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.

No solid info, but I can speculate on what we could see for CTs:

Saim-Hann = fast stuff/bikes, Ulthwe = psykers, biel tan = guardians, lyanden = wraiths, Alaitoc = Aspect Warriors obviously, but thinking about the others...

Yme-Loc: the tank faction. Since CTs are seemingly only affecting infantry, bike infantry and some others (I'd bet that Wraithlords will get in as Dreadnoughts were able to benefit for marines) it has been tough to get a good tank based chapter tactic. I think something like granting all characters a "bonesinger" ability to repair vehicles could be a cool feature, incentivizing a Yme-Loc army to field many Warlocks and other psykers as buff/support units for their armored column.

Altansar: They've completely joined the Ynnari. Perhaps a rule that allows them to benefit from both SfD and Battlefocus, without needing to have one of the Ynnari characters as warlord?

Lugganath: Canonically pal around with Harlequins, and hire lots of mercenaries in their armies. It would be interesting to have them have a less-powerful craftworld tactic, but allow them to still benefit from it if they have other Aeldari units in their detachment

I just want them to fix the point costs of Dire Avengers and Guardians.

After that... we'll see.

the_scotsman wrote:
No solid info, but I can speculate on what we could see for CTs:

Saim-Hann = fast stuff/bikes, Ulthwe = psykers, biel tan = guardians, lyanden = wraiths, Alaitoc = Aspect Warriors obviously, but thinking about the others...

"obviously" - except that guardians are more associated with ulthwe as well as psykers, alaitoc is pathfinders and rangers, and biel tan is aspect warriors.

I wonder if we will see Craftworld Traits that are as significant as Chapter/Legion Traits for SM/CSM? Here are some ideas off the top of my head (I am sure others can come up with better ones).

Alaitoc: Masters of Stealth (-1 to hit when shooting at their infantry from >12" range).
Ulthwe: Black Guardians (Ignore cover saves when firing Shuircan weaponry)
Saim Hann: Hit and Run (Jetbikes can withdraw and charge in the same turn).
Iyanden: Wraith Host (<Wraith> units can reroll failed to Wound rolls).
Biel Tan: Court of the Young King (Aspect units can reroll failed Morale tests as long as their Exarch is alive)
Yme Loc: Forges of Vaul (Vehicles ignore wounds on a 5+ rather than on a 6 when equipped with Spirit Stones).

I ant to see Black Guardian webway portals back!

My main Eldar army is Iyanden and that is what I will use most of the time, but I do have some Black Guardians that I'd like to see the light of day although would be fine if they were just in a Ynnari force.


So this book is just Craftworld right? No Ynnari in this book? That gives me hope that they intend to flesh out Ynnari into a more distinct faction at a later date.

Correct, no Ynnari. To be fair, Ynnari might well remain an Index list for some time. They work well as a bolt-on to the other factions and a fluffy way to run a mixed Eldar list.

 Karhedron wrote:
I wonder if we will see Craftworld Traits that are as significant as Chapter/Legion Traits for SM/CSM? Here are some ideas off the top of my head (I am sure others can come up with better ones).

Alaitoc: Masters of Stealth (-1 to hit when shooting at their infantry from >12" range).
Ulthwe: Black Guardians (Ignore cover saves when firing Shuircan weaponry)
Saim Hann: Hit and Run (Jetbikes can withdraw and charge in the same turn).
Iyanden: Wraith Host (<Wraith> units can reroll failed to Wound rolls).
Biel Tan: Court of the Young King (Aspect units can reroll failed Morale tests as long as their Exarch is alive)
Yme Loc: Forges of Vaul (Vehicles ignore wounds on a 5+ rather than on a 6 when equipped with Spirit Stones).

Going with the SM/Codex I am speculating that infantry, bikers, and maybe War Walkers (Iyaden would probably benefit Wraith Lords instead) will get to benefit from <Craftworld> tactics.

