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.

Oooh, I don't even collect Eldar and I'm liking that Warp Hunter. Very pretty.

All of those models are just amazing. My only question is do the new aspect warriors make the swooping hawks completely useless now?

DarknessEternal wrote:

Griever wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:12" range guns? Not again.

18", and Fast Attack please. Then they'd be great.

I'd give the rules another look through. For each Spectre that channels the shot, the range is 12" farther. If all 5 combine and you buy one of the Exarch powers, that's a Str 10 Ap 2 60" Range TL-Lance that is relentless and can JSJ. The Exarch can also take the Prism cannon and fire his own Str 7 Ap 2 Lance shot @ BS 5 as well.

The Exarch's weapon is not a Lance. Also his BS doesn't affect Ghostlight, it's always 4.

2 Fire Prisms cost the same amount, get a better shot (since it'll be AP 1), and aren't wiped off the board by two heavy bolters.

The Exarch's weapon may not be a lance, but the Exarch can fire separately at BS5 with a S7 gun and with Cynosure, he allows the squad to reroll their Ghostlight attack.

Give him a Haywire Launcher in lieu of a Prism Lance and he becomes marginally better in that setup, assuming you're hunting vehicles only.

Awesome looking models, but forgeworld is just too expensive.

Actually, to be fair the Warp Hunter's well priced considering...

Cynosure with BS5, that's a 2+ to hit, sure... that can be discarded half the time by anything in cover.

My issue with the Spectres isn't actually their weapon, which could be made to work under the right circumstances. And it isn't the points cost... FW stuff is often overcosted out of their strange "can't let it be too good for the points so err on the side of suckage or overcosting" formula.

No, the big issues with the Spectres are:

1- Their saves. 4+ isn't good enough for something that will draw this much fire, especially with 12" weapons. Sure they can combine fire to go long, but individual shots could/should be used in close (great Marine killers in that mode). But 4+ isn't good enough for close-in roles. And the armor is even modeled to look quite heavy, flowy robe bits aside.

The holofields are also pretty redundant, as the whole point of jetpacks is effective use of cover. If well played, that 5+ invuln is marginal in value. A 3+ regular save would be much, much more useful.

2- The HS slot assignment. Discounting those "But FW gets to read secret GW future codex drafts and are therefore immune to error!!!!" posts, it's pretty obvious that this is an aesthetic choice. But it's not a clear one, these guys are plenty mobile enough to be FA.

Maybe we CAN start a write-in campaign to FW and get this changed.


As for the Warp Hunter, WOOT! Great model, great rules. Makes me want to haul all those Wraithguard that I never field out and put them on the Apoc battlefield for aesthetic unity with this thing and 9 D-Cannon battery. If there were enough superheavies stomping around it might actually be worth it.

First off, Cynosure doesn't let you use the Exarch's BS5.

Taking an Exarch with Cynosure, and then adding in a Haywire Blaster on the Exarch means a nasty little transport/tank popper.

Anyways:

1--The armor doesn't look "quite heavy" actually. It looks like standard Guardian armor, just with the jetpacks fused to the armor making it appear heavier.
4+ isn't bad for what they are. It's also likely they'll be altered to 4+ for both invulnerable and armor save.
Which brings us to the Holofields.
Holofields are likely a "just in case", meant to make the unit a smidge more forgiving while people are getting used to them.

The real point of this unit seems to be the "Ghostlight". Which is slightly underwhelming, simply because the shot halts. A continually penetrating shot would be much better.

2- Historically, we've always had units that fill roles like Devastators(which these guys do actually, fairly well even. Lascannon armed Devastators that are more mobile, but...still. Devastators) in Heavy Support. Add in that likely the army list we'll be seeing in IA11 will put restrictions on some stuff(or have weird weather rules that make the Spectres a far better choice than Fire Dragons or Dark Reapers, Falcons, etc) and the slot makes sense.

And yes. The rules are likely going to be changed.

Know why?

They're experimental.

And the book is more than two or so months out.

Ok seriouslly i think im starting an eldar army. like Now!

Love the tank.

I also like the ghost guys EXCEPT for the rocks on the bases: it looks really forced and overdone imho (and are gonna look weird in an army unless you do all yur models bases with a similar rock theme).

