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.

I don't think Eldar have been updated in every edition anyway...

I'm getting really tired of repeating myself on this argument. Individual units do mot make an army as a whole OP. Tyranids have an FMC that is ridiculously cheap for the level of firepower it puts out, but you wouldn't in good faith be able to say that the current Tyranid codex is OP. Same goes for Eldar.

Let's take a brief trip back in time, shall we, and chart what has made Eldar OP:

2nd/3rd edition: Starcannons
4th/5th edition: Unkillable vehicles
6th edition: Wave Serpents
7th edition: Scatbikers, D-weapons, Wraithknight

Only the latest codex stands out for the number of broken units, but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. The Eldar codex may be somewhat more OP have have broken units, but that doesn't mean it can't be fixed.

1. Tyranid FMC's (suppose you mean flyrants, because harpies suck and crones are average) are definitely NOT cheap. 240 pts is land raider category points spent to get 12 str 6 shots within 18". Exactly the same number of shots eldar get with, let's say, 3 scatter bikes. Only 3 scatter bikes cost 81 pts and can shoot from 36" away. Yeah. Tyranids are ridiculously cheap. Whatever.

2. Your historical analysis lacks a couple of huge facts. From the 5th to the 6th edition, all Eldar guardians got a free point of Ballistic skill for no reason whatsoever. In addition your whole army got to benefit double from the shooting phase, arguable the best phase in the game. There is a reason all other armies are restricted in either running or shooting. Reason is that doing both is too much for a single phase. And then Eldar get to do this with ALL their army. Then in 7th edition your aspect warriors got a free point of ballistic skill, also for no reason whatsoever. In this, you should add the fact that Eldar have the best AND cheapest psychic phase in the game for as long as I can remember, in comparison Tzeentch lies in the corner crying, and that's stupid. If you add specific changes it is easy to miss the bigger picture. And this is the bigger picture:

1. Eldar have (one of) the best movement phases in the game. Troop jetbikes, warp spyders, ability to have all your characters get jetbikes (in contrast,since you like to compare to tyranids, they only have ONE independent character and he isn't even allowed to get wings and join Shrikes), Wraithknights moving 12", skimmer transports etc etc etc.

2. Eldar have the single best psychic phase in the game period. Cheapest way to get multiple warp charges, an EXCELLENT choice of powers, army standalone powers that put to shame all other disciplines in the game, 3+ to cast, reroll dice, ignoring perils etc etc etc.

3. Eldar have the best shooting phase in the game, period. Giving all bikes a laser is akin to giving each single tactical marine an assault cannon, only much much better. Consider an army of 3-4 full tactical units holding 10 assault freaking cannons each and if you think that's crazy, think about scatterbikes. Also with D weapons everywhere for ridiculously cheap you can practically amass shooting that would put Tau to shame. And no army should be better at shooting than Tau, mainly because Tau have nothing else going for them, shooting is all they do. And besides having the best shooting in the game, your WHOLE ARMY also gets to run along with shooting. For completely utter free.

4. Eldar have one of the strongest - if not the strongest - close combats in the game. Melee Wraithknights fast enough that nobody can escape, the most unkillable deathstar (seerstar with farseers) that also deals ridiculous amount of damage due to fleshbane weapons (oh poor eldars with str 3) etc etc etc. When your melee units put to shame armies such as tyranids and orks this is bad.

Now add to the mix interesting little stuff here and there in ALL your units like bladestorm, warp spyders 6 to wound thing, flickerjumps, reapers ignoring jinking, fire dragons shooting with AP0 etc etc etc, add some of the best blanket rules in any codex (maybe second only to marines - and said Tyranids' own blanket rule is a blatant nerf, only army in the game that does so) and then sprinkle on top of it formations that give free ballistic skill to your aspect warriors and better casting to your farseers, effectively leaving you with only ONE bad unit in your whole codex, and that's storm guardians. And since you like comparing to Tyranids, let me tell you that Tyranids STILL have pyrovores.

So that's about Eldar. You got any objections?

topaxygouroun i wrote:

I don't think Eldar have been updated in every edition anyway...

I'm getting really tired of repeating myself on this argument. Individual units do mot make an army as a whole OP. Tyranids have an FMC that is ridiculously cheap for the level of firepower it puts out, but you wouldn't in good faith be able to say that the current Tyranid codex is OP. Same goes for Eldar.

Let's take a brief trip back in time, shall we, and chart what has made Eldar OP:

2nd/3rd edition: Starcannons
4th/5th edition: Unkillable vehicles
6th edition: Wave Serpents
7th edition: Scatbikers, D-weapons, Wraithknight

Only the latest codex stands out for the number of broken units, but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. The Eldar codex may be somewhat more OP have have broken units, but that doesn't mean it can't be fixed.

1. Tyranid FMC's (suppose you mean flyrants, because harpies suck and crones are average) are definitely NOT cheap. 240 pts is land raider category points spent to get 12 str 6 shots within 18". Exactly the same number of shots eldar get with, let's say, 3 scatter bikes. Only 3 scatter bikes cost 81 pts and can shoot from 36" away. Yeah. Tyranids are ridiculously cheap. Whatever.

