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.

Void Shields only require what...

3 Hits per bike. 1/2 Results. So 2 bikes per shield to take it down. One squad of bikes drops your shields.

 Leth wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Ehh, Outside of bikes most of it looks alright.

Most tournaments have a hard LOW limit of one. Just because its in a decurion style does not mean it changes slots.

Hawks are kinda cool, looks like aspects might actually see some table time!! That is exciting, glad to see wave serpents toned down.

Alright, will have to wait and see overall but its not looking too bad. I bring AV 13 so bikes dont scare me much. Wraithknight is either shooting or CC D attacks not both. Auto 6 on run is pretty powerful, still losing OS is a rough hit.

Will have to see how lists shake out

Yes, but you seem to be forgetting the Wraithguard, Hemlock, and artillery have St D weapons as well. True, the d-scythes aren't AS nasty, but still, D3 wounds on a 3+ is a singificant boost over their original S4 Distort. A single 1850 CAD could have a WK, 3 5-man units of WG in wave serpents, a Hemlock, and at least one BATTERY of the D-cannon artillery. That is an insane amount of mostly durable ranged D in a standard game.

I was not forgetting about them at all. For a majority of targets outside of ignore saves on a 6 it is going to be business as before. The thing about D weapons is that they are all concentrated in a few units that are expensive at their cheapest. While it is very powerful against certain builds it is nearly worthless against others. You cant invest so much in one aspect, you need to diversify.

I am not saying that it is not powerful. It is quite powerful, but I just see myself taking two void shields and watching them either have to use their D(which is not that long of a range for most of it) to try and pop it or use their strength 6 trying to get through.

Against infantry targets the D weapons won't be much of a change, but the ability to effectively delete any vehicle, no matter its AV, and likewise MC's, will be the big game changer.

A unit of 5 Wraithguard is killing a Baneblade on average with a single salvo.

Instead of complaints or saying "comp!", why not invest your money into another game. One by a game company that has a narrative with its customers, attempts balance, and supports all play styles. There's many on the market these days, choose one.

As for me? I'm gonna sell off some loose models and garbage, find a hot deal on some used Eldar and get back into 40k. I'll bring my other games too. Wanna play against my Scatbike, D-bone list? Or how about some Malifaux? Warmachine, eh, eh?

 pretre wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:
Or this:

Each army gets a points multiplier, agreed to by the community. If we take Eldar as "1", then Necrons might be 1.3, Daemons 1.5, and weaker armies can be 2 - 2.5. For any game, just multiply the points to arrive at the handicapped points allowed in the list.

That is just too clunky to work. You'd have to bring an extra 2000-3000 points to an event depending on your army.

It wouldn't really be "extra", as the TO would publish a full list of the point values for any faction. It could get really complex, though, as people ally and add formations. Decurion might be 1.3, but CAD Necron might be 1.6, etc.

 TheKbob wrote:
Instead of complaints or saying "comp!", why not invest your money into another game. One by a game company that has a narrative with its customers, attempts balance, and supports all play styles. There's many on the market these days, choose one.

As for me? I'm gonna sell off some loose models and garbage, find a hot deal on some used Eldar and get back into 40k. I'll bring my other games too. Wanna play against my Scatbike, D-bone list? Or how about some Malifaux? Warmachine, eh, eh?

Other games companies could so harness this as advertising. Pose as a player and kick people's asses with Eldar, and afterwards show them your far better balanced game...

 JimOnMars wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 JimOnMars wrote:
Or this:

Each army gets a points multiplier, agreed to by the community. If we take Eldar as "1", then Necrons might be 1.3, Daemons 1.5, and weaker armies can be 2 - 2.5. For any game, just multiply the points to arrive at the handicapped points allowed in the list.

That is just too clunky to work. You'd have to bring an extra 2000-3000 points to an event depending on your army.

It wouldn't really be "extra", as the TO would publish a full list of the point values for any faction. It could get really complex, though, as people ally and add formations. Decurion might be 1.3, but CAD Necron might be 1.6, etc.

No, I get that. But if I'm a DA player say, I have to bring a 3750 point army to a 1500 point tournament.

