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.

If our codex gets updated is all you want to see points cost adjustment and 18 catapults? Really?

Yes, the Eldar codex is in good state, for a 4th edition codex. There's plenty of items to touch up to get it working, but sweeping changes aren't necessary to get the codex working as far as the fame is concerned.

That is, if you want to put a gun to the back of the Eldar fluff and make the army a horde-army (more precisely; a close-ranged / in-your-face version of Imperial Guard).

The current point cost of most units are good, but their performance ratio has been left in behind in the dirt comparing to all 5th edition codices, with a few units being the exception.

Nulipuli2 wrote:

Mahtamori wrote:

rivers64 wrote:Wait... so you just created this off the top of ur head, or it is actually information you have that will be in the next codex probably??

I highly doubt there's even rough drafts at the moment, so it's most likely a wish-list (something we're trying to avoid in this thread).

if you call trying to fix units wishlisting, then this entire thread is just about wishlisting

I keep my own wish-list (or complete re-write) separate in an article of it's own. We're trying to discuss ideas individually, even ideas we don't like for the merits for-and-against.

Araenion wrote:I still feel like the Defender Guardian issue is being blown out of proportion. They're so easy to fit into the codex with their own little niche and popular opinion here seems to be that somehow that would be a bad thing. But nevermind, not gonna fight a losing battle.

And usually I am not intimidated by a wall of text but damn! That is the chinesse wall of DakkaDakka!

Guardian Defenders have been cannon-fodder since 3rd edition, and each new edition since then makes them worse.

No, it's not a huge issue, but it is an issue. People aren't using the Guardian Defenders - they purchase a heavy weapon platform for 80 points + cost of heavy weapon. Or they purchase expendable troops. See where I'm going here?

Regardless, as long as they are improved and do not remain as they were in 3rd edition, there's going to be improvement.

*

??

@Nulipuli2 - I really thing that uberpost could do with an article of its own. were trying to keep things a little simpler and look at issues one at a time. Much of the stuff in the post seems largely unchanged anyway

Nulipuli2 wrote:

Mahtamori wrote:

rivers64 wrote:Wait... so you just created this off the top of ur head, or it is actually information you have that will be in the next codex probably??

I highly doubt there's even rough drafts at the moment, so it's most likely a wish-list (something we're trying to avoid in this thread).

if you call trying to fix units wishlisting, then this entire thread is just about wishlisting

@rivers- If it is information that was likely to be in the next codex it would be in News and Rumours, not proposed rules

I think there is a huge difference between wishlisting and trying to find practical fixes to make useless units viable. Although some of the ideas are a bit unrealitic, were gearing everything towards fixing things that genuinly need fixing (ie never get used competitivly).

Eldar remain a competitive army in today's game but...
The competitive eldar build has become dependent on a limited number of things so while the eldar codex may be 30 pages long, the reality is you could probably list the useable stuff in a 2 to 3 page document.

In a fun fluffy game, a lot of the codex is still playable but when we talk making an all-comers list too much of the codex is left at home.

What works: Waveserpents, Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons, War walkers, Eldrad and to a lesser extent farseers, Yriel. Scatterlasers over all other vehicle weapons.

All the other stuff is situational or may see the light of day to address a specific issue but the above core dominates the competitive lists of today.

5th Ed really nerfed eldar vehicles in that they are costed with previous editions in mind. As an example in 3rd and 4th a Falcon in many respects was equal or better than a landraider and so it was acceptable that it costed out @200 pts. If you moved 6", your opponent could only glance your vehicle and you could fire all your weapons. Sure the glance chart was more lethal but you also had spirit stones and holofield to make the likelyhood that you would suffer no worse than a no shooting turn. Today your tank guns have only range but in 5th ed melta-tech has the premium position as being the anti-tank weapon. Now that you can suffer pens, your 12 AV is not too hot and the holofield is of questionable value. So in has stepped the Wave Serpent. Two-thirds the cost, same armor value but the shield makes you safe from melta fire (relatively speaking) so why field a higher cost vehicle that has less survivablity and no real ability to provide more firepower.

