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.

Engaging troll multiquote in 10...9...1...!

Vaktathi wrote: 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.

At least from my perspective, Aspect Warriors needed a buff to give people a reason to take them over Wraith units and Wave Serpents in the last codex. The problem is that now they've been overshadowed by the unholy trinity of Scatbikers, D-Weapons, and Wraithknights. The buff to Aspect Warriors mean that you can now make a strong Eldar list without having to include the most broken units.

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).

Again, that's the problem with power creep. Why take anything other than the most OP/broken units? After all, winning tournaments is all that matters right?

Funnily enough, my own Eldar army is relatively similar to your 5th edition list and I've been having similar levels of success. I'm not doubting that Guard have taken a serious kick in the shorts through a combination of a mediocre codex and changes in edition and design philosophy. But I don't think it's fair to measure an army with relatively few problems by an army with many serious problems.

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.

You have been, and I respect you for that. Unlike certain other posters (both Eldar players and not) you're at least willing to argue politely and reasonably.

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.

 krodarklorr wrote:


One attempt by GW to have the fluff resembled correctly in game?

That's fine but if every other army doesn't have the fluff power supporting them and the Eldar have none of the things holding them back like huge points costs for an army made of a dieing race than how does that make any sense

@Martel

It seems a huge part of your problem is that you are mad about the quality of your codex. That is GWs fault, not Eldar players and the ire should be directed at GW. It is not reasonable to essentially say Eldar don't deserve to play their army because my codex can't handle them.

Then you make the problem even worse by declaring that even if the Eldar player makes concessions, acknowledging that some stuff is OP, and plays with more balanced units, it still isn't right because he could take stronger stuff even though he didn't. Again that is GWs fault, not the Eldar player.

If you are going to hate on a faction's players because of what they could do, not because of what they actually do, YOU are the problem, not the Eldar player.

--

OP's other thread I'll acknowledge is pompous and reinforces negative Eldar stereotypes, but just because he is wrong there (in my opinion), doesn't mean that the point here is not valid.

--

Among other complaints in this thread that really make no reasonable sense is the complaint that too many units in the Eldar codex are good. Not that they are OP, just that they are good. Or put another way, the complaint is that the Eldar don't have either any or enough bad units. It would be best if GW actually made every unit in every codex useable, but to complain about a codex having too many useable units is to sound like a petulant child, and really if you got what you were asking for, the real problem, i.e. too much OP, would be exacerbated. The choice for the Eldar player would be take a bad unit or take an OP one. Most people from any faction aren't going to willingly take bad units. At least with a codex full of good choices, there can be variety and the choice isn't OP or underpowered.

Don't let jealousy cloud your judgment of Eldar players. It isn't their fault GW writes lousy rules and does a poor job with internal balance in many codexes. It is GWs fault. Get mad at them. Every codex should have good internal balance so that every unit is viable. The problem isn't that Eldar have it, the problem is that other codexes don't. The solution is to fix the other codexes, not to break the Eldar one.

You haven't had it bad often enough so it is time for you to get yours is a petty, immature mindset. Rather than wishing ill on other factions and calling for them to suffer from bad rules, how about calling for everyone to have quality rules. Everyone being happy seem to be a much better scenario, than deliberately putting people through times of frustration and powerlessness.

 TheNewBlood wrote:


But only if the Riptide and Dreaknight receive reasonable price increases, Grav Centurions go away, Battle Brothers shenanigans are abolished, 2++ re-rollable is no longer possible, Admech/Skitarii have to pay for their upgrades, and you can no longer have an army consisting only of 5 Imperial Knights.

Deal?

Honestly, I'd be ok with fixing everything you just listed, they all seem fair and reasonable.

Though, honestly, don't you think it's just a little hypocritical to play eldar and call riptides and dreadknights underpriced? I'm not going to disagree with you, but it's a bit off to hear from an eldar point of view.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:


But only if the Riptide and Dreaknight receive reasonable price increases, Grav Centurions go away, Battle Brothers shenanigans are abolished, 2++ re-rollable is no longer possible, Admech/Skitarii have to pay for their upgrades, and you can no longer have an army consisting only of 5 Imperial Knights.

Deal?

Honestly, I'd be ok with fixing everything you just listed, they all seem fair and reasonable.

Though, honestly, don't you think it's just a little hypocritical to play eldar and call riptides and dreadknights underpriced? I'm not going to disagree with you, but it's a bit off to hear from an eldar point of view.

