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.

Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............

Yup, and that's why I want it banned. Use your feet, elf boy!

Great argument!

Here is an easy fix. Swap it for the Falcon. i.e. make it a Heavy Choice and the Falcon a dedicated transport.

Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.

I think what needs to change is the weapon part of the shield. 60" is crazy, and I say that as an Eldar player. I think the maximum it should be is 24" and maybe not ignores cover. If people complain that the nerd is too heavy, maybe add in a rule where targets are repelled D6" or something? Not sure.

60" range means nothing to a weapon that you will never use outside of 36". Why people keep saying that all these eldar players are blasting them off the table at 60" I have no idea. At 36" a serpent is within range of every AT weapon in the game. At 24" the serpent might be easier to take out but then you would just see more people taking chin mounted shuri cannons. So now the transport is avg 11 shots a turn. That'll fix the complaining!

Edit: I forgot to add that while I do have an eldar army my main army is dark angels.

Rubbish - I have played games against Cheese Serpents where they were destroying my trasnports as they tried to clsoe at more than 36" range.

36" is not in range of my Multi-Meltas, my Melta guns or pretty much everyhting that cna hurt Serpents in my Sororitas list.

I have a substantial Eldar army myself but I would not use multiple Wave Serpents

As far as i mentioned the Option to fire the Serpent shield was ment as an "emergency" gun. So my way to fix it would be the following:

Make the shield "one shot only". If its fired, its defensive capabilties are gone too, for the rest of the game. Problem solved...

Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.

Well lets look at this assertion

1.) Costs 10 points more
2.) Scatter laser would no be twin linked, so it would not be an auto twinlink for all guns, even moreso against flyers.
3.) Scatter laser costs 5 points more so now you are at 15 points more expensive.
4.) Max range 48" on a 2 shot gun
5.) Does not ignore cover
6.) Wave Serpent averages 8.5 shots so 2 more shots, but can also shoot more than that (and less but 6 is the minimum.)

It would not be complained about nearly as much, and would actually get used (if it is so good why do people never take it and instead take serpents as transports in spam lists)




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I see people taking the chin mounted cannons already so....yeah

 Mr Morden wrote:
Rubbish - I have played games against Cheese Serpents where they were destroying my trasnports as they tried to clsoe at more than 36" range.

36" is not in range of my Multi-Meltas, my Melta guns or pretty much everyhting that cna hurt Serpents in my Sororitas list.

I have a substantial Eldar army myself but I would not use multiple Wave Serpents

You're kidding right? You only bring AT with a max of 24" range and pile them into rhinos which have been considered trash since 6th started and complain about serpents...

Pretty sure any army with long range weapons would be destroying your rhinos. Which is just about everyone? oh and serpents avg 4 shots outside of 36" and with no rerolls they are only going to do 1 or 2 glances if they are lucky. So yes if the eldar player devoted 300+ points of his army I hope he destroyed your 35pnt transport.

There needs to be a discussion about serpents in competitive formats and casual formats. I'll agree that if someone brings 5-6 serpents against what I would think is a casual list like yours it may be a bit boring for you as a sister player but that's what you get when you bring a casual list against someone that is taking a more competitive approach. In a competitive setting 5-6 serpents are okayish but eldar wouldn't be tabling people. Their opponents, you know, have answers for an Av12 tank.

Dakka Serpent runs 145
Dakka Falcon runs 175

(SL, SC, HF).

Serpent costs much less.

Serpent shooting gets twin linked heavy weapon plus d6+1 s7 range 60 ignore cover pinning
Falcon gets 2 s8ap2 range 48 shots

Serpent shoots much better.

Serpent can transport 12
Falcon can transport 6

Serpent is a much better transport (Guardians and Wraithnouns can't even use a Falcon).

Top of turn 1, when neither can Jink, the Serpent can degrade Pens to Glances. Falcon has no defense the Serpent doesn't have.

Serpent is much more survivable.

Identical movement.

Clearly there is a balance problem.

The Falcon feels right, if a bit overcosted. But moving it to DT really only pushes tank armies, not mechanized armies. Besides the thing feels like a HS choice.

The Falcon should be the tank hunter, and the Serpent should be the close-support tank/transport, but currently the Serpent is simply better.

Breng77 wrote:

Then you would have people complaining about the falcon as well, with a scatter it has 6 shots a turn as well, but its just a little less accurate.

