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.

The only reason I have for suggestion range 24" shuricats is because I used to have range 24" shuricats when I played my Eldar in 2nd edition. *shrug* It's not a desire for 'long range', it's more like nostalgia for when people were actually scared of Shuriken Catapults.

Mahtamori - The older fluff explicitly states that Shuriken weaponry works via gravitic induction. Kind of like a railgun, only with gravity instead of electromagnetism. This reduces recoil, and in any case, the mass of a shuriken is infinitesimal - so you really don't need a lot of force to get one going very, very fast.

Why do I say that the mass is infinitesimal? Because under the fluff, Shuriken are monomolecular - that is, each shuriken is one molecule thick, just like the wire on a Harlequin's Kiss. This is where they get their insane cutting power from, and why when books describe someone as being killed by shuriken weaponry, they describe the lacerations but never find any shurikens - because shurikens are invisible from one direction and tiny in the other.

Personally I felt that they got the weapons round the wrong way between Eldar and Dark Eldar when 3rd ed came around.
The Shuriken Catapult should have been rapid fire and the splinter rifle should have been assault.
with this in mind;

Make the Shuricat 24" rapid fire and the avenger shuricat 24" Assault 2

Leave all the other stats the same, and don't touch the points.

Why all the complicated methods?

Pistols stay at 12" range.
Make all basic Shuriken Catapults 18" range.
Avenger Shuriken catapults go up to 24" range.
Shuriken Cannons go up to 36" range.

No cost change on any of the models that have access to them. It's what their stats should have been for the points in the first place.

Nuff said.

They don't need special rules, just a range buff. The above still wouldn't make ANY of the shuriken weapons as good as they were in 2nd Edition, while nearly all other weapons stayed the same or got better. I know my Eldar get an instant improvement on several levels just by playing back in that edition!

While I wouldn't mind a range increase, I'd prefer to see +1 or +2 shots across the board for shuriken weapons. It would definitely offset the range shortcomings of the weapons and make overwatch hurt that much more.

I'd also like to see the weapons platforms either crewed by all the guardians in the unit, making them that much more resilient, or keep them as is and decrease the point costs.

I just can't believe the -50% range nerfs that GW seemed to think was "needed" on Shuriken weapons from 3rd edition on. I mean, a Shuriken Cannon used to be a range of 40"!

Just put them back to the nearest 12" band that they used to be in 2nd edition. I liked the deadliness of the monofilament ammunition as translated in 2nd edition, but AP is not the same as Save Modifiers used to be, just giving them more AP doesn't affect 3+ save armies one bit.

But stat wise they are shot guns. Better shot guns infact because they have an AP. Str 4 assult 2 is a shotgun, or at least its clear that when they made the shurican catapult they wanted it to proform as a melee deterent. It is there for untrained millita to pour as much ammunition into on coming attackers as possible, hopefully driving them off the attack. They carnt do fire fights, and as i see it, they arnt ment to.

Do what you like to shurikens, but dont change there role. It would be like turning a las cannon into an AI weapon, because thats not its role either. Or making sniper rifles assult, shurikens are short ranged but high output, changing that would be assuming you know better then the designers. And if you do, why not make a whole new game?

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I just can't believe the -50% range nerfs that GW seemed to think was "needed" on Shuriken weapons from 3rd edition on. I mean, a Shuriken Cannon used to be a range of 40"!

Just put them back to the nearest 12" band that they used to be in 2nd edition. I liked the deadliness of the monofilament ammunition as translated in 2nd edition, but AP is not the same as Save Modifiers used to be, just giving them more AP doesn't affect 3+ save armies one bit.

Or give them a save modifier.
Shuriken Pistol: Range 18" S4, AP-, Pistol, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Catapult: Range 18" S4, AP-, Assault 2, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Cannon: Range 24" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save)
Maugetar: Range 36" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save) // Power Axe
Scrap the Avenger version. Make the Lasblaster the Guardian default weapon, allow Guardians to buy catapults for +1 point per model. Give all Eldar models other quality of life buffs such as Adaptive Armour, Dark Eldar can be the pointy-ear glass cannon while Craftworlders are the slightly more durable annoyance.

P.S. And yes, I mean any save. That includes Cover and Invulnerable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
But stat wise they are shot guns. Better shot guns infact because they have an AP. Str 4 assult 2 is a shotgun, or at least its clear that when they made the shurican catapult they wanted it to proform as a melee deterent. It is there for untrained millita to pour as much ammunition into on coming attackers as possible, hopefully driving them off the attack. They carnt do fire fights, and as i see it, they arnt ment to.