This is just an example but the idea is to address all items so that 2/3s or more of a new codex will be playable. SM - due to the multi-codex nature get reviewed by GW on almost an annual basis. Sure it may not make it into your flavor of marines today but if you play Codex: Dark Angel you can bet it will be a twist on the Codex: SM, SW and BA enhancements. Eldar will more than likely get reviewed once every 4 or 5 years so if you enjoy playing eldar, if they get the codex wrong, you will be playing a cookie cutter list of 3 or 4 items for the next five years or worse your eldar will be collecting dust for those 5 years.

So long rant, but the higher purpose of this thread is to get a non-OP flexible and playable eldar codex that presents choices to an eldar player that allows you to make competitive armies that are not tied to a small snippet of the codex.

Good rant DA I agree completely (appart from missing out fire prisms when you listed what works well )

To try and move things away from the seemingly endless Guardian debate (and to give people a chance to collect their thoughts into a single idea rather than loads of random thought) I think we should move on to discuss another unit. In fear of getting bogged down with Swooping hawk ideas again I think its best we leave FA alone for a bit and move on to heavy support. Thoughts?

well then, lets start with Falcons shall we?

I suggest for them to get cheapaer upgrades, and make them BS4

I think BS4 for all tanks (except the wave serpent) would be a good starting point. I don't see the upgrade costs as that much of an issue, the problem is weapon costs IMO. If they were brought to the same sort of level as previously discussed it would make a huge dfference. The only other major suggestion I'd like to see considered was the chance to fire multiple weapons whilst moving. If we wanted to make the falcon into a heavy duty battle tank I'd like to consider changing it to AV 13/12/10

It was also suggested in the last thread (no clue who said it originally ) that the Falcon could just be moved to dedicated transport. If that was the case I'd say the ability to fire multiple weapons on the move should be limited a little.

by upgrades i meant all upgrades including weapons for your dedicated transport suggestion, maybe it could count as a dedicated transport and a heavy supprt choice, much like the Sisters of battle Immolator, and i like the av 13/12/10 idea, makes it less killable

Ooh I though you meant holo-fields and star engines ect. Generally speaking I think their okay. I think AV13 would work, but not alongside the bonesinger HQ suggestion. even the possibility of AV 14 with holofields is insane

so we can agree on AV 13/12/10 and BS4 and cheaper weapons

Well, in heavy support, one issue to deal with is obviously overcrowding - especially if the nightspinner takes up permanent residence (as we must assume it will)

I will say very little about the nightspinner, as I've never used it, nor seen it used. Assume that general changes to the tanks applies there as well.

Currently, we have (* indicate oft-taken things):
Fire Prism*
Wraithlord*
Falcon*
War Walkers*
HS platforms
Dark Reapers
Night spinner

Issues:
Overcrowding - prisms/WLs really benefit from having more than 1 (prisms more directly than 'lords - but lone lords are fairly nonthreatening)
Overpricing - to a lesser extent on the tank hulls, greater extent on dark reapers. Wraithlords I feel aren't terribly priced - I'd rather see a slight boost for them than a price reduction.
Impotence - HS platforms, dark reapers, falcons, and to a much lesser extent, wraithlords, are all offensively challenged. If heavy support are supposed to be the big guns, only the Prism and War Walkers are pulling their weight.

Solutions:
Overcrowding - we've discussed it before. With appropriate changes to the FA units, war walkers can make a move to FA. HS platforms have a few options - upgrade and leave in HS, upgrade and move to troops with guardians, remove them. I do not feel that dark reapers should be moved.

Overpricing - discussed before. 35pt DRs - no. tanks need a slight decrease. HS platforms are such a clusterf*** that they need a complete redesign, from weapons to squad to mechanics, before pricing can be discussed.

Impotence - HS platforms are just bad. All the weapons need improving, and they need to be more resilient to damage. Dark reapers - they're an exarch delivery vehicle. Falcons BS3 and can't move and fire their plethora of weapons. Lords - slight boost and redesign of upgrades.

More details: I support moving the platforms to upgrades for troop Defenders, at appropriate pricing. Upgrade the platforms as well - the only platform I really care about is the D-cannon 30" Heavy 1 Blast

DRs:
Standard profile (still not a fan of aspect-specific profiles) same as current.

squad size 3-8.

