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.

shadowfinder wrote:
Help me understand this please.

Distortion Weapons
All Distortion weapons are Strength D. All of them. But the scythes apply a -1 when rolling on the D table, and the strength is considered to be 4 when calculating the instant death

SO on D-scythes are str what for wounding?

So that means that on a 1 or a 2 the do no damage right? so 33% chance of doing nothing... hope I am reading that right.


Not understanding the wounding on them for sure. It says they are str 4 for instant death. are they str 10 for wounding then????
Sorry just confused

OK, they are strength D for wounding. It means simply that you roll on the destroyer weapon chart instead of rolling to wound as usual. And yes, with a -1 modifier. So a 1 or 2 means no damage done. And a 3-6 is D3 wounds. It means that against scythes things like invulnerable saves will always be allowed, because they can't get a 6 result on the destroyer table.

As for the strength 4. That's purely for instant death purposes. So if you hit a toughness 3 multiwound model and your D3 result is just a 1 then they'll only lose one wound. But, if they're toughness 2 then 1 wound will be enough to remove the model.

Make sense?

 Khaine's Wrath wrote:

shadowfinder wrote:
Help me understand this please.

Distortion Weapons
All Distortion weapons are Strength D. All of them. But the scythes apply a -1 when rolling on the D table, and the strength is considered to be 4 when calculating the instant death

SO on D-scythes are str what for wounding?

So that means that on a 1 or a 2 the do no damage right? so 33% chance of doing nothing... hope I am reading that right.


Not understanding the wounding on them for sure. It says they are str 4 for instant death. are they str 10 for wounding then????
Sorry just confused

OK, they are strength D for wounding. It means simply that you roll on the destroyer weapon chart instead of rolling to wound as usual. And yes, with a -1 modifier. So a 1 or 2 means no damage done. And a 3-6 is D3 wounds. It means that against scythes things like invulnerable saves will always be allowed, because they can't get a 6 result on the destroyer table.

As for the strength 4. That's purely for instant death purposes. So if you hit a toughness 3 multiwound model and your D3 result is just a 1 then they'll only lose one wound. But, if they're toughness 2 then 1 wound will be enough to remove the model.

Make sense?

Thanks for clearing that up. I was a little lost on that.

No worries.... Now maybe someone will talk tactics and list building with me....

I'm looking forward to being able to run the pile of metal aspect warriors sitting in the box, thanks GW for banshees, my knight will be a special occasion toy now as no one locally runs super heavys , so the my regular opponents will be happy to see it go.
By buffing the less than viable units GW may have everyone a huge favour as eldar players will be able to run the units they always wanted to, not just the ones they have to.

I think the biggest upset I have with this new codex is that my wife plays Eldar, and thats a lot of newly viable units we have to buy. : /

But in the far spectrum, I'm very, very interested to see how Nova handles this. Its my first year attending, and something tells me they arent going to hold the tournament for hundreds of Eldar only players, so something will have to be done.

The only thing I dislike about the new codex, is the requirements for the guardian hosts. Having to take a support battery, unit of vypers, and a unit of warwalkers is a bit much for two of the options. Having to choose 1-2 of those three would have been less taxing IMO. Vyper making more sense as a requirement for the windrider host over the other two rather than ALL of them.

As far as tactics, I can't wait to field the aspect formation. It's probably THE best formation for Eldar units in the book IMO. I'm trying to figure out a good way to get Banshees into combat without using allied raiders. I'm thinking about still putting them into a Wave Serpent to get them safely into the mid field on turn 1 supported by other faster moving units (bikes, seer council) for saturation, drop them out turn two, then using their superior movement to get into combat turn 3. I don't think strait up running them across the table will be worth while, even using cover, considering scorpions will be more durable all around and have a higher strength/attacks in combat. Scorpions, will be much more useful, specially with the Exarch possibly getting a few extra attacks with his special weapons now. They'll be quite excellent along side a ranger based army supported by Vypers, bikes and warwalkers.

Yeah, the vyper tax on every host irritated me too. I instantly wanted the Windrider host with those new bikes, and vypers make sense there. But the guardian hosts can be a big point sink with war walkers and support battery's. Not unusable though. I was also a little irritated to see that crimson hunters can only be taken in squadrons of 3. But then I never really fielded one anyway.

