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 Signless wrote:
A general ruling of 'no D weapons on anything but super heavy vehicles and gargantuan creatures' would also silence a lot of the complaints.

Though I still can't see the difference between a squad with strength 10 meltas and strength D guns. They will both kill whatever tank they fire at and then be wiped out in the next turn by return fire. The only thing that this might affect are knights, and those need a good kicking anyways.

I've been saying this for days. An assault squad with 3 meltas will kill something just as dead, and you get a free drop pod, plus it costs way less. And both will die the next round anyways. It's why often ASM are superior to Sanguinary or DC; they just cost less.

Plus, the ONLY way to get wraithguard in a warhost is to take THREE units. That's 480 points locked up, plus you need to buy falcons or wave serpents to deliver them, or they'll never get in range. So 810+ points pissed away for 3 squads, and you really just one 1, 2 at max in 1850. Who knows if you'll ever get 800+ points of kills from them.

Take CAD you say? Well sure, but then give up all those nice bonuses and now you max out at 1 wraithknight.

 the Signless wrote:


Though I still can't see the difference between a squad with strength 10 meltas and strength D guns. They will both kill whatever tank they fire at and then be wiped out in the next turn by return fire. The only thing that this might affect are knights, and those need a good kicking anyways.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Talys wrote:


I've been saying this for days. An assault squad with 3 meltas will kill something just as dead, and you get a free drop pod, plus it costs way less.

3 Meltas are far less certain than D weapons. Meltas, despite being excellent anti-tank units, do have a not-unrealistic chance to fail to penetrate, and a single miss or glance means you're now having to rely on rolling an Explodes result on any pen to kill the target.

Meanwhile the D weapons are just doing gobs of HP damage on 2+. 2 D shots at BS4, even discounting 6's entirely, are putting an average of 1.77HP's on an AV14 tank, while 3 BS4 meltas are putting an average of 1.44 on. The meltas have to be within 6" for that, while the WK can do so from 36" away.

Sure, but for the price of Wraithguard + Transport, you can have 2 squads of ASM with 2 Drop Pods. Or jump packs. Or Death Company with points left over, which kills stuff pretty good, or 1 squad of Sanguinary Guard, with jump packs included that kill stuff awesomely well. Or Centurions.

Regardless, my other point still stands though: unless you want to use CAD and limit Wraithknights, you need to spend 50% of your points on Wraithguard and transports for them, and this is far from optimal.

 Talys wrote:
The Eldar were always a little overpowered, especially for the mid-experience curve.

Unlike, for example, space Marines,

I've played since 2E, and Eldar have always been a strong counter to Space Marines - they are deliberately designed by GW as a hard counter to Space Marines of any flavor. That is why SM players QQ and TwT about them every single edition. Eldar exist to keep the game from devolving into "all Space Marines, all the time". Eldar are not "overpowered" by any means, unless you're talking about their key role as Rock to the SM Scissors (Guard are Paper).

However, as long as SM are the most popular faction, Scissors will continue to claim that Rock is OP and should be nerfed/banned.
____

Experiment 626 wrote:
I didn't start playing 40k until the 3rd edition re-boot, but throughout all these years I've seen & had to try to deal with Eldar excesses that included;

1. Starcannon spam.
A 36" range, S6/ap2 Heavy 3 weapon that could be spammed ad nausium across 5-man Guardian Squads, War Walkers, Vypers, Falcons, Wraithlords, Wave Serpents et all... at a time when Marine armies were lucky to get maybe 40-50 models on the table.

1a. certain power weapon toting Exarchs could buy an ability called Sustained Assault.

2. Alaitoc Ranger list & Disruption table.
Eldar were the first army in 3rd to gain easy access to 2++ cover saves. They also got super snipers who essentially had ATSKNF, could always re-group and never had to take 'All on Your Own' tests...
Then they got the Ranger Disruption Table
And if you min/maxed your Rangers/Pathfinders, you could upto 9 times on this table!! I can recall more than once that this table alone would outright win the game for the Eldar player.

3. Biel-Tan Swordwind
Aspects were the best parts of the Eldar infantry in 3rd & early 4th. Now you could take them as Troops.
Plus they got take an entire unit of 3-5 DA/Fire Dragon/Banshee/Scorpion Exarchs in any combination as an HQ choice.

4. Ulthwe Seer Congress
Not only did Ulthwe armies get BS4 for the seemingly mandatory 5-man Starcannon platforms for no added cost, but now they could also take a unit of 2-5 Farseers + unlimited Warlocks, at a time when Psychic counters were simply non-existent!
Plus they also got the new 5pts Augment Warlock power which would double the range of all those Mind Wars, Fortunes & Guides that the Farseers were tossing about...
Grey Knights kinda laughed in the end due to being the only army that could invuln save ignoring wargear, but overall, no one else could dent a re-rolled 4++ save unit of 40-50+ models. (of which a 1/3 would be wielding Witchblades/Singing Spears!)

5. Flying Circus & Holofield Fire Prisms
The dirty list of mid to late 4th edition... Avoidancehammer at it's most obnoxious, as the Falcons and/or Prisms would shoot, then duck back behind cover. If you ever did manage to get shots off on them, it took an ungodly amount of firepower to get through the Holofields.

5a. Once the Harlie models became widely available, you then had units which would tear up most anything in combat with high WS & I rending attacks, coupled with an unblockable auto-pass psy power that made it almost impossible to shoot the unit down unless you could get within about 6" or so of them!

6. Serpent Spam.
Massed Wave Serpents toting Scatter Lasers for the Laser-lock rule coupled with the shield's shooting attack.

6a. Wraithknights thus far have really seemed more like a fire magnet that simply tanks damage rather than a super OP unit. (at least, my LoC loves currently smacking the things around!)