Relentless

Exarch retains crack shot and the tempest launcher, all DRs modify cover & obscured saves by -1 (i.e., 4+ becomes 5+ --- this means a wounded marine goes from rolling a 3+ armor to a 5+ cover when shot at by a DR, or, a 16 pt armor save to a 5 pt armor save - i'd take that).
Exarch power: Crack shot - as now
Exarch power: Fast Shot - if the squad does not move during the movement phase preceding the shooting phase, each model in the squad fires one additional shot. If the exarch uses crack shot, he may not benefit from fast shot (though the rest of the squad can).

Multiple firing modes - a method of strengthening eldar ranged AT. Reaper Launcher: S5 Ap3 Heavy 2, or S7 ap4 heavy 1

20-30 pts a model

Gorechild wrote:Ooh I though you meant holo-fields and star engines ect. Generally speaking I think their okay. I think AV13 would work, but not alongside the bonesinger HQ suggestion. even the possibility of AV 14 with holofields is insane

Nulipuli2 wrote:so we can agree on AV 13/12/10 and BS4 and cheaper weapons

I strongly disagree with av 13. You seem to be focusing on what the sm's have that you have forgotten the other armies and races. Here are my problems with the proposal:
1) you just created a fast hammerhead that can carry troops
2) you have just created a fast av13 transport
3) it goes against the fundamental fast, powerful but fragile design of the Eldar

I agree with bs4 and able to fire a second non-defensive weapon but would never agree with making the Tau a pointlessly redundant army. The way I see the Craftworld Eldar is that they are just a hair slower than their dark cousins but are slightly better armoured and much more disciplined/professional. The Craftworld Eldar should win by virtue of their adherence to the path (the skills of specializing in a certain aspect for centuries). They should not win by having technology that outclasses everyone else because that is the Tau's job.

I'm not trying to be harsh here, just trying to add perspective. Will post again soon with some ideas. Will lurk until then.

hmmm i geuss your right, so my opinion is the Falcons stays 12/12/10 still has 6 transport capacity, upgrades/weapons are cheaper has BS4 and has the Aerial assault rule, like the Dark Eldar ravager. move 12" and still fire all weapons, hows that?

I among others proposed moving Falcons to being dedicated transports. This removes them from the overload in Eldar heavy choices.
To that end, I would prefer the AV stays as is.

My related change would be to add a vehicle upgrade that allows all other weapons to be fired as long as the falcon can fire one weapon. I would bring back the old "Crystal Targeting Matrix" as the upgrade that allows for this. It should be a 25 to 35 point upgrade.

War walkers - I am on the other side of previous arguements to move them back to fast attack. They are a light heavy choice. Moving them to FA makes the vypers even less likely to be played.

Fire Prism and Nightspinner are both good as is.

If Dark reapers get relentless they fit the eldar better and their weapons are anti-MEQ. Only other change I would make is allowance to take a dedicated transport.

HW Platforms - agreed they are too vulnerable now and need to be moved to just another guardian platform in a guardian squad. Would like to see the spinner changed to match the night spinner with a large blast template and the night spinner rules. (Rending & Diffucult Terrain) That makes the choice to field them one of survivability (the vehicle) versus firepower (2 to 3 HW platforms in a squad)
Vibrocannon needs to be reworked. 5th ed glance charts makes the base effect almost valueless. I would rather something like this - treat any vibrocannon hit as a penetrating hit but any result of destroyed or weapon destroyed is considered an immobilize result. Add +1 to this roll for every platform beyond the first.

Wraithlords need weapons reduced. As the base WL has two fists, give it 3 base attacks. Make the sword +1 attack and reroll misses. In other threads I have seen suggestions of more wounds but reduced toughness and FNP. Something like W 5 T6 (wraithguard W1 T6 FNP). This changes the immumity of them. Also not averse to units of 1-3 per slot. The overriding problem is total points not limitation of the organisation slots.

War walkers should definitely be moved to FA as that is what they are. Otherwise take away scout from them.