And without wishing to break the Internet again with moans about D weapons, I'm gutted I can't field my scythe guard without having to get two more squads of wraith guard and a Lord on the table. I don't want that many guard in this army.

Of course, that's all solved with combined arms. Or by taking the wraith host formation as my primary detachment. But I don't want to do either of those.

I always liked Scythe-guard as well. Usually included one ina serpent as one of my troops choices. However, that's not possible anymore.

instead of trying to be fair and only wanting to take one unit of the so called "omg OP bull crap D weapon manz", I am forced to take multiples of them, and lords, and a knight.......Unless I don't use any of the new detachments rules...but I want to use the new shiny rules!

 Iechine wrote:
I think the biggest upset I have with this new codex is that my wife plays Eldar, and thats a lot of newly viable units we have to buy. : /

But in the far spectrum, I'm very, very interested to see how Nova handles this. Its my first year attending, and something tells me they arent going to hold the tournament for hundreds of Eldar only players, so something will have to be done.

First off all low super heavies and gargantuans are banned so no wraith knights or wraith host detachments with them.
Secondly the other three range d, wraith guard, platforms, hemlock sounds like they are going to allow just the nerfd d scythe version or make all normal ranged d into nerfed d scythe versions.
I doubt they will do anything to mass hvy wpn scatter laser toting bikes, but I'm sure it depends on play testing results for the next two to three months.

So excited about this!! Really can't wait.

Shame there has been so much negativity from some, but I think it just calls for a bit of creativity on their part to counter the new buffed things.

All changes make sense to me. It does seem like the new jetbikes will bring a lot of heavy weapons...if you're ok with mounting them on a fast Space Marine. I think if people spam Windriders then they will limit their own mobility by having that amount of models. Plus, who isn't bringing AP3 and better weapons? Plus they'll be jinking. Don't think it's as much of an issue as people think.

For me personally, I'm Ulthwe so I'll be using the Warhost Detachment, taking a Guardian Defender Host and a Seer Council. If it's a big game I'd use a Wraithknight but for most games (under 2k pts) I might actually try the Hemlock...!

Shane I can't use my single unit of Wraithguard anymore...

Is there any word on any new rules for Rangers / Outcasts yet?

partninja wrote:
I always liked Scythe-guard as well. Usually included one ina serpent as one of my troops choices. However, that's not possible anymore.

instead of trying to be fair and only wanting to take one unit of the so called "omg OP bull crap D weapon manz", I am forced to take multiples of them, and lords, and a knight.......Unless I don't use any of the new detachments rules...but I want to use the new shiny rules!

Yeah, I'm the same. I'm a little disappointed at the size of the formations. Daemonkin required 1 Hq, 2 troops and a unit of possessed minimum. Both guardian hosts and the wraith hosts are significantly bigger than that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bhazakhain wrote:
So excited about this!! Really can't wait.

Shame there has been so much negativity from some, but I think it just calls for a bit of creativity on their part to counter the new buffed things.

All changes make sense to me. It does seem like the new jetbikes will bring a lot of heavy weapons...if you're ok with mounting them on a fast Space Marine. I think if people spam Windriders then they will limit their own mobility by having that amount of models. Plus, who isn't bringing AP3 and better weapons? Plus they'll be jinking. Don't think it's as much of an issue as people think.

For me personally, I'm Ulthwe so I'll be using the Warhost Detachment, taking a Guardian Defender Host and a Seer Council. If it's a big game I'd use a Wraithknight but for most games (under 2k pts) I might actually try the Hemlock...!

Shane I can't use my single unit of Wraithguard anymore...

Is there any word on any new rules for Rangers / Outcasts yet?

Yeah, I agree with your take on bikes completely. I've always played iyanden.... I love background and the scheme. But I'm going to have to have a lot more 'living' models in my army now.

That is one thing I don't get. If you're Iyanden the Wraith Host should be the main thing but you have to have an awful lot of living Eldar in there. Is the supplement still valid?

Our choices are (a) spam a single Guardian choice, or (b) go CAD.

