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.

It's not like eldar was obscenely overpowered last night. They have been for the past 7 editions, the past 20 years. The only difference between this edition and the previous one is that they've become more obscenely powerful.

This has gathered the most that guys, L2P nub(such as yourself) powergamers into a single faction, who are unable to play a tactical game fairly, and hence, play the most overpowered easy-mode faction there is.

A lot of the hate is from the overpowered-ness, but a lot is from attitude from eldar players such as yourself. Thanks for reinforcing my gaming group's policy of no eldar allowed. I'll show them this thread tonight.

0 sympathies had. You deserve the hate 100%.

 Filch wrote:
I watched 2 Wraithknights murder my 5 Imperial Knight Titans in less than 3 Turns.

L2P? You better learn to dodge a wrench!

I have to ask how 2 WK's can destroy 6 Imperial Knights in 1-2 turns. It shouldn't be possible, as each WK would have to destroy 1,5 IK's a turn, starting from the very first.

OP, you posted an "unbeatable" Eldar list in the army list forum calling for anybody to challenge it, and responded to everybody who said "I think you would have a hard with X" or "You might struggle fighting a Y list" by basically responding "No! I would do this and that!"
Then you come on here and say "Why all the hate on Eldar? L2P lol!"

In one forum you say "I have an unbeatable Eldar list! Nothing you say will change my mind!" where you say how you would win every situation.
In another you say "Why does everybody hate Eldar? They need to get over themselves!" basically saying other armies can beat you if they knew how to play.

Do you see what I'm getting at here?

 TheNewBlood wrote:

Again, as you have indirectly pointed out, the problem is with those three units in the Eldar codex, not Eldar as a whole.

They're the largest offenders in the codex, but almost every single unit in the codex got buffs, be it Shrouded over just Stealth on Rangers, both Stealth and Shrouded on Scorpions, weapons battery's getting a D weapon option, Fire Dragons effectively getting "AP0", etc. not to mention formations giving multiple units BS5 (at no increase in cost) and other such things.

These aren't necessarily unique issues to the Eldar, as noted, Necrons and Space Marines get similar flak, but what makes the Eldar codex powerful isn't just those three units.

There are plenty of armies that have no effective counter to Scarbikers, massed D-Weapons, or the Wraithknight. Fortunately, Eldar have units other than Scatbikers and Wraithknights, and not every space elf is carrying a D-Weapon.

Enough do have such weapons, and such units form the common core of many, if not most, Eldar lists you see out there, and, as noted, they don't necessarily require them either to be extremely powerful.

My own Eldar army built to a 4E/early 5E paradigm, composed of Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons, Wave Serpents, Falcons, and War Walkers, and I've won all three games I've played with it running the current codex, and felt somewhat dirty doing it (especially BS5 "AP0" Fire Dragons). Hell, in the last two years, that army gained BS4 on all of its vehicles, pseudo rending on all of its shuriken weapons, 5++ saves on its war walkers, 3+ armor on its Fire Dragons, BS5 on most of its Aspect Warriors through formations, Battle Focus for Run & Shoot, and is cheaper to boot. While some may argue that all armies get better over time, In the same timepsan, the 2000pt IG army I built roughly at the same time became a 2215pt list and lost a grip of capability on half the units in the army (e.g. Hydras losing ignoring jink and becoming open topped, chimeras becoming more expensive and losing fire points).

This is the internet. People complain about everything around here. A week or two ago we had someone claiming the entire Tau codex was OP, including Vespids and Fire Warrios (and it was an Eldar player too). Suffice it to say, he caught a lot of flak for that. I'll do the same to anyone who claims the entire Eldar codex is OP too.

I'm not calling out things like Vypers, but there's a lot more in the codex in the "pretty awesome" category than the "pretty bad" category, and especially so when paired with the formations that greatly augment capabilities of units that would otherwise be fine, and lets be honest, the worst units aren't showing up in many lists, casual or not.

Face it, Eldar do not have a monopoly on cheese in this game.

To be fair, I thought I was rather pretty explicit in acknowledging that multiple times.