7. New Scatlas Jetbikes & massed range Str.D
I still don't think the bikes will quite as bad as what is being made of them right now honestly... they're still horribly vulnerable to any kind of Alpha Strike, plus Barrage weapons like Wyverns, Thunderfire Cannons and their ilk will make a huge mess of larger units of the things.
Massed range Str.D could easily become problematic, especially to those who typically rely on lots of MC's such as Tyranids & Daemons, or heavy armour like IG. But still, if the Wraithcannons are still just 12", they're still stuck being expensive suicide units, while D weapon batteries can be nuked by cheap Deep Strikers or other fast moving units.
Gargantuan Creature Wraithknights however look terrifyingly good for only 295pts base!

So overall, from the perspective of what Eldar used to pull in 3rd ed and early 4th, it actually seems like they're getting fewer cheesy antics overall... Back in 3rd, I never had fun against Eldar. Anything my army could do, Eldar did 100x better. Unless a list was based heavily around Guardians with only a couple 'not Guardian' units, it felt like I never had much of a chance in any game.

The Craftworld codex was the absolute peak of Eldar's total & utter domination of the 40k gaming scene. Nothing, not even the most broken aspects of the vaunted 3.5 Chaos codex could lay a finger on the levels of gouda an Eldar player could pull.
At one point when GW actively led & supported a tournament scene, Eldar during one year in the US had over 90 event wins!! Space Wolves were a distant 2nd with barely over 30 wins...

So sure, let the Eldar have their cheapie-cheap Scatlas Bikes and ranged Str.D weapons. At least they're no longer auto-winning at deployment, or laying down 80 man Seer congresses, or spamming high rate of fire S6/ap2 guns, or blenderising entire units in combat without breaking a sweat, etc...

It's funny that you complain about all of the Craftworld armies, because most of them were terrible...

1. Starcannon were the only good heavy weapon in the 3E Codex - pretty much everything else was crap. Then as now, SMs dominated the scene, so it was correct to take a lot of them. However, aside from Wraithlords and Guardians, the platforms that could field them were flat out bad.

1a. Sustained Assault was funny, because your expensive Character could randomly get a very big number. But you could just as easily whiff, and opponents don't remember those times. It's actually more of an Ork mechanic than an Eldar one. The reason 54 hits stands out is because it is so rare - rarer than one-shotting a Land Raider with a Missile Launcher. It's a good choice for fething about for gaks & grins, but it's a terrible competition pick.

2. Alaitoc Rangers and Pathfinders were another gimmick army. Disruption was great against foot Marines, but did basically nothing against mech. Most opponents don't get tabled by Rangers on Turn 0. And Rangers can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Area terrain also meant there was a lot of ground they couldn't shoot, assuming proper terrain placement and density. I would never take them in competition, because the opponent basically has to hand you the win.

3. Biel-Tan Swordwind was a good army, but also the very definition of "glass dagger". In pure form, it is the easiest army to win big, or lose big, because everything is expensive, deadly, minimal-ranged and fragile. If you aren't taking bulk, toughness and rangestrikers, or you take early casualties, you have a very big problem. The Exarch Court is a poor pick, due to high cost exacerbating the glass dagger design. Experience showed that Swordwind formed the base base for a "balanced" mixed force with Guardians and other units.

4. Ulthwe Seer Council was the other good army, for the 2 BS4 Black Guardian units. Thing is, bumping BS3 to BS4 on 2 Starcannon isn't that big of a benefit. Out of 3+3 shots, you only got 1 extra hit per turn, so over a 6-turn game, you killed 5 extra dudes - great if they're Cult Marines, worthless if they're Guardsmen. As with the rest, Seer Council was tough, but it was expensive, and slow - not a good match for my playstyle.

5. 4E Holofalcon / Holoprism was created to push sales of Eldar Mech, but it's a lot of points to put in non-Scoring units.

5a. Harlequins are deadly amusing if they survive to reach HTH, otherwise, it's an awful lot of points to pay for a T3 W1 dude without an armor save. Point for point, I find Sv3+ Scorpions better, but less flashy.

6. 6E Serpent Spam isn't something I play, so I won't comment here.

6a. Wraithknights are/were simply another 2-in-1 unit like the Imperial Knight, except it joins to Wraithlords instead of to Leman Russes. Imperial Knights are (were) better, point for point. Correct that they're a fantastic bullet soak, just like a Wraithlord. For the same effort, the opponent could utterly savage other units.

7. 7E Scatlas & S(D) has a lot of people excited, but I don't think that all Scatter Laser / Shuricannon is the right build, because you're pulling off 27-pt T4 models with every failed save. And it's not like they negate Sv3+. They're simply a very good support unit that helps against Guard and Orks and other Hordes that are the bane of any Eldar army.

The S(D) guns are not really that different from S10 or Melta, when you get down to it. But S(D) is ooh.. scary. Not. People are missing the only real buff - making the Wraithknight a GC - that matters a lot more than making his guns not suck for how expensive he is. Really, GW needed Eldar to counter Imperial Knights, which is what these changes are all about.

As above, back in 3E/4E, Craftworld Eldar were a counter army, and the best at it. The meta was still heavily foot Marines (that killed Guardians like Guardsmen), and Eldar could easily counter that with tremendous efficiency. But that's not cheese. It's simply smart metagaming to autowin 80-90% of the field and hope you don't get a bad matchup against an Ork or Guard player who's loaded for bear and out for blood. If you just got typical first round against Marines (80+% of the time), the other Marines would relegate the Guard players down into the losers bracket and it's smooth sailing after that, provided you didn't feth it up.