Well lets look at this assertion

1.) Costs 10 points more
2.) Scatter laser would no be twin linked, so it would not be an auto twinlink for all guns, even moreso against flyers.
3.) Scatter laser costs 5 points more so now you are at 15 points more expensive.
4.) Max range 48" on a 2 shot gun
5.) Does not ignore cover
6.) Wave Serpent averages 8.5 shots so 2 more shots, but can also shoot more than that (and less but 6 is the minimum.)

It would not be complained about nearly as much, and would actually get used (if it is so good why do people never take it and instead take serpents as transports in spam lists)




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I see people taking the chin mounted cannons already so....yeah

The question was if the serpent and falcon switched places. If they were switched I think people would more than likely run 3 serpents in heavy since it is better than most of the competition is that slot. If they would take as many falcons as they could I don't know, but I don't see why not. Honestly you might not see the serpent taken if they switched just because of the redundancy. The falcon doesn't get taken now because as you and I both said it is slightly worse than the serpent against the majority of targets and it's in a competitive heavy slot. Serpents and falcons are pretty much the same tank, but one is worse. What would you take?

It was either somewhere on this forum or another someone did the mathhammer for both of these tanks, and they are actually surprisingly similar with the serpent pulling ahead slightly in most situations.

So again then you are capped at 3 serpents, and cannot take any Wraithknights, or support platforms, or Dark Reapers etc.

Breng77 wrote:
So again then you are capped at 3 serpents, and cannot take any Wraithknights, or support platforms, or Dark Reapers etc.

Which is why I don't think people would take them if the falcon and serpent switched. They fulfill similar roles and the heavy slot is so competitive.

To the poster above, your points are off. Falcon with chin mounted cannon is 160 but I don't really see any point in bringing it so its really 150. Wave serpent without cannon is 135. 15 point difference isn't that bad when you consider one has to buy, at minimum, a 65 point troop.

The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.

SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).

Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.

It is similar or worse against light armor.

Etc.

I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.

Breng77 wrote:
The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.

SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).

Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.

It is similar or worse against light armor.

Etc.

I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.

90 points is a lot, but you're not factoring in troops. One is required to take them and one is not. I am sure that had some effect in their pricing.

The dakka is really the loss, as you said in most cases the falcon is firing less, on avg 2 less shots a turn. S8 AP2 though is nice which leads to the next point...

Against light armor the serpent is better, but against higher AV the falcon wins.

The cover debate is pointless in this comparison. For troops against the falcon you need cover to avoid the AP2, but against the serpent everyone get theirs sv so taking away their cover is useless the majority of the time.

Personally I would love it if they made it similar to a razorback. Having another option for transport with a better anti tank gun would be nice without losing a heavy slot.

Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............

Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.

Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.

 Goldphish wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
The issue is that if you are bringing 6, then you are looking at 90 points difference.

SO if people take no or less serpents then it is more balanced. The falcon simply put is not near as scarey. (consider that a scatter laser only TL 2 shots vs up to 7).

Falcon is not super scare for infantry, because they can take cover etc.

It is similar or worse against light armor.

Etc.

I also don't see how it feels Heavy support, when it is similar to an eldar razorback.

90 points is a lot, but you're not factoring in troops. One is required to take them and one is not. I am sure that had some effect in their pricing.

The dakka is really the loss, as you said in most cases the falcon is firing less, on avg 2 less shots a turn. S8 AP2 though is nice which leads to the next point...

Against light armor the serpent is better, but against higher AV the falcon wins.

The cover debate is pointless in this comparison. For troops against the falcon you need cover to avoid the AP2, but against the serpent everyone get theirs sv so taking away their cover is useless the majority of the time.

Personally I would love it if they made it similar to a razorback. Having another option for transport with a better anti tank gun would be nice without losing a heavy slot.

The cover is not at all pointless. If I have a 5+ save or worse cover is frequently better (often much better) than my save. As going to ground gets me a 3+ cover save instead of my 5+ or worse armor. (Even matters for 4+ save infantry if you go to ground)

Cover save matters for fliers that evade to get cover, now get nothing (note the twin linking makes the serpent much better vs fliers)

Cover save matters against skimmers with jink saves (or bike units with bad armor)

Cover save matters if I have stealth or shrouded

Cover save matters if my vehicle pops smoke.

Cover save matters vs an aegis.

Many units use cover as a significant part of their durability. The serpent ignores this..

In fact the cover save only really does not matter much if:

The target has a 3+ save or better
The target is not in cover of any kind.
The target cannot go to ground and has 5+ armor or better.

The selection of units that the falcon is better against is quite limited.