2. Your historical analysis lacks a couple of huge facts. From the 5th to the 6th edition, all Eldar guardians got a free point of Ballistic skill for no reason whatsoever. In addition your whole army got to benefit double from the shooting phase, arguable the best phase in the game. There is a reason all other armies are restricted in either running or shooting. Reason is that doing both is too much for a single phase. And then Eldar get to do this with ALL their army. Then in 7th edition your aspect warriors got a free point of ballistic skill, also for no reason whatsoever. In this, you should add the fact that Eldar have the best AND cheapest psychic phase in the game for as long as I can remember, in comparison Tzeentch lies in the corner crying, and that's stupid. If you add specific changes it is easy to miss the bigger picture. And this is the bigger picture:

1. Eldar have (one of) the best movement phases in the game. Troop jetbikes, warp spyders, ability to have all your characters get jetbikes (in contrast,since you like to compare to tyranids, they only have ONE independent character and he isn't even allowed to get wings and join Shrikes), Wraithknights moving 12", skimmer transports etc etc etc.

2. Eldar have the single best psychic phase in the game period. Cheapest way to get multiple warp charges, an EXCELLENT choice of powers, army standalone powers that put to shame all other disciplines in the game, 3+ to cast, reroll dice, ignoring perils etc etc etc.

3. Eldar have the best shooting phase in the game, period. Giving all bikes a laser is akin to giving each single tactical marine an assault cannon, only much much better. Consider an army of 3-4 full tactical units holding 10 assault freaking cannons each and if you think that's crazy, think about scatterbikes. Also with D weapons everywhere for ridiculously cheap you can practically amass shooting that would put Tau to shame. And no army should be better at shooting than Tau, mainly because Tau have nothing else going for them, shooting is all they do. And besides having the best shooting in the game, your WHOLE ARMY also gets to run along with shooting. For completely utter free.

4. Eldar have one of the strongest - if not the strongest - close combats in the game. Melee Wraithknights fast enough that nobody can escape, the most unkillable deathstar (seerstar with farseers) that also deals ridiculous amount of damage due to fleshbane weapons (oh poor eldars with str 3) etc etc etc. When your melee units put to shame armies such as tyranids and orks this is bad.

Now add to the mix interesting little stuff here and there in ALL your units like bladestorm, warp spyders 6 to wound thing, flickerjumps, reapers ignoring jinking, fire dragons shooting with AP0 etc etc etc, add some of the best blanket rules in any codex (maybe second only to marines - and said Tyranids' own blanket rule is a blatant nerf, only army in the game that does so) and then sprinkle on top of it formations that give free ballistic skill to your aspect warriors and better casting to your farseers, effectively leaving you with only ONE bad unit in your whole codex, and that's storm guardians. And since you like comparing to Tyranids, let me tell you that Tyranids STILL have pyrovores.

So that's about Eldar. You got any objections?

You forgot the extra free stuff from the formations!

 Farstrand wrote:
To get back to the point of balancing eldar.

Isn't the big problem spamming? Wouldn't it be great if a units cost increased if you had more of them? And let that go for weapons aswell.

Like first scatter laser is X. Second is 2X. Third is 3X. And so on in a unit.

Then sure you could have loads of the same weapon if you really wanted. But it would cost you.

And for units it could be a "tax" added to some units perhaps. Like first unit of jet bikes costs Y for 3. Next unit costs (Y+30)=Z. Next unit costs (Z+30). And so on.

Would be what I would change atleast.

Can we apply that to SM for every droppod they take it costs more and more

", but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. "

Never in consecutive editions, however. Eldar are consistently obnoxious.

Martel732 wrote:
", but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. "

Never in consecutive editions, however. Eldar are consistently obnoxious.

SM, tau have been really good since 4th so eldar aren't the only ones

Dman137 wrote:

Any one that openly likes AOS and thinks 40k should go down the same road clearly has lost it. It's a game made for kids (the box should just say ages 3-10. regardless of how 40k is going it's still a very fun game to play, if people don't like competitive army's then don't go to events, it drives me nuts that people with fluff army's and garbage list that they still use from 3ed come to events get tabled and then after the event complain that the game isn't fair and people are bringing OP army's and blah blah blah, if your not a competitive player and don't play with a competitive army then please just play with your friends in your gaming group instead of showing up to events to cry and bomb people's scores because your to sour.

In regards to balancing eldar, no matter what units people nerff the eldar book is so good that people (myself included) will just abuse some other unit. Comp the bikes cool I'll just take aspect warriors, comp the aspect warriors no problem I'll take a seerstar or you want to comp that to no problem wraithknight army it is. The list goes on and on

Since competitive 40k is a farce, and the current eldar codex is too broken to even play casual games with, why have points at all? IDK, if you want a proper competition, play warmahordes. Unrestricted tournaments are dominated by eldar, and even restricted ones are heavily dominated by them. Its just a competition to see who can bring the most obnoxious list.