Do what you like to shurikens, but dont change there role. It would be like turning a las cannon into an AI weapon, because thats not its role either. Or making sniper rifles assult, shurikens are short ranged but high output, changing that would be assuming you know better then the designers. And if you do, why not make a whole new game?

All due respect, the Shuriken Catapults haven't functioned in it's designed role ever since 3rd edition. It's been abundantly clear. It's not a deterrent, if anything it's an invitation. It was bad enough in 3rd edition where dedicated assault units would be able to bridge the gap by assaulting or moving 12", in fourth edition people just drove up to them and jumped out, fifth edition was like a mechier version of fourth, and sixth edition they are at their best. It's not a good best since the catapults can't be used for anything but overwatch but now they actually get to shoot something.

There are multiple ways to make the Catapult work. Keeping them the same is not it. Unless the host soldier changes in some way. Either by getting more interesting gear or becoming significantly cheaper. And the latter goes against the fluff more than catapults becoming long ranged snipers.

As a side note: "why don't you do it better?" is a rhetorical question that is on the juvenile side. We're not making our own game system for the same reason Andy Rooney isn't making his own political party. We're critics, not writers. The writer is probably in the worst position to identify errors and faults of his works.

I fully agree that shurikens could use a bit of a boost when the new codex comes out. As it is they are laughably ineffective weapons, and they make guardians one of the worst basic troop choices in 40k. I remember a time when the shuriken catapult was actually one of the better basic weapons, and its a bit sad that they have fallen this far. Added range and/or the addition of rapid fire would be very fair, rapid fire weapons are just so much better in 6th than they had been.

 Mahtamori wrote:

Or give them a save modifier.
Shuriken Pistol: Range 18" S4, AP-, Pistol, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Catapult: Range 18" S4, AP-, Assault 2, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Cannon: Range 24" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save)
Maugetar: Range 36" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save) // Power Axe
Scrap the Avenger version. Make the Lasblaster the Guardian default weapon, allow Guardians to buy catapults for +1 point per model. Give all Eldar models other quality of life buffs such as Adaptive Armour, Dark Eldar can be the pointy-ear glass cannon while Craftworlders are the slightly more durable annoyance.

P.S. And yes, I mean any save. That includes Cover and Invulnerable.

This is a terrible solution, and HORRIBLY imbalanced. I understand longing for the glory days of 2nd edition (I miss that rules set too) but reintroducing those old armor rules for just one weapon type is absurd. If you're going to make weapons reduce saves again, you'd have to do it game-wide not just for eldar. Save modifiers are dead, they aren't going to randomly show up again in 6th, and if they did they would break the game. Also, reducing invulnerable saves? really? thats not even fluffy, its just cheesy as hell. I'm assuming you didn't write the +1 point per model bit with a straight face, it would have to cost WAY more than that. The adaptive armor suggestion is also silly, either give them 4+ saves or not. Why do you want to introduce all of these game mechanics that completely ignore or change incredibly basic parts of the current rules?

But stat wise they are shot guns. Better shot guns infact because they have an AP. Str 4 assult 2 is a shotgun, or at least its clear that when they made the shurican catapult they wanted it to proform as a melee deterent. It is there for untrained millita to pour as much ammunition into on coming attackers as possible, hopefully driving them off the attack. They carnt do fire fights, and as i see it, they arnt ment to.

Do what you like to shurikens, but dont change there role. It would be like turning a las cannon into an AI weapon, because thats not its role either. Or making sniper rifles assult, shurikens are short ranged but high output, changing that would be assuming you know better then the designers. And if you do, why not make a whole new game?

Way to be overly snarky - bordering on insulting. I'm assuming you have only played 40K in the most recent additions and not since before the range nerf that some of us are talking about? Because my suggestions for improvement wouldn't even make them as good as they used to be!

Because before 3rd edition nerfed them, shuriken weapons most certainly weren't Shotguns meant as a melee deterrent. Not even by a long shot, as when 3rd edition dropped, they removed all forms of overwatch as a melee deterrent at all! Ever since then, if you can get within the range of Shuriken Catapults, you can charge the unit without any fear of their fire. Hell, at least 6e put overwatch fire back in.

