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.

What's the list to make them usable.

Because as it looks theyre way overcosted. Asurmen blobs??

Honestly, the points value for the avenger shuriken catapult reads like a complete error. However, they're super viable if you're just using power level (as you don't pay for weapons or wargear).

How are they over costed?

17pts/model that can run and shoot and has a 5+ Overwatch, and can be upgraded to have a 5+ invun for 20pts?

Because the avenger shuriken catapult is 7 points, where a normal shuriken catapult is 0 points. That's a massive price hike for a bonus 2 inches or so of range.

 Elbows wrote:
Because the avenger shuriken catapult is 7 points, where a normal shuriken catapult is 0 points. That's a massive price hike for a bonus 2 inches or so of range.

yeah edited it to 17, but yeah it is a 6" range increase which is pretty big tbh..

but 5+ overwatch is huge

Oh, don't get me wrong, I suspect they're probably still worth taking, but I am mystified by the massive points gap between the catapults, that's all. I haven't read all the 8th ed. rules etc. Truth be told I actually haven't seen the entry for standard guardians as a squad.

 Elbows wrote:
Oh, don't get me wrong, I suspect they're probably still worth taking, but I am mystified by the massive points gap between the catapults, that's all. I haven't read all the 8th ed. rules etc. Truth be told I actually haven't seen the entry for standard guardians as a squad.

It's likely to take into account the "free" exarch.

Well the main difference is that DA's have +1 Ld and Save over their Guardians. As well as 5+ Overwatch

But I do believe it is also a case of 'unit' rebalance that several previous top pick units have copped.

It really looks like an error. Their power cost suggests that the unit of 5 is worth about 60 points, or 12 points per model. The cheapest a DA squad can come is 85 points and the most expensive it can get is 102 points. Almost every other unit the Eldar have can be taken for 20 times its power in points, for some set of wargear options. Generally the power cost corresponds to 20 points per power for units that take most of their upgrades.

So I would bet that they were supposed to be 10 points per model with free avenger catapults. Possibly someone bumped the cost up after noticing that the Autarch could take it and didn't realize what they were doing. Or maybe a last-minute rebalance when they decided that 10 ppm was too good but didn't have time to try to work out the right cost.

GodDamUser wrote:
model that can run and shoot

This isn't really even worth mentioning anymore. Every unit in the game gets the same ability, only at a -1 To-Hit.
Battle Focus is almost worthless in its current form.

amhoward wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
model that can run and shoot

This isn't really even worth mentioning anymore. Every unit in the game gets the same ability, only at a -1 To-Hit.
Battle Focus is almost worthless in its current form.

O_0

you cannot shoot after advancing unless you are using an assault weapon.

I think you need to have a closer look at the rules

amhoward wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
model that can run and shoot

This isn't really even worth mentioning anymore. Every unit in the game gets the same ability, only at a -1 To-Hit.
Battle Focus is almost worthless in its current form.

Except that you can back peddle while running and still shoot assault at full effect...

Yeah, it's funny watching people try to justify the cost. I don't even think it's a balancing mistake - I think it's just a flat out error. The idea that Battle Focus and 5+ overwatch makes them worth the cost is not credible.

It seems obvious because if you compare the Power Level of DAs with the other Aspects and Guardians, there is a clear incongruence between their Power Level and points cost. So they should cost around 50% more then Guardians (as they always have) not double.

So the best way to make them viable is for as many people to point out the error to GW in the hope that they will FAQ it.

Daedalus81 wrote:

Except that you can back peddle while running and still shoot assault at full effect...

Yeah, this is the type of ability that seems amazing when you run a hypothetical simulation 1v1 against another equivalent unit type. In a real tabletop scenario its value is marginal.

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
Yeah, it's funny watching people try to justify the cost. I don't even think it's a balancing mistake - I think it's just a flat out error. The idea that Battle Focus and 5+ overwatch makes them worth the cost is not credible.

You get a really good gun and an exarch with an extra wound. And you can get a squad-wide invuln.

What do you think a 5 man squad is worth?

GodDamUser wrote:

amhoward wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
model that can run and shoot

This isn't really even worth mentioning anymore. Every unit in the game gets the same ability, only at a -1 To-Hit.
Battle Focus is almost worthless in its current form.

O_0

you cannot shoot after advancing unless you are using an assault weapon.

I think you need to have a closer look at the rules

Battle Focus doesn't apply to Heavy Weapons. I think you need to have a closer look at the rules.

amhoward wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:

amhoward wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
model that can run and shoot

This isn't really even worth mentioning anymore. Every unit in the game gets the same ability, only at a -1 To-Hit.
Battle Focus is almost worthless in its current form.

O_0

you cannot shoot after advancing unless you are using an assault weapon.

I think you need to have a closer look at the rules

Battle Focus doesn't apply to Heavy Weapons. I think you need to have a closer look at the rules.

No but it does apply to rapid fire weapons which they have

GodDamUser wrote:


No but it does apply to rapid fire weapons which they have

No they really don't.