Points unfairly penalise players like me, who play weak lists like tyranids, is pigeon-holed into FOCs/formations, into playing sure-lose games. People pretty much have to try to make weak list to match a fluffy tyranid list, and its pretty much impossible for eldar to match a weak tyranid list.

AoS will let me bring 4 squads of 12 stealers, 6 squads of 30 gaunts, a walkrant, warriors and 3 CC fexes and play against an eldar player who takes whatever he wants. Under the current rules, that list will get tabled within 2 turns, regardless of whatever the opponent takes.

Martel732 wrote:
", but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. "

Never in consecutive editions, however. Eldar are consistently obnoxious.

Add on common claim of eldar players claiming their 3++, jink saves, gragangutan creatures, fast every thing, insane shooting and firepower, holofields, etc. is a fragile army "for experts only", and it becomes infinitely more obnoxious. Multiply that with the fact that they've been building powergamers for 20 years, 7 editions straight, and you pretty much have the most overpowered faction with the most obnoxious players. Phil Kelly will continue making eldar more and more powerful, and the whole community gets torn apart even more.

AoS will toss the whole toxic population into the bin, probably they'll go on to play hayley2 in warmahordes, but at least its not an instant win for them.

Dman137 wrote:
[
SM, tau have been really good since 4th so eldar aren't the only ones

False again. Probably SM was only good in 6th and 7th with the advent of grav guns. They've been solidly average from 3rd-5th. Tau has only been good since 6th with riptides. Even in these editions, eldar has been an entire tier or 2 stronger than SM or tau, with theie jetseers, holofields, and generally insanly strong codex. No idea why eldar players love to rip on SM.

Tau has only been good since 6th with riptides.

to be fair, 4 edition Fish of Fury Tau lists were all the rage back in the day.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Tau has only been good since 6th with riptides.

to be fair, 4 edition Fish of Fury Tau lists were all the rage back in the day.

easily countered with matt ward's grey knights, any eldar codex, even the tyranid codex. Pretty much any CC codex then would trump them, and even the non CC-strong codex have a decent fighting chance, instead of the ROFLMAOLtabledin2turnseldar we have today.

Keep in mind, we're not talking merely strong. We're talking easy-mode, no brainer, cutting edge cheese several tiers above the rest, which only eldar has been for most of these 20 years, or 7 editions.

1) Make scatterbikes 1 in 3.
2) Make wraithknight Unique and cost +100pts.
3) Nerf wraithguard D-weapons.

Simples!

Dman137 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
", but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. "

Never in consecutive editions, however. Eldar are consistently obnoxious.

SM, tau have been really good since 4th so eldar aren't the only ones

Wrong. Very wrong. Vanilla marines were almost at the bottom at the end of 5th. Fish of fury builds were never as remotely strong as the crap Eldar have been known to field.

" Probably SM was only good in 6th and 7th with the advent of grav guns"

Meqs dominated the start of 3rd ed.

kburn wrote:
Maybe people want AoS rules because they're sick of being tabled by cheesemongers who claim to use a "fragile" or "hard to use" army? Maybe they're sick of being grossly underpowered 7 editions in a row. Maybe they're sick of being subject to the whims and fancies of robin cruddace and phil kelly? Maybe they're sick of half their units becoming unplayable every edition? Maybe they're sick of a poorly balanced narrative game masquerading as a competitive game?

Can't speak for the others so much but the bolded problems would only worse with this kind of thing. You'd get the same "cheesemongers" but with them not even limited by points anymore and they can house-rule their army to be even stronger with even less impunity because you can't even PLAY without house rules and the complete lack of balancing mechanics would brand it as the very epitome of "poorly balanced narrative game", while killing any hope for it to be anything else.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Crash mate.... once and for all, just because I'm discussing the relative pros and cons of ideas, doesn't necessarily mean I'm asking anybody to support one.

1) Completely unbelievable, you definitely were pushing that crappy idea and advocating it, don't hide behind some weaksauce excuse.
2) I'm going to pile on the emphasis because you don't seem to get this point: THERE AREN'T "pros and cons" BECAUSE THE IDEA OF A GAME NOT HAVING A BALANCE MECHANIC HAS NO PROS! ANYTHING A GAME WITHOUT ONE COULD DO, A GAME WITH ONE COULD DO BETTER BECAUSE YOU CAN JUST IGNORE OR TWEAK THE BALANCING MECHANIC AS YOU PLEASE WHILE ADDING ONE TO A GAME WITHOUT ONE IS MUCH, MUCH HARDER! Now with that said, actually address that point and stop dodging it.

kburn wrote:
Points unfairly penalise players like me, who play weak lists like tyranids, is pigeon-holed into FOCs/formations, into playing sure-lose games. People pretty much have to try to make weak list to match a fluffy tyranid list, and its pretty much impossible for eldar to match a weak tyranid list.

No, badly balanced points are what hurt you, tweak them with house rules and it gets better. It's what you'd be forced to do with crappy no-balancing-mechanic games like AOS anyway, whereas here you have a defined starting point as well as something to fall back on if you can't agree on house rules. With crap like AOS you'd need to completely start with scratch to get either crappy results (worse than now!) or require an utterly mind-bending amount of playtesting, and you'd have absolutely nothing to fall back on if you can't agree on house rules. Even the status quo is better.

kburn wrote:
AoS will toss the whole toxic population into the bin, probably they'll go on to play hayley2 in warmahordes, but at least its not an instant win for them.