1) Wow, I apparently have been putting 2 holofields on each of my Falcons. Oops. Glad to know it's 15 points cheaper than I thought.

2) You really shouldn't have to explain how mean "ignores cover" is to an Eldar player. We should all feel our victims pain (Curse you Tau and Hellturkey!)

3) Nobody puts a Brightlance on a Serpent, because there isn't really a need, but a TL Brightlance Serpent is better against AV14 than a Brightlance Falcon, for fewer points. Which is crazy. Falcon still has AV13 covered though.

The serpent shield should be one use only.

 Zakiriel wrote:

Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............

Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.

Some armies just don't have massed s7 shots with ignore cover. You've just stated: "Come om, stop playing orks, csm, adepta sororita, dark eldar and such - go get some tau, eldar or a gravstar".

The issue is that 4+ cover in the open, 3+ behind a ruin and 2+ behind fortifications on a vehicle that also is capable of ignoring pens or firing an ammount of s7 ignore cover shots that can get twin-linked and is simultaniously a transport and can jump across the whole map and get 3+ cover in the open...costs how much?!!

And it's extremely hard to catch a serpent in mellee.

To tell you the truth, i manage to win eldar from time to time just cause there are lots of eldar generals that allready got used to pushing win-buttons and don't give a heck about tacticks no more. It's fun but something like that happened to eldar fluffwise. They were super-advanced and could do anything. Got carried away and BAM! They got screwed to the point of exticntion. Probably this BAM will be a new codex a few years later. By that time common eldar players will completely forget about the existence of tactics with their serpentspams and seerstars. I forsee a titanic bugurt the moment they'll get brought in a line again. Heed my word!

One use only, and losing the defensive benefits, would make it perfectly fine, I think. Good alpha-strike, but limiting.

Breng77 wrote:
The cover is not at all pointless.
Cover save matters

I have already admitted that related to vehicles the ignores cover is good, but against troops a AP- weapon that ignores cover is hardly over powered. Yes a few units that depend on cover will have to use their Sv, but compare it to a weapon that is AP2-3 and ignores cover and you would have something to complain about. Not to mention that the scatter is AP6 without ignores cover. Serpents just make people roll lots of dice, but 1000 points worth of shooting should make you roll some dice.

The last couple posters asking for a one time use realize the price would have to come down to reflect the loss of fire power? Hell if it was one time use I would assume eldar would become become an ally force. You can get pretty much everything you want out of their codex with an ally matrix if you didn't have viable troop options. That or you would be forced to play aegis gun lines relying on warp spiders and war walkers/wraith knights to do the heavy lifting.

Gotta tell ya...

Orks
Daemons
Cultists
Chaos spawn
Ig
Dark eldar
Kroot
Etc.

Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.

Like I said if the serpent were not a dedicated transport it would be fine, but when it is a better tank than basically any heavy support tank I. The game and it is a DT that is a problem.

Breng77 wrote:
Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.

Do you realize how silly this sounds? If more than half my army cannot kill 200-300 points of anything in a single shooting phase I'd rewrite my list. Most games of 40k are decided by the end of the 3rd turn if not the 2nd. Competitive play revolves around death stars that can point and click to remove units and turn 5 objective grabbers. Honestly I'd be more worried about the death stars that cost half the amount of 6 serpents and do more damage and remain almost unkillable.

and all the units you listed are 5-10 ppm. Do you really care if you fail some 4-5-6+ saves and lose them?

Breng77 wrote:


Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.

Good thing it can't.

 Zakiriel wrote:

Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............

Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.

Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.

Wave Serpents in their current incarnation are more resistant to Lascannons than Land Raiders if they're not shooting their shields. A Land Raider is 250+ points for a transport, so by the Eldar standard it ought to be cheaper, because it's so unfair that a transport is expensive, right?

If they're not shooting the shields, there's no problem.

Land Raiders are much more resilient against S8 and especially S7 shooting, which has always killed Serpents more effective against them.

Lascannon are only a side to the argument, and any weapon that relies on penetrating hits and single hits is bound to be worse against something that downgrades a pen to a glance.

While I would think the Land Raider is worse overall and overpriced, this is not an honest comparison as you could say that the Land Raider is worth infinitely more than an AV12 vehicle as it's immune to S7 gunnery, which is common and most complained about this edition.

A Las cannon (s9) is only moderately more deadly to an LR than a Serpent with its shield up. But anything less and the LR is a brick.