Chaos Daemons is still going strong, Tyranids have undercosted FMCs, Grav Centurions are still around, and Admech/Skitarii and Knights are cheesing it out in ways previously not thought possible. All of these are generally considered too cheesy for play outside of tournaments, and we can likewise throw Scatbikers and D-Weapons and Wraithknights into that mix. But the entire Eldar codex? I'd say that's going a bit far.

If we're going to argue that we can't say a book is broken because not every single thing is broken, then I'd argue that that argument is a wee bit silly. You're absolutely right that a lot of these others things exist and are bad, but in many instances are also a lot more confined. Tyranids for example have FMC spam, and that's really about it in terms of "cheese".

Once again, Eldar aren't unique, I'm not trying to make that argument, however they are amongst the worst offenders.

All we do is sit around steaming in a pile of negativity complaining about how this unit is broken and that unit is OP, and don't realize that there are other options available.

Yes, there are, but that's really more a topic of discussion for Eldar players, not their opponents.

it's one thing to say "well just don't bring the scary stuff", but it's another to make it out like that scary stuff isn't a big deal, or that it isn't common even to many casual lists and doesn't run strongly through the core of the army. Same thing with Necrons, running a Decurion, just about whatever you actually take, you will probably steamroll most armies from 2014 books, or at least have a major notable advantage.

Don't go all out with the gouda or only add a bit of cheddar when you're playing for fun. This place could seriously use some perspective. It'll probably die down when someone has a bad game against Necrons or Admech/Skitarii and the whole cycle will begin again, with the same people rehashing the same old arguments in the same kinds of threads. It's beginning to get old, is what I'm saying.

You don't have to participate in the discussions if you don't want to...and I'm not the one making these threads. I am however pointing out that the "L2P" arguments we've seen from other posters are somewhat silly.

Against Eldar my Orks are 1 and 4. The 1 win came because my SAG Big Mek rolled box cars and killed my opponents WK and the next turn it scattered onto a IC with a squad of something or other, basically 1 SAG shot killed about 500points worth of Eldar.

I Have played against footdar, Scat bikes and WKs, I have fought the stupidly OP IC's of Eldar and I have fought against a seer conclave.

The only list that stands a chance against Eldar is the Green Tide which isn't even in the codex its in the supplement. And regardless of what 1 or 2 people say, Playing against a green tide is FETHING boring. 101+ models moving in the movement phase, the shooting phase (run), the assault phase and then either Initiative step or consolidating = longest game turns possible.

SO please all knowing Eldar player, explain to me in what fething world my Orks stand even a remote chance against an AVERAGE Eldar list, barring stupidly amazing luck such as my SAG rolling a 1 in 36 chance not taking scatter into account? Lets do a comparison shall we?

Boyz vs Scat Bikes Winner Eldar
Nobz vs Any Eldar Elite Winner Eldar
Tank Bustas Vs Fire Dragons Winner Eldar
Ghazghkuul or Stompa vs WK Winner Eldar

So what your saying is if I play against an Eldar player who is stupid I have a chance but otherwise im boned.

Outside of game mechanics fluff wise Eldar and Necrons should be the most powerful armies to face... if you are familiar with fluff and the old ones and what not. In game terms yeah they should be hard to fight per fluff. They fought in the war of heavens.... my 2 cents and i have Eldar force but have not played new dex... my main are Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Black Legion Chaos.

In real life as example German Tiger Tanks would be very hard for Sherman Tanks to fight and thus you had to adapt and try to figure out how to fight them. War games are not balanced and if they were i guess that is fine but would lack a realism in some aspects in my opinion. 40k is not balanced, it has structure and options etc.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
Face it, Eldar do not have a monopoly on cheese in this game. [...] Tyranids have undercosted FMCs

I only know the Nids well enough to comment on. Yes, the Flying Dakkafex is great: no argument. What else does the book have that is even remotely competitive? The entire rest of the codex is so decidedly sub-par that anyone else can laugh you off the table before they finish deploying. Over-costed, fragile, weak units with terrible rules... and the Flyrant. The Flyrant would even be an easy fix, as (really) he should only be able to take one pair of Devourers, not two. The other pair of arms are used for his wings, so he essentially has a freebie weapon compared to all other units in the book. Fix the Flyrant and the Nids go from bottom tier to... er... what comes next?