Once again, NO IT WON'T! They'll just be completely unrestrained and run roughshod over everything else, I keep pointing this out and nobody can even be bothered to refute it or even just respond...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

zerosignal wrote:

2) Make wraithknight Unique and cost +100pts.

Not so sure about making them Unique, kind of a middle finger to anyone who bought more than one...
Besides if they're balanced, having more than one won't be such an issue anymore.

Let's not get rose tinted glasses here. 4th edition Eldar codex was hardly something to be feared like you make it out to be. It has very few competitive builds, most were Seer Council based. You try matching up a 5th ed Space Wolves army or GK list during 5th and early 6th and a Biel-Tan or Iyanden or Guardian list and see where that would have taken you. A bit like Tyranids now. Besides you moan about how bad Tyranids are but that's really it, it's Tyranids who are gak. You come up against an optimised Necrons or SM list and you'll suffer the same problem, so don't be unfairly hating on Eldar. I think I've made my opinion clear about Eldar balancing already so I won't go back on it.

You know what would also nerf Eldar?

Nerfing Battle-Brothers.

Solo 2016!

kburn wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

Any one that openly likes AOS and thinks 40k should go down the same road clearly has lost it. It's a game made for kids (the box should just say ages 3-10. regardless of how 40k is going it's still a very fun game to play, if people don't like competitive army's then don't go to events, it drives me nuts that people with fluff army's and garbage list that they still use from 3ed come to events get tabled and then after the event complain that the game isn't fair and people are bringing OP army's and blah blah blah, if your not a competitive player and don't play with a competitive army then please just play with your friends in your gaming group instead of showing up to events to cry and bomb people's scores because your to sour.

In regards to balancing eldar, no matter what units people nerff the eldar book is so good that people (myself included) will just abuse some other unit. Comp the bikes cool I'll just take aspect warriors, comp the aspect warriors no problem I'll take a seerstar or you want to comp that to no problem wraithknight army it is. The list goes on and on

Since competitive 40k is a farce, and the current eldar codex is too broken to even play casual games with, why have points at all? IDK, if you want a proper competition, play warmahordes. Unrestricted tournaments are dominated by eldar, and even restricted ones are heavily dominated by them. Its just a competition to see who can bring the most obnoxious list.

Points unfairly penalise players like me, who play weak lists like tyranids, is pigeon-holed into FOCs/formations, into playing sure-lose games. People pretty much have to try to make weak list to match a fluffy tyranid list, and its pretty much impossible for eldar to match a weak tyranid list.

AoS will let me bring 4 squads of 12 stealers, 6 squads of 30 gaunts, a walkrant, warriors and 3 CC fexes and play against an eldar player who takes whatever he wants. Under the current rules, that list will get tabled within 2 turns, regardless of whatever the opponent takes.

Martel732 wrote:
", but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. "

Never in consecutive editions, however. Eldar are consistently obnoxious.

Add on common claim of eldar players claiming their 3++, jink saves, gragangutan creatures, fast every thing, insane shooting and firepower, holofields, etc. is a fragile army "for experts only", and it becomes infinitely more obnoxious. Multiply that with the fact that they've been building powergamers for 20 years, 7 editions straight, and you pretty much have the most overpowered faction with the most obnoxious players. Phil Kelly will continue making eldar more and more powerful, and the whole community gets torn apart even more.

AoS will toss the whole toxic population into the bin, probably they'll go on to play hayley2 in warmahordes, but at least its not an instant win for them.

Dman137 wrote:
[
SM, tau have been really good since 4th so eldar aren't the only ones

False again. Probably SM was only good in 6th and 7th with the advent of grav guns. They've been solidly average from 3rd-5th. Tau has only been good since 6th with riptides. Even in these editions, eldar has been an entire tier or 2 stronger than SM or tau, with theie jetseers, holofields, and generally insanly strong codex. No idea why eldar players love to rip on SM.

I won the grand tournament in 2008 (4th Ed) the last GT gw supported back in the day with tau that had no fish of fury all foot tau, so pretty sure they were amazing in 4th

The 4th ed eldar codex could burn down careless sw players in 5th with guided scatterlasers. Basically the eldar are always at least average because of their weapon profiles and fast platforms.

 krodarklorr wrote:
You know what would also nerf Eldar?

Nerfing Battle-Brothers.

Solo 2016!

If by "nerf Eldar" you mean "screw over Dark Eldar and Harlequins while Craftworld Eldar have all their cheesy crap to fall back on", then yes.

P.S. You need to drop the Battle Brothers hate, it's got some exploits but there are many valid uses and people have built armies around it. Killing Battle Brothers ally levels because of those would be like squatting Necrons because they have quite a few OP things, and I know you wouldn't like that...

Not so sure about making them Unique, kind of a middle finger to anyone who bought more than one...