War Walkers - Moved to Fast Attack (although this will upset my 9xWW + 9xHornet list)
Support Platform - Moved to Guardian Defenders - honestly, it's so obvious.
That leaves:
Wraithlord - the walker option
Falcons - the multi-purpose option / lightning strike option
Fire Prism / Nightspinner - the artillery option (could we get a Distortion vehicle?)
Dark Reapers - the infantry option

The beauty with this is that with War Walkers and Hornets in Fast Attack, you gain sufficient long-ranged anti-armour that you can afford to take infantry-punishers like Dark Reapers*

* Whom need to be better at defeating *all* sorts of heavy infantry, not just MEQ, but TEQ as well.

Nulipuli2 wrote:hmmm i geuss your right, so my opinion is the Falcons stays 12/12/10 still has 6 transport capacity, upgrades/weapons are cheaper has BS4 and has the Aerial assault rule, like the Dark Eldar ravager. move 12" and still fire all weapons, hows that?

Very good suggestions, I'd build on to this one; Vectored Engines could possibly be made the aerial assault upgrade, as it is currently serving a dysfunctional role.

Weapon additions shouldn't be made cheaper when BS4, although the Bright Lance and Star Cannon are grossly over-priced (Bright Lance has the monopoly on reliable anti-14, which is the only reason it's price is high.)

The "fire all weapons" option becomes intensely exciting if you add in the suggestion that the under-slung weapon be more freely upgraded. This makes the Falcon even more a glass-cannon. Falcon with 3 Pulse Lasers able to fire them all when moving 12"? Insanely expensive, but, damn... (For the record, even with our suggestions, a pure-pulse Falcon like that would end up 250+ points prior to other upgrades)

Armor and BS on Falcon is fine. It's not a main battle tank, that's the Fire Prism.

It should be a dedicated transport though, and a cheaper base cost.

Am I the only one who sees making falcons a DT as a bad idea?

Its the only way (currently) to access the pulse laser, which would be the best light-AT weapon in the codex, if it wasn't so scarce. All I see if we make falcons DT is the 4x 5xDA+Falcon+shuricannon upgrade+holofields, which sits at 205 pts total at current prices (which should all drop with a 5th ed codex).

Thats 4 pulse lasers, 4 scoring 12/12/10 holofielded tank hulls using only 4 troop slots, for less than 800 pts. Then add in three naked fire prisms and we're still under 1150ish pts.

Maybe its what eldar need, but it sounds stupidly awesome.

Upgrades to the falcon are all well and good. Making it a dedicated transport is dangerous.

How about something like "only 1 per army as transport" like LR w/ terminators. Or maybe one per all elites, and then 1 per all troops?

It would sell more tanks. So it's definitely a possibility.

If the Falcon is moved to dedicated transport I think it would be best if it was only available for Elites. It would stop units of 5 troops holding up in a vehicle with holo-fields and being un-hurtable. It would be useful as a tough transport to get scorps/banshees into combat. If they are too readily available then they will just become the new wave serpents.

Frankly, I'd rather keep them in Heavy Support. In my opinion they have no business in dedicated transport section and if they are made that way, that will only make GW balance it out at the cost of firepower/survivability.

As I said earlier in this thread, balancing heavy weapons, giving the Falcon BS4 and allowing it to move 12" and fire both turret weapons(not ALL weapons, mind) would be pretty much all it takes to make the Falcons very viable again. AV 13 is a possibility, but honestly, I think that this would make it cost way too many points.

I will agree with a couple of comments... A BS4 falcon as a dedicated transport could likely displace the wave serpent especially with 5th ed cost reduction.

An option is to leave it BS3 as a dedicated transport. Yes it provides volume of fire but it is inaccurate (50/50) as opposed to a waveserpent with a 75% accuracy. As I have played it over the years, it is a transport first and a weapons platform second. In previous editions it spent too much time being dinged and not shooting and currently it spends too much time as a smoking wreck unless you add 50 points in vehicle upgrades. Let the vehicles in heavy slots get the BS 4 but move falcons to dedicated transports.

Fire Prism/Night spinner - To remain as is. If it works well why change it? pricing may be a little off, i don't use them enough to comment effectively.