We have a large group but there are 5 Regular Eldar players and 5 that have them to ally with other armies. I have every army except Skitarii and blood angels. Eldar and Harliquins were my first armies. Yes it is competitive but I don't think game breaking. We have a good range of armies though. Many space marines, some blood angels, grey knights, few Tau, many CSM and Chaos, many Orks and I know people that are building skitarii. Many have used Imperial knights and we have allowed LOW at our tournaments since escalation. It does change meta to have ranged D but it also makes people think twice about running annoying deathstars like Screamer Stars, Draigo Cents, or Seer Councils as one roll of a '6' and your powerful characters are gone. It makes MSU better, however you can tailor your tournaments to help eliminate advantages or make running LOW or lower model counts as a disadvantage. Maelstrom helps with this, but not maelstrom straight from GW. But it does help with the big things in tournaments. I have played at multiple events and run some of my own, that have their own modified decks or charts that can make maelstrom very fun and challenging.
Last year there was a player with 3 knights and Gray knights, they did well until round 2 when the player they were against could clean up on objectives and piecemeal take on or outmaneuver his heavy stuff. They are not the end all be all.

For those that don't play anymore. I don't think you really have a right to bitch as you really don''t have a feel for how the game works anymore, so how do you know if this will break the game. You have not been in the trenches playing the game ans seeing how the codices affect or interact with the others.
Once again all I say is relax. Will there be good things? Hell yes. But that happens with every codex. Cheers.

 TheKbob wrote:
Instead of complaints or saying "comp!", why not invest your money into another game. One by a game company that has a narrative with its customers, attempts balance, and supports all play styles. There's many on the market these days, choose one.

As for me? I'm gonna sell off some loose models and garbage, find a hot deal on some used Eldar and get back into 40k. I'll bring my other games too. Wanna play against my Scatbike, D-bone list? Or how about some Malifaux? Warmachine, eh, eh?

Because contrary to popular belief it's totally possible to play 40k and other games at the same time and not burst into flames.

 Las wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
Instead of complaints or saying "comp!", why not invest your money into another game. One by a game company that has a narrative with its customers, attempts balance, and supports all play styles. There's many on the market these days, choose one.

As for me? I'm gonna sell off some loose models and garbage, find a hot deal on some used Eldar and get back into 40k. I'll bring my other games too. Wanna play against my Scatbike, D-bone list? Or how about some Malifaux? Warmachine, eh, eh?

Because contrary to popular belief it's totally possible to play 40k and other games at the same time and not burst into flames.

To be fair he didn't say you had to drop 40k altogether. He was just suggesting that there's other games out there who give a rats ass about balance

 Las wrote:


Because contrary to popular belief it's totally possible to play 40k and other games at the same time and not burst into flames.

Yes, but if you're into wargames for the gaming, why continue to throw money at a company who obviously has no clue what they're doing?

If you're pushing pretty plastic,... Why not still use another ruleset with GW models?

If you're paying over $100 for rules, you shouldn't have to house rule it.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:


I guess we have different outlooks on the game. Sure I like taking the units I want to take, but sometimes that just isn't possible due to them being either OP or UP. If I take too many of those units then the game simply isn't fun, since I am responsible for my own actions I then take other things. I don't consider taking the most broken units part of playing to my full potential btw. I try to take fairly balanced non cheesy lists so I can play to my full potential and feel like I earned it. If I have a list on the same power level as my opponent and I still beat him and he still blames it on me playing Eldar, it's not my fault he needs an excuse for losing, and honestly he probably would have blamed it on my list regardless of the army I played.

Actually I build lists just as you do. I think in a real game we'd have a blast That said I am not going to expect others to approach the game the same way and nor should I. Rules and balance are there for a reason, the burden shouldn't lie on the player to make a list that isn't too powerful. It's poor design.

Actually I think that's where the different outlook lies. I personally don't think it's bad game design, just a type of game design. Again I grant that there are too many powerful units in this codex, but for the most part the game design of 40k is exactly what I want and why I continue playing it and enjoying it. Personally, as much as I love the lore and style and everything, if I was unhappy with the game design I would find something else.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Las wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
Instead of complaints or saying "comp!", why not invest your money into another game. One by a game company that has a narrative with its customers, attempts balance, and supports all play styles. There's many on the market these days, choose one.

As for me? I'm gonna sell off some loose models and garbage, find a hot deal on some used Eldar and get back into 40k. I'll bring my other games too. Wanna play against my Scatbike, D-bone list? Or how about some Malifaux? Warmachine, eh, eh?

Because contrary to popular belief it's totally possible to play 40k and other games at the same time and not burst into flames.

To be fair he didn't say you had to drop 40k altogether. He was just suggesting that there's other games out there who give a rats ass about balance

He's suggesting we do that instead of discuss a game we enjoy, as if the two are mutually exclusive.

