW.

Well, I'm surprised here that Phil Kelly who is generally responsible for Aeldari, the lead architect, changed Ynnari that much (from playable to non-playable) and designed Phoenix Rising I as it is including the box set for 180 € with mostly unplayable stuff in there.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Burnage wrote:
It's been over a month since release and some very obviously incorrect rules haven't been FAQed yet (particularly looking at Focus Will here). Even if you disagree that the book itself is crap, it's clearly not been given much care by GW.

Well, I'm surprised here that Phil Kelly who is generally responsible for Aeldari, the lead architect, changed Ynnari that much (from playable to non-playable) and designed Phoenix Rising I as it is including the box set for 180 € with mostly unplayable stuff in there.

Maybe hes just bored of his job and dont care nomore and tells his his assistants: "Yes steve , just deal with it I'm at the company retreat playng golf.. I mean team building for the next two weeks. Get it done"

 wuestenfux wrote:

 Burnage wrote:
It's been over a month since release and some very obviously incorrect rules haven't been FAQed yet (particularly looking at Focus Will here). Even if you disagree that the book itself is crap, it's clearly not been given much care by GW.

Well, I'm surprised here that Phil Kelly who is generally responsible for Aeldari, the lead architect, changed Ynnari that much (from playable to non-playable) and designed Phoenix Rising I as it is including the box set for 180 € with mostly unplayable stuff in there.

Why are you surprised? Phil Kelly actually has exceptionally long record of terrible rules and ruining books, him always buffing Eldar into the stratosphere is somewhat of an outlier (outlier that continues the trend of bad rules, though, if for different reasons). Remember how he thought SW Terminators in 5th edition are worth 64 points for one with TH/SS loadout? Months after 40 pts ones in Codex SM didn't exactly shone and were rarely taken? But then he went and made Thunderwolves immune to ID and hit harder than truck for less points? It really seems he has problems grasping basic math, 90% of things he wrotes tend to be either below mediocre or straight overpowered, no middle ground. There is no other explanation why he buffed 7th edition Eldar into the stratosphere after years of complains they were already far too good in 6th...

 Argive wrote:
Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

It has nothing dark elfs need. Custom traits are cool, there are a couple I mightbuse for coven but they don't need them. It has nothing for Kabals. Some possible swaps for cults. But 5 out of 8 are completely irrelevant, can't be used. I could see trying to make a new build with a couple of them but you give up Lilith, the best warlord traits and the best relics and the unique strategems. And none of them are more useful than advance and charge, or +1 attack, or +1strenght and only loosing 1 to moral.

I know its not as good as the marine supplements, but its also not as good as Vigilis.

If I played craft world I might not be quits so sour they already got the biker host and wraith host bonuses. And having a bit more customizability on the aspect warriors is cool.

The disappointment is it didn't patch easy holes, no new hq, no new warlord traits. Still can't take the triple patrol detachment (let alone the 6 Patrol) which would be really cool and fluffy.

It was the only attention paid to my faction in 2 years but it had nothing to change the way I play. I won't buy any new models becuase of it (unless they are space marines). I am still playing with the same army I was playing with 2 years ago and will be playing the same list 2 years from now. Thats why it was a crap book.

Headlss wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

It has nothing dark elfs need. Custom traits are cool, there are a couple I mightbuse for coven but they don't need them. It has nothing for Kabals. Some possible swaps for cults. But 5 out of 8 are completely irrelevant, can't be used. I could see trying to make a new build with a couple of them but you give up Lilith, the best warlord traits and the best relics and the unique strategems. And none of them are more useful than advance and charge, or +1 attack, or +1strenght and only loosing 1 to moral.

I know its not as good as the marine supplements, but its also not as good as Vigilis.

If I played craft world I might not be quits so sour they already got the biker host and wraith host bonuses. And having a bit more customizability on the aspect warriors is cool.

The disappointment is it didn't patch easy holes, no new hq, no new warlord traits. Still can't take the triple patrol detachment (let alone the 6 Patrol) which would be really cool and fluffy.

It was the only attention paid to my faction in 2 years but it had nothing to change the way I play. I won't buy any new models becuase of it (unless they are space marines). I am still playing with the same army I was playing with 2 years ago and will be playing the same list 2 years from now. Thats why it was a crap book.

Fair enough I'm guilty of not looking at the DE/Ynnari stuff as it doesn't concern my faction. So I suppose I was only speaking from a CWE perspective - which I stand by. The rest of the book indeed is pretty crap by all accounts.

Even Craftworlds seems like a very mixed bag to me. They got some fun new tools, but I'm still saddened by the Jain/Banshees update and confused at many of the new Exarch abilities.

 Burnage wrote:
Even Craftworlds seems like a very mixed bag to me. They got some fun new tools, but I'm still saddened by the Jain/Banshees update and confused at many of the new Exarch abilities.