Really, if you just want to show how not-broken Eldar are, just bring Guard to the table and you should win most of the time. Even if the Eldar bring their scary S(D) toys in bulk. Let them break cover into the teeth of your guns, wasting their S(D) shots on 5-pt Guardsmen while you drop ID no-save pie plates on their expensive targets...

We dont have to do much, from what I'm gathering, the Eldar players are just as upset with this codex as the non-eldar players are. I know Eldar Players that are going to shelve this army for the time being.

its very well understood that its not a good codex. I cant fathom what army would be an equal match to this...I dont get it.

unless their codex states that all non eldar units have Prefered enemy Eldar and Hated Eldar.

The whole idea of this thread would carry a lot more weight if it had been posted after the codex was released...

Despite us having confirmed info from someone with photo evidence that they hold the physical codex?

This feels like deja vu from all those Serpent threads but turned up to 11. Where is Morgoth anyway? Figured he'd be all over arguing in favor of this new book.

 Eldarain wrote:
Despite us having confirmed info from someone with photo evidence that they hold the physical codex?

This feels like deja vu from all those Serpent threads but turned up to 11. Where is Morgoth anyway? Figured he'd be all over arguing in favor of this new book.

Noooooo! Saying his name may summon him!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just. Don't. Say. It. Three. Times.

This is the epitome of "I'm taking my ball and going home" maybe playing against a strong army would make you a better general? And would negate the effect the boosted units will give? I remember when Necrons were announced and everybody was up and arms over them as well. If everything is broken and everything is OP then nothing is. At the end of the day all these fancy tools and units don't mean anything if your dice rolls suck. Eldar players out there, I'll play you, and we'll have fun, it'll probably be more fun than playing against a daemon army with 20 base psychic dice casting invis on 20 flesh hounds.

Corny wrote:
The whole idea of this thread would carry a lot more weight if it had been posted after the codex was released...

It would actually be even more meaningful if Eldar were sweeping tournaments.

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Despite us having confirmed info from someone with photo evidence that they hold the physical codex?

This feels like deja vu from all those Serpent threads but turned up to 11. Where is Morgoth anyway? Figured he'd be all over arguing in favor of this new book.

Noooooo! Saying his name may summon him!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just. Don't. Say. It. Three. Times.

Who's name, Morgoth? Who is Morgoth? What happens if I say Morgoth three times?

:-o oh dear god. Now we are going to be told about how ridiculously expensive in points the new jetbikes are and how imperial plasma guns are far better on infantry than D weapons. In every thread ever where the word Eldar occurs. What have you done?!?

 Talys wrote:

 the Signless wrote:
A general ruling of 'no D weapons on anything but super heavy vehicles and gargantuan creatures' would also silence a lot of the complaints.

Though I still can't see the difference between a squad with strength 10 meltas and strength D guns. They will both kill whatever tank they fire at and then be wiped out in the next turn by return fire. The only thing that this might affect are knights, and those need a good kicking anyways.

I've been saying this for days. An assault squad with 3 meltas will kill something just as dead, and you get a free drop pod, plus it costs way less. And both will die the next round anyways. It's why often ASM are superior to Sanguinary or DC; they just cost less.

Plus, the ONLY way to get wraithguard in a warhost is to take THREE units. That's 480 points locked up, plus you need to buy falcons or wave serpents to deliver them, or they'll never get in range. So 810+ points pissed away for 3 squads, and you really just one 1, 2 at max in 1850. Who knows if you'll ever get 800+ points of kills from them.

Take CAD you say? Well sure, but then give up all those nice bonuses and now you max out at 1 wraithknight.

3 meltas is not that reliable. Do the math.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


It's funny that you complain about all of the Craftworld armies, because most of them were terrible...

1. Starcannon were the only good heavy weapon in the 3E Codex - pretty much everything else was crap. Then as now, SMs dominated the scene, so it was correct to take a lot of them. However, aside from Wraithlords and Guardians, the platforms that could field them were flat out bad.

Warwalkers with guide were a thing in 3rd edition, but yes, marines were the best armies in 3rd edition.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

1a. Sustained Assault was funny, because your expensive Character could randomly get a very big number. But you could just as easily whiff, and opponents don't remember those times. It's actually more of an Ork mechanic than an Eldar one. The reason 54 hits stands out is because it is so rare - rarer than one-shotting a Land Raider with a Missile Launcher. It's a good choice for fething about for gaks & grins, but it's a terrible competition pick.

Sustained assault worked by generating an additional attack for every hit made in close combat. These extra attacks could also generate extra attacks. It was pretty bonkers as far as powers went, and was one of the best. Granted, it was on a swooping hawk who had a power sword at best, so it was never over powered. But it would wipe a squad...I was the only person I knew personally fielding swooping hawks in 3rd though.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

2. Alaitoc Rangers and Pathfinders were another gimmick army. Disruption was great against foot Marines, but did basically nothing against mech. Most opponents don't get tabled by Rangers on Turn 0. And Rangers can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Area terrain also meant there was a lot of ground they couldn't shoot, assuming proper terrain placement and density. I would never take them in competition, because the opponent basically has to hand you the win.

They weren't the strongest craftworld, but they could do really well against certain armies. Not marines, but a lot of armies hated fighting them. Tanks were not really taken when the craftworld book dropped, and putting units in reserve could make an enemy really easy to deal with. Not to mention pathfinders having super rending and cover.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

3. Biel-Tan Swordwind was a good army, but also the very definition of "glass dagger". In pure form, it is the easiest army to win big, or lose big, because everything is expensive, deadly, minimal-ranged and fragile. If you aren't taking bulk, toughness and rangestrikers, or you take early casualties, you have a very big problem. The Exarch Court is a poor pick, due to high cost exacerbating the glass dagger design. Experience showed that Swordwind formed the base base for a "balanced" mixed force with Guardians and other units.