 TheKbob wrote:

 Las wrote:


Because contrary to popular belief it's totally possible to play 40k and other games at the same time and not burst into flames.

Yes, but if you're into wargames for the gaming, why continue to throw money at a company who obviously has no clue what they're doing?

If you're pushing pretty plastic,... Why not still use another ruleset with GW models?

If you're paying over $100 for rules, you shouldn't have to house rule it.

Because I enjoy 40k on the whole. This is the first time I've genuinely been flabbergasted by something GW has done. Why would I jump ship and ruin a game cause of something that can be easily house ruled? I like 40ks rules for what they are. The other ges aren't going anywhere. I have every right to criticize a game I am invested in without wanting to give it up completely.

Hollismason wrote:
They have a unwarranted nostalgic love for 2nd Edition so I'm not surprised they would make this codex.

You know, I played the tail end of 2nd edition. It seemed fun to me (although I was totally new to it at the time). I necessarily wouldn't mind a return of 2nd edition style and size (and prices!) if they got rid of some of the most broken nonsense....

Warhams-77 wrote:
It was a typo, he corrected himself. Until they fire a shot or fight in close-combat Scorpions have Stealth & Shrouded

That means they get a 2+ save even in 5+ cover.

If it specifies fight phase that means they'd even get the 2+ save in overwatch...


Oh, Wyches. Why does GW hate you so much?

 Las wrote:


He's suggesting we do that instead of discuss a game we enjoy, as if the two are mutually exclusive.

Sure, you enjoy it. Then you won't refuse to play my Eldar list and still have lots of fun, right? 'Cause I will.

 ronin_cse wrote:
just a type of game design.

Yeah, its called bad.

 Blacksails wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:
just a type of game design.

Yeah, its called bad.

In your opinion. In my opinion it is perfectly fine. There is absolutely NOTHING that makes your opinion more valid in this case than mine.

 TheKbob wrote:

 Las wrote:


He's suggesting we do that instead of discuss a game we enjoy, as if the two are mutually exclusive.

Sure, you enjoy it. Then you won't refuse to play my Eldar list and still have lots of fun, right? 'Cause I will.

I'll do whatever I please. That's my point. Plastic space dudes isn't an all or nothing equation. Learn 2 live.

 ronin_cse wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:


I guess we have different outlooks on the game. Sure I like taking the units I want to take, but sometimes that just isn't possible due to them being either OP or UP. If I take too many of those units then the game simply isn't fun, since I am responsible for my own actions I then take other things. I don't consider taking the most broken units part of playing to my full potential btw. I try to take fairly balanced non cheesy lists so I can play to my full potential and feel like I earned it. If I have a list on the same power level as my opponent and I still beat him and he still blames it on me playing Eldar, it's not my fault he needs an excuse for losing, and honestly he probably would have blamed it on my list regardless of the army I played.

Actually I build lists just as you do. I think in a real game we'd have a blast That said I am not going to expect others to approach the game the same way and nor should I. Rules and balance are there for a reason, the burden shouldn't lie on the player to make a list that isn't too powerful. It's poor design.

Actually I think that's where the different outlook lies. I personally don't think it's bad game design, just a type of game design. Again I grant that there are too many powerful units in this codex, but for the most part the game design of 40k is exactly what I want and why I continue playing it and enjoying it. Personally, as much as I love the lore and style and everything, if I was unhappy with the game design I would find something else.

You'd love my house rules for Yahtzee then, where in my house I get 10 re-rolls to your 1. It's not bad, it's just different.

I'm sure a few of you have seen me defending GW in several threads. I have genuinely believed that they were on the right track with 7th and that the similar power level of all codices so far was a sign that they had started caring about balance. Even the Necron codex I could see as a lapse rather than the start of a trend. The excellent Skitarii release reassured me that I was right. Now... there's really nothing I can say. This is beyond my wildest fears, an abomination of a codex that has me considering selling my beloved Eldar and taking a long break from 40k. The worst thing is that this would probably not affect me personally in a huge way, since my group is largely casual. It's mainly that the faith I had in the future of the game has been completely shattered, and that has ruined most of the excitement and enthusiasm I have felt since getting back into 40k. Jesus.

 ronin_cse wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:
just a type of game design.

Yeah, its called bad.

In your opinion. In my opinion it is perfectly fine. There is absolutely NOTHING that makes your opinion more valid in this case than mine.

No, your opinion is that you like it.