Eldar have some OP options, but once you take them out they still have a top-tier codex filled with extremely good options. A fluffy Biel-Tan list would not be OP (Autarch rather than Seer Council, Dire Avengers rather than Scatterbikes or Wraithguard, etc), but it would still be way better than anything half the other factions in the game could field. I am not in the 'waaah, Eldar ruin the game' camp, but you cannot deny they have one of, if not the, best designed books in the game. If every faction were as well written this game would be a million times better, but some books were written by Cruddace

I've played the scatterbike list twice against two guys in my gaming club. First time I got smashed into the ground and wasn't fun at all. All done by turn two.

The second bloke I survived a bit longer due to air support coming on time. But, on the whole both players were great folks to play who I laughed and had some banter with. Both times were in a tournament setting.

The list honestly depends on you're opposition. And like most of 40k, it's fun if the opponent is fun.

The emperor demands the hate of all xenos, my conscious is clean!

And that they are "slightly" overpowered doesn't help either

 Spacewolfoddballz wrote:
Outside of game mechanics fluff wise Eldar and Necrons should be the most powerful armies to face... if you are familiar with fluff and the old ones and what not. In game terms yeah they should be hard to fight per fluff. They fought in the war of heavens....

Every faction can make any excuse it wants to be "hard to fight". Sure the Eldar & the Necrons fought the War in Heaven. Chaos however is the physical manifestation of the mind, the Imperial Guard is the largest fighting force in the galaxy that outnumbers the Eldar by tens of millions to one, the Tyranids invade without number having shown only the tiniest fraction of their size so far, etc.

When GW made armies "hard" to face like "they should be" in the past, they've killed entire editions, like with Chaos Daemons in 7th edition WHFB.

In real life as example German Tiger Tanks would be very hard for Sherman Tanks to fight and thus you had to adapt and try to figure out how to fight them.

While true, there's something that's not being touched on here...namely that there were only about 1,300 Tiger tanks produced, 1,700 if you want to include the Tiger II, and spread over both the Eastern and Western fronts, facing ~160,000-200,000+ Shermans, T-34's, KV & IS tanks, M10/18/36 tank destroyers, Pershings, ISU's, etc, with more T-34's alone produced between 1941 and 1945 alone than Germany made AFV's of all types from 1933 to 1945 (including SPG's, TD's, and assault guns and early model tanks like Panzer I's and II's).

War games are not balanced

They should be, that's why they're games. and not realism simulators, and they have mechanisms for balancing such. If you look at WW2 games that have TIgers and Shermans, a Tiger is a much larger proportion of a force than a Sherman. To use Flames of War as an example, a Tiger Tank is something like 230pts, a T-34 with hindered soviet doctrine is like 40, a Sherman with is like 50?

and if they were i guess that is fine but would lack a realism in some aspects in my opinion. 40k is not balanced, it has structure and options etc.

40k's problem (and really GW in general) is that they're not interested in trying to make the game balanced.

I played a quick 500 point game against Eldar once.
I only won because Captain Sicarius 1 shotted the Avatar.

Bharring wrote:
Corrected the math? Like the time you ran the numbers without cover to show that that my numbers that explicitly state a 5+ cover were wrong?

I ran both, to show that eldar still would win.

Bharring wrote:

Or the time that the numbers were run based on BS5 a3 from the formation?

I never once ran the numbers assuming BS 5 or the formation. They were always BS 4, and I didn't bother running the exarch separately.

Bharring wrote:

Or all the talk of an Exarch without Precision Shots sniping the special/heavy weapons?

I mentioned precision shots because Chaos marines and regular marines do have to worry about losing a 30+ point model to one randomly. It's why icons aren't widely taken.
Eldar don't have that problem as often. The exarch isn't usually critical to the performance of the squad like special weapons.

Bharring wrote:

As for why DAs would go through terrain, because the CSM run the show. If they don't do their exact, controllable counter every round, the Marines win.