Can you point to a post I've made in this thread where I haven't said that Scatbikers, D-Weapons, and the Wraithknight aren't undercosted and overpowered?

How is it hypocritical to say my stuff is OP, but so is X, Y and Z, let's fix all of it? Hypocritical would be saying my stuff is fine, but XY and Z aren't.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

SirDonlad wrote: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.

Playing Eldar is fun...for Eldar players!

So you managed to get an Eldar player to avoid all the cheese and then some, and you still lost. What exactly did your opponent bring? What did you bring? Could it be a case of bad dice or hot dice on someone's part, or was that specific list just the kryptonite to yours?

Hey dude. Okay, memory is a little hazy but i'll try - he had ten fire dragons, ten warp spiders 6 swooping hawks three windriders a farseer on a jetbike, five rangers, two blobs of guardians one with scatter laser the other with a bright lance. i think there was other stuff, but i really can't remember! i took a fully decked out Archmagos lachrimallus with an abeyant, macchiator array, MC photon thruster etc; i also took two tech-priest auxillia units both with reductor adept (fluffy) and an extra 'lacyraemarta' adept - one unit had 2 HB servitors and two flamer servitors and the other had 4 flamer servitors - i spent the remaining points on thrall units with 'revenant alchemistry' and 'induction chargers' so they all had a 3+ FNP while near the tech-priests (who stayed near my board edge on eigther side of the Archmagos).
There was a fair amount of buildings (it would probably count as a city fight) and three objectives - one in our deployment zones and one in the middle.
Around turn three i had lost all my leadership and my opponent allowed me to keep doing my 'ruthless assault' rolls despite my warlord being dead so leaving a squad of thralls on my home objective i strated to rush what i had left forward in the hope of getting units back and holding the centre objective when the game ended, but i didn't get any back and he just CC'd all i had off the centre objective while the swooping hawks dropped next to the thralls on my home objective who enjoyed the best rolling i did all game to survive thier shooting, assault them in return and win the combat! no sweeping advance (that would have been nice) but reconsolidated on my objective and we called the game there as he had all the things which just killed everything else bearing down on them.

I killed his rangers, a single jetbike, a couple of warp spiders some guardians (10 i think?), a trio of fire dragons and 3 swooping hawks.

My mate did thank me a lot for the game and i was intrested to see how my buildings would affect things.

 SirDonlad wrote:
Hey dude. Okay, memory is a little hazy but i'll try - he had ten fire dragons, ten warp spiders 6 swooping hawks three windriders a farseer on a jetbike, five rangers, two blobs of guardians one with scatter laser the other with a bright lance. i think there was other stuff, but i really can't remember! i took a fully decked out Archmagos lachrimallus with an abeyant, macchiator array, MC photon thruster etc; i also took two tech-priest auxillia units both with reductor adept (fluffy) and an extra 'lacyraemarta' adept - one unit had 2 HB servitors and two flamer servitors and the other had 4 flamer servitors - i spent the remaining points on thrall units with 'revenant alchemistry' and 'induction chargers' so they all had a 3+ FNP while near the tech-priests (who stayed near my board edge on eigther side of the Archmagos).
There was a fair amount of buildings (it would probably count as a city fight) and three objectives - one in our deployment zones and one in the middle.
Around turn three i had lost all my leadership and my opponent allowed me to keep doing my 'ruthless assault' rolls despite my warlord being dead so leaving a squad of thralls on my home objective i strated to rush what i had left forward in the hope of getting units back and holding the centre objective when the game ended, but i didn't get any back and he just CC'd all i had off the centre objective while the swooping hawks dropped next to the thralls on my home objective who enjoyed the best rolling i did all game to survive thier shooting, assault them in return and win the combat! no sweeping advance (that would have been nice) but reconsolidated on my objective and we called the game there as he had all the things which just killed everything else bearing down on them.

I killed his rangers, a single jetbike, a couple of warp spiders some guardians (10 i think?), a trio of fire dragons and 3 swooping hawks.

My mate did thank me a lot for the game and i was intrested to see how my buildings would affect things.

I think I can diagnose the problem: I'm not very familiar with Mechanicus Auxilia (pardon me if I get the name wrong; I don't play 30k), but it doesn't seem like you have many vehicles or high-toughness models. With the units the Eldar player brought, he could easily mulch through infantry units, especially with the Warp Spiders and Swooping Hawks. Maybe consider bringing more vehicles to the next matchup, or some MCs?