Alaitoc - ala RG/Alpha so high probability it will be one of the benefits
Ulthwe - I think it would be for all <Ulthwe> units not just shurican weapons like the SM/CSM
Saim Hann - I would say H&R plus a minor benefit (like the WS tactic of +2" to advance) or can advance and charge or if they advance they get a defensive buff (maybe -1 to hit or are treated being in cover)
Iyaden - Rerolling on all wounds might be too powerful of a benefit on wraiths. I am thinking auto advance of 6" and Wraith Lords can move and shoot Heavy without the -1 to hit.
Biel Tan - Spider exarch already has that benefit. So probably totally different. I am hoping for <Salamander> ish tactic from SM
Yme Loc - that would be interesting or vehicle just ignore the -1 to hit when moving with Heavy.

/speculation

I could see Ynnari and Harlequins being included in this book, and having unique Craftworld traits, with specific requirements to meet to gain them.

Ynnari - gain Strength from Death, must have the Ynnari characters (and Eldrad?) as warlord, can't include the Avatar
Harlequins - must all have <Masque> keyword, gain Rising Crescendo

Unique strategems, as well as the general Aeldari ones, can be used.

Tamwulf wrote:I just want them to fix the point costs of Dire Avengers and Guardians.

After that... we'll see.

That would be wonderful.

A bit if what roflmajog and the_scotsman have suggested with each Craftworld have something unique...even if it is a small/symbolic reduction on one units cost. Not enough to encourage spamming that unit, but meaning each Craftworld would add it into their list. I have been including a Ranger unit with my Alaitoc for each battle regardless of my opponent.

Karhedron wrote:I wonder if we will see Craftworld Traits that are as significant as Chapter/Legion Traits for SM/CSM? Here are some ideas off the top of my head (I am sure others can come up with better ones).

Alaitoc: Masters of Stealth (-1 to hit when shooting at their infantry from >12" range).
Ulthwe: Black Guardians (Ignore cover saves when firing Shuircan weaponry)
Saim Hann: Hit and Run (Jetbikes can withdraw and charge in the same turn).
Iyanden: Wraith Host (<Wraith> units can reroll failed to Wound rolls).
Biel Tan: Court of the Young King (Aspect units can reroll failed Morale tests as long as their Exarch is alive)
Yme Loc: Forges of Vaul (Vehicles ignore wounds on a 5+ rather than on a 6 when equipped with Spirit Stones).

That would be nice, but very unlikely.

My two cents,

CB

 Karhedron wrote:

Saim Hann: Hit and Run (Jetbikes can withdraw and charge in the same turn).

This is a horrible trait. It would only benefit Shining spears and Autarchs. An ideal trait should benefit the whole army, not just 1-2 units.
If this also made Windriders Troops, than it would be fine, I guess.
I'd like to see something like move-shoot-move, but implemented in a way that wasn't as broken as prior editions. Maybe -1 to hit if you intend to move after shooting?

 vipoid wrote:
Regarding the Avenger Catapult, is it really worth more than three times as much as a 2pt Storm Bolter?

The Storm Bolter lacks Rending, sure, but it also has +6" of maximum range and gets twice as many shots as the Catapult at 12".

You also have to remember that Catapults, Avenger or otherwise, are Assault weapons for an army that ignores the -1 penalty to hit after Advancing.
Is the Avenger cat worth 7pts? Maybe not, but it is at least worth 2 Storm bolters

My point was that Avenger cats cannot be 0 pts because it is one of the items that an Autarch can take. This is why the current 7pts Avenger cat is clearly not a typo, but the 10ppm Dire Avenger might be. However you do it, Dire Avengers need to end up costing no more than a Tactical Marine.

-

 Galef wrote:
You also have to remember that Catapults, Avenger or otherwise, are Assault weapons for an army that ignores the -1 penalty to hit after Advancing.

Which is a pretty unimpressive special rule in the grand scheme of things. At least certainly not worth that 5pt difference between the two. The stormbolter in rapid-fire range does more wounds against MEQs and GEQs (nearly double the wounds in the later case) even accounting for the shuricat's rend rule. Maybe a 1pt difference I could believe, but 5 is just gobsmackingly absurd, even if you're just looking at it's value to an Autarch.