First off, all the DAs have to do is use Battle focus to stay outside of rapid fire range outside of shooting. That's it. It's not exactly a super difficult move to pull off, JSJ has been around for several editions now. One of the complaints against it has never been "Dude, JSJ is so hard to pull off!". Usually the complaint is that you may run out of table space, but luckily the eldar army has some of the best fire power in the game. I believe in our example the eldar needed about ~20" of space, though by the 3rd turn of shooting its most likely over for the marines in terms of making a come back.
How are CSM running the show? They have less offensive output, are slower, and need to be within 12" to do any real damage while the eldar can be at 18? I even assumed an initial round of rapid fire as the eldar would use battle focus to get within 18, and the marines still lost.



For the record, your math was corrected when you did the following;
Ran 5 tactical marines with 2 plasma guns against 7 dire avengers. You said this proved your point, until it was pointed out that you can't take 2 special weapons in a 5 man squad. 1 plasma and 4 bolters lost.

Suggested that tacticals with one load out are better against 2+ saves and MC, while marines with a completely different load out perform better against GEQ. I believe when the numbers were ran it turned out that Eldar tied, it was extremely close, or Eldar pulled ahead quite a bit. With the same loadout. At 18+ inches rather than 12", since your numbers assumed rapid fire everytime.

Claimed that a 10 man squad would win against Dire avengers. You failed to load out the avengers like the marines got, giving them a 20% point advantage. The marines still lost.

Kept suggesting that marines get into rapid fire range round after round without showing how they would accomplish this. I'm sure that, in 4+ cover if maintaining rapid fire range all the time, marines can win (though it is funny that they need cover more than eldar do in this situation) but its not a real scenario.

Later suggested a combi weapon would make the difference, and that your original numbers included a combi weapon and regular weapon. This was a lie, it was pointed out, and the discussion ended.


Never once did I use a BS 5 formation. I think we can all agree that formations are pretty busted. For the discussion, I can't assume a BS 5 since that assumes 2 other squads. I'd have to give the marines a psyker and...Sternguard? Something. It would defeat the purpose and I didn't need it to prove my point.

Battle demi company with Captain Sicarius, Iron clad 'Naught with missiles and devastator cents.

That is all.

Akiasura, trying to use mathhammer or any kind of evidence or proof against Bharring is useless. According to him his Eldar aren't that great and this last codex finally brought them to where they need to be. Nothing in his codex is OP, he suggests that the WK needs a point increase, i thin he said 35-40 points.
Trying to convince him that his Codex isn't op is like trying to convince an Ork that humies aren't tasty.

"Maybe you are really unlucky with only having Eldar players who only play the best stuff available in the codex"

I expect nothing less from Eldar players.

"You my friend hit the nail on the head, some one said before that there aren't OP army's just OP players"

Right. All those OP BA players. Or OP Ork players.

Martel732 wrote:
"Maybe you are really unlucky with only having Eldar players who only play the best stuff available in the codex"

I expect nothing less from Eldar players.

"You my friend hit the nail on the head, some one said before that there aren't OP army's just OP players"

Right. All those OP BA players. Or OP Ork players.

Or dark eldar. You forgot the tons of op dark eldar

kburn wrote:
It's not like eldar was obscenely overpowered last night. They have been for the past 7 editions, the past 20 years. The only difference between this edition and the previous one is that they've become more obscenely powerful.

This has gathered the most that guys, L2P nub(such as yourself) powergamers into a single faction, who are unable to play a tactical game fairly, and hence, play the most overpowered easy-mode faction there is.

A lot of the hate is from the overpowered-ness, but a lot is from attitude from eldar players such as yourself. Thanks for reinforcing my gaming group's policy of no eldar allowed. I'll show them this thread tonight.

0 sympathies had. You deserve the hate 100%.

Apart from the complete banning of Eldar, this post sums up my feelings on this thread and the wider matter quite nicely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spacewolfoddballz wrote:
Outside of game mechanics fluff wise Eldar and Necrons should be the most powerful armies to face... if you are familiar with fluff and the old ones and what not. In game terms yeah they should be hard to fight per fluff. They fought in the war of heavens.... my 2 cents and i have Eldar force but have not played new dex... my main are Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Black Legion Chaos.