GAdvance wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:


One attempt by GW to have the fluff resembled correctly in game?

That's fine but if every other army doesn't have the fluff power supporting them and the Eldar have none of the things holding them back like huge points costs for an army made of a dieing race than how does that make any sense

Hey, I'm not going to disagree with you.

Wow this blew up quite a bit. Realize I'm a bit late to the game, but I'll comment on this as I believe its still relevant.

Bharring wrote:
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.

Most players, and this is purely anecdotal, don't like list tailoring. It's a word that carries a very negative vibe in most circles.

Bharring wrote:

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!

CC isn't powerful, for the most part, this edition. Eldar have some of the best firepower in the game, and don't need to take melee units. That being said, I still think storm guardians and striking scorpions stand up to most Ork melee units (probably not their best, but the regular troops sure).

Bharring wrote:

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

And grots can kill termies. Point?

Bharring wrote:

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

And yet, against the dexes that aren't at the top, most armies don't have to list tailor to play. Eldar are the worst at this, though necrons with formations come close. Eldar don't need formations to break the game, though it helps.

Bharring wrote:

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.

The new book is must more powerful than the old book, unless you were spamming WS. They got weaker, everything moved up in strength.

Bharring wrote:

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.

Again, this isn't even remotely close to what happened. You ran a 5 man squad claiming they would deal X wounds per round (suggesting no combi) to 2+ armor targets and MCs. You claimed that this made them better than DA without fact checking, and were corrected.
You, several posts later, claimed you knew they could take a combi weapon and this was splitting the difference. I pointed out this wasn't what you originally stated and this was a fabrication, and one that doesn't jibe with your earlier statement regardless. You then left the discussion.
If you want to run the numbers for a combi, we can. We can take an assumed amount of rounds of shooting an infantry unit of that size will get (3?) and determine an average number of wounds dealt per round and compare it to DA.

As far as keeping the PG to the last man, this doesn't always happen. Models are removed from the front, and eldar are mobile. They can move, and you risk not being in rapid fire range if you keep them too far back. PG's also have to worry about precision shots removing them. DA don't have this problem. This is a strength, not a weakness.
I'm also dubious about losing effectiveness twice as fast, but I'm not going to bother running the numbers.
I have no idea why you mentioned storm bolters.

Bharring wrote:

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.

Let's try answering the whole point, yes? You took PG for TEQ and MEQ (where they tied with DA without the combi, for the record, or were slightly worse). You then switched to a different loadout for another enemy (GEQ) to make the numbers look better for marines.
You can't list tailor mid combat. Stick to one loadout and do that math, with that same loadout, against every target. If you want to run multiple loadouts and take an average, thats okay I suppose, but if your argument relies on list tailoring, its already lost.
You also had the eldar DA be down the cost of 2 plasma guns. They still tied or were better in every scenario.

Bharring wrote:

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.

Actually, in the math I ran SM did rapid fire the first round and then eldar fired back. They still won. After that there was no way for marines to catch up ever again. I believe at the end the eldar had...4 guys alive before the marines wiped?
If you want, we can do marines firing 1 time, eldar moving forward and firing 2 times, and then this continues. Marines still lose though.

Bharring wrote:

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.

If you want, you can run CC against most enemies. I'd like you to explain how basic marines reach CC if the enemy doesn't want them to (they won't against DA, for example), but you can if you want.
The marines failed to destroy DA against any target, only being higher, I believe, against MCs with a 20% point advantage being given.

Bharring wrote:

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

People take aspect warriors and GEQ all the time, if that is what you are implying. Cover saves stop the boltguns from being good against those units.
Boltguns and tacs are terrible. The enemy doesn't matter, they aren't very good and can be considered bottom tier.

The only person agreeing with you was master of ordiance. While he/she is a nice person, his list building was god awful in the thread he made. Heavy bolters and melta guns on slow troops probably make marines seem like god kings. Against even a semi-optimized list, tacticals are crap, as most people agree.

Bharring wrote:

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.

An Eldar list can be less powerful then a marine list (and it's BA, which isn't the same thing). On average, an eldar list will be leaps and bounds above an average marine list.

Bharring wrote:

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.