I hope they are not cast attached to the rocks, as I think they would look better without the rocks tbh...

It's a shame that the Warp Hunter is BS3 and only 36" Range

Fire Prism is still superior; neither of these units with their experimental rules are competitive enough to replace the Fire Prism at this time, in terms of points cost and effectiveness. That's the problem when you have to balance units by how easy they are to min/max

Maybe if they are revised into the Codex they will be better and will get a buff to their utility




Still hanging out for Eldar flyers, like the DE Voidraven and Razorwing




PS: That being said I'd buy 3 units of Spectres for the "LOLFUN" factor and because they look awesome and fun to paint

Maybe so, but that's why, at only US$6.00 more, they'll be my "counts as" Fire Prisms!

Savnock wrote:
No, the big issues with the Spectres are:

1- Their saves. 4+ isn't good enough for something that will draw this much fire, especially with 12" weapons. Sure they can combine fire to go long, but individual shots could/should be used in close (great Marine killers in that mode). But 4+ isn't good enough for close-in roles. And the armor is even modeled to look quite heavy, flowy robe bits aside.

The holofields are also pretty redundant, as the whole point of jetpacks is effective use of cover. If well played, that 5+ invuln is marginal in value. A 3+ regular save would be much, much more useful.

2- The HS slot assignment. Discounting those "But FW gets to read secret GW future codex drafts and are therefore immune to error!!!!" posts, it's pretty obvious that this is an aesthetic choice. But it's not a clear one, these guys are plenty mobile enough to be FA.

Maybe we CAN start a write-in campaign to FW and get this changed.

1 - 4+ is perfect for them. Your opponent shouldn't have many opportunities to actually fire on them. If they do manage to outmaneuver you, then they have an invul save, an armor save, and they are likely to have a cover save as well. If you want a marine killer, take a unit of fire dragons and stick them in a wave serpent. It comes out to about the same cost, the dragons are better protected as they move upfield thanks to the serpent, and they need to be in close to take out their intended targets (tanks) anyway. If you don't want to bother w/ a serpent, you can take a full squad of warp spiders w/ tooled out exarch. I usually manage about 5-6 dead marines per round of shooting and 1-2 in cc. Plus they can potentially JSJ a much farther distance. Their intended role is not close-in. They are long-range AT. Consider their ability to kill things up close a bonus , intended to give them a measure of protection against deepstrikers/outflankers, etcand to give them something to do once enemy tanks have been eliminated.

The holofields are there to protect them from barrage weapons/things that ignore cover. Since actually ENTERING cover would require dangerous terrain checks, its kind of a nice addition.

2 - Whatever. I don't really care much about the slot assignment. Since the Heavy section is kind of aspect-light at this point (aside from the Dark Reapers) I think it makes a nice addition to this section.

Their Range should be 18” because it allows them to function as a shooty unit that uses their own guns rather than always having to combine to get the most use of their weapons. And they should be Fast Attack so they don’t have to compete with things like Prisms.

If you want to make the combined shot have a max range of 60”, that’s fine, but the individual guns need to have a range that makes them useful. 12” is not useful.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Their Range should be 18” because it allows them to function as a shooty unit that uses their own guns rather than always having to combine to get the most use of their weapons. And they should be Fast Attack so they don’t have to compete with things like Prisms.

If you want to make the combined shot have a max range of 60”, that’s fine, but the individual guns need to have a range that makes them useful. 12” is not useful.

The point of the unit IS the combined shot. At the Games Day display thing where they revealed the unit, it was stated that they would be an aspect specializing in long range anti-tank. The eldar have enough mobile shooty units in the army. The 12" weapons are there so they can defend themselves from enemy units that get to close. If you want an offensive shooty unit, take Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons and Warp Spiders.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Their Range should be 18” because it allows them to function as a shooty unit that uses their own guns rather than always having to combine to get the most use of their weapons. And they should be Fast Attack so they don’t have to compete with things like Prisms.

If you want to make the combined shot have a max range of 60”, that’s fine, but the individual guns need to have a range that makes them useful. 12” is not useful.