It's also a curious argument that the cost of Battle Focus should be figured in to the Avenger Shuricat, when our fusion gun (which also benefits from Battle Focus) doesn't cost any more Space Marine counterpart. I'd surely rather take the fusion gun, or any of the other Battle Focus-benefiting gun options over the Avenger Shuricat, given it's exorbitant price.

 Galef wrote:

You also have to remember that Catapults, Avenger or otherwise, are Assault weapons for an army that ignores the -1 penalty to hit after Advancing.
-

Sure. But surely Battle Focus should be built into the base models - not their weapons.

 Galef wrote:

Is the Avenger cat worth 7pts? Maybe not, but it is at least worth 2 Storm bolters

Seriously?

You'd need to Advance just to break even with the Storm Bolter in terms of range.

And, at lower ranges, the Storm Bolter gets double the shots - which I'd argue is worth far more than pseudo-Rending.

 Galef wrote:

My point was that Avenger cats cannot be 0 pts because it is one of the items that an Autarch can take.

Absolutely. However, 7pts still seems far too much. I think 2-3pts would be more reasonable, even on an Autarch.

 Galef wrote:
This is why the current 7pts Avenger cat is clearly not a typo, but the 10ppm Dire Avenger might be. However you do it, Dire Avengers need to end up costing no more than a Tactical Marine.

Agreed.

I personally feel that Iyanden should gives wraiths a feel no pain. Always felt like it was something they should have always had in the first place.

Why should Iyandan wraith-constructs be tougher/different than other Craftworlds?

Things which need fixing off the top of my head:

- Yes, Dire Avenger points costs need fixing (at power level they're fine, but that indicates even moreso how broken they are in points)
- Wave Serpent needs a cost increase or a nerf.
- Falcon and Fire Prism need a cost decrease or a buff (or simply something to make them worth taking vs. a Wave Serpent - an age old problem)
- Eldar psyker powers could use a return to some offensive capability. While excellent at buffing units and dooming things, the Farseer at the very least needs some offensive bite (i.e. Mind War, Eldritch Strom or a real version of Destructor)
- Vyper vs. War Walker costs need looking at.

Regarding Craftworlds, I'd like to see some return to identity, hopefully with small army list limitations. While we haven't seen any of this yet, it'd be nice to see "Iyanden takes Wraithguard as troops..." etc. Alaitoc will get some kind of sniper/ranger/infiltrating buff or stratagem. They've all but ruined Black Guardians when they made the stupid decision to make Guardians 3+/3+..since you can no longer differentiate them by skill. They'll end up giving them some crap garbage rule. I hope they include an option for the old Ulthwe Strikeforce --- that'd be a neat return. It was a cool and unique list.

Biel-Tan should get Aspect Warriors of certain types, as troops etc --- though perhaps we'll see Biel-Tan excluded or downplayed since half of their craftworld went bust.

I'd like to see some genuine identity, but I don't expect too much since the Space Marine chapters got nothing more than a few stratagems and a single army-wide tactic. While a nice little bit of flavor it's unlikely to let you really exhibit a difference between a Saim-Hann warhost and one from Ulthwe.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with the wave serpent as it stands. It fits it's fluff and it's roll and I think is priced about right.The falcon and fire prism do need love because the wave serpent does do their job better.

Falcon- let it deep strike. You could do this in 7th with a formation. Gives the falcon a very different and unique role that the wave serpent can't do.

Fire prism- Not totally sure how to fix this. It doesn't have the raw damage out put of other tanks like the Predator. The point difference is about 30. I would change it's weapons profile and bump it's cost to around 200points

Lance- Heavy 2
Focused - 2x Heavy D3
Dispersed - 2x Heavy D6

 Deepeyes wrote:
I don't think that there is anything wrong with the wave serpent as it stands. It fits it's fluff and it's roll and I think is priced about right.

Given its speed, resilience and firepower, I think it really needs to cost more.

(That or a lot of other transports need a discount).