On the other hand though, anyone who just went ballistic and bought multiple Wraithknights the moment they saw the codex entry kinda deserves a middle finger imho.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:
You know what would also nerf Eldar?

Nerfing Battle-Brothers.

Solo 2016!

If by "nerf Eldar" you mean "screw over Dark Eldar and Harlequins while Craftworld Eldar have all their cheesy crap to fall back on", then yes.

P.S. You need to drop the Battle Brothers hate, it's got some exploits but there are many valid uses and people have built armies around it. Killing Battle Brothers ally levels because of those would be like squatting Necrons because they have quite a few OP things, and I know you wouldn't like that...

A. Dark Eldar have a terrible codex. That is not by any means my fault, and I feel for them, I really do. Harlequins aren't even involved in any of the cheese builds from what I've heard, so they would remain mostly unaffected.

B. I said nerf, not remove. I'm obviously a strong advocate for playing an army the way it was meant to be played, but I also understand that allying is a fun and fluffy part of the game. I simply think that Battle-Brothers should not be able to take each other's transports. That, at the very least, would fix quite a few issues across the board. Also, remove Come the Apocalypse. But that's another issue that isn't relevant to this topic.

C. You need to chill. I've read your posts across this topic and you either enjoying jumping on people's cases or are very passionate about this topic. Either way, you need to tone it down a bit.

D. Solo 2016 is a joke that I'm running with because why not. I thought that was pretty clear.

 krodarklorr wrote:
I thought that was pretty clear.

T'was.

There's a reason you can't take this guy's face seriously:

 krodarklorr wrote:
A. Dark Eldar have a terrible codex. That is not by any means my fault, and I feel for them, I really do. Harlequins aren't even involved in any of the cheese builds from what I've heard, so they would remain mostly unaffected.

Well, I had heard that Dark Eldar and Harlies are fun/effective with each other, which is more what I was getting at.

 krodarklorr wrote:
B. I said nerf, not remove. I'm obviously a strong advocate for playing an army the way it was meant to be played, but I also understand that allying is a fun and fluffy part of the game. I simply think that Battle-Brothers should not be able to take each other's transports. That, at the very least, would fix quite a few issues across the board. Also, remove Come the Apocalypse. But that's another issue that isn't relevant to this topic.

Alright, that's more reasonable, would still make a couple points:
A) Don't take it any further than that.
B) While "no transport sharing" wouldn't be unworkable, I'm thinking it might be overkill, it sounds like it's more just a few specific transports when taken as Fast Attack that cause the problem. I don't really see any complaints about Guardsmen in Rhinos, Bullgryns in Land Raiders or Terminators in a Stormlord.

 krodarklorr wrote:
C. You need to chill. I've read your posts across this topic and you either enjoying jumping on people's cases or are very passionate about this topic. Either way, you need to tone it down a bit.

Damn right I'm passionate, can't really be anything else when someone's seriously suggesting an idea that would very likely destroy my hobby entirely (if 40k went AOS-style that's basically all that money, time and effort down the drain for me... Unlike what Yoyoyo seems to think I am UNABLE to adapt to that!).

 krodarklorr wrote:
D. Solo 2016 is a joke that I'm running with because why not. I thought that was pretty clear.

Oh, guess it really didn't come across (not anything special, sarcasm doesn't travel properly over the web), maybe just because I've seen people suggest much worse ideas with a straight face (see anyone seriously suggesting the AOS route).

 Selym wrote:
There's a reason you can't take this guy's face seriously:

I just took that to mean he was really enthusiastic about it.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

 Selym wrote:
There's a reason you can't take this guy's face seriously:

I just took that to mean he was really enthusiastic about it.

Fair enough

topaxygouroun i wrote:

I don't think Eldar have been updated in every edition anyway...

I'm getting really tired of repeating myself on this argument. Individual units do mot make an army as a whole OP. Tyranids have an FMC that is ridiculously cheap for the level of firepower it puts out, but you wouldn't in good faith be able to say that the current Tyranid codex is OP. Same goes for Eldar.

Let's take a brief trip back in time, shall we, and chart what has made Eldar OP:

2nd/3rd edition: Starcannons
4th/5th edition: Unkillable vehicles
6th edition: Wave Serpents
7th edition: Scatbikers, D-weapons, Wraithknight

Only the latest codex stands out for the number of broken units, but keep in mind that during that time Blood Angels, Grey Knights, Space Marines, Space Wolves, CSM, and Tau have all been broken, OP, and widely hated on. The Eldar codex may be somewhat more OP have have broken units, but that doesn't mean it can't be fixed.

1. Tyranid FMC's (suppose you mean flyrants, because harpies suck and crones are average) are definitely NOT cheap. 240 pts is land raider category points spent to get 12 str 6 shots within 18". Exactly the same number of shots eldar get with, let's say, 3 scatter bikes. Only 3 scatter bikes cost 81 pts and can shoot from 36" away. Yeah. Tyranids are ridiculously cheap. Whatever.