Assuming front/side armor

S9 hits:
Serpents are penned half as often.
Serpents are glanced 3.5 times as often

S8:
LRs can't be penned, Serpent can
Serpents are glanced almost 3 times as often

S7:
LRs immune, Serpents can be penned or glanced

S6:
LRs immune, Serpents can be glanced

Anything in melee (or rear armor):
LRs: S8 can glance, s9 can pen
Serpents: S4 can glance, s5 can pen

Also, since the LR has 4hp, and the Serpent has 3hp and an abnormal glance:pen ratio, the LR cares more about pens than a Serpent, but a Serpent cares more about glances.

Basically, the argument here is like claiming a Warlock should cost as much as a Tyranofex because they both die to a hit from Shard of Anaris.

 Zakiriel wrote:

Mr Morden wrote:
Oh look an Eldar player saying his broken unit is perfectily fine - sheesh............

Whenever I read one of his posts about this topic, and it is his favorite, I am reminded of that quote about how one should not wrestle pigs in mud. You will both get dirty but the pig likes it.

Just bring some good anti tank units and blow some Wave Serpents up and I believe you wont see them as so "broken" afterwards.

Or you will find them overpowred like most people posting on this topic apart from a few hardcore defenders - some of whom happen to be Eldar players (as I am) - as you will know from reading all the varied posts about the Wave Serpent here - it is a problem - ignoring it does not mean it does not exist.....

Denying there is a problem isn't as bad as the cleanse-it-with-fire options (such as outright banning them), but it's still not a good thing. Hyperbole in either direction makes forming a consensus even harder.

(Edit - sorry, Morden, what I wrote didn't match what I meant)

I didn't - LIke the majority of posters I said reduce the sheer OP power of the shield gun -0 which is one of the major porblems - if that means reducing the cost fair enough.

I also said it compounded the problem that the Serpent s the only DT that the Eldar have and it would better to have more choice and an Assault vehicle that enabled Banshees to be playable.

 Goldphish wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.

Do you realize how silly this sounds? If more than half my army cannot kill 200-300 points of anything in a single shooting phase I'd rewrite my list. Most games of 40k are decided by the end of the 3rd turn if not the 2nd. Competitive play revolves around death stars that can point and click to remove units and turn 5 objective grabbers. Honestly I'd be more worried about the death stars that cost half the amount of 6 serpents and do more damage and remain almost unkillable.

and all the units you listed are 5-10 ppm. Do you really care if you fail some 4-5-6+ saves and lose them?

Which deathstars are those? 6 Serpents cost 900 points fully upgraded.

Screamerstar to function well is 920 points and does far less damage on average
Seer Council is about 800 points
Beast Star is Probably around 500-600 points
Centurian Star is Probably around 800 points
Ovesastar is 800+

So hardly half the cost. Most of these engage one unit per turn unless they charge....

as for caring about 5-10 points per model, yes I care if those are my troops, I want to be able to make use of ways to keep them alive, like cover. Or you know 30+ PPM spawn, or 52 point Beasts of Nurgle, or 43 point Plague drones, or Say Belakor for 350 points. More or less any unit that relies on Shrouding. Or DE jetbikes that cost what 22 points per model or so. 25 point screamers without the Grimoir on them, Flesh hounds, Seekers, Nob Bikers, Lootas,.....the list goes on. There are plenty of units which at least in part rely on cover for their durablility, having a base transport that easily denies it at range is bad IMO.

The thing people fail to realize is that sure it does not sound crazy that you do 300+ points of damage per turn with your shooting against stuff, until you take into account armies that take 2 turns or so to get to you, now those armies are down 600 points before any damage is dealt. At which point playing down 600 points becomes difficult.

Now you can say "well you should have long range anti-tank in your army....so for Daemons that would be what exactly? Oh nothing...ok just so we are clear on that.

Or you know the serpents target the long range anti tank first....and then don't worry about it...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daba wrote:

Breng77 wrote:


Don't really care much whether something is ignores cover or ap 2-3 ignores cover (which not much really is stock). Daemons especially don't care. Sure 1000 points of shooting should do damage, but it should not be able to remove say 200-300 points every turn with ease.

Good thing it can't.

Really against models with a 5+ save, 6 serpents average 28 wounds. SO against say flesh hounds tha tis 455 points.

I heard a rumor about 7th edition coming up that the rule 'Acrobatics' will be changed to allow the unit to assault out of a transport.
This would be so nice for the Banshees and wouldn't need to have them create an assault transport for the Eldar.
Taking the easy way out as it were.

What about making wave serpents no longer fast vehicles?