Or the lack of relics... or WL traits... or Starts... But hey, a fire dragon can punch someone with burning fists so that's pretty cool right ?? Riight? Riiiiight!? (it is pretty darn cool though even if impractical and largely useless in a game scenario)
Cheers GW.

But at least its addressed an army building issue thanks to expert crafters. So I'm grateful for that at least. Lotsa fun lists floating around in the odd noggin since I got the book.

 grouchoben wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Right, I should clarify - my brain was 1 shot from each, which results in half of that 3.7. Even with RF they don't come close to killing 2 IS per model.

Assault bolter Intercessors kill 4.4 guardsmen. If they shoot with CM/LT buffs in the tactical doctrine, that's 8.64 dead IS from 5 Intercessors. IF will kill 10.8..

Hell, give 5 Assault IF Intercessors no buffing characters, only tactical doctrine, and they kill 6.94 guardsmen, which is squad wipe with morale.

With the ease and cheapness and sheer spamminess of SM buffs, I really don't think we get anywhere by running numbers in the void anymore.

I think your math is wrong on the AB IF?

15 * .666 * .666 * .666 = 4.4
15 * .167 * .666 * .666 = 1.1

6 SH to 5 Intercessors.

Fly over, kill 3.3 with grenades, and shoot off 5.6 for a total of 8.9.

AB IF intercessors kill 1 intercessor.

SH grenades and shooting kill 2 - charge and tripoint (easy with BF and M14) and then they're safe to fallback and shoot next turn unless they're packing a TH (but then that's another SH).

People complain about only one model dropping grenades, but the flip side is only one model is needed to drop grenades at full effect.

 Argive wrote:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:

 Argive wrote:


Hawks are an excellent example of an Aspect Unit. Highly specialised unit very good at doing one thing. I don't get the complain. Its the eldar way. Highly specialised tools for the right job. Even though some aspects fail at that due to reasons. E.g Banshees not being killy in melee, scorpions not actually able to infiltrate etc. I don't want units all become generically good at everything..

Yes and a hyper-specialized unit to fight a moderate amount of T3, low save models is such a hilariously quaint concept in a game where Rapid Fire 6 hurricane bolters exist

Having them drop all the grenades on whatever unit they choose all the tie would probably be a bit OP and make them good at killing single entities with MW though. I think they are an awesome unit (not awesome for marine meta, but then again what is?). If they weren't crappy finecast Id build me a squad of 10 for sure.

lol for a full squad that comes out to 3-4 MW average with the new aspect trait. But apparently that would be "a bit OP" in the fight twice, shoot twice, hit on 2s with rerolls meta

Are you the guy who wrote the Ynnari rules and Phoenix Rising?

Didint realise eldar have acess to hurricane bolters...

They pump out a lot of shots to clear t3 screens. Thats what they do so you can direct SC at other stuff. Im not saying they are SM intercessor amazing. They aint. But as a unit they fit their nieche pretty well for their point.

I get what you mean without you being snide.. the meta /sm codex creep is undeniable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Imateria wrote:

 Argive wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I plan to use the Ynnari HQs in Aeldari armies other than Ynnari
such as Harlies with a battalion (troupes in starweavers, outrider detachment (lots of skyweavers) and Yncarne.

Doesn't this stop the detachment be battle forged?
I got my copy of the book at home but I cant remember what the ynari rules are. Always been pure CWE.

The new(ish, they've been out since May) rules let you take the Ynnari characters in any type of Aeldari detachment and not break the detachment bonus requirements (Battleforged is just meeting the min requirements of a detachment and every unit having at least 1 faction keyword in common), so you can slot them into a Craftworlds detachment no problem. Just remember that you can't include them in a detachment with any other named characters.

I guess their psychic powers/strats are locked into ynnari keyword.. need to cast my eye over their rules

The problem with Swooping Hawks is not that they aren't good at their role, they're not bad at anti chaff but for 13ppm they aren't amazing, it's that their role is hyper specialised. If your opponent isn't bringing chaff models then you've spent a lot of points on a unit that doesn't have a role in your game. Compared to that, Guardians and Dire Avengers are specialised for anti infantry, but have a weapon that can make them effective against many different types of infantry instead of one very specific type. They're not the only Aspect shrine that suffers from this.

For Ynnari, relics and strats are locked away if you don't have an Ynnari detachment, but Yvraine and the Yncarne still get to choose their psychic powers from the Revenant Discipline.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Argive wrote:

 Burnage wrote:
Even Craftworlds seems like a very mixed bag to me. They got some fun new tools, but I'm still saddened by the Jain/Banshees update and confused at many of the new Exarch abilities.

Or the lack of relics... or WL traits... or Starts... But hey, a fire dragon can punch someone with burning fists so that's pretty cool right ?? Riight? Riiiiight!? (it is pretty darn cool though even if impractical and largely useless in a game scenario)
Cheers GW.

But at least its addressed an army building issue thanks to expert crafters. So I'm grateful for that at least. Lotsa fun lists floating around in the odd noggin since I got the book.