For Guardian spam:
1) Scatter Bikes are going to be derp. Enough has been said in other threads
2) Storm Guardians may actually see use in heavily offensive lists. I doubt it'll be tourny-level, but with an Avatar in there, they can be a scary assault threat. Without the Avatar, though, I don't think we'll see much of them.
3) 3 units of Defenders (min 10 each) are quite an investment. Could be a solid defensive line backed by some big guns. Similar to current builds, plus some new threats. Except that its capped at 1 Vaul's Wrath, I think.


Its too bad we can't mix and match. 2x Defenders + a Storm or Windrider unit could be fun, but 3x one unit just doesn't feel right.

I'll be running the CAD, and usually Swordwind. Perhaps more vehicles, though.

I actually don't own War Walkers or Vaul's Wrath batteries so this might be a trip to eBay!! I think I'll take 2 Vypers, War Walkers and Support Batteries, 2x 10 man Defender units and one 20 man unit. Is the free platform perk one per unit or one per detachment?

Assuming Eldar can take the other formations by themselves like Necrons, I might even just run 1-2 aspect hosts with 0-1 Avenger host and a heroes/living legends character. From the screen shots, I can't tell if this is possible or not.

People keep overlooking that Eldar Guardians move 12" with the War Host.

To me that makes them valuable as a cheap unit and mobile as well plus they get a free Support Weapon and give Preferred Enemy to War Walkers etc..

Hollismason wrote:
People keep overlooking that Eldar Guardians move 12" with the War Host.

To me that makes them valuable as a cheap unit and mobile as well plus they get a free Support Weapon and give Preferred Enemy to War Walkers etc..

I completely agree, however I don't have enough models to field the Guardian hosts currently. I think that is a large turn off for a lot of people. It's not so much what is in there, it's how many.

partninja wrote:
Assuming Eldar can take the other formations by themselves like Necrons, I might even just run 1-2 aspect hosts with 0-1 Avenger host and a heroes/living legends character. From the screen shots, I can't tell if this is possible or not.

Yeah, it works the same. So you can take a formation like the aspect, and make that your primary, and fill your points with other formations to make it a legal bound choice. But you won't get the bonuses of the overall warhost, just the individual formations.

Ah so Iyanden players could take a Wraith Host as primary? I hope for their sake that's true. So the whole thing about one compulsory guardian host formation is only if you want to benefit from the Warhost perks?

 Bhazakhain wrote:
Ah so Iyanden players could take a Wraith Host as primary? I hope for their sake that's true. So the whole thing about one compulsory guardian host formation is only if you want to benefit from the Warhost perks?

That's how it is with Necrons, and is what he is saying. Just looking at the picture of the leaked chart, it does appear to be the opposite though as it says 1-12 per guardian host. There are probably separate pages with the formation datasheets like Necrons. This would allow you to just run the formations (but lose the added warhost bonus - but keep your formation specific bonus).

You don't have to use the special detachment system and simply use the standard FOC. If I have to add two squads of cheap rangers to fill out my troop slots so be it, Ill find a few points somewhere. My army will continue to be:
Seer
Wraithseer w D-Cannon
2x7 Warp Spiders
Crimson Hunter
2x5 Wraithguard (5 scythe, 5 guns) in a BL serpent
2 Dreadnoughts(wraithlords)
Knight with suncannon

Unless they significantly change points around, my list should still be pretty functional. Look ma', no Vypers!

partninja wrote:

 Bhazakhain wrote:
Ah so Iyanden players could take a Wraith Host as primary? I hope for their sake that's true. So the whole thing about one compulsory guardian host formation is only if you want to benefit from the Warhost perks?

That's how it is with Necrons, and is what he is saying. Just looking at the picture of the leaked chart, it does appear to be the opposite though as it says 1-12 per guardian host. There are probably separate pages with the formation datasheets like Necrons. This would allow you to just run the formations (but lose the added warhost bonus - but keep your formation specific bonus).

That's how it works in the daemonkin book. You have one slaughtercult that allows you 1-8 auxiliary. Buy you can take the auxiliary formations separately.