Shuriken catapults used to be Storm Bolters that dropped -2 from all armor save rolls when Storm Bolters did only -1. Eldar, even basic Guardians, used to be the army hold the Long-range superiority role that the Tau supposedly fill now. Guardians used to come with a basic lasgun as standard, with the Shuriken catapult as an upgrade because it's stats were so much better. Now Catapults are worse than Lasguns, lol!

 ragingmunkyz wrote:
I fully agree that shurikens could use a bit of a boost when the new codex comes out. As it is they are laughably ineffective weapons, and they make guardians one of the worst basic troop choices in 40k. I remember a time when the shuriken catapult was actually one of the better basic weapons, and its a bit sad that they have fallen this far. Added range and/or the addition of rapid fire would be very fair, rapid fire weapons are just so much better in 6th than they had been.

 Mahtamori wrote:

Or give them a save modifier.
Shuriken Pistol: Range 18" S4, AP-, Pistol, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Catapult: Range 18" S4, AP-, Assault 2, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Cannon: Range 24" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save)
Maugetar: Range 36" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save) // Power Axe
Scrap the Avenger version. Make the Lasblaster the Guardian default weapon, allow Guardians to buy catapults for +1 point per model. Give all Eldar models other quality of life buffs such as Adaptive Armour, Dark Eldar can be the pointy-ear glass cannon while Craftworlders are the slightly more durable annoyance.

P.S. And yes, I mean any save. That includes Cover and Invulnerable.

This is a terrible solution, and HORRIBLY imbalanced. I understand longing for the glory days of 2nd edition (I miss that rules set too) but reintroducing those old armor rules for just one weapon type is absurd. If you're going to make weapons reduce saves again, you'd have to do it game-wide not just for eldar. Save modifiers are dead, they aren't going to randomly show up again in 6th, and if they did they would break the game. Also, reducing invulnerable saves? really? thats not even fluffy, its just cheesy as hell. I'm assuming you didn't write the +1 point per model bit with a straight face, it would have to cost WAY more than that. The adaptive armor suggestion is also silly, either give them 4+ saves or not. Why do you want to introduce all of these game mechanics that completely ignore or change incredibly basic parts of the current rules?

Never played 2nd edition, have nothing to reminisce about. I only look at the mechanics themselves, I don't care about keeping everything the same - I mean there's a reason why I think having more than one space marine codex is excessive and fairly stupid.

I could go out on a tangent regarding the logical error in your argument, but I Feel No Pain worth having arguing over how introducing a rule that needlessly complicates a situation since after all We'll Be Back for more discussion later. Since you appear to be new, or at least not an Eternal Forum Warrior you may not yet be familiar with how GW handles special rules. You see they have these Brootherhoods of Rules Writers coming up with weird mechanic-altering rules that provide exceptions to rules all the time, slap it on a unit or army and see if it floats. If it does you'll eventually see these rules pasted on to marines rushing out on Assault Ramps all over the place even though the rule itself wasn't written for them at all (and hey, they'll even forget to give the rule to the Xeno army that the rule references). It's true that modifiers on armour piercing is a thing of the past, but if you claim that modifiers in general have been removed from the game then I can tell you It's After You and that it'll Furiously Assault your stance in such a way that your argument will disappear in a Symphony of Pain.

I'm not out to insult you (even though I'm not certain the reverse is true), that's meant as comedy to show a bunch of rules that were introduced specifically for an army or a model that complicates things - sometimes horribly - or modifies existing stats. So far I can't think of anything that modifies saves, but that's just about the only stat that I can't think of that isn't modified by something. I also find modifiers a lot more simple than a bunch of re-rolls, but it is like all things best done in moderation.

I will say one thing completely without humour:
A Guardian should be worth 8 to 10 points. It's currently worth 4 to 5 points. It needs proper compensation to reach another full 4 points worth of upgrades with no option to go less than 8 points. Cheap Guardians - THAT is ignoring fluff.

From experience with Corsair, BS4 is a very good start. They still aren't worth 9 points when on the ground, but they are only marginally overpriced at 11 points when they are jet infantry. I don't necessarily think this is the appropriate way to go, however, since I think the difference between Eldar and Dark Eldar should be distinct.

First of all, let me reassure you that I was not, nor am I now, out to insult you. With that in mind, I hope you'll forgive me, as I will now launch into a tangent much like one you wanted to avoid.

Now, as entertaining as your second paragraph was – and don’t get me wrong, I cracked a few smiles – there is one key sentence in your post that I want to focus on for a moment.

So far I can't think of anything that modifies saves, but that's just about the only stat that I can't think of that isn't modified by something.