Swooping Hawks have a horrible Rapid Fire gun, but other than that, there's really not any Rapid Fire in the Eldar army.

I was wrong.. they are assault weapons..

So yeah shoot at a non -1 not as good as I was thinking..

Firstly, the 5+ inv is irrelevant as it's an optional upgrade. If it's such an amazing option that it justifies 17ppm then include it in the base cost or simply price the option appropriately.

All Aspects get a 'free' exarch. Banshees at Power Level 4 compared with Power Level 3 for Dire Avengers. Banshees cost fewer points than Dire Avengers. It's an error.

No one claimed that DAs were OP in 7th. If anything, line troops have been coming down in cost. But I'd be happy enough for them to stay at 7th ed cost.

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
Firstly, the 5+ inv is irrelevant as it's an optional upgrade. If it's such an amazing option that it justifies 17ppm then include it in the base cost or simply price the option appropriately.

All Aspects get a 'free' exarch. Banshees at Power Level 4 compared with Power Level 3 for Dire Avengers. Banshees cost fewer points than Dire Avengers. It's an error.

No one claimed that DAs were OP in 7th. If anything, line troops have been coming down in cost. But I'd be happy enough for them to stay at 7th ed cost.

So you think that a squad of 5 dire avengers, including the exarch, should be 65 ppm, which is exactly how much a tactical squad costs currently?

I'm not sure what I think about this.

The gun is better than what IG or SM get. I think that the gun should cost something.

I will admit that 17 ppm seems pretty steep, though.

And again, that extra wound on the exarch should cost something.

What points cost would you have put for a 5 man squad?

 Traditio wrote:

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
Firstly, the 5+ inv is irrelevant as it's an optional upgrade. If it's such an amazing option that it justifies 17ppm then include it in the base cost or simply price the option appropriately.

All Aspects get a 'free' exarch. Banshees at Power Level 4 compared with Power Level 3 for Dire Avengers. Banshees cost fewer points than Dire Avengers. It's an error.

No one claimed that DAs were OP in 7th. If anything, line troops have been coming down in cost. But I'd be happy enough for them to stay at 7th ed cost.

So you think that a squad of 5 dire avengers, including the exarch, should be 65 ppm, which is exactly how much a tactical squad costs currently?

I'm not sure what I think about this.

The gun is better than what IG or SM get. I think that the gun should cost something.

I will admit that 17 ppm seems pretty steep, though.

And again, that extra wound on the exarch should cost something.

What points cost would you have put for a 5 man squad?

The extra wound might cost something but it also just means a dmg2 or d3 weapon deletes him just the same. Also they have a 4+ save vs a marines 3+ And are t3 so get wounded on 2s by s7 and 8 and hurt on 4s by s3 and 5s instead of 6s for s2. They also don't hit back very hard and a measly s3 as well. Their weapon does more damage than a bolter but they also have a shorter range arguably that can be made up for in movement. So a marine is substantially tougher than a dire avenger and Avengers get a damage increase. But marines cost 65 for 5 with no sergeant weapons but still bonus leadership and attack yet Avengers cost 85 their sergeant gains 1 extra wound and that the only difference. 5 stock Avengers is actually closer to a primaris marine squad which costs 100 who have ap-1 range 30 2 attacks and everyone has 2 wounds a piece meaning they hit harder in every phase something is wrong there.

5 marines 65 5 Avengers 85 5 primaris 100

How even

Titanicus wrote:The extra wound might cost something but it also just means a dmg2 or d3 weapon deletes him just the same. Also they have a 4+ save vs a marines 3+ And are t3 so get wounded on 2s by s7 and 8 and hurt on 4s by s3 and 5s instead of 6s for s2. They also don't hit back very hard and a measly s3 as well. Their weapon does more damage than a bolter but they also have a shorter range arguably that can be made up for in movement. So a marine is substantially tougher than a dire avenger and Avengers get a damage increase. But marines cost 65 for 5 with no sergeant weapons but still bonus leadership and attack yet Avengers cost 85 their sergeant gains 1 extra wound and that the only difference.

So what do you think is a fair points cost?

It's questionable that the Avengers Shuriken Catapult is a significantly superior weapon to a Bolt Gun, especially given the new relative cost. Previously, there was a trade off that the DA was a bit more deadly but significantly less resilient. Now there is admittedly a smaller differential in terms of resilience but I would also argue that Bladestorm is not as useful as it once was.

10 DAs will inflict 3.33 casualties against a tactical squad in the open. 10 TMs double tapping will inflict 4.44 casualties against the DAs.

Bladestorm is less useful against 2+ save units because (a) they still get a 5+ save and (b) most 2+ save units now have at least 2 wounds.

DAs would need far greater damage output to justify 17ppm.

I could ask you why you think they should cost 3ppm more than a tactical (or more than a tactical at all for that matter considering they have always been costed a few points less and I don't see what has changed dramatically).

