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.

Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

 Orock wrote:
You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

Loyalty to a paint scheme? What an odd concept.

 Orock wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

You signature mentions you play Tau. So I suppose you already know which Sept you'll be playing when the codex drops, no matter the rules.

fresus wrote:

 Orock wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

You signature mentions you play Tau. So I suppose you already know which Sept you'll be playing when the codex drops, no matter the rules.

Septs aren't based on the color of the model or the style of their wargear.

 Kanluwen wrote:

fresus wrote:

 Orock wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

You signature mentions you play Tau. So I suppose you already know which Sept you'll be playing when the codex drops, no matter the rules.

Septs aren't based on the color of the model or the style of their wargear.

Septs are based on the markings' color.
And some kits come with decals with the tau icons, so you can definitely paint your Tau models as part of a specific sept.

fresus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

fresus wrote:

 Orock wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

You signature mentions you play Tau. So I suppose you already know which Sept you'll be playing when the codex drops, no matter the rules.

Septs aren't based on the color of the model or the style of their wargear.

Septs are based on the markings' color.

Except the Sept colors aren't always utilized even in the fluff. Nor are the actual Sept insignia.

You might have some form of a case for faction loyalty if the rules for said factions had any consistency across editions. GW changes rules like the wind shifts direction.

In a game that has historically struggled with any sense of balanced play, you cannot put players at fault for trying to give themselves something resembling a fair hand when it comes to rules, regardless of which lore/paint scheme they fancy.

More on-topic, are we fairly certain that Eldar traits will apply to all their <Craftworld> units now? Unlike SM who are limited to infantry, bikes and dreads?
Oh dat 8th balance.

 Orock wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Calling BS on a paint scheme confusing you. Every army has a unique combo of attributes. If you can't keep army wide attributes straight because of the color of the models, you aren't playing at a very competitive level to begin with. Don't blame the other guy for your shortcomings.

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

Most people's paint schemes came before these new chapter tactics, Forgeworld dogmas etc. I hate that we now have a system forcing a playstyle or unit selections onto people based on a paint scheme which, let's be honest, held no relevance to gaming at the time of choosing.
My ad mech and dark Eldar are home brews anyway, so I'll play them as something different whenever I feel like it. But it's because I like to have fun and try different lists and make the most of the variety an army has to offer. I chose to collect an army, not a specific Forgeworld or Kabal.

 Orock wrote:

I would also say to paint scheme swappers: Dont get insulted when people jab you for being a powergamer and a waac player. You painted your army how you liked, now that suddenly that matters, you are throwing away any pretense of loyalty for a bit of extra power.

"Sorry pal, you need to use X rules because you painted your plastic army men Blue. Whereas that player across the room can use any rules because he painted his plastic army men Orange"

If the army is legal nobody worth playing is going to care. Don't let a paint scheme prevent you from having full access to the options in your army book.

And this is why I'm glad I've always selected my own unique paint schemes.
My playstyle has always favored jetbikes, so I've claimed to be Saim-Hann and do have some red on my models, however there is also a good deal of yellow and mostly black with green edges (like the traditional Dark Eldar scheme).

My paint scheme conveniently matches with Ynnari, but at the end of the day, I hold "loyalty" to the playstyle, not the Craftworld. I started Eldar because I could build a list whose core was Jetbikes. That traditionally has been Saim-Hann, but as long as I can field a super fast army with mobile firepower, I'll pick whichever attribute supports that playstyle (which are this point could be Biel-tan, Ulthwe or Saim-hann)

I've also been mixing Dark Eldar units into my list since it was legal, although they have been converted and painted to look more like Corsairs.
So my stance on this whole issue it that you can use whatever attribute YOU feel fits your army, whether that be for theme or game-play benefit.