2. Your historical analysis lacks a couple of huge facts. From the 5th to the 6th edition, all Eldar guardians got a free point of Ballistic skill for no reason whatsoever. In addition your whole army got to benefit double from the shooting phase, arguable the best phase in the game. There is a reason all other armies are restricted in either running or shooting. Reason is that doing both is too much for a single phase. And then Eldar get to do this with ALL their army. Then in 7th edition your aspect warriors got a free point of ballistic skill, also for no reason whatsoever. In this, you should add the fact that Eldar have the best AND cheapest psychic phase in the game for as long as I can remember, in comparison Tzeentch lies in the corner crying, and that's stupid. If you add specific changes it is easy to miss the bigger picture. And this is the bigger picture:

1. Eldar have (one of) the best movement phases in the game. Troop jetbikes, warp spyders, ability to have all your characters get jetbikes (in contrast,since you like to compare to tyranids, they only have ONE independent character and he isn't even allowed to get wings and join Shrikes), Wraithknights moving 12", skimmer transports etc etc etc.

2. Eldar have the single best psychic phase in the game period. Cheapest way to get multiple warp charges, an EXCELLENT choice of powers, army standalone powers that put to shame all other disciplines in the game, 3+ to cast, reroll dice, ignoring perils etc etc etc.

3. Eldar have the best shooting phase in the game, period. Giving all bikes a laser is akin to giving each single tactical marine an assault cannon, only much much better. Consider an army of 3-4 full tactical units holding 10 assault freaking cannons each and if you think that's crazy, think about scatterbikes. Also with D weapons everywhere for ridiculously cheap you can practically amass shooting that would put Tau to shame. And no army should be better at shooting than Tau, mainly because Tau have nothing else going for them, shooting is all they do. And besides having the best shooting in the game, your WHOLE ARMY also gets to run along with shooting. For completely utter free.

4. Eldar have one of the strongest - if not the strongest - close combats in the game. Melee Wraithknights fast enough that nobody can escape, the most unkillable deathstar (seerstar with farseers) that also deals ridiculous amount of damage due to fleshbane weapons (oh poor eldars with str 3) etc etc etc. When your melee units put to shame armies such as tyranids and orks this is bad.

Now add to the mix interesting little stuff here and there in ALL your units like bladestorm, warp spyders 6 to wound thing, flickerjumps, reapers ignoring jinking, fire dragons shooting with AP0 etc etc etc, add some of the best blanket rules in any codex (maybe second only to marines - and said Tyranids' own blanket rule is a blatant nerf, only army in the game that does so) and then sprinkle on top of it formations that give free ballistic skill to your aspect warriors and better casting to your farseers, effectively leaving you with only ONE bad unit in your whole codex, and that's storm guardians. And since you like comparing to Tyranids, let me tell you that Tyranids STILL have pyrovores.

So that's about Eldar. You got any objections?

Back in the 6th edition codex, Wraithknights cost about as much as a Land Raider, and it was widely agreed that they were underpriced even then. Believe it or not, FMCs are more survivable due to only being hit on sixes and still having armour and improvable cover saves. If anything, Land Raiders are overcosted for what they do, warranting around 200 points.

Eldar Guardians used to be BS3? Sheesh, no wonder older players think they're garbage. Considering that Eldar are natural warriors and that each Eldar spends a century or two learning how to fight as a Guardian, BS4 seems about right. It's also balanced with their points cost of 9 ppm (and before you complain, DE Kabalites are BS4 at 8 ppm). Aspect Warriors are arguable supposed to be BS5, as they have spent hundreds of years mastering the use of a single weapon. The extra point of BS helps to compensate for a low Toughness value.

I'm not denying that Eldar aren't mobile, but they're actually the 2nd most mobile army in the game; Dark Eldar are the first. As far as the psychic phase goes, Tzeentch Daemons outclass them in terms of psychic power and versatility due to their massive summoning potential.

Scatbikers are widely acknowledged, including by myself, as broken. Same deal with D-weapons. Battle Focus is there to add mobility to foot infantry, and is hardly as powerful as other armies' special rules. Tau have arguably more powerful shooting, and thanks to markerlights can be just as accurate and ignore cover to boot.

You named the one unit in the Eldar codex that is good in CC: the Wraithknight. All other Eldar units, including our assault troops, fold to other armies' dedicated assault units.

Eldar have broken units, I'll admit. But the army as a whole is no more broken than any other 7th edition codex.

" whole is no more broken than any other 7th edition codex."

BA. Most of my codex is unplayable garbage. This is a false statement.

Eldar Guardians are essentially a Militia force that is called upon in a time of war. They are not 'Natural warriors' and that century of training is not all training, it is essentially a century of spending a couple of days a week learning the basics.

BS 3 was perfectly fine for them back then and it still is now. Aspect Warriors should be WS and BS 4/5 though, they actually train for it.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
Eldar Guardians used to be BS3? Sheesh, no wonder older players think they're garbage. Considering that Eldar are natural warriors and that each Eldar spends a century or two learning how to fight as a Guardian, BS4 seems about right. It's also balanced with their points cost of 9 ppm (and before you complain, DE Kabalites are BS4 at 8 ppm). Aspect Warriors are arguable supposed to be BS5, as they have spent hundreds of years mastering the use of a single weapon. The extra point of BS helps to compensate for a low Toughness value.