I don't know how you could say the army was minimally ranged..it allowed you to take any aspect as a troop choice. Reapers are not short ranged and were an excellent unit. Warp spiders were fast and pretty tough too. I do not remember anyone taking guardians, as outside of Ulthwe they were considered poor. Even ulthwe took 2 min units with a starcannon and took a giant seer council instead.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

4. Ulthwe Seer Council was the other good army, for the 2 BS4 Black Guardian units. Thing is, bumping BS3 to BS4 on 2 Starcannon isn't that big of a benefit. Out of 3+3 shots, you only got 1 extra hit per turn, so over a 6-turn game, you killed 5 extra dudes - great if they're Cult Marines, worthless if they're Guardsmen. As with the rest, Seer Council was tough, but it was expensive, and slow - not a good match for my playstyle.

Back then, armies were a lot smaller then they were now. Guardians were cheap, and could be given cover and fortune with guide for a solid shooting platform. They weren't good awful in CC, but no one took storm guardians. Ulthwe was taken for the seer council though, and it was an absurdly strong unit at the time. A lot of attacks that wounded on 2+, usually hit on 3+, had flamers and mind war with guide as well. The rerolls for saves with 4+ invuls was also considered to be quite the thing back then. If you chose not to play them, that's great, but you can't hand wave away what a strong unit it was.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

5. 4E Holofalcon / Holoprism was created to push sales of Eldar Mech, but it's a lot of points to put in non-Scoring units.

It was still an absurdly difficult to kill tank with really solid anti-tank/anti-heavy infantry. It may have pushed sales but my god was it strong back in 4E.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

5a. Harlequins are deadly amusing if they survive to reach HTH, otherwise, it's an awful lot of points to pay for a T3 W1 dude without an armor save. Point for point, I find Sv3+ Scorpions better, but less flashy.

Harlies were nice because you couldn't fire at them outside of a certain range, and they were monsters in HTH.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

6. 6E Serpent Spam isn't something I play, so I won't comment here.

Again, just because you don't play it doesn't mean you can hand wave it away. It was still very much a thing.
I can't deny the Chaos 3.5 dex was overpowered just because I didn't drop the siren bomb.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

6a. Wraithknights are/were simply another 2-in-1 unit like the Imperial Knight, except it joins to Wraithlords instead of to Leman Russes. Imperial Knights are (were) better, point for point. Correct that they're a fantastic bullet soak, just like a Wraithlord. For the same effort, the opponent could utterly savage other units.

Wraithknights were good, but the serpents were the best unit. I don't think anyone claimed they were the best, I saw many polls putting them behind riptides and other similar units.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

7. 7E Scatlas & S(D) has a lot of people excited, but I don't think that all Scatter Laser / Shuricannon is the right build, because you're pulling off 27-pt T4 models with every failed save. And it's not like they negate Sv3+. They're simply a very good support unit that helps against Guard and Orks and other Hordes that are the bane of any Eldar army.

Remember GK in 5th? They were expesnive, and had 2 shot 24" weapons at Str 5 with BS 4. They were so destructive it was absurd, and an army that was supposed to fight demons one on one became the king of midfield shooting.
Eldar have 4 36" Str 6 with BS 4 and are much faster for slightly more points. It's even more amazing by leaps and bounds, on a codex that is already pretty good. Negating saves isn't really as important as weight of fire is. The waveserpent wasn't exactly negating saves either.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The S(D) guns are not really that different from S10 or Melta, when you get down to it. But S(D) is ooh.. scary. Not. People are missing the only real buff - making the Wraithknight a GC - that matters a lot more than making his guns not suck for how expensive he is. Really, GW needed Eldar to counter Imperial Knights, which is what these changes are all about.

The S(D) guns are dramatically different from S10 or Melta against tanks. Saying Eldar counter the best "tank" dex in the game while also having the best anti-infantry dex in the game is exactly the problem.
Saying it's not scary doesn't make it true. 3 S(D) weapons can destroy most tanks. 3 Meltas do not.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

As above, back in 3E/4E, Craftworld Eldar were a counter army, and the best at it. The meta was still heavily foot Marines (that killed Guardians like Guardsmen), and Eldar could easily counter that with tremendous efficiency. But that's not cheese. It's simply smart metagaming to autowin 80-90% of the field and hope you don't get a bad matchup against an Ork or Guard player who's loaded for bear and out for blood. If you just got typical first round against Marines (80+% of the time), the other Marines would relegate the Guard players down into the losers bracket and it's smooth sailing after that, provided you didn't feth it up.

Well, the Meta in 3rd was not foot marines, it was the Rhino Rush. BA were the best army in the game because of their crazy assault abilities, but not by a huge amount. Eventually this was replaced by the Siren Bomb and Iron Warriors, which was eventually replaced by the Eldar in a few builds.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Really, if you just want to show how not-broken Eldar are, just bring Guard to the table and you should win most of the time. Even if the Eldar bring their scary S(D) toys in bulk. Let them break cover into the teeth of your guns, wasting their S(D) shots on 5-pt Guardsmen while you drop ID no-save pie plates on their expensive targets...

The S(D) weapons will go into the tanks while the guardsmen chase the scatterbikes endlessly across the table. They can take both.

I'm in, I think the Eldar stuff is bs, and unless I'm playing to goof off with friends I think its stupid. Even my Eldar buddy plays his space wolves if we're being serious.

Akiasura wrote:

It's not really being overlooked, it's just that 40k isn't a tactically deep game. Too much is based off of a single dice roll, which has an equal chance of any number coming up (compared to a 2d6, where you get a nice bell curve).
Dice means anything can happen, of course, but saying you're army has a 70:30 advantage over Eldar or Necrons because of your player skill is dubious at best as a claim.