-

Note that the Warhammer Live Twitch stream will have a preview of the new Craftsworlds codex in a few hours (17:00 pm GMT+1). Have your notepads and screencapture applications ready!

https://go.twitch.tv/warhammer

See? Like I said. There are different kinds of players, and these craftworld rules really make it obvious if a persons army is based on liking the background or liking the rules.

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
See? Like I said. There are different kinds of players, and these craftworld rules really make it obvious if a persons army is based on liking the background or liking the rules.

And something to also keep in mind is that it isn't as black-n-white as fluff vs rules. For example, I pick rules that fit my personal fluff, which is a Corsair group made up of a mix of Saim-Hann exiles, Kabalite mercenaries and "freed" Aspect warriors that were once slaves made to fight in the Wych arenas and Incubi temples.
I've never liked using Forgeworld rules, so I prefer mixing up the CWE and DE unit rules.

Depending on what kind of list I want to play, I could take the Saim-Hann attribute to benefit bikes with Scatter lasers and benefit my Scorpions or Shining Spears
Or in a different game, I could take the Beil-tan attribute to benefit my Shuricannon bikes, Fire Dragons and Shining Spears

Since my gaming group is big enough, I tend to play different people who may or may not remember that I used Saim-Hann in one game or Biel-tan in another. As long as I am clear from that start and consistent throughout the game, that's all they care about.

-

No different than marines, or necrons or Tau etc.

This same old argument has been going on for years, but frankly I dont understand it. I started a space wolves army in the early 90's- I have thousands of points painted but it has taken 20 years. I can't paint faster and GW doesnt give the models away for free. Why should I let a paint scheme restrict how I play the game. You dont think playing the game the same way for 20 years gets boring? Now, SW to Marines isnt even a good comparison, because many of the same models are used across the board. Eldar craftworlds favor certain units which makes playstyle from Craftworld to Craftworld extremely different in some cases, in a good way. Just because someone wants a bike themed army and wants rules to justify that doesnt make them that guy. You can actually use rules without abusing them. Maybe we should somehow track which players paint their models compared to those that don't as someone who buys a fully painted army on ebay hasnt gone through all the toil to get those models on the battlefield- maybe that makes them that guy too because they have more money than time (so essentially the money means less to them).

Can we just drop the whole mess. This thread isnt about what types of players do what, its about the new eldar codex and rules. Honestly, everyone plays differently and one way isn't better than another. Some people dont want to forge the narrative, they just want to roll dice and move models around, some folks could care less about the game, they just want to paint models and to be fair, you can find people in each aspect of the game you might disagree with, but who says your style is more fair or morale than theirs?

The good craftworld is up: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/20/craftworld-focus-alaitoc-oct-20gw-homepage-post-3/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's a lot here.
Images:





So everything gets -1 to hit, possibly even flyers?
Rangers are 12 points (pretty nice).
Fire Prisms get Grinding Advance (but still shoot at -1 if they move I think).
Prisms can link fire to re-roll hits and wounds as long as they all shoot the same thing (this is great).

Also noteworthy: Alatoic did not get the infiltration stratagem, so if there's any sort of deep striking stratagem it's generic.

 Galef wrote:

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
See? Like I said. There are different kinds of players, and these craftworld rules really make it obvious if a persons army is based on liking the background or liking the rules.

And something to also keep in mind is that it isn't as black-n-white as fluff vs rules. For example, I pick rules that fit my personal fluff, which is a Corsair group made up of a mix of Saim-Hann exiles, Kabalite mercenaries and "freed" Aspect warriors that were once slaves made to fight in the Wych arenas and Incubi temples.
I've never liked using Forgeworld rules, so I prefer mixing up the CWE and DE unit rules.

Depending on what kind of list I want to play, I could take the Saim-Hann attribute to benefit bikes with Scatter lasers and benefit my Scorpions or Shining Spears
Or in a different game, I could take the Beil-tan attribute to benefit my Shuricannon bikes, Fire Dragons and Shining Spears

Since my gaming group is big enough, I tend to play different people who may or may not remember that I used Saim-Hann in one game or Biel-tan in another. As long as I am clear from that start and consistent throughout the game, that's all they care about.