I'm not claiming these units are broken. I'm claiming they are better than any equivalent unit in any other dex. I don't think this breaks the game, but it does give the eldar a big advantage. And these are some of the weaker units they can take. The weakest, at a guess, would be banshees.

Bharring wrote:

Not all Eldar lists are broken.

Fair enough.

Bharring wrote:

(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.)

Well, so far you've implied that I "cheated" by running the avengers in formation. I didn't. Not once.
You also called me mentally challenged when I suggested using the same load out against each target, because list tailoring isn't good and marines can't switch out weapons.
You've also lied.

Frankly, I don't find you are arguing in good faith. None of my numbers were BS (nobody, not once, said my math was wrong including yourself). I also did quite a bit more math than you in the last thread, comparing Marines and DA against a large number of targets and against each other before refuting any claims. Your numbers, however, were wrong because the assumptions they were based on were wrong. You arrived to a false conclusion. This isn't a bad thing, we are making some assumptions here (Didn't include a combi, assume no exarch/formation for eldar, assume plasma weapons never overheat/die, assume no buffs from any psyker), but you don't need to make things up and insult other posters who disagree with you (bitch about it above, for example).

"If you are going to hate on a faction's players because of what they could do, not because of what they actually do, YOU are the problem, not the Eldar player."

Maybe I've just been around too long. Eldar have been getting the royal treatment since *2ND* ed. It's getting hard to swallow at this point. Same crap, different decade.

Reread that post.

I had thought *you* had not included cover. It would have explained your numbers. I never said *you* used BS5 A3. It was a different thread, and probably a different poster. Go upthread and reread my response.

For numbers, what those numbers would show if Tacs Rapid Fired then DAs responded?

A Boltgun has a (2/3)(2/3)(1/2) chance to kill a DA. 2/9 kills/shot.

A Shuriken round has a (2/3)(1/3)(1/3) chance of a nonrend kill, plus (2/3)(1/6)(2/3) chance of a rend kill. 4/27 kills/shot.

Assuming, like you said, the Tacs shoot first, 10vs 10:

Tacs kill:
10x2x(2/9) = 4+4/9ths die
5+5/9 DAs return fire
5+5/9x2x(4/27) is about 48/27, or a bit less than 2.

Now we have 8 Tacs and 6 DAs.

I don't need to finish that math.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And Aki,
About me lying about trying to pull a fast one when I did an analysis vs 2PG. If you can't be bothered to reread that post despite harping on me so much about it since then, there really is no hope.

Its hard to be secretive about something *explicitly stated in the initial post*.

 TheNewBlood wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
Hey dude. Okay, memory is a little hazy but i'll try - he had ten fire dragons, ten warp spiders 6 swooping hawks three windriders a farseer on a jetbike, five rangers, two blobs of guardians one with scatter laser the other with a bright lance. i think there was other stuff, but i really can't remember! i took a fully decked out Archmagos lachrimallus with an abeyant, macchiator array, MC photon thruster etc; i also took two tech-priest auxillia units both with reductor adept (fluffy) and an extra 'lacyraemarta' adept - one unit had 2 HB servitors and two flamer servitors and the other had 4 flamer servitors - i spent the remaining points on thrall units with 'revenant alchemistry' and 'induction chargers' so they all had a 3+ FNP while near the tech-priests (who stayed near my board edge on eigther side of the Archmagos).
There was a fair amount of buildings (it would probably count as a city fight) and three objectives - one in our deployment zones and one in the middle.
Around turn three i had lost all my leadership and my opponent allowed me to keep doing my 'ruthless assault' rolls despite my warlord being dead so leaving a squad of thralls on my home objective i strated to rush what i had left forward in the hope of getting units back and holding the centre objective when the game ended, but i didn't get any back and he just CC'd all i had off the centre objective while the swooping hawks dropped next to the thralls on my home objective who enjoyed the best rolling i did all game to survive thier shooting, assault them in return and win the combat! no sweeping advance (that would have been nice) but reconsolidated on my objective and we called the game there as he had all the things which just killed everything else bearing down on them.

I killed his rangers, a single jetbike, a couple of warp spiders some guardians (10 i think?), a trio of fire dragons and 3 swooping hawks.

My mate did thank me a lot for the game and i was intrested to see how my buildings would affect things.