Agreed.

@chaosxomega, H.B.M.C. means (and I agree) that Spectres would be most interesting as multi-role troops, having one specialized role and the ability to shift into another not just in a pinch, but as another peak function. Kind of like how Hawks are supposed to be both decent against lightly armored troops and nasty against heavy vehicles thanks to their las plus grenades kit (actually they are decent at both, their points are just too high for such fragile troops). Having a viable anti-troops role is important, even for specialists. It's also why Dragons carrying flamers can be useful.

Also, good point about the holofields. And they are kind of a cool idea. But the 4+ is still too low for close-range roops that cost that much, and I do think they need a close-range role if they have 12" (or even 18") guns.

@Kanluwen: Enough condescending, bud. I'm here to discuss too. That said:

Having the ghostlight "penetrate": do you mean a line attack like Blood Lance or JotWW? That would be pretty cool. Great idea, and well worth bringing to FW's attention.

Speaking of experimental rules, crappy ones often do not change, unfortunately. Experimental means they might be changed, but does not mean that they will be changed for sucking unless the FW guys have the time and inclination to do so. Sad past experience (Malcador is again a good example) has proven this.

As for armor, the jetpacks, chest plates/pack attachments, helms, arm guards attached to the weapons, and the greaves all look heavier than Guardian armor, or even DA armor for that matter. They look equivalent to Warp Spider armor, actually, which carries a 3+. Not as heavy as Reaper armor looks, given, but then there's those big honkin' packs.

Regarding slots, you may have a point that IA11 might make Spectres good in some specialized settings due to weather rules or something. But I will believe that when I see it and until then judge the rules by the other 99.5% of 40K scenarios.

More importantly, I and lots of other Eldar players would never field Spectres in a competitive environment. They're in HS ad not even vaguely comparable to Prisms for firepower-to-points ratio, durability, or even mobility. So we won't buy them because time and money are too short for models that will only get trotted out in a friendly game once every two years. I like and support FW's sculptors, and want them to sell models both to increase my enjoyment of the game, and just to see good artists rewarded for their work. It sucks that their support staff makes bad rules (and can't edit worth a damn, either).

And yes Spectres are indeed kind of like Devastators but more mobile. More mobile than regular Troops infantry, in fact. Which would make them great for, say, a FA slot.

Savnock wrote:@Kanluwen: Enough condescending, bud. I'm here to discuss too. That said:

There was no condescending. Sorry if it gave you that impression.

My point was simply that no matter what, you don't use the Exarch's BS of 5. But giving him a Haywire Launcher and Cynosure in a full unit of 5 means that it can be a pretty effective anti-vehicle platform.

Having the ghostlight "penetrate": do you mean a line attack like Blood Lance or JotWW? That would be pretty cool. Great idea, and well worth bringing to FW's attention.

Yeah. The biggest issue I see is just how far they could penetrate.

Speaking of experimental rules, crappy ones often do not change, unfortunately. Experimental means they might be changed, but does not mean that they will be changed for sucking unless the FW guys have the time and inclination to do so. Sad past experience (Malcador is again a good example) has proven this.

The Malcador's experimental rules came out like a week before the actual model and book went up for sale.

Kinda hard to turn back the clock there

As for armor, the jetpacks, chest plates/pack attachments, helms, arm guards attached to the weapons, and the greaves all look heavier than Guardian armor, or even DA armor for that matter. They look equivalent to Warp Spider armor, actually, which carries a 3+. Not as heavy as Reaper armor looks, given, but then there's those big honkin' packs.

It looks pretty similar to me. The straps are even in the same place on the boots. I really do think it's the harness for the pack skewing the "heavy armor" look.

Regarding slots, you may have a point that IA11 might make Spectres good in some specialized settings due to weather rules or something. But I will believe that when I see it and until then judge the rules by the other 99.5% of 40K scenarios.

Yeah. The problem is Forge World stuff is sometimes designed for specific scenarios.

Which is silly.