I'd say the Craftworld traits provided are definitely a step up but thats only because 4 of the 5 traits in the codex are rubbish and all 5 are very 1 dimensional and and only 1 is partly fluffy for the types of armies they are supposed to represent. However, most of the custom traits feel like they were written by someone who doesn't care, I mean why did we need 6 different ways to reroll 1's?

Headlss wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

It has nothing dark elfs need. Custom traits are cool, there are a couple I mightbuse for coven but they don't need them. It has nothing for Kabals. Some possible swaps for cults. But 5 out of 8 are completely irrelevant, can't be used. I could see trying to make a new build with a couple of them but you give up Lilith, the best warlord traits and the best relics and the unique strategems. And none of them are more useful than advance and charge, or +1 attack, or +1strenght and only loosing 1 to moral.

I know its not as good as the marine supplements, but its also not as good as Vigilis.

If I played craft world I might not be quits so sour they already got the biker host and wraith host bonuses. And having a bit more customizability on the aspect warriors is cool.

The disappointment is it didn't patch easy holes, no new hq, no new warlord traits. Still can't take the triple patrol detachment (let alone the 6 Patrol) which would be really cool and fluffy.

It was the only attention paid to my faction in 2 years but it had nothing to change the way I play. I won't buy any new models becuase of it (unless they are space marines). I am still playing with the same army I was playing with 2 years ago and will be playing the same list 2 years from now. Thats why it was a crap book.

truthfully IMHO supplements like PA SHOULD be exactly that, not focused on stuff we need (that should be reserved for codices) but be fun little cool things that can be amusing but ultimately aren't nesscary. the problem is GW more often then not puts total game changers into these books, and we enchourage it by basicly screaming a product sucks if it's not got some OP rules in it. please keep in mind I'm not saying that "ohh Eldar should have gotten their crap" but rather stuff like PA should be more akin to eldar level stuff for everyone.

 Imateria wrote:

I'd say the Craftworld traits provided are definitely a step up but thats only because 4 of the 5 traits in the codex are rubbish and all 5 are very 1 dimensional and and only 1 is partly fluffy for the types of armies they are supposed to represent. However, most of the custom traits feel like they were written by someone who doesn't care, I mean why did we need 6 different ways to reroll 1's?

Traits were fine, but the aspect powers were really terrible

Why did the CHE deserve the strongest powers? It's a mystery I guess.

How hard is it to just write "Each destroyed Dire Avenger model may immediately fire their weapon or attack on a 3+"?

Why did the warp spiders get a weird and situational 6" pile-in ability? That definitely should be a banshee ability...

Why do the fire dragons only get close combat abilities and pistol profile for their weapons?

Man, Dire Fragons were the biggest misses of CWE's PA. They were in desperate need of something and got absolutely nada.

 grouchoben wrote:
Man, Dire Fragons were the biggest misses of CWE's PA. They were in desperate need of something and got absolutely nada.

They are good as they are.

BrianDavion wrote:

Headlss wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Its not a crap book. It has a lot of utility and interesting traits lending to new builds. Its a breath of fresh air and without comparing it to SM supplaments /BT PA book it would be awesome. It is a crap book compared to SM supplement grade BT book/ SM rules supplements in general though. (what isisn't?)

It has nothing dark elfs need. Custom traits are cool, there are a couple I mightbuse for coven but they don't need them. It has nothing for Kabals. Some possible swaps for cults. But 5 out of 8 are completely irrelevant, can't be used. I could see trying to make a new build with a couple of them but you give up Lilith, the best warlord traits and the best relics and the unique strategems. And none of them are more useful than advance and charge, or +1 attack, or +1strenght and only loosing 1 to moral.

I know its not as good as the marine supplements, but its also not as good as Vigilis.

If I played craft world I might not be quits so sour they already got the biker host and wraith host bonuses. And having a bit more customizability on the aspect warriors is cool.

The disappointment is it didn't patch easy holes, no new hq, no new warlord traits. Still can't take the triple patrol detachment (let alone the 6 Patrol) which would be really cool and fluffy.

It was the only attention paid to my faction in 2 years but it had nothing to change the way I play. I won't buy any new models becuase of it (unless they are space marines). I am still playing with the same army I was playing with 2 years ago and will be playing the same list 2 years from now. Thats why it was a crap book.

truthfully IMHO supplements like PA SHOULD be exactly that, not focused on stuff we need (that should be reserved for codices) but be fun little cool things that can be amusing but ultimately aren't nesscary. the problem is GW more often then not puts total game changers into these books, and we enchourage it by basicly screaming a product sucks if it's not got some OP rules in it. please keep in mind I'm not saying that "ohh Eldar should have gotten their crap" but rather stuff like PA should be more akin to eldar level stuff for everyone.

Agreed - the whole 10 pages devoted to yet more standard Marine enhancement in PA2 should have been in the main Codex.