I'm not that much in pain with points for Guardians and Dire Avengers or catapults. I would like them to fix Falcons, so they are worth taking over Serpents for once. Also some changes to the Fire Prism to make it viable. I just love my Eldar Grav Tanks and would like to field more than just the old Serpent spam.

Deris87 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
You also have to remember that Catapults, Avenger or otherwise, are Assault weapons for an army that ignores the -1 penalty to hit after Advancing.

Which is a pretty unimpressive special rule in the grand scheme of things. At least certainly not worth that 5pt difference between the two. The stormbolter in rapid-fire range does more wounds against MEQs and GEQs (nearly double the wounds in the later case) even accounting for the shuricat's rend rule. Maybe a 1pt difference I could believe, but 5 is just gobsmackingly absurd, even if you're just looking at it's value to an Autarch.

It's also a curious argument that the cost of Battle Focus should be figured in to the Avenger Shuricat, when our fusion gun (which also benefits from Battle Focus) doesn't cost any more Space Marine counterpart. I'd surely rather take the fusion gun, or any of the other Battle Focus-benefiting gun options over the Avenger Shuricat, given it's exorbitant price.

Cough Cough Battle Focus...

Edit: Also SB's are 2pts, thats 24" 2 shots and at 12" 4 shots. So... IMO a ASC should cost like 3-4 pts max only b.c it has Rending. Its 6" shorter and no Rabid Fire, but b.c Eldar has Battle Focus its almost the same distance.

I'd rather have longer range and potential more shots over rending on my basic troop buys, eldar has many other heavy infantry and tank killing weapons.

You want to be pretty careful with the Wave Serpent, since it's a mandatory choice for so much of the army. We've got a bunch of expensive and/or short-ranged fragile infantry which generally need some way to stay safe until they get close. Nerfing Serpents nerfs Guardians, Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons, Howling Banshees, Wraithguard, and even Dark Reapers (which want to deploy inside a transport in case you go second). I don't know that Serpents are particularly out of line with other transports either, like the Razorback, Repressor, or even the Ghost Ark. People are even pretty happy to bring Razorbacks and Ghost Arks without using them to transport anything. Yes, Serpents being good drive Eldar towards being a mechanized army, but that's pretty much intrinsic to the faction -- you can't have 8 point T3 5+ basic Troops with 12" guns and expect footslogging to be a serious option. Possibly this is fluffy since a horde of Eldar infantry would look pretty weird on the table, but it does mean that a huge portion of the army list depends for its effectiveness on having a transport which you're happy to include in your army.

I don't understand what the controversy is about Avenger catapults. There's no reason to worry about how much they cost relative to storm bolters. The only things that can take optional ASCs are Avenger Exarchs and Autarchs, and their cost is pretty negligible on an Autarch. The main thing GW should keep in mind when pricing the ASC is that a cheap ASC (with a correspondingly expensive base Avenger) promotes the dual catapult Exarch while an expensive ASC promotes the melee loadouts. It doesn't seem worth worrying about a handful of points on an Autarch, especially for a gun that people are really only taking when they don't have the points for the ones they actually want to take.

Dionysodorus wrote:
You want to be pretty careful with the Wave Serpent, since it's a mandatory choice for so much of the army. We've got a bunch of expensive and/or short-ranged fragile infantry which generally need some way to stay safe until they get close. Nerfing Serpents nerfs Guardians, Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons, Howling Banshees, Wraithguard, and even Dark Reapers (which want to deploy inside a transport in case you go second). I don't know that Serpents are particularly out of line with other transports either, like the Razorback, Repressor, or even the Ghost Ark. People are even pretty happy to bring Razorbacks and Ghost Arks without using them to transport anything. Yes, Serpents being good drive Eldar towards being a mechanized army, but that's pretty much intrinsic to the faction -- you can't have 8 point T3 5+ basic Troops with 12" guns and expect footslogging to be a serious option. Possibly this is fluffy since a horde of Eldar infantry would look pretty weird on the table, but it does mean that a huge portion of the army list depends for its effectiveness on having a transport which you're happy to include in your army.

