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.

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I would have thought Ynnari couldn't use Craftworld stratagems.

I mean, Grey Knights can make use of Space Marine stratagems as long as you have a Marine detachment.

They can make use of them in that the Stratagems can be used. There's no guarantee that it will actually affect you.

Isn't "Asuryani" the keyword that the Craftworld Eldar stuff has, while "Aeldari" is the shared racial keyword?

Yup. Means that you wouldn't be able to cast the stratagem on Yvraine. But you'd still be able to cast it on any other craftworld unit you have in a ynnari force, as they don't lose their Asuryani keyword, they just gain Ynnari on top of it.

Assuming the rules remain the same.

 Imateria wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I agree with the Red Corsair, there’s way too much hyperbole in this thread. It seems that unless something is OP, it’s always considered “Garbage.”

It’s no surprise to me that the new Eldar codex hasn’t given tonnes of free buffs. The amount of whining about Eldar as an army in 7th has clearly had an influence on the design team, and while they haven’t nerfed them completely, they have tried to balance things out a little.

Then you and Red Corsair havn't been paying much attention. In and of themselves the traits shown off so far aren't bad, in fact on the right army builds they can be verry good, the problem that most of us are complaining about is that the traits don't particularly fit the fluff of the Craftworlds they are being paired with in a way that makes realistic sense. I mean Iyanden having a trait that favours large blobs of Guardians is moronic, that trait is good but better characterises Ulthwe or Alaitoc.

And as for Strategems Red Corsair will probably be proved to be very wrong, because unless our troops choices have had a massive points drop on all of them we wont be using them often, which means command points will be in short supply even with the Autarchs ability to get some back.

Nope, I’ve been paying attention and fully understand the concerns you have raised about the traits. I just don’t agree. In a competitive sense, the traits could be utilised to greater affect for different units than those intended. However, that doesn’t make them unfluffy, or indeed moronic (there we go with that hyperbole again)

The Iyanden trait, combined with their relic, makes their wrait units tougher, even if it in a hyper competitive meta it won’t make a huge difference.
The Ulthwé trait, again gives a sense of psychic support in that it’s basically quasi fortune.
The Biel Tan trait specifically affects their Aspect warriors, while at the same time showing that their militia is likely some of the best trained.

The leaked Samm Hain and Alaitoc traits also seem pretty fluffy too.

To me the traits are a little overly simplistic, and that’s why in some cases they could be used in a different way than intended. But I think they are like that for a reason. It’s far easier to balance the game if you keep things simple. Guard seems to have bucked the trend so far and over stepped the power mark a little.

As for strategems, they can still add plenty of flavour, even if you’re not using a dozen of them in a game.

That was not hyperbole, that was me being acurate.

The Iyanden trait does not make Wraith units tougher (their base toughnes stat being increased to 6 makes them tougher), Wraithguard are never run in large squads due to the need for transports so at Ld9 the triat will never effect them, and 10 man Wraithblade squads have better options for survivability (the Ulthwe trait for starters). And the relic doesn't make them tougher, it makes them hit harder once per game then take mortal wounds.
No, the Ulthwe trait gives everything FnP, does absolutely nothing to boost Pyskers so gives no impression of extra pyschic support, and at present it actually physically stops Fortune from working in an Ulthwe army due to units with a similar ability being untargetable for that power. So, actively reduces Psychic support since Fortune is better than the trait.
+1Ld, WOW, suddenly Aspects are amazing! The only Aspect that actually gains out of this is Dire Avengers, the only other Apects likely to be run in large enough squads (Banshees and Scorpions) struggle for killing power so much you don't use them. And nothing in Biel-Tan's fluff says they have better trained Guardians, thats Ulthwe.

Saim-Hann's trait is very fluffy for them, I'll certainly agree to that.

I disagree on Alaitoc, they might be known as the Ranger Craftworld but their standing Warhost doesn't rely on a core of Rangers, it's a core of Guardians with Aspect support. They're probably the most generalist of the big 5 Craftworlds, they just have a higher proportion of affiliated Rangers.

When I have to use the Ulthwe trait to get the most out of my Wraith army, you know something has gone wrong.

Biel Tan are the most warlike of Craftworlds (written throughout the fluff) and as such probably have more Guardians that have experienced warfare. I'd say that places them above the other ones with exception of Black Guardians who are specifically trained as a standing army.

the vipers being "bikers" it made me really optimistic to use the ulthwe' stratagem on more than simple guardians ...
I'm dreaming about a unit of 2 warwalkers with bright lances hitting on 2s for just 1 cp

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'm still waiting to see if there is a "Webway" stratagem that allows a unit to 'deepstrike'. If it exists, I'll breathe a sigh of relief.
Until then, Eldar are "ok" and probably still "fun" but hardly tournament worthy in the current meta.