I think I can diagnose the problem: I'm not very familiar with Mechanicus Auxilia (pardon me if I get the name wrong; I don't play 30k), but it doesn't seem like you have many vehicles or high-toughness models. With the units the Eldar player brought, he could easily mulch through infantry units, especially with the Warp Spiders and Swooping Hawks. Maybe consider bringing more vehicles to the next matchup, or some MCs?

The idea behined the match was no vehicles because thats my speciality as the ordo reductor.

The massive unit of warp spiders that i knew he'd bought stopped me taking my thanatar - everything is I2 so they wound everything on a 2+ (even my Archmagos) and fire dragons have a decent chance of bringing one down in one round of shooting too, so i didn't take one, i thought i could maybe swamp him in numb bodies; but alas, t'was not to be.

I recon if it happens again i'll bring my myrmidon destructors with irradiation engines.

(It's 'The Mechanicum' and comes in 'taghmata' 'legio cybernetica' or 'ordo reductor' flavours)

That Eldar list would do just fine against vehicles, I think. Lots of heavy hitters to stop them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait, where did I lie?!?

Bharring wrote:
Reread that post.

I had thought *you* had not included cover. It would have explained your numbers. I never said *you* used BS5 A3. It was a different thread, and probably a different poster. Go upthread and reread my response.

For numbers, what those numbers would show if Tacs Rapid Fired then DAs responded?

A Boltgun has a (2/3)(2/3)(1/2) chance to kill a DA. 2/9 kills/shot.

A Shuriken round has a (2/3)(1/3)(1/3) chance of a nonrend kill, plus (2/3)(1/6)(2/3) chance of a rend kill. 4/27 kills/shot.

Assuming, like you said, the Tacs shoot first, 10vs 10:

Tacs kill:
10x2x(2/9) = 4+4/9ths die
5+5/9 DAs return fire
5+5/9x2x(4/27) is about 48/27, or a bit less than 2.

Now we have 8 Tacs and 6 DAs.

I don't need to finish that math.

Real game play is where tacs fall apart anyway. I'm all for mathhammer, but I think we are hitting the limits of its usefulness here.

No matter the statistics they are still statistics... that are based on Random dice rolls... math hammer is fine and all but to base the whole game on it means you are playing the game wrong

People saw this thread. Got angry. Clicked it. And began spreading more eldar hate.

Geeze i wish i had that kind of time on my hands. My army would probably be more than an 8th painted. I would love to have the time to play my eldar buddy.

What I most definitely would not do is waste my time and life bitching at him and making his experience with the hobby far less enjoyable. That, is a dick move. I don't think I would have many opponents in that scenario. Nor would I feel entitled to actually play with an eldar player, because I have the self awareness to know I was being terribly rude to them and shouldn't expect them to enjoy themselves around me at all, let alone during a 3 hour game of toy soldiers.

I just don't get it... Do you guys even like this game? Is this some sort of masochistic thing, like staying at a job you hate because reasons? Can't we all just fething get along?

There's just so much amazing fun and fulfillment in this hobby. People get caught up in the effectiveness of units and forget its a game involving two people with feelings and time put into their army. I'm not talking about TFG. I mean normal dudes that like the game. I'm not trying to be a bleeding heart here. I just can't imagine being an eldar player and going through all this. I'd probably get weighed down and just quit, and not talk to my gaming buddies nearly as much as I used to.

The craziest thing is the eldar players keep playing and loving their army in the face of all this crushing dislike. They would probably never refuse a game against you guys, even if you brought your stinkiest cheese. Before you say it, i'm aware they have the tools to counter your cheese. But my point remains. Theyre just asking for a reprieve from all this bullgak so they can love the hobby without getting gakked on.

Do you eldar haters hate eldar, or the game itself? Or GW? I think you hate the game and have to throw that hatred at the easiest target available like it's some sort of outlet. Why dont you just stop playing if it's a negative enough experience to force others to dislike the hobby too. Nobody will miss the negativity.

For what it's worth i know some eldar stuff is OP. But so is the rampant negativity. It's getting to me, and i don't even play the new hotness. I just feel like you're all wasting your time bombarding eldar players with hate when it might be more productive for everyone to constantly bombard GW with emails.

Martel732 wrote:
"If you are going to hate on a faction's players because of what they could do, not because of what they actually do, YOU are the problem, not the Eldar player."

Maybe I've just been around too long. Eldar have been getting the royal treatment since *2ND* ed. It's getting hard to swallow at this point. Same crap, different decade.