Aspect Warriors can now be BS5.

I'm not denying that Eldar aren't mobile, but they're actually the 2nd most mobile army in the game; Dark Eldar are the first.

Incorrect. I shall state my case.

Windriders vs. Reavers: Same speed. Windriders are more durable and have better firepower.

Scourges vs. Swooping Hawks: By fluff, both of these units fly through the air. In fact, you are correct that in fluff, Scourges would fly as fast as their Raiders, and therefor are more mobile. In game? Scourges are Jump Infantry. Swooping Hawks can precision deep strike, hit fliers, and move 18". They are faster.

Wave Serpents vs. Raiders: Same speed. Raiders are open topped and squishier, but the guys can shoot out of them. They cannot, however, move 12" and fire with efficiency, so they are actually slower than Eldar vehicles if they want to take advantage of the open-topped rule. The only way they could be considered faster is by giving them Enhanced Ether Sails, which no one does. Raiders can Deep Strike though, which is nice. Granted, so can Falcons now, with no scatter (granted to have to take more of them).

Eldar Fliers vs. Dark Eldar Fliers: Both are squishy, Eldar ones have better firepower, are cheaper, and have Vector Dancer. Why don't Dark Eldar ones have Vector Dancer? That's an excellent question.

Howling Banshees vs. Wyches: I don't remember the exact wording, but Howling Banshees get, like, what, +3 inches to charging? Wyches have literally nothing besides explodable open-topped transports. Which I guess is okay.

Lets wrap this up with a few other points. Eldar characters can take Jetbikes, Dark Eldar cannot. Eldar have a 12" moving GC. Eldar have Warp Spyders. Eldar also have Battle Focus.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Unlike what Yoyoyo seems to think I am UNABLE to adapt to that!

You'd be more convincing if you said *why* you're unable to adapt, rather than just having an all-caps freakout moment. Passion isn't a substitute for insight, a 2-year old's temper tantrum qualifies. Anyway, adaptation is pretty easy. Put models on the table, start game. Voilà. Pretty complicated eh?

Balance is balance, maybe some people are too inexperienced to adjust it on their own but wargaming is a social and communal activity. YOU don't need to be able to adapt. You are supposed to have support to help you. Incidentally, in that thread I linked, here is a relevant anecdote coming from a "no points" historical gamer:

I recently played a game of WH40k against a new opponent at a gaming club I just started going to. It was a hard fought game of Spacemarines VS Tyranids. It was also my first game against tyranids so I was a little unsure of thier rules and abilities. This game was an absolute joy to play because I think that the two of us approached the game in a similar way - That it was precisely that - a game - and that we were going to spend the better part of a Saturday doing something fun and enjoying ourselves. Juxtaposed to that was a group of gamers off to one side playing a team game who did nothing but squabble over technicalities and who was and wasnt in cover. Because we didnt do that, didnt mean that certain dice rolls were any less exciting or suspensfull.

So whats the moral of that little vingette - It is your playing style and attitude that will shape your gaming experience and not the rules system.

Martel732 wrote:
BA. Most of my codex is unplayable garbage. This is a false statement.

That's what you get for picking Team Edward!

Seriously though, can you lay off the BA complaints? You seem to keep bringing it up but there's not a lot that can be done in this particular thread. Maybe that should have its own thread? Then again the answer would probably just point to giving them the boosts that the Unforgiven and Smurfs & Friends got, maybe with added boosts to assault-based units to counteract the 7E shooting bias.

Yoyoyo wrote:
You'd be more convincing if you said *why* you're unable to adapt, rather than just having an all-caps freakout moment.

I did, not my fault if you don't listen when I say it.
While it's easy enough to figure out minor house rules, expecting me to just invent whole rulesets is too big an ask.
For a sort of example, I can totally accept that Terminators might be overcosted and figure out a way to boost them and/or a better new price but if I just had a squad of Deathwing Terminators with the points costs cut out but everything else left in, I'd have no bloody clue how much they'd be worth, even BEFORE upgrades were factored in...
Not to mention this crosses the line from house-ruling to homebrewing, which is difficult, time-consuming and something I'm not even good at by the looks of it, so it's not something you can expect me to do JUST TO PLAY THE DAMN GAME!
Now, is there any part of this you don't understand, that I need to explain further?

Yoyoyo wrote:
Anyway, adaptation is pretty easy. Put models on the table, start game. Voilà. Pretty complicated eh?

Extremely complicated. How much of anything am I supposed to bring? Too much and I'll be TFG and make my opponent miserable (even if I'm not trying to be a powergaming gakker), too little and I'll get hopelessly stomped.
And I can't avoid either because without points or another balancing mechanic because without one I have no idea how much is enough...

Yoyoyo wrote:
Balance is balance, maybe some people are too inexperienced to adjust it on their own but wargaming is a social and communal activity. YOU don't need to be able to adapt. You are supposed to have support to help you.