-

Yes this will be really important. I am worried that this will just be the Alatoic infiltration stratagem, which would be far less useful.

The sad thing is that even if they get an any CW available Webway stratagem, Eldar still won't be top-teir because they can't get access to nearly as many CPs as Imperial armies.
But at least they'll be able to participate in competitive games.

-

Oh look, a really strong and cheap stratagem with no craftworld restrictions. So far it looks like Imateria will be wrong...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heck that even works on tanks, get ready for shoot and scoot to come back.

Lord Perversor wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh hai:

Sooo, Eldar just got the Tau crisis suits jump-shoot-jump ability? I imagine we'll see this used with Warp Spiders a good bit?

No the Eldar just got back proper Battlefocus as 1CP stratagem (albeit a bit stronger)

Also gotta love the wording, unless Wraith lost the Asuryani Keyword it means we can use this for slingshot them across a melee line.

So D-scythe wraithguard moves 5"+1d6 shoot then burn 1 CP to move 7" extra and bubble wrap X unit so the wraiths remain as only viable charging unit for the enemy... that can be really nasty

P.S: also seems the Fire Prism it's been *vastly Improved*.... we'll see it tomorrow

I was thinking of my Wraithguard getting out of a Wave Serpent, shooting, then getting back in so they can't be shot at.

 Imateria wrote:
I was thinking of my Wraithguard getting out of a Wave Serpent, shooting, then getting back in so they can't be shot at.

Wow. Didn't even think of that. Nasty

While I think it's a plenty strong Stratagem...in Matched play you'll be doing it with one unit per shooting phase only. It's definitely potent, but considering I've never made more than 8 CPs in my Eldar force, that'll be one per turn...and even in non-Matched play, you'd be pretty limited.

Wraithguard could not embark after this. Unless it is specifically stated like the Steel Legion stratagem a unit may not disembark and embark in the same turn.

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point you're missing is that there is no guarantee that Ynnari units will retain the Asuryani keyword.

No, I think this is basically guaranteed. I'm not sure why anyone would suspect otherwise. You're suggesting that most Warlock and Farseer powers would stop working in Ynnari armies -- we've even seen an example of a Warlock power from the new codex, which buffs only Asuryani units. And, again, even Grey Knights still have ADEPTUS ASTARTES and they're an entirely separate codex with their own stratagems. It's also very implausible that Ynnari units would lose <Craftworld>, since this is how Wave Serpents and Autarchs work. Any change to these keywords that still keeps transports and psychic powers functional seems to risk allowing Dark Reapers to ride in a Fortuned Raider.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:
I agree with the Red Corsair, there’s way too much hyperbole in this thread. It seems that unless something is OP, it’s always considered “Garbage.”

It’s no surprise to me that the new Eldar codex hasn’t given tonnes of free buffs. The amount of whining about Eldar as an army in 7th has clearly had an influence on the design team, and while they haven’t nerfed them completely, they have tried to balance things out a little.

Then you and Red Corsair havn't been paying much attention. In and of themselves the traits shown off so far aren't bad, in fact on the right army builds they can be verry good, the problem that most of us are complaining about is that the traits don't particularly fit the fluff of the Craftworlds they are being paired with in a way that makes realistic sense. I mean Iyanden having a trait that favours large blobs of Guardians is moronic, that trait is good but better characterises Ulthwe or Alaitoc.

And as for Strategems Red Corsair will probably be proved to be very wrong, because unless our troops choices have had a massive points drop on all of them we wont be using them often, which means command points will be in short supply even with the Autarchs ability to get some back.

Nope, I’ve been paying attention and fully understand the concerns you have raised about the traits. I just don’t agree. In a competitive sense, the traits could be utilised to greater affect for different units than those intended. However, that doesn’t make them unfluffy, or indeed moronic (there we go with that hyperbole again)

The Iyanden trait, combined with their relic, makes their wrait units tougher, even if it in a hyper competitive meta it won’t make a huge difference.
The Ulthwé trait, again gives a sense of psychic support in that it’s basically quasi fortune.
The Biel Tan trait specifically affects their Aspect warriors, while at the same time showing that their militia is likely some of the best trained.

The leaked Samm Hain and Alaitoc traits also seem pretty fluffy too.