1) You are assuming anyone playing a competitive eldar list is mediocre.
2) You are assuming you are an excellent player, without evidence supporting this.
3) You are assuming your skill is so large that you can overcome an inherent disadvantage in your codex to the point where you actually gain a significant advantage in the matchup.
4) You are assuming your skill is somehow relevant to a larger discussion.

People are in favor of restrictions in this game, and any tournament game, because it adds a semblance of balance back to a game that otherwise doesn't function. Many fighting games do the same thing, to stop the game being Akuma versus Akuma (not saying he was banned, just an example). People play in tournaments, in a more balanced setting, to prove who is the better player and to play against new people who they otherwise may never have gotten to play against.

In 40k, tournaments don't add much because different tournaments have different restrictions, though some of them are being widely regarded as successful (though the eldar codex does stomp on some of those rulings). In more competitive games, (WMH, SSB, Magic) being a competitive gamer means you can make statements like yours and be taken seriously. I may not agree with M2K on everything (I don't even like him personally), but when he says a character is overpowered, everyone listens.

I wasn't really trying to say anything about my own talents, so much as to say the new Eldar Codex is only going to be dangerous in the hands of people who actually know how to play the game.

If that requires some kind of evidence, assume I am just a boastful jerk, consider your own experiences and go from there. I would say it's only about 3 out of every 10 players I meet really know how to use the rules to their advantage, which would correspond with the upper end of a bell curve (it's actually being a little generous.)

Most of the people I see running competitive lists tend to have bought clones of armies they heard won at NOVA or LVO, and thus lack some skills either with the army or 40k in general. Their armies tend to be hastily assembled and they have a tendency to overestimate / underestimate what they can do with them.

Of course, your standards and mine could be completely different. But I would put experience over an OP list any day.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Talys wrote:
The Eldar were always a little overpowered, especially for the mid-experience curve.

Unlike, for example, space Marines,

I've played since 2E, and Eldar have always been a strong counter to Space Marines - they are deliberately designed by GW as a hard counter to Space Marines of any flavor. That is why SM players QQ and TwT about them every single edition. Eldar exist to keep the game from devolving into "all Space Marines, all the time". Eldar are not "overpowered" by any means, unless you're talking about their key role as Rock to the SM Scissors (Guard are Paper).

Guard haven't done any better against Eldar the last couple years than Marine armies have been. I'd feel much more comfortable engaging SM's than Eldar in a competitive environment with IG, and with my own Eldar I've never really found IG to be harder to deal with than SM's.

*DARK* Eldar very much fit the mold you describe, I very rarely see them lose to Marines and almost never see them beat IG, but normal Eldar? IG aren't particularly hard matchups, and IG certainly weren't particularly good against Eldar in 2E, 3E or 4E (in fact, IG weren't particularly good against anything in 3E and 4Eexcept mediocre las/plas spam). The only edition where IG were truly a "paper" to Eldar's "rock" was 5E.

5. 4E Holofalcon / Holoprism was created to push sales of Eldar Mech, but it's a lot of points to put in non-Scoring units.

In 4E they could be scoring, it was only when 5E came around that they were no longer scoring, and then they weren't as unkillable as they once were either.

7. 7E Scatlas & S(D) has a lot of people excited, but I don't think that all Scatter Laser / Shuricannon is the right build, because you're pulling off 27-pt T4 models with every failed save. And it's not like they negate Sv3+. They're simply a very good support unit that helps against Guard and Orks and other Hordes that are the bane of any Eldar army.

They're not bad at all against MEQ units. A 10 man unit of jetbikes is clearing 7-8 marines off the table every turn from 36" away straight through the 3+ save. And that's without anything like Guide or Doom, and they're not having to deal with scatter or unit spread. For the range at which they can engage, they're actually really very good, putting as many casualties on a MEQ unit (again, in cover or no) as many specialized anti-MEQ units are under optimal conditions.

The S(D) guns are not really that different from S10 or Melta, when you get down to it. But S(D) is ooh.. scary. Not.

I don't know how many times I need to debunk this, because it's simply, flat out not true. I'm sure the tune would be different if suddenly IG Manticores got Strength D.

Again, lets look at S10 AP2 and S8 AP1 Melta vs AV14 along with a Destroyer weapon.

S10 - Each hit on average causes 0.5 HP's lost, and 0.0555 Explodes Results
S 8 Melta: Each hit on average causes 0.722 HP's lost and 0.1944 Explodes Results
S D - Each hit on average inflicts 2.92 HP's, and 0.055 Explodes Results (assuming AP2).

Now, the Explodes result are a bit interesting, but the average HP stripping ability is astounding. Even if you want to artificially remove the 6's from the equation, you're almost doubling the HP stripping ability of a Meltagun and nearly tripling the HP stripping ability you had with Strength 10.

Yes, there is a very real and huge difference here.

Really, if you just want to show how not-broken Eldar are, just bring Guard to the table and you should win most of the time.

Tournament results and my own experience over multiple editions really do starkly disagree with this.

 Talys wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Talys wrote:


I've been saying this for days. An assault squad with 3 meltas will kill something just as dead, and you get a free drop pod, plus it costs way less.

3 Meltas are far less certain than D weapons. Meltas, despite being excellent anti-tank units, do have a not-unrealistic chance to fail to penetrate, and a single miss or glance means you're now having to rely on rolling an Explodes result on any pen to kill the target.

Meanwhile the D weapons are just doing gobs of HP damage on 2+. 2 D shots at BS4, even discounting 6's entirely, are putting an average of 1.77HP's on an AV14 tank, while 3 BS4 meltas are putting an average of 1.44 on. The meltas have to be within 6" for that, while the WK can do so from 36" away.