A point to note though, if it does work like the daemonkin book one of the auxiliary slots is 'daemon engines' (maulerfiends and the like) these aren't a formation and simply a single model. So you can't field them unless they're with a slaughtercult, or in a CAD.

The same may go for the auxiliary selection labelled 'wraith constructs' meaning that if you don't take a guardian host, and your primary is a wraith host then you'll only have access to a single wraithknight. Not that that's such a bad thing considering its power now.

Col. Dash wrote:
You don't have to use the special detachment system and simply use the standard FOC. If I have to add two squads of cheap rangers to fill out my troop slots so be it, Ill find a few points somewhere. My army will continue to be:
Seer
Wraithseer w D-Cannon
2x7 Warp Spiders
Crimson Hunter
2x5 Wraithguard (5 scythe, 5 guns) in a BL serpent
2 Dreadnoughts(wraithlords)
Knight with suncannon

Unless they significantly change points around, my list should still be pretty functional. Look ma', no Vypers!

But all those new shiny formation rules! I don't care about the army wide auto-6 run (although it is awesome on some units) so much as I want the +1WS/BS on aspects

 Khaine's Wrath wrote:

partninja wrote:

 Bhazakhain wrote:
Ah so Iyanden players could take a Wraith Host as primary? I hope for their sake that's true. So the whole thing about one compulsory guardian host formation is only if you want to benefit from the Warhost perks?

That's how it is with Necrons, and is what he is saying. Just looking at the picture of the leaked chart, it does appear to be the opposite though as it says 1-12 per guardian host. There are probably separate pages with the formation datasheets like Necrons. This would allow you to just run the formations (but lose the added warhost bonus - but keep your formation specific bonus).

That's how it works in the daemonkin book. You have one slaughtercult that allows you 1-8 auxiliary. Buy you can take the auxiliary formations separately.

A point to note though, if it does work like the daemonkin book one of the auxiliary slots is 'daemon engines' (maulerfiends and the like) these aren't a formation and simply a single model. So you can't field them unless they're with a slaughtercult, or in a CAD.

The same may go for the auxiliary selection labelled 'wraith constructs' meaning that if you don't take a guardian host, and your primary is a wraith host then you'll only have access to a single wraithknight. Not that that's such a bad thing considering its power now.

Same for the Necrons. One of the Auxiliary options is to take a C'Tan or Vault, but since that isn't actually a formation you can't just take that in other armies.

I agree the new rules are nice, but if I want to run my army the way I want to run it, I have to go with a standard FoC. I still get some shiny rules to go with it.

Wraithhunter just became a nasty tank again with its big nasty template of doom.

Ah well I guess we'll see on Saturday.

What are people's thoughts on the Hemlock Wraithfighter now?

 Bhazakhain wrote:
Ah well I guess we'll see on Saturday.

What are people's thoughts on the Hemlock Wraithfighter now?

A smaller, more psychic, and hugely undercosted variant of the Vampire superheavy. I don't plan on using one anytime soon.

Besides, one of the primary purposes of a flyer is as a defense against other flyers, and the Crimson Hunter does that much better.

 Bhazakhain wrote:
Ah well I guess we'll see on Saturday.

What are people's thoughts on the Hemlock Wraithfighter now?

I haven't seen enough rules about it to comment really. I wanted to field one in the old book, but it just wasn't that great. And it was out performed by the Hunter everytime.

However, it looks like it's gaining strength D on its wraith weapons, so no matter how awful it is otherwise, expect the community to continue to whine if you select one.

I think now it isn't a morale based thing and is just lvl 2 psycher it'll be more useful. Looking forward to taking one myself. I think it was over costed before so now I think it's fair. Lucky I have one kit that isn't made up yet!

Are Heavy D-Scythes on the Hemlock still 18" with Blast?

I think it's a bit strong for the cost if it's still 185 points, but not overly so. The shorter range doesn't mean much when you can move 36" and still fire, but it does limit the mobility somewhat if you want to have good firing solutions. I'm less worried about the D and more worried about having a ML2 supersonic flyer with Psychic Shriek. It's scary on Daemon Princes, it'll be scary on this guy, especially when compounded with his gun.