Let me save you some time. You won’t think of anything that modifies an armor save because nothing in 6th edition 40k does that. You say you never played second edition, so perhaps you were not aware that save modifiers used to be the norm. The entire game (at least with regards to killing models) was based and balanced around armor saves and weapons which reduced those saves. With the advent of 3rd edition, that system was replaced with something akin to the current armor penetration rules, though a few weapons still retained minor modifiers (i.e. ork choppas allowed a save no better than 4+). Over time, modifiers of any kind were removed from 40k entirely.

With that piece of history out of the way, let’s look at another sentence:

if you claim that modifiers in general have been removed from the game then I can tell you It's After You and that it'll Furiously Assault your stance in such a way that your argument will disappear in a Symphony of Pain.

If you want to discuss logical fallacies, well we can start right here. Now I know straw man arguments are all the rage on the internet, but they are a poor substitute for a well reasoned position. You will note that I never once claimed that modifiers do not exist in 40k. I said that save modifiers no longer exist in 40k, and that is a fact.

One more quote, and then I'll reiterate and expand upon my original point:

Since you appear to be new, or at least not an Eternal Forum Warrior you may not yet be familiar with how GW handles special rules. You see they have these Brootherhoods of Rules Writers coming up with weird mechanic-altering rules that provide exceptions to rules all the time, slap it on a unit or army and see if it floats.

As I am not new to 40k or how GW operates, and have seen vast changes since I first started playing, I am all too familiar with their propensity for introducing rules which can radically alter the game. In my first post, I never made the argument that new rules should not be introduced, or that GW would never change any rules ever (that was just another straw man you built up). The fact that I did point out, was that GW doesn’t go around reintroducing universal rules relating to a fundamental game mechanic from over a decade ago - for just one army. Overwatch used to exist as a universal rule in second, and they brought it back as a universal rule in 6th, but if instead they had brought it back just for chaos, and at +1 point per model, everyone would cry foul. The point is that the rule you proposed DID exist for eldar and every other army. So why should just your army get it back, when mine used to have that rule too? Hence:

 ragingmunkyz wrote:
If you're going to make weapons reduce saves again, you'd have to do it game-wide not just for eldar.

You would have just as much right to be indignant if I wanted to bring back an old rule that your eldar also used to have, but just for my army. That is perhaps the main reason why it won't happen. The other is that GW isn't going to bring back rules from a now defunct rules system that circumvent such a fundamental and basic foundation of the current rules. The armor rules, as they currently exist, are an evolution of the rules that you wanted to introduce; the current rules directly and intentionally replaced those rules. Thus not only would it be unbalancing and unfair for just eldar to get that rule, it would be a regression of the rules in general.

All of that said, I am all for buffing guardians. I agree (and never said otherwise) that they should be worth 8 to 10 points for both fluff and game balance reasons. If you want to raise their BS or armor save, I can get behind that. If you want to introduce an original rule that is exclusive to Eldar (hell, Fleet used to be just for them), I’m willing to hear that out as well, as long as it doesn’t unbalance things. After all, just because GW doesn’t seem to know any better when it comes to unbalancing the game with new rules, that doesn't mean we should stoop to their level. I think we can strive for a higher standard than that, don’t you?

Honestly, I think that trying to fix one thing without looking at the whole is the wrong way to go about it. With that said, I feel that there is a very "Eldar" way of properly improving the guns.

The Eldar way is to follow the "path". The "path is the chosen focus an Eldar warrior has decided to follow. Keeping this in mind then I propose:

Shuriken Catapaults become range 18"

Avenger Shuriken Catapults are removed from the Armoury in favour of Aspect specific statlines and abilities. This means that Dire Avengers get their +1 bs and +6" range based on dedication to their chosen path rather than from a unit specific weapon getting the credit for the improved abililties.
If there are to be unit specific weapons then I say let the Dire Avengers have access to shuriken pistols(also gets +6" range), Dire Swords and some form of grenades(Blind? ) .
In other words, it would read like this: Dire Avengers train tirelessly with their shuriken weapons. As such, any shuriken weapon fired by a Dire Avenger will have +6" added to its range value

Now if the base shuriken weaponry gets a range improvement then the Shuriken Cannon would need a tweak. I propose it also gets a +6" range bump.