Sure, but for the price of Wraithguard + Transport, you can have 2 squads of ASM with 2 Drop Pods. Or jump packs. Or Death Company with points left over, which kills stuff pretty good, or 1 squad of Sanguinary Guard, with jump packs included that kill stuff awesomely well. Or Centurions.

Sure you can get other units, but the Wraithguard & transport are effective against a wider array of potential targets and have more staying power and are more likely to survive a counterattack (depending on what they're throwing back), and also only taking one FoC slot, and aren't having to rely on getting into CC.

Regardless, my other point still stands though: unless you want to use CAD and limit Wraithknights, you need to spend 50% of your points on Wraithguard and transports for them, and this is far from optimal.

If you want to use the Warhost, yes. But, unlike Necrons, a CAD remains an excellent options and the best way to spam many of the best units.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

It's not really being overlooked, it's just that 40k isn't a tactically deep game. Too much is based off of a single dice roll, which has an equal chance of any number coming up (compared to a 2d6, where you get a nice bell curve).
Dice means anything can happen, of course, but saying you're army has a 70:30 advantage over Eldar or Necrons because of your player skill is dubious at best as a claim.

1) You are assuming anyone playing a competitive eldar list is mediocre.
2) You are assuming you are an excellent player, without evidence supporting this.
3) You are assuming your skill is so large that you can overcome an inherent disadvantage in your codex to the point where you actually gain a significant advantage in the matchup.
4) You are assuming your skill is somehow relevant to a larger discussion.

People are in favor of restrictions in this game, and any tournament game, because it adds a semblance of balance back to a game that otherwise doesn't function. Many fighting games do the same thing, to stop the game being Akuma versus Akuma (not saying he was banned, just an example). People play in tournaments, in a more balanced setting, to prove who is the better player and to play against new people who they otherwise may never have gotten to play against.

In 40k, tournaments don't add much because different tournaments have different restrictions, though some of them are being widely regarded as successful (though the eldar codex does stomp on some of those rulings). In more competitive games, (WMH, SSB, Magic) being a competitive gamer means you can make statements like yours and be taken seriously. I may not agree with M2K on everything (I don't even like him personally), but when he says a character is overpowered, everyone listens.

 techsoldaten wrote:

I wasn't really trying to say anything about my own talents, so much as to say the new Eldar Codex is only going to be dangerous in the hands of people who actually know how to play the game.

Honestly folks I called it before the codex came out. The Necron codex was a warning of things on the horizon. Wait until space marines. If GW is beefing up Eldar just wait for what we see out of the new marine dex.

sparti67 wrote:
Honestly folks I called it before the codex came out. The Necron codex was a warning of things on the horizon. Wait until space marines. If GW is beefing up Eldar just wait for what we see out of the new marine dex.

SM codex wasnt pulling up trees compared to the last eldar book so what makes you think this time it will be different?

Akiasura wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


It's funny that you complain about all of the Craftworld armies, because most of them were terrible...

1. Starcannon
Warwalkers with guide were a thing in 3rd edition, but yes, marines were the best armies in 3rd edition.

1a. Sustained Assault
Sustained assault worked by generating an additional attack for every hit made in close combat. These extra attacks could also generate extra attacks. It was pretty bonkers as far as powers went, and was one of the best. Granted, it was on a swooping hawk who had a power sword at best, so it was never over powered. But it would wipe a squad...I was the only person I knew personally fielding swooping hawks in 3rd though.

2. Alaitoc Rangers and Pathfinders
They weren't the strongest craftworld, but they could do really well against certain armies. Not marines, but a lot of armies hated fighting them. Tanks were not really taken when the craftworld book dropped, and putting units in reserve could make an enemy really easy to deal with. Not to mention pathfinders having super rending and cover.

3. Biel-Tan Swordwind
I don't know how you could say the army was minimally ranged..it allowed you to take any aspect as a troop choice. Reapers are not short ranged and were an excellent unit. Warp spiders were fast and pretty tough too. I do not remember anyone taking guardians, as outside of Ulthwe they were considered poor. Even ulthwe took 2 min units with a starcannon and took a giant seer council instead.

4. Ulthwe Seer Council
Back then, armies were a lot smaller then they were now. Guardians were cheap, and could be given cover and fortune with guide for a solid shooting platform. They weren't good awful in CC, but no one took storm guardians. Ulthwe was taken for the seer council though, and it was an absurdly strong unit at the time. A lot of attacks that wounded on 2+, usually hit on 3+, had flamers and mind war with guide as well. The rerolls for saves with 4+ invuls was also considered to be quite the thing back then. If you chose not to play them, that's great, but you can't hand wave away what a strong unit it was.

5. 4E Holofalcon / Holoprism
It was still an absurdly difficult to kill tank with really solid anti-tank/anti-heavy infantry. It may have pushed sales but my god was it strong back in 4E.

5a. Harlequins
Harlies were nice because you couldn't fire at them outside of a certain range, and they were monsters in HTH.

6. 6E Serpent Spam isn't something I play, so I won't comment here.

Again, just because you don't play it doesn't mean you can hand wave it away. It was still very much a thing.
I can't deny the Chaos 3.5 dex was overpowered just because I didn't drop the siren bomb.

6a. Wraithknights
Wraithknights were good, but the serpents were the best unit. I don't think anyone claimed they were the best, I saw many polls putting them behind riptides and other similar units.

7. 7E Scatlas & S(D)
Remember GK in 5th? They were expesnive, and had 2 shot 24" weapons at Str 5 with BS 4. They were so destructive it was absurd, and an army that was supposed to fight demons one on one became the king of midfield shooting.

Eldar have 4 36" Str 6 with BS 4 and are much faster for slightly more points. It's even more amazing by leaps and bounds, on a codex that is already pretty good. Negating saves isn't really as important as weight of fire is. The waveserpent wasn't exactly negating saves either.