More importantly, I and lots of other Eldar players would never field Spectres in a competitive environment because they're in HS ad not even vaguely comparable to Prisms for firepower-to-points ratio, durability, or even mobility. Which is sad, because I would really love to buy and field those great models, but I don't buy models with terrible rules that I'll never field (and again suspect many others are like that). I like and support FW, and want them to sell models both to increase my enjoyment of the game, and just to see good artists rewarded for their work. It sucks that their support staff makes bad rules (and can't edit worth a damn, either).

Not an Eldar player, personally, but I just find it silly that people are decrying it before we've seen the finalized rules for it.

And yes, Spectres are kind of like Devastators, but more mobile. More mobile than regular Troops infantry, in fact. Which would make them great for, say, a FA slot.

Yeah, they may be more mobile...but at the same time, they are a heavy firepower unit.

Savnock wrote:
@chaosxomega, H.B.M.C. means (and I agree) that Spectres would be most interesting as multi-role troops, having one specialized role and the ability to shift into another not just in a pinch, but as another peak function. Kind of like how Hawks are supposed to be both decent against lightly armored troops and nasty against heavy vehicles thanks to their las plus grenades kit (actually they are decent at both, their points are just too high for such fragile troops). Having a viable anti-troops role is important, even for specialists. It's also why Dragons carrying flamers can be useful.

Also, good point about the holofields. And they are kind of a cool idea. But the 4+ is still too low for close-range roops that cost that much, and I do think they need a close-range role if they have 12" (or even 18") guns.

Aspect warriors tend to be hyper-specialized one-trick ponies. Multi-role would kinda go against the trend and the fluff. The Swooping Hawks are a bit of an anomaly in this case, I'm not sure what their role is supposed to be, and I don't think GW does either. They seem to have a grenade theme going... but thats not really a role. Fire Dragons got away w/ the exarch flamer because of the fire theme, but thats also just the Exarch, that doesn't make the rest of the squad more effective at the anti-tank role. Ditto Dark Reapers, exarch can take a missile launcher, but it doesn't make the rest of the unit better at anti-tank. Perhaps that could be how to 'fix' the squad, as right now the Exarch seems rather pointless IMO, aside from giving the squad cynosure, I'm not sure if paying for the +1 strength on the gun is worth 10 points, and the haywire grenade launcher seems a bit out of place in a long range AT squad.

Speaking of experimental rules, crappy ones often do not change, unfortunately. Experimental means they might be changed, but does not mean that they will be changed for sucking unless the FW guys have the time and inclination to do so. Sad past experience (Malcador is again a good example) has proven this.

As of late, FW seems to be getting better at this. As I understand it, the rules for the Land Raider Achilles have changed in IA10 (no more 'immunity' against Strength D and an increased point cost

That depends, Eldar haven't really changed since there 3rd Edition codex but all the 5th edition codices have been pushing at least some versatile units which can multi task. From a balance stand point an army completely made up of specialists is very hard to get right.

Having said that I do think all Eldar Aspect warriors should cover a different primary role (but from a balance perspective need to be able to partially cover others), and in this regard there are still plenty of holes which the Spectres can fit into. Carrying Prism Rifles I was expecting them to be long ranged anti tank specialists, fitting into heavy support (yes I know its packed, but only 1 choice is an Aspect atm) along with Dark Reapers (who are long ranged anti infantry). The way their weapons are set up at the moment they are too close to Fire Dragons, a close ranged anti tank Aspect and they just trade some effectiveness for mobility and a limited long ranged option. They are no more effective against MEQ than Fire Dragons are either, just some added mobility (which you pay for). I was hoping for something more like S7 AP3 (with the ability to boost this to get S10 AP1 using the same concept as the Fire Prism, +1 per contributor) with 24-36" range. This would make them more like mobile Devastators with a cross between Lascannons and Autocannons who trade survivability and range for mobility (which is the Eldar way). That I could certainly fit into a list, as it is they are very nice models but the rules need some work.

chaos0xomega wrote:As of late, FW seems to be getting better at this. As I understand it, the rules for the Land Raider Achilles have changed in IA10 (no more 'immunity' against Strength D and an increased point cost

The problem was never Strength D, it was Strength 8. But yes, from what I've heard, they fixed it.

I just had another idea that would be fun for this unit: let the entire squad count as a single Fire Prism for the purposes of Linking.