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
It's questionable that the Avengers Shuriken Catapult is a significantly superior weapon to a Bolt Gun, especially given the new relative cost. Previously, there was a trade off that the DA was a bit more deadly but significantly less resilient. Now there is admittedly a smaller differential in terms of resilience but I would also argue that Bladestorm is not as useful as it once was.

10 DAs will inflict 3.33 casualties against a tactical squad in the open. 10 TMs double tapping will inflict 4.44 casualties against the DAs.

Bladestorm is less useful against 2+ save units because (a) they still get a 5+ save and (b) most 2+ save units now have at least 2 wounds.

DAs would need far greater damage output to justify 17ppm.

I could ask you why you think they should cost 3ppm more than a tactical (or more than a tactical at all for that matter considering they have always been costed a few points less and I don't see what has changed dramatically).

Dire Avengers actually cost 4 ppm more than a tactical marine, not 3 ppm more. Tactical marines actually went down in price to 13 ppm

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
It's questionable that the Avengers Shuriken Catapult is a significantly superior weapon to a Bolt Gun, especially given the new relative cost. Previously, there was a trade off that the DA was a bit more deadly but significantly less resilient. Now there is admittedly a smaller differential in terms of resilience but I would also argue that Bladestorm is not as useful as it once was.

10 DAs will inflict 3.33 casualties against a tactical squad in the open. 10 TMs double tapping will inflict 4.44 casualties against the DAs.

Bladestorm is less useful against 2+ save units because (a) they still get a 5+ save and (b) most 2+ save units now have at least 2 wounds.

DAs would need far greater damage output to justify 17ppm.

I could ask you why you think they should cost 3ppm more than a tactical (or more than a tactical at all for that matter considering they have always been costed a few points less and I don't see what has changed dramatically).

Maybe they shouldn't have cost less in the past.

Martel732 wrote:

Enigma of the Absolute wrote:
It's questionable that the Avengers Shuriken Catapult is a significantly superior weapon to a Bolt Gun, especially given the new relative cost. Previously, there was a trade off that the DA was a bit more deadly but significantly less resilient. Now there is admittedly a smaller differential in terms of resilience but I would also argue that Bladestorm is not as useful as it once was.

10 DAs will inflict 3.33 casualties against a tactical squad in the open. 10 TMs double tapping will inflict 4.44 casualties against the DAs.

Bladestorm is less useful against 2+ save units because (a) they still get a 5+ save and (b) most 2+ save units now have at least 2 wounds.

DAs would need far greater damage output to justify 17ppm.

I could ask you why you think they should cost 3ppm more than a tactical (or more than a tactical at all for that matter considering they have always been costed a few points less and I don't see what has changed dramatically).

Maybe they shouldn't have cost less in the past.

Maybe...maybe you should explain why?

Bladestorm was amazing in 7th ed, especially vs MCs, because it bypassed both T and saves. Battle focus allowed DA to project their full firepower 18" + 6" + D6". Pretty crazy compared to the boltgun.

Tac marines had to buy extra equipment to even begin to hurt MCs.

The 4+ armor hurt, but certainly in my area, people quit using AP4 for the most part and went straight for AP 2 or mass shots ignoring AP.

 Traditio wrote:

So what do you think is a fair points cost?

The obvious price would be 12 ppm.

Ignoring the free Exarch, which is what the index seems to do (it's not like you get a price cut for taking a bigger squad ever), 12 ppm means that, per point, they have 2/3 the firepower of Guardians at greater range and are somewhat easier to kill (2 bodies at 4+ for every 3 bodies at 5+). And then they get 33% more hits when Overwatching. So generally a weaker and more fragile unit than Guardians but maybe a little harder to actually concentrate fire on.

I am not sure they would see play at 12 ppm. They're still almost as suicidal as Guardians and the Guardians are going to take more of the bad guys with them when they go. Maybe if the shuriken catapults were free and the Exarch could still take two of them so that he has the wounds and firepower of two regular DAs. Then the effective cost is 10 points per avenger catapult in a minimum squad, and then maybe it's worth trying to dance with them rather than just dropping a Guardian suicide squad, though you probably still prefer the Guardians if you're taking a Serpent because the DAs wouldn't scale well with squad size. You might take a larger squad with a shimmershield, sacrificing some offensive efficiency to spread the 4++ to more models.

Dionysodorus wrote:The obvious price would be 12 ppm.

That seems more or less reasonable.

The DA catapult still needs a points cost, though, if only because the exarch can take more than one.

Its an error, no doubt about it. The power level comparison with other Eldar units makes absolutely no sense - Banshees cost more power, but are somehow cheaper in points...

They should be 12-13 ppm, they have a number of advantages vs the Tac marine even though they don't win 1v1, most notably their better damage output against vehicles/mcs, faster movement & better overwatch ability. Additionally, let me tell you in my experience 6" of range makes a massive difference relative to Guardians, especially vs foot cc infantry units such as Ork Boyz. I don't think they 'won't see play'.