It is bad game design whether or not you like it. Let me put it this way, if 40k had a list of goals it was trying to achieve through its rules, would it achieve any of them? Its not balanced, it doesn't mesh with the fluff, its complicated, its expensive, and it creates divisions between player types.

Its not easy or simple or balanced enough (or conversely, entirely random enough) to be beer and pretzels, and its not tight or balanced enough to be enjoyed competitively. It has no system for campaigns, and the balance issues lead to a poor game for scenario/themed battles.

The Eldar dex is only the latest symptom of this. Creating a blatantly overpowered codex is not good game design, unless you'd like to argue otherwise, besides stating that you like it.

And for the record, I'm not stating in any way shape or form that you can't or shouldn't enjoy playing 40k, but I'm calling out that 40k is anything other than good game design. I'd accept that GW has done some solid stuff with the game in the past that the current edition are built on, but they're not making it any better with the likes of books like this.

Mymearan wrote:
I'm sure a few of you have seen me defending GW in several threads. I have genuinely believed that they were on the right track with 7th and that the similar power level of all codices so far was a sign that they had started caring about balance. Even the Necron codex I could see as a lapse rather than the start of a trend. The excellent Skitarii release reassured me that I was right. Now... there's really nothing I can say. This is beyond my wildest fears, an abomination of a codex that has me considering selling my beloved Eldar and taking a long break from 40k. I... I just can't. Jesus.

I'd say make an all banshee list, but hen after 2 years of modeling pricy failcast GW will probably give them a new kit and D weapons too, wasting more of your resources

 ronin_cse wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The fact I don't play any more doesn't make any thing I say automatically less valid. But thanks for just dismissing everything I say for no reason.

I think there's probably quite a few Eldar players out there. They're a great looking army, and they consistently have pretty good rules.

Well when I am asking about the meta that PEOPLE PLAY IN and you don't play the game, it does kind of invalidate what you say about the meta.

Don't worry ImAGeek, you'd still be wrong even if you played. Because you made a negative comment about 40k, so you are automatically wrong. And a whiner. Deal with it.

I said myself that the codex is OP and I'm not defending it, I am saying that a single codex being op doesn't ruin the game in all but the worst most competitive metas.

Also: you're both whiners, not because you said something bad about GW but because you are making the same petulant comments about things that can't be changed. We can't do anything about Eldar being OP at this point, so either deal with it and try to overcome it, or go play another game and stop bothering with 40k threads.

You're a whiner for constantly complaining about other people *not* positively accepting this new army, so I guess that makes all three of us.

Seriously, I don't understand why you feel the need to attack someone else for posting issues they have with the have. Because they're not cheery and don't say "don't worry guys! I'm sure we just power through it, we'll find a way to get around this!"? No. We pay TOO much money for these rules to have to be the ones fixing it. IF GW didn't charge out the rear for rules, continue to inflate the game to larger and larger sizes, and nickel and dime us every chance they got, the complaining wouldn't have merit. But they do- they charge a premium price for these rules and I think everyone should expect a premium product. Otherwise we're just giving charity to GW.

And I know they've been hurting these past few years financially, but they can fix these problems like any good business could. In the meantime, it is perfectly fine to just accept that these are some gross errors in this codex, not feel compelled to tell others their opinion is worthless because they haven't played lately (since the rules for the game have changed sooo much...not ).

But I suppose this thread would be half the size if it wasn't people criticizing each other over GW's decision to go all-in on cashhammer.

I called it. Knew this dex was an abomination to 40k kind. The best descriptor I heard was the broken GK dex on crack.

 Blacksails wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:
just a type of game design.

Yeah, its called bad.

In your opinion. In my opinion it is perfectly fine. There is absolutely NOTHING that makes your opinion more valid in this case than mine.

No, your opinion is that you like it.

It is bad game design whether or not you like it. Let me put it this way, if 40k had a list of goals it was trying to achieve through its rules, would it achieve any of them? Its not balanced, it doesn't mesh with the fluff, its complicated, its expensive, and it creates divisions between player types.

Its not easy or simple or balanced enough (or conversely, entirely random enough) to be beer and pretzels, and its not tight or balanced enough to be enjoyed competitively. It has no system for campaigns, and the balance issues lead to a poor game for scenario/themed battles.

The Eldar dex is only the latest symptom of this. Creating a blatantly overpowered codex is not good game design, unless you'd like to argue otherwise, besides stating that you like it.