AlexHolker wrote:
I just had another idea that would be fun for this unit: let the entire squad count as a single Fire Prism for the purposes of Linking.

Now THAT would be sweet.

chaos0xomega wrote: At the Games Day display thing where they revealed the unit, it was stated that they would be an aspect specializing in long range anti-tank.

They're a total failure then. One shot per unit is not a good anti-tank weapon.

DarknessEternal wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote: At the Games Day display thing where they revealed the unit, it was stated that they would be an aspect specializing in long range anti-tank.

They're a total failure then. One shot per unit is not a good anti-tank weapon.

Its a twin-linked BS4 shot, its just about as good as a fire prism, better than a hammerhead, way better than a leman russ vanquisher, and about the same as a lascannon predator... Its clearly not a bad anti tank weapon.

chaos0xomega wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:
I just had another idea that would be fun for this unit: let the entire squad count as a single Fire Prism for the purposes of Linking.

Now THAT would be sweet.

Seconded. 5 spectres counting as one fireprism for linking would be intense. And if they share heavy support it could be balanced so that the synnergy would be that you could take spectres that "Count as " fire-prisms, hence making them more attractive

I really don't understand what FW was thinking about with these. The unit just seems completely misbegotten.

chaos0xomega wrote:Its a twin-linked BS4 shot, its just about as good as a fire prism, better than a hammerhead, way better than a leman russ vanquisher, and about the same as a lascannon predator... Its clearly not a bad anti tank weapon.

Being better than a Vanquisher at anti-tank is kind of like being a better husband than Tiger Woods. Nothing to sing high praise about.

Those look really sweet! It's too bad they are a heavy support choice. Also the tabards look strange. seems rather fragile to me.

severedblue wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:
I just had another idea that would be fun for this unit: let the entire squad count as a single Fire Prism for the purposes of Linking.

Now THAT would be sweet.

Seconded. 5 spectres counting as one fireprism for linking would be intense. And if they share heavy support it could be balanced so that the synnergy would be that you could take spectres that "Count as " fire-prisms, hence making them more attractive

Hmmm. Dunno, copying the function of an already-existent unit wouldn't be that great, especially because their mobility is worse (sure they can JSJ but Prisms are fast skimmers with an option for star engines) and their fragility as well.

I'd rather see a different shape for the attack: either a line attack as Kanluwen suggests, or a smaller version of the Prism. This last could be a small blast each (S6 AP4) with the ability to focus into single-shot (S7 AP2 lance). Linked shots could then be powered up +1 S./-1 AP per Spectre contributing, up to a scarier small blast (up to S10 AP 2) or a nasty single shot (S10 AP2 lance).

That would make the unit just as flexible as the prism, but with a different function (layering small blasts or taking single shots)

chaos0xomega wrote:Aspect warriors tend to be hyper-specialized one-trick ponies. Multi-role would kinda go against the trend and the fluff. The Swooping Hawks are a bit of an anomaly in this case, I'm not sure what their role is supposed to be, and I don't think GW does either. They seem to have a grenade theme going... but thats not really a role. Fire Dragons got away w/ the exarch flamer because of the fire theme, but thats also just the Exarch, that doesn't make the rest of the squad more effective at the anti-tank role. Ditto Dark Reapers, exarch can take a missile launcher, but it doesn't make the rest of the unit better at anti-tank.

Must disagree. Most aspects have secondary functions, which they are equipped with secondary gear to cover. Some aspects lost this a bit in 4th/5th, but the precedent is there. Hawks' haywires and Dragons' flamers are not aberrations. In addiiton to those two, Spears have a decent amount of S6 lance shooting (and can include a shuriken cannon) and Spiders have a CC exarch option plus Withdraw and decent armor. That's most of the aspects- as for the others Scorps used to pack haywires, Reapers had webs of skulls on their exarch and even Hawks had a powerweapon and the ability to do LOTS of hits with it thanks to whatever that exarch power was.