The S(D) guns are dramatically different from S10 or Melta against tanks. Saying Eldar counter the best "tank" dex in the game while also having the best anti-infantry dex in the game is exactly the problem.
Saying it's not scary doesn't make it true. 3 S(D) weapons can destroy most tanks. 3 Meltas do not.

Well, the Meta in 3rd was not foot marines, it was the Rhino Rush. BA were the best army in the game because of their crazy assault abilities, but not by a huge amount. Eventually this was replaced by the Siren Bomb and Iron Warriors, which was eventually replaced by the Eldar in a few builds.

The S(D) weapons will go into the tanks while the guardsmen chase the scatterbikes endlessly across the table. They can take both.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Don't like my Eldar? Stay off my tables then. If this is your stance on Eldar than I do not want to play against you using my Astral Claws, Tyranids or even my stupidly weak Chaos list. If you want to take steps to invalidate the army that I spent a few hundred dollars on because of a rule set that is 1) out of my control and 2) not the end of the world, then your group, area and whatever else you get to side with you is not a part of the hobby that I want to be a part of. Reimburse the time and money I put into the army or you can kindly stuff it. You damage the hobby more with this sort of thinking than anything else.

this x 1,000,000
thank you for expressing what i was thinking.

as for OP its posts like yours that make me want to never come back to this site.

as soon as I saw the rules leaks I knew i'd be playing more of the guardians with aspect support and putting away my wraith constructs (and i hope this is what most eldar players will do). its not hard to know when to tone down your list.

if you're playing at tournaments or against waac's then that is your own fault. those games are meant to push the competitiveness to the limit, so people will use whatever tools they can.

I don't think you can or have the right to invalidate an entire army because you don't like the rules that where released for them.

This all reminds me of the Open ban of the tau codex when it first was coming through

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


1. Warwalkers were not good in 3E, being unarmored and horribly unreliable with Sv- shots.

They weren't the best choices, but they did make appearances. Guide on a unit of these bad boys could nearly wipe a unit, giving it CC like power in an edition where CC ruled.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


1a. I experimented with Hawk Exarchs, but found them too fragile with the delivery being T3 Sv4+ and too unreliable at S3, especially if using the DS Reserves effect.

Agreed, they weren't competitive. I liked them because I found it hilarious that my Eldar could out fight my brothers orks...and the dainty models did it the best

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


2. I experimented with a max Ranger/Pathfinder army, and it was great against certain armies, horrible against armor. As I noted above, winning depended entirely on what the opponent brought.

Armor wasn't exactly super common. Many armies took 1 tank or so, and the army wasn't much worse then any other (aside from biel-tan) at killing tanks.
For the record, the craftworld gave Pathfinders, and ability to rend on a 4+, a +2 save in cover, and the ability to place a unit in reserve randomly. It was strong against certain lists.
You noted that your opponent handed you the victory. This was not the case. Their list could make this overpowered, but it didn't autolose against anyone unless you decided to max out pathfinders...which you didn't have to do.
You made a bad list choice, but the list itself isn't bad against armor.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


3. Biel Tan could take expensive Reapers as Troops, but *SO* expensive. And that was the entire problem with the army - all-Aspect got too expensive too quickly. I always took some Guardians for bulk, and they always earned their points back.

Guardians were not taken in competitive armies in that edition. Portent used to laugh at people taking guardians unless they were ulthwe. Dire avengers were also not taken.
Reapers could delete units from across the board and sported a 3+ save. Spamming them with guide was the strongest Biel-Tan list, precisely because marines were so common.
Again, just because you didn't take it doesn't mean it wasn't the meta at the time. They were an absurdly good unit.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

4. Ulthwe didn't break saves. Wounding on 2+ but failing 3+ saves meant units simply stayed locked for a long time. It may have been effective at VP denial via Seer Council, but it's not aggressive enough for me, so I don't think it "strong".

I didn't mention anything about them breaking saves offensively. Wounding on a 2+ and hitting on a 3+ with re-rolls for a 4+ invul was absurdly strong at the time. It was very difficult to go up against such a unit, especially since hidden powerfists and could be sniped out with mind war.
This, spamming starcannons, was the strongest eldar list in 3rd. Maybe biel-tan was better, but I saw more ulthwe on the boards.
Again, just because you didn't take it doesn't mean it wasn't the meta at the time. It was a very strong list.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

5. Holofalcon was the first "success" at making Falcon's competitive to the point that Eldar players would buy them in quantity. Again, VP denial versus pure aggression doesn't suit me.

Then you weren't playing the strongest list in the edition they were released. Which is fine, but it has nothing to do with the point that eldar have always been a very strong codex minus a very brief time.
You can't take a subpar list and claim the codex is fine, anything in any game can do that.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

5a. I experimented enough with Harlequins, and you're just confirming that they're good in HtH once they get there. As they should be for the points.

They also had the ability to get there very easily because of their ability to not get shoot at unless you are close enough to get charged by them. Which is why I mentioned them, and it's an ability you saw fit to ignore.
There is a reason they were feared.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

6. Wraithknights needed a bump, and now they got one.

Calling it a bump seems slightly dishonest to me but they did need a boost.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

7. GK never took off in my playgroup.

I'm gathering your meta isn't one that runs the competitive options, so you're opinions do not reflect the metas at the time. That doesn't mean we can throw out what is competitive just because your meta doesn't run it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

I've been playing non-mech IG for roughly 15 years now, and no matter how many massive lasgun volleys I generate, I still don't believe the "weight of fire" is all that it's cracked up to be.