In real life as example German Tiger Tanks would be very hard for Sherman Tanks to fight and thus you had to adapt and try to figure out how to fight them. War games are not balanced and if they were i guess that is fine but would lack a realism in some aspects in my opinion. 40k is not balanced, it has structure and options etc.

Ahhh so the game should be based on fluff and damn the points. Brilliant! I remember reading a book where a SM singlehandedly took out an entire DE raiding party. So 14pt marines need to be T5 3W 2++ EW with a st8 ap1 assault 3 36" armourbane bolter. Oh and don't forget a reasonable 3+fnp. But we really should throw ignores cover in there as well, he is after all, a whole 14pts.

...I wonder if OP is morgoth.

 Quickjager wrote:
...I wonder if OP is morgoth.

Excellent!

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
...I wonder if OP is morgoth.

Excellent!

Omg, yes. It all makes sense now.

You can give a OP army to someone that isn't a good general (OP player) and they will lose. The combination of both OP players and OP army lists/army's is where things get crazy.

But in like 2 months, everyone is just going to hate in tau since there dex comes out October and word on the street is there getting the same treatment as the eldar got. Further more all this won't matter by this time next year when 40k gets the age of sigmar treatment. Gw doesn't care about how you feel, or what's OP they just want money, and the eldar make them a lot of money, pretty much all the good things in the dex were sold out some for about a month, scatbikes made them so much money they created a whole new box for them just to sell even more lol




Automatically Appended Next Post:
You can give a OP army to someone that isn't a good general (OP player) and they will lose. The combination of both OP players and OP army lists/army's is where things get crazy.

But in like 2 months, everyone is just going to hate in tau since there dex comes out October and word on the street is there getting the same treatment as the eldar got. Further more all this won't matter by this time next year when 40k gets the age of sigmar treatment. Gw doesn't care about how you feel, or what's OP they just want money, and the eldar make them a lot of money, pretty much all the good things in the dex were sold out some for about a month, scatbikes made them so much money they created a whole new box for them just to sell even more lol

First off, Ork players, more than most, seem to dislike playing most Eldar lists. I've come to find, however, that if list-tailoring is feasible for facing Orks - and the Ork player doesn't mind - this can be fixed. Orks want to see some good Krumping. Its not what most Eldar units do. But I usually run as many DAs as I can backed up by Scorpions and Banshees and other CC units. I still need to spread out the Orks, and still need to thin them out before assaulting, but the games usually climax in one big pile, and win or lose, we both tend to have a blast.

In regard to most Ork players I have played, its not that they lose, its that there is no counterplay. They move forward, most Eldar units run away. Change to a more CC oriented Eldar army, and things naturally change!

That and, apparently, a half-dead Nob can punk an unhurt Asurmen in a challenge. Fun times, but dice hated me apparently.

List tailoring shouldn't be necessary, but it does make those games much, much better.

The new book is much worse than the old book. What was my old 1500pt list is now 1407. It lost a number of tricks, but is mostly better. But its Swordwind. Its hardly unbeatable by other casual lists.

Ghaz,
What the hell. Do you even read my posts?

You posted numbers that didn't mesh with mine once, I posted my methodology and where I thought your math was off, and you never got back to me regarding your methodology, or any demo of where mine was wrong.

Aki,
The post where I ran numbers, I made it explicitly clear that I wasn't sure if CSM could take 2 PGs at 5, but alternately they could take a combiplas Instead. That was in the initial post. And you still bitch about it. 5 less points, but one shot only. Would make the attrition more similar to the DAs dying from Storm Bolters, but the CSM would still retain their PG to the last man, where DAs lose firepower with every man lost, losing them twice as fast.

Of course I ran numbers vs TEQ with a PG unit. Isn't that what you take them for? I was very clear about what matchups were for what.

The counter to 2 shots at 12-18" is 0 shots at 18-24. Compared to 1 for Boltgun/PG. Its quite the tradeoff. If you don't believe me, think about the typical distance between deployment. If you cannot start within 24", if you move up 6", an 18" gun can't shoot. A 24" gun just needs to step over the line. Sure, DAs can BF forward, and then eat rapid fire death and lose handily.