Having a "backup option" is still something Aspects do, and it used to be universal. While they have become even more specialized in 5th, at least half of them are still left a secondary role option. Yes, it may be "just the Exarch", but when your primary targets are all gone you're very happy to have a flamer or haywires or whatever. And Dragons can indeed do anti-personnel well, Spears kill tanks decently thanks to their mobility, and Spiders kill infantry, light vehicles and tanks on rear armor all pretty decently. Heck, with a 3+ save, powerblades and Withdraw they can even do okay in CC. As someone occasionally left with a handful of Aspect Warriors and little else left on the board, I am particularly happy about having backup options When you've GOT to kill a tank or a horde unit to score, it's a good thing to be flexible.

I'm hoping the designers build a bit more of that back into the Aspects in the next edition. Let the noobs be confused about primary purpose or the min-maxers sneer at the backup gear: it's really fun to have around in friendlies. I cannot tell you how many times a 12-point flamer on my Fire Dragons has helped me against pissed-off Orks or my Spiders have been used as a CC tarpit thanks to their exarch.

Perhaps that could be how to 'fix' the squad, as right now the Exarch seems rather pointless IMO, aside from giving the squad cynosure, I'm not sure if paying for the +1 strength on the gun is worth 10 points, and the haywire grenade launcher seems a bit out of place in a long range AT squad.

Kanluwen had another good point with the Haywire launcher plus squad shooting making the Exarch worth taking. With Cynosure on the squad and Haywire on the exarch, you've got two shots that are pretty likely to hit and penetrate at least once (50% or better between the two weapons if my admittedly poor mathhammer is sufficient).

BTW, reading the rules for Cynosure, I'm pretty sure it can be used by the squad even if the Exarch is firing a different weapon. The flavor text says "the Exarch is adept at precision targeting using the ghostlight.", but then the actual rules bits say "The squad may re-roll a failed hit when using the ghostlight."

Savnock wrote:Hmmm. Dunno, copying the function of an already-existent unit wouldn't be that great, especially because their mobility is worse (sure they can JSJ but Prisms are fast skimmers with an option for star engines) and their fragility as well.

I am suggesting an expansion of the existing synergistic ability of the Prism weapon, not merely a copy of a standalone function. It's kind of like a combination of Tesla and Prism Towers in Red Alert: all the Fire Prisms in a network can combine their attack into a single massive blast, but nearby Shadow Spectres can contribute power to the network with their Prism Rifles as well.

AlexHolker wrote:

Savnock wrote:Hmmm. Dunno, copying the function of an already-existent unit wouldn't be that great, especially because their mobility is worse (sure they can JSJ but Prisms are fast skimmers with an option for star engines) and their fragility as well.

I am suggesting an expansion of the existing synergistic ability of the Prism weapon, not merely a copy of a standalone function. It's kind of like a combination of Tesla and Prism Towers in Red Alert: all the Fire Prisms in a network can combine their attack into a single massive blast, but nearby Shadow Spectres can contribute power to the network with their Prism Rifles as well.

THAT would be cool.

I have an Eldar army idea in the back of my mind and I may even start on it this spring depending on how personal stuff works out. While I think both these models look excellent, I'm not sure if they'll be a part of my plan or not. The Warp Hunter isn't bad at all. I like the template idea, but it doesn't really light any fires for me as a tank. I happen to like the look of the Fire Prism model as well, so I don't really want to replace it with this. Unless the meta-game ends up being very titan-heavy where I play, I may give it a skip.

I really like the look of the Shadow Spectres, and I think their rules are intriguing. I'm just terrified of owning these models because I'm sure I'll snap them in half.

Hmmm, I think it's a tough one. I've been planning and building an eldar army based around these two units and a trio of Hornets, which is now at the 1500 point stage. The problem I now face is that my HS slots are all accounted for, 2 Falcs and a Prism, and I was hoping these would be in the Elites or FA section with the possibility of dropping the prism for the mini cobra.

It could all still work, but only if Wave Serpants stopped performing so poorly. If I could get Holo Fields on a WS then life would be pretty again and my FoC would not be so cluttered. I've ordered them any way as they are superb in the flesh, but am unsure as to how I can fit them into my 2000 points list.

That Vehicle looks like an upgrade kit to me.

So it's in line with the other things in the same catagory.

I'd rather have the Eldar Lynx I saw at Gamesday TBH its more pretty.