Non-mech IG was never great, leafblower refers to a tank build. IG have usually been an average army, rarely considered overpowered outside of a brief time in the sun.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

I still think we need to see the Eldar in actual competitive play. I'd be surprised if it dominates like Daemons did Fantasy.

Sure, actual data would be nice. Keep in mind that, currently, they can not take Ranged D which cuts their strongest options.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

3E was definitely foot marines, at least where I played. Rhinos were rare, because they still cost 50 points plus options.

Again, this was not the meta at large. The edition was literally referred to as Rhino rush, and BA ruled the field with an iron yet caring fist.
Your meta just isn't very competitive.
50 points was very cheap back then for what they supplied.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

How are you getting Wraithguard right on top of the Tanks? I guess if you can set up those ideal tactical matchups, Eldar are autowin. But if you can always set up nice tactical positions, I think any Codex wins.

Transports mainly. Eldar tanks are still hard to kill and can pop out and destroy a tank.
Considering their toughness, I'd rather you shoot them then the scatbikers as long as I have a few alive to blow up your tanks. It won't take many.
Delivering a unit has never been an eldar problem. If your eldar players can't do that, and take pretty bad lists it seems historically, I can see why your opinion of them is different from most.

This thread is the single most childish thing I've ever read in my life.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
This thread is the single most childish thing I've ever read in my life.

Try this (spoilered due to size):

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Sure, but for the price of Wraithguard + Transport, you can have 2 squads of ASM with 2 Drop Pods. Or jump packs. Or Death Company with points left over, which kills stuff pretty good, or 1 squad of Sanguinary Guard, with jump packs included that kill stuff awesomely well. Or Centurions.

Sure you can get other units, but the Wraithguard & transport are effective against a wider array of potential targets and have more staying power and are more likely to survive a counterattack (depending on what they're throwing back), and also only taking one FoC slot, and aren't having to rely on getting into CC.

 Talys wrote:

Regardless, my other point still stands though: unless you want to use CAD and limit Wraithknights, you need to spend 50% of your points on Wraithguard and transports for them, and this is far from optimal.

If you want to use the Warhost, yes. But, unlike Necrons, a CAD remains an excellent options and the best way to spam many of the best units.

Right, Wraithguard & transport are very effective to kill -- anything. However, I disagree that they have any staying power at all. They'll both be toast the next round -- so make sure you've killed 280 points worth of stuff or gotten something worthwhile.

CAD does remain an excellent option (but have you seen some of the Warhost buffs?!). BUT: you can only deploy 1 Wraithknight in CAD. That's huge!!

I'm trying to say: you can't spam Jetbikes AND Wraithknights AND have some Wraithguard in the new codex, whereas in the old codex, you could. Either you spam Jetbikes, have 1-2 WG and 1 WK by using CAD -- or you have some Jetbikes, too many Wraithguard, and spam Wraithkights.

The combinations people are describing are just impractical in an 1850 game (your army would be totally gimp).

Compare to 6e: since Wraithknights were Heavy, Wraithguard were elite, and Wave Serpents were DT to troops, you could essentially take whatever ratio you wanted. And, Wave Serpents were 60".

Nope, talk nicer. motyak

(removed no longer needed quote above)

With all the cheese talk I wonder how something like this would be received This was a 2000 point Eldar from from White Dwarf 219, April 1998 circa 2nd edition when the Falcon and Fire Prism just were released. Minor modifications due to changes over the years:

Farseer (the 2nd edition one had a Witch Blade, Psychic Hood and Spirit Stone. No idea what translates)
Warlock (I think they go in units now and aren't characters?)

2x 10 Guardians (the 2nd edition one was three squads of 5 and one squad of 7; back in these days there were no weapon platforms either)*
* Seeing as the box now has 8 guys and a heavy weapon (I remember it having I think 12 guys in 3rd!!!) I guess heavy weapons count here. Umm... Starcannon and Bright Lance I guess?
Rangers ("Eldar Scouts" back in the day)
Wraithguard (with D-Cannons, only option back in 2nd)

6x Jetbikes, 1 w/Shuriken Cannon (or scatter laser mwa ha ha )
Vyper w/Shuriken Cannon
Vyper w/Bright Lance (Lascannon back in 2nd)

Fire Prism
2x Falcons w/Scatter Lasers

That's nostalgic. Would you ban that? Note I have zero clue how many points that translates to in 7th edition. That also comes to around $480 (!!) if anyone was wondering, just to make a jab at how high the prices are.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Felldrake wrote:
edited by motyak

Yeah, this comment isn't helpful.

With all the cheese talk I wonder how something like this would be received This was a 2000 point Eldar from from White Dwarf 219, April 1998 circa 2nd edition when the Falcon and Fire Prism just were released. Minor modifications due to changes over the years:

Farseer (the 2nd edition one had a Witch Blade, Psychic Hood and Spirit Stone. No idea what translates)
Warlock (I think they go in units now and aren't characters?)

2x 10 Guardians (the 2nd edition one was three squads of 5 and one squad of 7; back in these days there were no weapon platforms either)*
* Seeing as the box now has 8 guys and a heavy weapon (I remember it having I think 12 guys in 3rd!!!) I guess heavy weapons count here. Umm... Starcannon and Bright Lance I guess?
Rangers ("Eldar Scouts" back in the day)
Wraithguard (with D-Cannons, only option back in 2nd)

6x Jetbikes, 1 w/Shuriken Cannon
Vyper w/Shuriken Cannon
Vyper w/Bright Lance (Lascannon back in 2nd)

Fire Prism
2x Falcons w/Scatter Lasers

That's nostalgic. Would you ban that? Note I have zero clue how many points that translates to in 7th edition. That also comes to around $480 (!!) if anyone was wondering, just to make a jab at how high the prices are.

I don't think that's even 1.2k points now.