The numbers I showed were without Rapid Fire in the head to head. If they were, the Marines would destroy the DAs. By a lot. For the other targets, sure, I did assume they were within 12", but I also assumed they were within 18", and also that CC wasn't an option. That's a 6" window where Marines dominate, a 6" window where DAs win, a 12" window where Marines win again, and then CC where Marines destroy.

I keep hearing about are Tacs are gak because nobody ever takes the things that boltguns fear. Because those things suck ass.

Now I'm being told that those things are OP. And there is no way an Eldar list can be less powerful than a Marine list.

The Eldar dex certainly just got buffs they didn't need. Scorpions can get an amazing cover save if they don't fight. Rangers, who pay Sniper Scout points for t3 5+ and far fewer tools, now Gert shrouded. Its better, but not broken. DAs can get BS2 overwatch instead of Counterattack. They didn't need that, but it doesn't make them OP.

Not all Eldar lists are broken.

(And I take allusions of bad math in the face of showing my work, but with either BS numbers or no numbers at all, as an insult.)

"Now I'm being told that those things are OP."

Better than everyone else's stuff, because...

"The Eldar dex certainly just got buffs they didn't need."

Now we can quibble about the definition of OP, but I'd say a codex getting buffs they didn't need when many other codices are getting nerfs or non-improvements would make that codex OP.

" Change to a more CC oriented Eldar army, and things naturally change! "

Most Eldar players are not going to do this. Scatterbikes backing up is what they will do to Orks. And send in the WK.

So Bharring what your saying is that if you list tailor your entire army to be CC oriented as opposed to bringing a regular list, an ork player will have fun against you. While that would be a lot better then other Eldar lists it would still end with a Eldar victory unless your really gimping yourself.

 Spacewolfoddballz wrote:
Outside of game mechanics fluff wise Eldar and Necrons should be the most powerful armies to face... if you are familiar with fluff and the old ones and what not. In game terms yeah they should be hard to fight per fluff. They fought in the war of heavens.... my 2 cents and i have Eldar force but have not played new dex... my main are Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Black Legion Chaos.

In real life as example German Tiger Tanks would be very hard for Sherman Tanks to fight and thus you had to adapt and try to figure out how to fight them. War games are not balanced and if they were i guess that is fine but would lack a realism in some aspects in my opinion. 40k is not balanced, it has structure and options etc.

But as a game, you need to balance it or people will stop playing it. Why would I play a game I'd have basically 1% or less change to win?
And the balance mechanic for this game are points. If Eldar and Necron models costed a lot more than Orks, Tyranids or AM stuff, then they'd be more balanced. But a 300p Wraithknight while the Imperial counterpart, a Knight, costs almost 100p more with worse weapons? That's the wrong turn GW did with Eldar. They don't want to give a model too many points or they'll sell less of them (as players won't be able to field as many as if they'd cost less). Imagine if the Wraithknight costed 400, 450 or even 500p. People would complain a lot less (would still complain, though), because for what it brings to the table, the Wraithknight is surely undercosted now. Heck, even the Imperial Knights shoudl cost more.

And that's only the Wraithknight. Scatterbikes and D-Scythes/Guard is even more problematic (to me), as they're quite cheap and numerous. 2 wraithguards can deal much more damage than 1 Wraithknight and cost only a bit more. This kind of thing is the main complain regarding the new Eldar book - they're pretty powerful, but too cheap.

I am going to have to say ghaz that an assault eldar army with no knight would not stand a chance against an ork army... also, Martel, hopefully I will be running a BA army against scatter bike on sunday (he may even bring two knights) and I will let you know how it goes... even though I know that if I win it will not end your complaints it will at least prove that it can be done with the right tools...

By the way, two game conventions and two other tournaments, that I have won 3 of and not taken a single grav weapon.... not one... perhaps I should start running them so my life is easier...