This would mean:
Shuriken Pistols= range 12"........range 18" when used by DA
Shuriken catapault= range 18"....range 24" when used by DA
Shuriken Cannons= range 30"....range 36" when used by DA

I also feel that Guardian Defenders and Storm Guardians should have a fluff tweak to represent that these are Eldar who are on the beginning steps of a "path".
This would be reflected by
Guardian Defenders being BS 4 and WS 3...
Storms would be BS 3 and WS 4.
Then use these stats as the base starting point when determining Aspect Warrior stat-lines.

Guardian Defenders are supposed to be a defensive force, holding the last line when all else fails. They are given armour and weaponry far superior to the imperial guard.

Why would you give them a short-ranged weapon? In the fluff it's a highly accurate weapon at mid-range with a high rate of fire.

Really they should be like lasguns but better, i.e. 24" range and assault 2, instead of Rapid Fire.

The downside should be that each guardian should be far more expensive than a imperial guard grunt.

I don't believe in extra range for the aspects either. The exarchs might use ancient weaponry with enhanced stats, but the grunts are equipped normally. They are just far far better at it than the guardians.

 ragingmunkyz wrote:
First of all, let me reassure you that I was not, nor am I now, out to insult you. With that in mind, I hope you'll forgive me, as I will now launch into a tangent much like one you wanted to avoid.

Now, as entertaining as your second paragraph was – and don’t get me wrong, I cracked a few smiles – there is one key sentence in your post that I want to focus on for a moment.

So far I can't think of anything that modifies saves, but that's just about the only stat that I can't think of that isn't modified by something.

Let me save you some time. You won’t think of anything that modifies a save because nothing in 6th edition 40k does that. You say you never played second edition, so perhaps you were not aware that save modifiers used to be the norm. The entire game (at least with regards to killing models) was based and balanced around armor saves and weapons which reduced those saves. With the advent of 3rd edition, that system was replaced with something akin to the current armor penetration rules, though a few weapons still retained minor modifiers (i.e. ork choppas allowed a save no better than 4+). Over time, modifiers of any kind were removed from 40k entirely.

WraithSeer from FW allows Wraithlords and Wraithguards to worsen the cover save of the unit they are shooting at.

 noghri wrote:
WraithSeer from FW allows Wraithlords and Wraithguards to worsen the cover save of the unit they are shooting at.

Lots of things modify cover saves: camo cloaks, shrouded, etc. You'll notice that was talking about armor saves, a stat which is inherent to the model, and the only stat which relates to the armor penetration rules. Cover saves aren't affected by AP, because they aren't a stat for the model, hell they change with the type of terrain the model is in. Totally different system within the rules.

Nice try though.

 ragingmunkyz wrote:

 noghri wrote:
WraithSeer from FW allows Wraithlords and Wraithguards to worsen the cover save of the unit they are shooting at.

Lots of things modify cover saves: camo cloaks, shrouded, etc. You'll notice that was talking about armor saves, a stat which is inherent to the model, and the only stat which relates to the armor penetration rules. Cover saves aren't affected by AP, because they aren't a stat for the model, hell they change with the type of terrain the model is in. Totally different system within the rules.

Nice try though.

So I guess both Eldrad and Yriel's CC weapons aren't what you meant neither, right? Started to play on 5th, so maybe (hell, probably) I'm missing completely the point. My apologizes

 noghri wrote:
So I guess both Eldrad and Yriel's CC weapons aren't what you meant neither, right? Started to play on 5th, so maybe (hell, probably) I'm missing completely the point. My apologizes

Both of those weapons (and a few others like the bonesword) ignore armor saves, they do not modify armor saves. Look at the weapons Mahtamori suggested:

 Mahtamori wrote:
Shuriken Pistol: Range 18" S4, AP-, Pistol, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Catapult: Range 18" S4, AP-, Assault 2, Shuriken Swarm (-1 to any save)
Shuriken Cannon: Range 24" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save)
Maugetar: Range 36" S4 AP-, Heavy 3, Shuriken Swarm (-2 to any save) // Power Axe

A weapon which modifies an armor save is one which reduces a models save when it attacks. So for example: a weapon with a "-1 save modifier" would force a space marine to make his armor save on a 4+ instead of a 3+. This was once the way every single weapon worked, but it has since been replaced by AP which, much like Eldrad and Yriel's weapons, either ignores an armor save or does not. Nothing left in the game has this effect, and my point (made in more detail previously) was that it makes no sense to bring back that system for just eldar weapons because: 1) that rules system was replaced entirely by the current system, why resurrect a more dated version of the current rules unless you're going to do so universally? and 2) if you were going to bring those rules back they would have to be universal, because you can't justify giving said rules back to just one army's weapon type, when every other army's weapons had the same rule.