Sounds nice at first, but falls apart once you think about it.
Having the community handle a few fixes here and there, or even having a gaming group or tournament make extensive house rules/FAQs/errata is fine, because you have an official baseline that you start from and always fall back on.
But having the whole ruleset be that CANNOT work.
It's already bad enough that I won't know from game to game if I can have an Interrogator-Chaplain on Bike lead my Ravenwing Strike Force and how his special rules could be affected if I can. Imagining my entire army and every single unit I could bring being in such a state, along with some being buffed, nerfed or just changed beyond recognition and my "master list" fluctuating in value from 1000 points to 5000 points with the exact same models in it is utterly horrifying to me! And how the hell am I supposed to work with that?!

Yoyoyo wrote:
Incidentally, in that thread I linked, here is a relevant anecdote coming from a "no points" historical gamer:

I recently played a game of WH40k against a new opponent at a gaming club I just started going to. It was a hard fought game of Spacemarines VS Tyranids. It was also my first game against tyranids so I was a little unsure of thier rules and abilities. This game was an absolute joy to play because I think that the two of us approached the game in a similar way - That it was precisely that - a game - and that we were going to spend the better part of a Saturday doing something fun and enjoying ourselves. Juxtaposed to that was a group of gamers off to one side playing a team game who did nothing but squabble over technicalities and who was and wasnt in cover. Because we didnt do that, didnt mean that certain dice rolls were any less exciting or suspensfull.

Yeah, it's nice to be friendly with the opponent and to know that he won't shove my Vindicator up my butt if I suggest that being forced to take a 3+ armor save instead of a 4+ rerollable cover save because of some dippy technicality doesn't make sense and that s/he know I won't make him/her eat his/her Wraithlord if s/he wants to bring an old Forge World model authorized for "Codex: Eldar" rather than "Codex: Eldar Craftworlds".
But as nice as that all is, being chummy with the other player doesn't tell me how many points/whatever a Black Knight is or how many points/whatever we're bringing to this game.

Yoyoyo wrote:
[i]So whats the moral of that little vingette - It is your playing style and attitude that will shape your gaming experience and not the rules system.

Not really, both are important. And in this case a broken, unplayable, unfinished and ultimately unusable ruleset dooms the game to misery no matter the playing style and attitude.

And I'll quote this since you ignored it even though I specific asked you to address it:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

2) I'm going to pile on the emphasis because you don't seem to get this point: THERE AREN'T "pros and cons" BECAUSE THE IDEA OF A GAME NOT HAVING A BALANCE MECHANIC HAS NO PROS! ANYTHING A GAME WITHOUT ONE COULD DO, A GAME WITH ONE COULD DO BETTER BECAUSE YOU CAN JUST IGNORE OR TWEAK THE BALANCING MECHANIC AS YOU PLEASE WHILE ADDING ONE TO A GAME WITHOUT ONE IS MUCH, MUCH HARDER! Now with that said, actually address that point and stop dodging it.

Seriously though, can you lay off the BA complaints? You seem to keep bringing it up but there's not a lot that can be done in this particular thread. Maybe that should have its own thread? Then again the answer would probably just point to giving them the boosts that the Unforgiven and Smurfs & Friends got, maybe with added boosts to assault-based units to counteract the 7E shooting bias.

thats unfair as its a direct response to your own inaccurate statement:

But the army as a whole is no more broken than any other 7th edition codex.

But having the whole ruleset be that CANNOT work.
It's already bad enough that I won't know from game to game if I can have an Interrogator-Chaplain on Bike lead my Ravenwing Strike Force and how his special rules could be affected if I can. Imagining my entire army and every single unit I could bring being in such a state, along with some being buffed, nerfed or just changed beyond recognition and my "master list" fluctuating in value from 1000 points to 5000 points with the exact same models in it is utterly horrifying to me! And how the hell am I supposed to work with that?!

Almost every single tournament ever run is a House Rules environment - they almost all change the core rules and impose limits and other elements for balance.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Seriously though, can you lay off the BA complaints? You seem to keep bringing it up but there's not a lot that can be done in this particular thread. Maybe that should have its own thread? Then again the answer would probably just point to giving them the boosts that the Unforgiven and Smurfs & Friends got, maybe with added boosts to assault-based units to counteract the 7E shooting bias.

thats unfair as its a direct response to your own inaccurate statement:

But the army as a whole is no more broken than any other 7th edition codex.

I didn't say that, TheNewBlood said that.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Almost every single tournament ever run is a House Rules environment - they almost all change the core rules and impose limits and other elements for balance.

I actually addressed this in my post:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Having the community handle a few fixes here and there, or even having a gaming group or tournament make extensive house rules/FAQs/errata is fine, because you have an official baseline that you start from and always fall back on.

"Seriously though, can you lay off the BA complaints? You seem to keep bringing it up but there's not a lot that can be done in this particular thread. Maybe that should have its own thread? Then again the answer would probably just point to giving them the boosts that the Unforgiven and Smurfs & Friends got, maybe with added boosts to assault-based units to counteract the 7E shooting bias. "

The BA are just a very obvious counter example to his statement. I could have just as easily picked IG.