-

I'm pretty similar, I guess. I think of my Eldar as corsairs that sometimes come to the aid of a craftworld. Their leader is from Iyanden, though I swear I came up with this back in 2nd edition, which I think is before there was a Prince Yriel. So I would sometimes play with lots of guardians to represent mostly the corsairs, or sometimes lots of Wraith guard/lords to represent the Iyanden allies, or a mix in a big game. I guess now I could make it two detachments if I wanted, one Iyanden and one maybe Alaitoc (or just nothing). But still, I wouldn't hesitate to have one of my guardian squads of corsairs show up in the mostly Iyanden army, or a unit of Iyanden wraithguard in my corsair army.

I kind of wish, if they aren't going to have any unit restrictions on the craftworlds, that they at least had some strategems that are specific to "generic" craftworlds, or for people who make up their own craftworld that doesn't fit one of those molds.

I wonder what they're going to do with falcons. I have three because they're supposed to be dedicated transports for my corsairs (thanks again forge world) and I want to have them do something again in the game.

Almost makes me want to turn from my first love (Iyanden).

So rangers return to their 7th edition cost funny enough.

The Fire prism Linked Fire Stratagem can allow to deliver a great amount of damage while only putting a single tank into the enemy fire.

I think a Dual set of Fire Prism tanks can allow some decent firepower both vs Meq, Elite and armored targets that shouldn't be ignored easily.

So take 2 Prisms, deploy them all out of LoS. Move one of them out 6-7" to target a unit. Use the Linked Fire stratagem to fire 4x at the target re-rolling hits and wounds. Then use the Fire and Fade stratagem to move the first Prism back out of LoS.

Viable tactic?

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
I wonder what they're going to do with falcons. I have three because they're supposed to be dedicated transports for my corsairs (thanks again forge world) and I want to have them do something again in the game.

I was curious about the Falcon as well. I hope this doesn't mean they just left it rotting in unplayability.

 Cream Tea wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
I wonder what they're going to do with falcons. I have three because they're supposed to be dedicated transports for my corsairs (thanks again forge world) and I want to have them do something again in the game.

I was curious about the Falcon as well. I hope this doesn't mean they just left it rotting in unplayability.

Falcons rules are fine as is, they just need to be noticably cheaper than a Serpent. As in 3/4 the cost. If a Serpent is 160pts, a Falcon should be 120pts

 Galef wrote:
So take 2 Prisms, deploy them all out of LoS. Move one of them out 6-7" to target a unit. Use the Linked Fire stratagem to fire 4x at the target re-rolling hits and wounds. Then use the Fire and Fade stratagem to move the first Prism back out of LoS.

Viable tactic?

Considering the Prism shoot modes, it can wreck armored targets easily, also not need to use the Fire and Fade unless you really need the tank to remain safe.
Leaving it in the open for 1 turn will force the enemy to throw some firepower at it, only to see how it moves back into cover and the 2nd new one pops out able to repeat the same trick, add Iyanden trait and you can use them as both beatstick and fire magnets knowing they'll be able to run at nearly 100% efficiency after 2-3 turns of enemy focus on them.

Quite useful to allow our troops get into position.

P.S: just realized this makes the Nightspinner pretty much obsolete, unless you need it to attack out of LoS infantry, a Fire Prism dispersed mode firing 2x times per turn can deal more damage due the added -ap

Raven Guard attribute - as expected. HOWEVER i doesn't look like it rules out any units (i.e flyers etc). This might be listed independently in the codex though... Hopefully... Fire Prism section implies this attribute affects tanks, so it might also work on flyers. This also appears to stack with existing bonuses, so, -3 to hit units here we come!

8 point reduction for rangers! Now 12 points a model!