To me the traits are a little overly simplistic, and that’s why in some cases they could be used in a different way than intended. But I think they are like that for a reason. It’s far easier to balance the game if you keep things simple. Guard seems to have bucked the trend so far and over stepped the power mark a little.

As for strategems, they can still add plenty of flavour, even if you’re not using a dozen of them in a game.

That was not hyperbole, that was me being acurate.

The Iyanden trait does not make Wraith units tougher (their base toughnes stat being increased to 6 makes them tougher), Wraithguard are never run in large squads due to the need for transports so at Ld9 the triat will never effect them, and 10 man Wraithblade squads have better options for survivability (the Ulthwe trait for starters). And the relic doesn't make them tougher, it makes them hit harder once per game then take mortal wounds.
No, the Ulthwe trait gives everything FnP, does absolutely nothing to boost Pyskers so gives no impression of extra pyschic support, and at present it actually physically stops Fortune from working in an Ulthwe army due to units with a similar ability being untargetable for that power. So, actively reduces Psychic support since Fortune is better than the trait.
+1Ld, WOW, suddenly Aspects are amazing! The only Aspect that actually gains out of this is Dire Avengers, the only other Apects likely to be run in large enough squads (Banshees and Scorpions) struggle for killing power so much you don't use them. And nothing in Biel-Tan's fluff says they have better trained Guardians, thats Ulthwe.

Saim-Hann's trait is very fluffy for them, I'll certainly agree to that.

I disagree on Alaitoc, they might be known as the Ranger Craftworld but their standing Warhost doesn't rely on a core of Rangers, it's a core of Guardians with Aspect support. They're probably the most generalist of the big 5 Craftworlds, they just have a higher proportion of affiliated Rangers.

When I have to use the Ulthwe trait to get the most out of my Wraith army, you know something has gone wrong.

Biel Tan are the most warlike of Craftworlds (written throughout the fluff) and as such probably have more Guardians that have experienced warfare. I'd say that places them above the other ones with exception of Black Guardians who are specifically trained as a standing army.

The fluff also has a larger proportion of the populace leaving and rejoining shrines than any other Craftworld which is why they have so many Aspect Warriors, but you wouldn't know it from their trait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
While I think it's a plenty strong Stratagem...in Matched play you'll be doing it with one unit per shooting phase only. It's definitely potent, but considering I've never made more than 8 CPs in my Eldar force, that'll be one per turn...and even in non-Matched play, you'd be pretty limited.

Wraithguard could not embark after this. Unless it is specifically stated like the Steel Legion stratagem a unit may not disembark and embark in the same turn.

I'd forgotten about that restriction in my haste. Oh well, I'm sure there will be some other cool things we can do with that strategem. Shame I only have 5 CP in my list.

 Marfuzzo wrote:
the vipers being "bikers" it made me really optimistic to use the ulthwe' stratagem on more than simple guardians ...
I'm dreaming about a unit of 2 warwalkers with bright lances hitting on 2s for just 1 cp

Unfortunately, on the Facebook page they confirmed that only Guardian Defenders and Storm Guardians have the "Guardian" keyword...

 Kanluwen wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I would have thought Ynnari couldn't use Craftworld stratagems.

I mean, Grey Knights can make use of Space Marine stratagems as long as you have a Marine detachment.

They can make use of them in that the Stratagems can be used. There's no guarantee that it will actually affect you.

Isn't "Asuryani" the keyword that the Craftworld Eldar stuff has, while "Aeldari" is the shared racial keyword?

Yup. Means that you wouldn't be able to cast the stratagem on Yvraine. But you'd still be able to cast it on any other craftworld unit you have in a ynnari force, as they don't lose their Asuryani keyword, they just gain Ynnari on top of it.

Assuming the rules remain the same.

Assuming? It's near guaranteed. Otherwise farseers, spiritseers and warlocks would become totally useless.

Also the rule that tells you about how to gain Ynnari keyword without losing the Asuryani keyword is in the Ynnari section of the rulebook, which isn't being updated or changed. The rules being added to the Triumverate box are identical to the ones in the index.

From the Facebook page, regarding Battle Focus:

"In the new Codex, Battle Focus means warriors count as stationary when firing, even if they moved or advanced... pretty cool!"

and

"Does that include heavy weapons?" "no, the rules specifically excludes heavy weapons."

RIP

 Red Corsair wrote:

Niiru wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:This thread is funny. Like every other thread nobody is happy until the stratagems are busted out. Seriously, it's the stratagems in every book that take things to the next level. Most traits from any of the books so far are not that great barring a select few.

For Imperial Guard, stratagems make a lot of difference. This is because they can easily get 15-25 CP's, and burn through 3 or 4 stratagems every turn.