Wraithlord - Good as is... mostly... Ive toyed with the idea of aspect lords, but that would lead to way to many statlines, simply adding more options would suffice, such as,
Replacing the 2 shuriken catapults (attached to the wrists) with flamers, death spinners, reaper launchers, fusion guns, etc
The abillity to take 2 swords, or two of the same weapon without twin-linking them.
The ability to take only 1 main waepon, but take a support weapon as that choice.
Also if they were a little weaker and cheaper, units of them would be feasable, although armed with all the same equipment to avoid wound allocation shenanagins...

Falcon - kept as a 12/12/10 and moved to DT section for small aspect units. Throw in BS4 and the CTM idea and its golden. To avoid the spamming of it as DT the option to take it could be removed for DA, or DA could be unit size 10-15

War Walkers - Split into two units...
1) - Scout Walkers - As is, fast attack choice
2) - Combat Walkers - looses scout, gains a force field of some sort. Was thinking...
Force Barrier: War Walker combat squadrons are often deployed as a front line unit, usually lending mobile firepower to an Eldar infantry advance or as a rear-guard for the faster elements of the Eldar army. As such combat squadrons come equiped with a force barrier, increasing their front armour to 12. An additional effect is that any enemy attempting to assault one or more War Walkers with this barrier with at least one model in the front arc of that/those War Walker/s will have to test for difficult terrain.

HS platforms - Merged into guardian units, taken instead of 2 normal plaforms (or just a 0-1 expensive platform)

Dark Reapers -
USR: Slow and Purposeful.
- Reaper launcher: The reaper missile launcher has the following profile:
Range: 48” S: 5 AP: 3 Heavy 1
Range: 48" S:7 AP:4 Heavy 1
- Tempest Launcher: The Exarch has an ancient reaper launcher that fires clusters of small reaper missiles in a great arc. It has the following profile:
Range: G48” S: 4 AP: 3 Heavy 2, ignores cover, pinning
- Fast shot: The unit is adept at laying down a lethal hail of fire from any weapon, firing shot after shot into the enemy. The unit may add 1 to the number of shots fired by their weapons (example, Heavy 1 becomes Heavy 2) This power may not be used if the unit moves via the USR: Slow and purposeful.
- Crack shot: The members of the unit are supreme masters of ranged combat, able to pinpoint their targets with unerring accuracy. Any cover saves claimed from a unit with crack shot have a -1 modifier.

Ok, rate of fire down, but if the earlier proposal of BS5 is incorperated this won't be a problem, if the BS remains 4 then the 2 shots remain. I also like the idea of different fire modes mentioned earlier aswell, so i put that in.

I like the Falcon in HS with BS4. The Fire Prism fills the "tank" job nicely, but having multiple tanks isn't a bad thing. Fire Prism is your blast tank, Falcon is your massed fire tank.

What we could use is a brand new dedicated transport. The Wave Serpent is akin to a Razorback. (Maybe we could split it's TL guns and drop transport capacity to 6). What we need is a Rhino equivalent. Something that's minimal points with very limited firepower.

Perhaps:
FA 11, SA 11, RA 10, BS3
Twin-linked catapult that can upgrade to single cannon for 10pts
Skimmer, Tank, Fast
It does NOT have the energy field
Standard vehicle upgrades available
Transport 15
Access points: 3, rear and sides
Fire Points: 2, from the side hatches
Give it the option to buy an upgrade to make it an assault vehicle for 10pts

For... 45pts total? 50?

Also, the Fire Prism gun should be ordinance.

45-50 points for a skimmer and fast rhino that you can assault out of for another 10 points? too powerful in my opinion

Ordinance for the Fire Prism would help. It is. in theory, THE AT gun for eldar. Allowing 2 D 6 and taking the best for pen result would increase its effectiveness in this role.
If the small blast would be AP 1 it would increase its pen result effectiveness. With an army limit of 3 in a standard FOC, it would not be OP. The cost would probably need to change, but this would give them a true AT weapon. Leaving it with the small blast template also makes it work different than Tau Rail Guns.

just ordanance for the Fire prisms would be fine, you can already have ap1 by linking 2 prisms,i think thats all that needs to change