Thyhadras wrote:
I am going to have to say ghaz that an assault eldar army with no knight would not stand a chance against an ork army... also, Martel, hopefully I will be running a BA army against scatter bike on sunday (he may even bring two knights) and I will let you know how it goes... even though I know that if I win it will not end your complaints it will at least prove that it can be done with the right tools...

By the way, two game conventions and two other tournaments, that I have won 3 of and not taken a single grav weapon.... not one... perhaps I should start running them so my life is easier...

Cannons with amps are way, way better than the regular guns. You may not notice a huge difference.

Against a knowledgeable Eldar player, I think the BA simply don't have the tools to compete. No matter how you rearrange the deck chairs. Maybe if you make a pod list and your opponent has no idea how to set up against pods. You seemed to indicate that you haven't had much experience with people deploying to neuter the alpha strike.

Actually, Thy/Ghaz, the win/loss isn't that different between my typical CWE list and when I build a list to face Orks. They win some they lose some against either type. The difference is, even if an Ork player beats my typical list but loses to the sort of list I prefer against Orks, the Ork player doesn't enjoy the first game, but enjoys the second.

Melee (Swordwind) CWE can certainly go either way against the sort of Ork lists I face. As I said, I certainly need to soften the Orks up first, but it tends to be an even-ish slugfest at the end.

The concern about list tailoring isn't about giving Orks a fighting chance - they have that against my typical list. Its about changing the flow of the game to something the Ork player will enjoy.

Is it right that the Eldar dex, as a whole is so much better? Certainly not. But not everything in the Dex is broken.

Martel,
Are you still saying that, when I bring, say, a buch of Footdar, my list is still OP because Scatter Bikes and WK - which are not in the list - are OP? Once more down that hole?

How is a list without Scatter Bikes or WKs OP because of Scatter Bikes and WKs?

This isn't specifically about whether the CWE dex is OP (I don't think anyone here has been arguing otherwise). Its about your claim that any list I might have from CWE is OP.

If I don't own Scatter Bikes or WKs, they aren't relevant. Most CWE players you've faced may have brought the cheese, but how does that necessitate that all Eldar players and lists are cheese?

(Regarding Wraithguard, Scythe or Cannon - they aren't so OP when they don't have a WWP. That is supposed to be part of their cost, but allying in DE just negates their biggest balancing point. Its stupid. I don't do it. But yes, its OP.)

"when I bring, say, a buch of Footdar,"

You are gimping yourself and I don't consider that to be a true Eldar list. If my opponent has to hamstring himself, I didn't win a thing. It really feels like begging my opponent to let me win.

At any rate, I don't give BA much of a chance against Footdar, either. Too many free buffs in the 7th ed codex.

"I don't do it."

You gimping yourself doesn't help me.

"(I don't think anyone here has been arguing otherwise)"

You sure seem to be doing a pretty good imitation.

", but how does that necessitate that all Eldar players and lists are cheese? "

20 years of playing against them. People who pick Eldar are usually win first: that's from a sample of about 50ish Eldar players over the years.

Last time i played eldar, my mate said he'd bring a fluffy list - no d-weapons, no waveserpents only 3 scatbikes, no wraithknights, no wraithlords, no falcon deepstrikes, no wraithguard and only one farseer. I felt confident.

he brought (among other things) 10 warp-spiders, 10 fire dragons and 6 swooping hawks.

turn 4 i was down to 3 tech-thralls on an objective. It lasted to turn 4 because they got into CC with the swooping hawks at turn 3.
I was playing a taghmata list that brings back thrall units on a 5+; i used techpriest auxillia and an Archmagos lachrimallus to give 3+ FNP for the thralls.
He took out all but one of my tech-adepts and my magos in one turn (the second turn) - all my buffs disappeared and he basicly just advanced while remaining just outside my ability to move and shoot.

Playing eldar just isn't fun.
I'm sure it's a blast for anyone with a recently released deathstar combo (the fire and ice thing) but that's only four codex's so far - do yourself a favour and shelve your eldar until all the codex's have had similar treatment.

Oh, and keep out of 30k OP - we don't want to play people who gloat on one thread about having an unbeatable list and then make another thread wondering why people dislike your codex so much.