Additionally, just think about it logically. That rule would be ridiculously overpowered in today's 40k if you used it for just one army. Every weapon in the current game is either effective against an armor class, or it is not. That rule makes a weapon effective against EVERY armor class. Suddenly your basic troops are great for hunting MEQs and TEQs, when every other army is required to pay dearly for that privilege, and can only take 1 or 2 weapons per squad (unless its an elite squad) which can deal with armor that tough.

I see your point now. To be honest (maybe because I consider it more exotic), the worsening of armour saves appeals more to me, because it allows more gradual control over the wounds. But I also agree in that 2 different systems for reaching the same goal (wounding through an armor) is a bit OP outside maybe a IC or a very specific unit

While I agree that the worsening of armor saves may not be the solution to the problem, I do like the idea and think that it is along the lines we need to think. I feel that the ablative armor might be a good replacement for the Defend special rule for the Dire Avengers but should not carry over to all Eldar units. Guardians should get a standard 4+ save.

When arguing the idea of improving shuriken weaponry, the solution is not to add a slapped on +6" range or shred or whatever (though I would appreciate the range), its going to be solved by adding a new rule. Plain and simple, that is why people hate playing against the Eldar of any type. They don't know what cheese is going to be sprung next.

If I had to advocate for one camp or another I would be in favor of worsening the save. True, it is an old and outdated rule but to many who play now it would be as goon as a new rule since a majority of players came in post 2 or 3ed. Better would be to refer to the rule you mentioned for a choppa and make an "if your save is better than X+ then roll as if it were X" rule yes it would give Eldar a cheesy new MEQ TEQ foil but its only an idea and all ideas fall apart after a certain point. Or another idea could be "if the armor save is equal or worse than X it treats the weapon as shred in conjunction to AP".

This in conjunction to shuricats getting Overwatch on a 5+ due to the rate of fire seems sufficient to me. Thoughts?

Somehow I've got a feeling that shuriken weapons should stay at their range (maybe Guardians range should be improved to 18") but they obviously have to have their fire power improved.
Either by getting Shred or by getting other enhancement.

ragingmunkyz, straw man or no straw man, I can understand the argument to "don't do that to the basic weapon in the army" but the argument "don't do it because it was done before" is not a very solid one. And no, you really really do not need to change AP for the rest of the codexes as well.
Yes, it's a powerful ability and I do agree that it shouldn't be done to a Bolter or Shuriken. Some sort of exotic Eldar support weapon or a daemonic greater demon power, sure thing.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

Way to be overly snarky - bordering on insulting. I'm assuming you have only played 40K in the most recent additions and not since before the range nerf that some of us are talking about? Because my suggestions for improvement wouldn't even make them as good as they used to be!
Shuriken catapults used to be Storm Bolters that dropped -2 from all armor save rolls when Storm Bolters did only -1. Eldar, even basic Guardians, used to be the army hold the Long-range superiority role that the Tau supposedly fill now. Guardians used to come with a basic lasgun as standard, with the Shuriken catapult as an upgrade because it's stats were so much better. Now Catapults are worse than Lasguns, lol!

Kind of funny that the bolded snuck right out from under you. Shuriken Catapults never reduced field saves or ignored cover in 1st or 2nd edition, so why make it now?

Personally I like the idea of increasing range by 6", decreasing Strength by 1 and giving them Shred all across the board.

I'm just predicting that GW will make shuricats salvo just to use the new weapon type.

 Vladsimpaler wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:

Way to be overly snarky - bordering on insulting. I'm assuming you have only played 40K in the most recent additions and not since before the range nerf that some of us are talking about? Because my suggestions for improvement wouldn't even make them as good as they used to be!
Shuriken catapults used to be Storm Bolters that dropped -2 from all armor save rolls when Storm Bolters did only -1. Eldar, even basic Guardians, used to be the army hold the Long-range superiority role that the Tau supposedly fill now. Guardians used to come with a basic lasgun as standard, with the Shuriken catapult as an upgrade because it's stats were so much better. Now Catapults are worse than Lasguns, lol!

Kind of funny that the bolded snuck right out from under you. Shuriken Catapults never reduced field saves or ignored cover in 1st or 2nd edition, so why make it now?

Personally I like the idea of increasing range by 6", decreasing Strength by 1 and giving them Shred all across the board.

That's because he wasn't the one drawing up the rough draft. I did. For effect. Maybe too much effect.