I get that sentiment. I'm just saying, take a breath and realize some Eldar players aren't that unreasonable. And sometimes things aren't quite as bad as they seem at first.

Example from 3rd I've given already. Eldar player deploys Wraithlord with star cannon and opponent thinks here we go with spamming OP stuff. Then no more lords and only other Star cannon is on a Falcon. Suddenly context shows reasonableness if opponent can get past the initial shock. The very real problem though is that some opponents never get past that first shock and spend the entire game complaining about OP wraithlords and star cannons never realizing that the reality is that the list they are facing isn't that frightening.

To be fair, they may sometimes be justified in their initial impression. One starcannon wraithlord, follows another follows another. Or for more contemporary examples Wave serpent with min avengers x6 with old codex, or scat bike spam with the new.

And I feel for you if your local area only has bad Eldar players, but it isn't that way everywhere.

Thyhadras wrote:
No matter the statistics they are still statistics... that are based on Random dice rolls... math hammer is fine and all but to base the whole game on it means you are playing the game wrong

The law of large numbers of dice are much more in play now than in 2nd ed, though. Therefore, mathhammer is more accurate than ever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"The very real problem though is that some opponents never get past that first shock and spend the entire game complaining about OP wraithlords and star cannons never realizing that the reality is that the list they are facing isn't that frightening. "

I've played this game enough to know the difference between a list with two priority targets and a list that's shooting me with 100+ S6 shots a turn from 36" away. I don't think these situations are comparable at all.

You just said that you actually ran the numbers with Tacs Rapid Firing first, and DAs firing back, and DAs won.

It was an outlandish enough claim I felt it should be demonstrated false.

Of course that rarely happens.

The dueling claims you're referring to?
The first one was that I wasn't sure they could, which I had also put in the first post (go ahead, look up the last modified date. Fairly sure it was before any responses, if at all. Certainly isn't recent).
The second claim was, that as I wasn't sure it was true, I sort of "split the difference" between 2 at 5 and 1+combi at 5. Even if what I thought might be true wasn't, there was another possibility that also made the numbers reasonable.

Not only are those two thoughts *not* mutually exclusive, the second is literally predicated on the first!

You're so desperate to discredit me that you seem awfully invested in me being some dirty rotten liar trash or something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for fun to play against, consider a pure Drop Pod army.
To some players, its autowin. To others, its autolose. Countering it is something every "competitive" player needs to know. Either way, wouldn't it usually be unfun for both players?

Bharring wrote:
You just said that you actually ran the numbers with Tacs Rapid Firing first, and DAs firing back, and DAs won.

It was an outlandish enough claim I felt it should be demonstrated false.

Of course that rarely happens.

Looking back at the math from the other thread, I ran it so the rapid fire was without cover.
With cover, I ran it so that marines fire once, but not at rapid fire range.
This is my mistake, I had to double check the thread to see what I had done.

If you admit it rarely happens why did you bring it up? What point does it serve to prove?

Bharring wrote:

The dueling claims you're referring to?
The first one was that I wasn't sure they could, which I had also put in the first post (go ahead, look up the last modified date. Fairly sure it was before any responses, if at all. Certainly isn't recent).
The second claim was, that as I wasn't sure it was true, I sort of "split the difference" between 2 at 5 and 1+combi at 5. Even if what I thought might be true wasn't, there was another possibility that also made the numbers reasonable.

No, because you claimed they did these wounds per wound. A combi doesn't work every round, only on the first. You only see combis taken on drop pods for this reason (which I also addressed).

Not only are those two thoughts *not* mutually exclusive, the second is literally predicated on the first!

AncientSkarbrand wrote:

...
There's just so much amazing fun and fulfillment in this hobby. People get caught up in the effectiveness of units and forget its a game involving two people with feelings and time put into their army. I'm not talking about TFG. I mean normal dudes that like the game. I'm not trying to be a bleeding heart here. I just can't imagine being an eldar player and going through all this. I'd probably get weighed down and just quit, and not talk to my gaming buddies nearly as much as I used to.

The craziest thing is the eldar players keep playing and loving their army in the face of all this crushing dislike. They would probably never refuse a game against you guys, even if you brought your stinkiest cheese. Before you say it, i'm aware they have the tools to counter your cheese. But my point remains. Theyre just asking for a reprieve from all this bullgak so they can love the hobby without getting gakked on.
...

Great post.