I don't understand what the controversy is about Avenger catapults. There's no reason to worry about how much they cost relative to storm bolters. The only things that can take optional ASCs are Avenger Exarchs and Autarchs, and their cost is pretty negligible on an Autarch. The main thing GW should keep in mind when pricing the ASC is that a cheap ASC (with a correspondingly expensive base Avenger) promotes the dual catapult Exarch while an expensive ASC promotes the melee loadouts. It doesn't seem worth worrying about a handful of points on an Autarch, especially for a gun that people are really only taking when they don't have the points for the ones they actually want to take.

B.c they are 17pt model guys that do only 1 thing and honestly arnt that good at that. The point of comparing is to show lack of balance in points (something GW is looking into and changing), some of use use SB as an example that the ASC should be cheaper, others like you show examples why the dudes need to be cheaper.

 vipoid wrote:

 Deepeyes wrote:
I don't think that there is anything wrong with the wave serpent as it stands. It fits it's fluff and it's roll and I think is priced about right.

Given its speed, resilience and firepower, I think it really needs to cost more.

(That or a lot of other transports need a discount).

It really needs to stay the same price. All the other elder vehicles need price reductions. It's firepower is not good. It's durability is great - it's speed is great. It is properly priced.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Deepeyes wrote:
I don't think that there is anything wrong with the wave serpent as it stands. It fits it's fluff and it's roll and I think is priced about right.

Given its speed, resilience and firepower, I think it really needs to cost more.

(That or a lot of other transports need a discount).

It really needs to stay the same price. All the other elder vehicles need price reductions. It's firepower is not good. It's durability is great - it's speed is great. It is properly priced.

Every other transport in the game would beg to disagree.

 vipoid wrote:

Every other transport in the game would beg to disagree.

This just doesn't seem to be true at all. There are lots of transports that seem to be more desirable than the Serpent as tank replacements -- not many people are bringing Serpents unless they have something to put in them, but Stormravens, Razorbacks, Taurox Primes, and Ghost Arks get used as regular vehicles. Their transport capacity is just a bonus (though not much of one in the case of the Ghost Ark). As far as transports which are primarily used as actual transports go, several of them are at least as good as the Serpent. The Repressor is incredible. The Kharybdis Assault Claw is obviously great, and features in a high-placing Nova list. There are niches where Dark Eldar transports and Chaos Rhinos are really solid. It's really only Orks and Tau where transports aren't among their best units.

Ultimately, Serpents have pretty weak firepower for their cost. If taken about as cheaply as possible, they're very durable, at least against shooting. They're good but I'm really not seeing how they're that out of line with other factions' options.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

B.c they are 17pt model guys that do only 1 thing and honestly arnt that good at that. The point of comparing is to show lack of balance in points (something GW is looking into and changing), some of use use SB as an example that the ASC should be cheaper, others like you show examples why the dudes need to be cheaper.

Right, like, obviously Dire Avengers should cost at most 12 points, and I doubt they'd see much play at that price, but what I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to matter how their cost gets split between the base models and their guns. That really only impacts how you equip their Exarch. If GW wants Avengers to be a hybrid shooty/CC unit, then they should keep ASCs expensive and drop the price of the base models. If they want them to be mostly a close-in shooting unit, then they should cut the price of the ASCs while keeping the base models expensive.

 Galef wrote:

My point was that Avenger cats cannot be 0 pts because it is one of the items that an Autarch can take. This is why the current 7pts Avenger cat is clearly not a typo, but the 10ppm Dire Avenger might be. However you do it, Dire Avengers need to end up costing no more than a Tactical Marine.

It never made sense that DIre Avengers would cost the same as a Tactical Marine or Necron Warrior, they should be cheaper.

Regarding Craftworlds, I'd like to see some return to identity, hopefully with small army list limitations.

This would be cool but I don't think we will see it, GW are shying away from this type of thing this edition.

They seem to be trying to encourage players to make lore friendly army choices by giving them incentives to do so, rather than trying to restrict their choices to force them to play army compositions that reflect the lore.