And for the record, I'm not stating in any way shape or form that you can't or shouldn't enjoy playing 40k, but I'm calling out that 40k is anything other than good game design. I'd accept that GW has done some solid stuff with the game in the past that the current edition are built on, but they're not making it any better with the likes of books like this.

Exalted good sir.

 Las wrote:


I'll do whatever I please. That's my point. Plastic space dudes isn't an all or nothing equation. Learn 2 live.

Ah, yes. The "I do what I want" strategy. You forgot the head bob and three finger snaps.

And your misdirection of an answer holds no relation to this problem. Good job!

Mymearan wrote:
I'm sure a few of you have seen me defending GW in several threads. I have genuinely believed that they were on the right track with 7th and that the similar power level of all codices so far was a sign that they had started caring about balance. Even the Necron codex I could see as a lapse rather than the start of a trend. The excellent Skitarii release reassured me that I was right. Now... there's really nothing I can say. This is beyond my wildest fears, an abomination of a codex that has me considering selling my beloved Eldar and taking a long break from 40k. The worst thing is that this would probably not affect me personally in a huge way, since my group is largely casual. It's mainly that the faith I had in the future of the game has been completely shattered, and that has ruined most of the excitement and enthusiasm I have felt since getting back into 40k. Jesus.

I appreciate that you're open to saying this Mymearen. I think all of us in the, shall we call it, anti-GW (note: not anti-40k) group want to see the game do well, but the writing seems to be on the wall with everything GW does that it becomes more and more impossible to defend them.

EDIT: exalted, as well!

Gamgee wrote:
I called it. Knew this dex was an abomination to 40k kind. The best descriptor I heard was the broken GK dex on crack.

You are not unique.

 Accolade wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 ronin_cse wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
The fact I don't play any more doesn't make any thing I say automatically less valid. But thanks for just dismissing everything I say for no reason.

I think there's probably quite a few Eldar players out there. They're a great looking army, and they consistently have pretty good rules.

Well when I am asking about the meta that PEOPLE PLAY IN and you don't play the game, it does kind of invalidate what you say about the meta.

Don't worry ImAGeek, you'd still be wrong even if you played. Because you made a negative comment about 40k, so you are automatically wrong. And a whiner. Deal with it.

I said myself that the codex is OP and I'm not defending it, I am saying that a single codex being op doesn't ruin the game in all but the worst most competitive metas.

Also: you're both whiners, not because you said something bad about GW but because you are making the same petulant comments about things that can't be changed. We can't do anything about Eldar being OP at this point, so either deal with it and try to overcome it, or go play another game and stop bothering with 40k threads.

You're a whiner for constantly complaining about other people *not* positively accepting this new army, so I guess that makes all three of us.

Seriously, I don't understand why you feel the need to attack someone else for posting issues they have with the have. Because they're not cheery and don't say "don't worry guys! I'm sure we just power through it, we'll find a way to get around this!"? No. We pay TOO much money for these rules to have to be the ones fixing it. IF GW didn't charge out the rear for rules, continue to inflate the game to larger and larger sizes, and nickel and dime us every chance they got, the complaining wouldn't have merit. But they do- they charge a premium price for these rules and I think everyone should expect a premium product. Otherwise we're just giving charity to GW.

And I know they've been hurting these past few years financially, but they can fix these problems like any good business could. In the meantime, it is perfectly fine to just accept that these are some gross errors in this codex, not feel compelled to tell others their opinion is worthless because they haven't played lately (since the rules for the game have changed sooo much...not ).

But I suppose this thread would be half the size if it wasn't people criticizing each other over GW's decision to go all-in on cashhammer.

Have an exalt.

Mymearan wrote:
I'm sure a few of you have seen me defending GW in several threads. I have genuinely believed that they were on the right track with 7th and that the similar power level of all codices so far was a sign that they had started caring about balance. Even the Necron codex I could see as a lapse rather than the start of a trend. The excellent Skitarii release reassured me that I was right. Now... there's really nothing I can say. This is beyond my wildest fears, an abomination of a codex that has me considering selling my beloved Eldar and taking a long break from 40k. The worst thing is that this would probably not affect me personally in a huge way, since my group is largely casual. It's mainly that the faith I had in the future of the game has been completely shattered, and that has ruined most of the excitement and enthusiasm I have felt since getting back into 40k. Jesus.

And this is what people seem to not realize. Unbalanced things like this hurt casual groups more than competitive players. Poor rules hurt casual gamers more than competitive ones.