One thing that is missing from many of the critiques is this effort to look at things from the Eldar players perspective. The critic can't be expected to buy some new units or use a different army to adapt to the Eldar book, but the Eldar player is expected to not play the faction he likes best at all which necessarily means he has to spend for a different army he may not like.

Or when GW suddenly makes his particular units really powerful, he has to shelve them and get weak stuff because I shouldn't have to update my army to face yours, you should update your army so I can feel I have a chance. It is a double standard and the Eldar guy has to absorb the anger that should be directed at GW.

The whole time I played Eldar I was walking on eggshells trying not to tick people off and even when I used bad lists that didn't win much people would grumble. I would have to not use stuff I may have wanted to for fluff or coolness purposes because I'm not in it to ruin someone else's game if I can avoid it.

I never minded fair critiques. The annoyance is when there is a reasonable tactical or list building counter that people can't or won't grasp and just grumble instead.

" I shouldn't have to update my army to face yours"

I have all BA units in high quantity. It's updated. I shouldn't need allies. Eldar don't.

Martel732 wrote:
I've played this game enough to know the difference between a list with two priority targets and a list that's shooting me with 100+ S6 shots a turn from 36" away. I don't think these situations are comparable at all.

Good. Even though I am replying to you, I'm not taking about you specifically with my posts. My observation is that Eldar critics sometimes either can't get past that first step, or if they realize they can effectively counter feel the need to continuously grumble about how OP XY or Z is. 100+ S6 is really bad, but then someone limits themselves to essentially the old rules of one gun per three bikes and they still have to hear the complaints. Even if they just take shuricat bikes they hear the complaints because all that matters is bikes are OP how dare you take them.

Again not saying you personally are this way, but it is a persistent, simple, erroneous attitude. The Eldar guy tries to accommodate and still has to take verbal abuse.

Believe it or not, I am capable of thinking something is true, but considering that I might be wrong *at the same time*. I think most people are.

I thought something was probably true. I considered it being false. I considered another condition existing with the same numbers was reason enough to post before checking. And I stated my assumption in the post.

Get over it.

Why do I bring up a situation that doesn't happen? Because you just claimed it a few posts back! "Proving" all my math wrong! I don't think its an important setup to analyze, but if it worked out the way you had claimed, then it would preempt any other discussion. It was important to note the claim was wrong.

And the last time I saw your numbers, less than 8 DAs were killing 2.8something Marines in cover in a round. A correction:
8x2x(4/27) is 64/27 is 2.37. So clearly, less than 8 DAs don't kill 2.8+ Marines a round. Between that and rounding, recursing through the entire matchup, your numbers were very, very wrong. I'll admit I just assumed you had included no cover, but didn't have time then to work out what you did wrong.

Oh, and I use Combis all the time without pods. I may not be a competitive player, but clearly it happens. And I face them, too.

You didn't quote all the times my math was supposedly "proved wrong", so I didn't look it up. When one leadin specifies you, then another separate paragraph outlines a similar incident that "someone" did, I assumed that wouldn't imply that that "someone" was you. I'm a terrible communicator. I did not mean to imply that it was you.

Another huge issue is what counters scatterbikes is not too hot against TriRiptide. BA can't get close to being able to challenge both with a single build.

Yeah, the game as is blows for competitive play.

I had such high hopes for the new Eldar dex. T5 Wraiths and Decurion aside, everything preceding it was so well done.

I think we can all agree that, feelings aside, 40k has become an objectively gakky game in need of a massive overhaul. Even as a casual game, it sucks. Sorry, but it's the truth. We shouldn't have to go through hours of deliberations and hostage negotiations before we can agree to a relatively balanced pickup game. There's nothing casual about a buy-in cost of around 500 bucks.

That said, a player only deserves the criticism that goes with abusing a game system if he constantly shops for the latest power builds. Pro-tip - guys who have been playing Eldar for a long time, and love the army for the sake of the army, aren't the ones going out buying Scatterbikes by the bucketload.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
I think we can all agree that, feelings aside, 40k has become an objectively gakky game in need of a massive overhaul.

That said, a player only deserves the criticism that goes with abusing a game system if he constantly jumps ship to the newest power army. Pro-tip - guys who have been playing Eldar for a long time, and love the army for the sake of the army, aren't the ones going out buying Scatterbikes by the bucketload.

But a lot of them are the Serpent Spam guys from 6th. And some of those were the invinci-Falcon players from 4th.