Sorry for being uninformed, but where did we hear that Eldar were getting the next codex?

 WE Drake Man wrote:
Sorry for being uninformed, but where did we hear that Eldar were getting the next codex?

GW announced about a week ago the Craftworld Codex would be coming in November.

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/09/gws-q3-4-2017-schedule-putting-it-all-together.html


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroem wrote:

They seem to be trying to encourage players to make lore friendly army choices by giving them incentives to do so, rather than trying to restrict their choices to force them to play army compositions that reflect the lore.

Indeed. Wraith Hosts and Swordwinds can be made easily using Vanguard detachments and Wildriders with Outrider Detachments. If you want more CPs you can be more creative in your thinking. DAs are Troops so you can make Swordwind Battalions easily enough. Wildriders don't have to be just Jetbikes, put some Guardians in Wave Serpents for mobile infantry and that works too. I am not sure how much further you could go with army building without starting to offer unfair advantages.

morgoth wrote:

 Galef wrote:

My point was that Avenger cats cannot be 0 pts because it is one of the items that an Autarch can take. This is why the current 7pts Avenger cat is clearly not a typo, but the 10ppm Dire Avenger might be. However you do it, Dire Avengers need to end up costing no more than a Tactical Marine.

It never made sense that DIre Avengers would cost the same as a Tactical Marine or Necron Warrior, they should be cheaper.

While DAs don't have the durability of a Tac Marine or Necron Warrior, they are faster and have a much better stock weapon. BS5+ Overwatch should also be considered.
If all 3 units cost EXACTLY that same and it didn't matter what army I took them with, I would still probably take the DAs every time.
Their lack of durability is the only reason they should never cost MORE than basic Tacs or Warriors (like they do now)

-

 Galef wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 Galef wrote:

My point was that Avenger cats cannot be 0 pts because it is one of the items that an Autarch can take. This is why the current 7pts Avenger cat is clearly not a typo, but the 10ppm Dire Avenger might be. However you do it, Dire Avengers need to end up costing no more than a Tactical Marine.

It never made sense that DIre Avengers would cost the same as a Tactical Marine or Necron Warrior, they should be cheaper.

While DAs don't have the durability of a Tac Marine or Necron Warrior, they are faster and have a much better stock weapon. BS5+ Overwatch should also be considered.
If all 3 units cost EXACTLY that same and it didn't matter what army I took them with, I would still probably take the DAs every time.
Their lack of durability is the only reason they should never cost MORE than basic Tacs or Warriors (like they do now)

-

Necron warriors shoot at 24", damage vehicles, are damn hard to destroy, S4 T4 does wonders in CC.
Being faster is a recent development of no real relevance, and their "much better stock weapon" shoots at 18" and is noticeably inferior to Tac Upgrades.

If all 3 units cost exactly the same and it didn't matter what army I took them with, I would certainly take Necron Warriors every single time.
Tactical Marines are obviously better than Dire Avengers as generalists, and Dire Avengers suck at being specialists, so Tacs would be my second choice.

In 5th Edition (or was it 4th), you could unload your 10 Dire Avengers and BladeStorm (3 shots each) into the enemy's face, losing the next shooting phase for it.
Back then, they had a shot at being decent specialists and saw some use.

For all of 6th codex they never were more than min. Serpent Tax, and no "tax" is "worth" 13 points by itself.
For all of 7th codex they were entirely useless since Serpents were nerfed into oblivion.

That tells me that them costing 13 points has been a mistake since 5th ed codex.

Shooting shuriken catapults at 18" and then dying is hardly better than shooting shuriken catapults at 12" and then dying, especially without 6th and 7th Battle Focus.
A case could be made to say that the new Battle Focus is a lot more beneficial to the guardians, and they're still quite terrible.
That means that if people aren't going to consider defender guardians competitive, Dire Avengers with +5 ppm are sure as hell not going to be unless they gain something very relevant to compensate for that 60% cost increase.

DA were pretty decent in 7th as long as you didn't play crappy games. The ability to shoot someone and then get behind cover along with decent overwatch was good.