Alaitoc stratagem affects Rangers only. 1CP. Use at the start of enemy shooting phase. 1 unit of Rangers can only be hit on 6's regardless of modifiers. (not massively seeing the point in this, as most things will be shooting them on 5's and 6's anyway when this attribute is active.)

Fire prism gets the Leman Russ shoot twice rule!

Fire Prism stratagem is... Strong. Linking shots together for 1cp (requirement 60" range and visible to each other) means shots ignore range limits, don't need LoS, re-roll hits AND re-roll wounds! All fire prisms that link must shoot the same target. I presume this works alongside the shoot twice rule, but might need clarifying. 4D6 str 6 -3 no LoS, re-roll hits and wounds. Going to cause some serious infantry damage (12 geq, 9 mew, 3 teq)

As everyone predicted, this is likely going to be the craftworld everyone uses - especially if flyers gain the attribute.

I hope the other grav tanks get a similar shoot twice rule, but we'll see.

 Galef wrote:

Falcons rules are fine as is, they just need to be noticably cheaper than a Serpent. As in 3/4 the cost. If a Serpent is 160pts, a Falcon should be 120pts

Of course a recost is all it would take, that's true of almost anything. I just would have liked to see a points change mentioned somewhere, because I love my grav tanks.

 Cream Tea wrote:

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
I wonder what they're going to do with falcons. I have three because they're supposed to be dedicated transports for my corsairs (thanks again forge world) and I want to have them do something again in the game.

I was curious about the Falcon as well. I hope this doesn't mean they just left it rotting in unplayability.

The name of the rule is "Pulsed Laser Discharge", the main gun on a Falcon is a "Pulse Laser". I'm feeling optimistic.

 Galef wrote:
So take 2 Prisms, deploy them all out of LoS. Move one of them out 6-7" to target a unit. Use the Linked Fire stratagem to fire 4x at the target re-rolling hits and wounds. Then use the Fire and Fade stratagem to move the first Prism back out of LoS.

Viable tactic?

was thinking the same thing....have to weigh the 2 cp per round vs your total dmg output and your total cps

not game breaking

Kdash wrote:
Raven Guard attribute - as expected. HOWEVER i doesn't look like it rules out any units (i.e flyers etc). This might be listed independently in the codex though... Hopefully... Fire Prism section implies this attribute affects tanks, so it might also work on flyers. This also appears to stack with existing bonuses, so, -3 to hit units here we come!

8 point reduction for rangers! Now 12 points a model!

Alaitoc stratagem affects Rangers only. 1CP. Use at the start of enemy shooting phase. 1 unit of Rangers can only be hit on 6's regardless of modifiers. (not massively seeing the point in this, as most things will be shooting them on 5's and 6's anyway when this attribute is active.)

Fire prism gets the Leman Russ shoot twice rule!

Fire Prism stratagem is... Strong. Linking shots together for 1cp (requirement 60" range and visible to each other) means shots ignore range limits, don't need LoS, re-roll hits AND re-roll wounds! All fire prisms that link must shoot the same target. I presume this works alongside the shoot twice rule, but might need clarifying. 4D6 str 6 -3 no LoS, re-roll hits and wounds. Going to cause some serious infantry damage (12 geq, 9 mew, 3 teq)

As everyone predicted, this is likely going to be the craftworld everyone uses - especially if flyers gain the attribute.

I hope the other grav tanks get a similar shoot twice rule, but we'll see.

Be wary at least the 1st Fire Prism choosing to link fire must Target a unit normally (within LoS and range) and then you play the stratagem for the others.

the fire prism it's awsome...you can get rid of a 2 super heavy thank in 3 turns with two of them and some support ...I'll buy my second soon I bet.
Damn -1 to hit is definetly great if it's really applied to everyone and with conceal still in the game...it will be nice to see how a guard player will face an army with a gunline -2 to it with some warlocks mixed in,
I don't want to say nothing about the hemlock -3 to be hit :O, if they give this to flyers as well they are fething crazy