Eldar... I dunno. I think the most I've gotten in my random list theory builds is 9 points total, and the list was very minmax and not very good. 7 or 8 is probably the more common end result, if not more like 5 or 6. Depends on if people bother with troops in their lists (which might become more useful in the codex with points drops etc).

Which means Eldar can use 3 or 4 stratagems PER GAME. Compared to IG using that many every turn.

Stratagems make a lot more of a difference to an IG army. For Eldar, they're just a novelty. Especially if they're all like that Avatar one, which is pretty situational and very expensive.

Sorry but this is so daft. I have been playing a ton of 40k against all the newest books as of late and sure some armies can spam CP's more then others but that isn't nearly what your making it out to be. Most books have a half dozen really glowing statagems and most of them are amazing because they are 1cp. Since you can only use them once a turn in matched play and some are situational, having 25 is totally unnecessary. Also, as a guy that ownbs a ton of guard going back to 2nd ed, thats a bullcrap claim as well. I can make a list that gets around 16 and that is with some major holes in my army, to get to 25 I'd be fielding garbage, something every army can do. You know how I know thats BS btw, because in matched play your stuck with 3 detachments meqaning you would need 3 brigades... Also you can try to claim 9 CP's somehow equates to 3-4 Strats per game.... but we both know what your doing there. It's more likely 8 or even 9 stratagems per game because we all know it's bullcrap that your gona burn your CP's on 3 point stratagems.

Basically, just relax and wait to see what really matters that they are not leaking. I am sure this book is going to be strong.

Ok, I rounded my numbers a bit much on the IG front, should really have been more like 15-21. I've seen a few lists used with 21 CPs, but 15 is more common. Maybe a more common range would be 12-18 instead. So lets say 12-18.

A more common range for Eldar is 5-7. So still less than half the CP's.

You seem to think the only stratagems that are good are the ones that cost 1 CP. And yet you say IG can't use 3 or 4 per turn. Say a 5 turn game... 15 CP's... 3 stratagems per turn. So I was spot on.

You disagree when I say Eldar can only use 3 - 4 per game. Ok, I was wrong. It was more like 5-6. Means that, unlike IG, they have no option to use any stratagem that -isn't- only 1CP to use.

So you disagree with everything I said, fine. I tweaked my numbers to be more precise, just to please your pedantry, and everything I said is still completely accurate. Eldar can not compete with the use of stratagems.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point you're missing is that there is no guarantee that Ynnari units will retain the Asuryani keyword.

No, I think this is basically guaranteed. I'm not sure why anyone would suspect otherwise. You're suggesting that most Warlock and Farseer powers would stop working in Ynnari armies -- we've even seen an example of a Warlock power from the new codex, which buffs only Asuryani units. And, again, even Grey Knights still have ADEPTUS ASTARTES and they're an entirely separate codex with their own stratagems. It's also very implausible that Ynnari units would lose <Craftworld>, since this is how Wave Serpents and Autarchs work. Any change to these keywords that still keeps transports and psychic powers functional seems to risk allowing Dark Reapers to ride in a Fortuned Raider.

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I would have thought Ynnari couldn't use Craftworld stratagems.

I mean, Grey Knights can make use of Space Marine stratagems as long as you have a Marine detachment.

They can make use of them in that the Stratagems can be used. There's no guarantee that it will actually affect you.

Isn't "Asuryani" the keyword that the Craftworld Eldar stuff has, while "Aeldari" is the shared racial keyword?

Yup. Means that you wouldn't be able to cast the stratagem on Yvraine. But you'd still be able to cast it on any other craftworld unit you have in a ynnari force, as they don't lose their Asuryani keyword, they just gain Ynnari on top of it.

Assuming the rules remain the same.

Assuming? It's near guaranteed. Otherwise farseers, spiritseers and warlocks would become totally useless.

Also the rule that tells you about how to gain Ynnari keyword without losing the Asuryani keyword is in the Ynnari section of the rulebook, which isn't being updated or changed. The rules being added to the Triumverate box are identical to the ones in the index.

Next week also sees the Triumvirate of Ynnead repackaged for the new edition. As well as three awesome character models, this set contains full datasheets for everything inside, as well rules for fielding Ynnari detachments in your army, meaning you won’t need anything else to use them with your Craftworlds codex!

That's the brief snippet they gave out on Sunday.

Doesn't mean they won't alter the rules.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.

I mean, we'll see I guess, but I feel like you're about as deeply in denial here as you were the other day when you were insisting that the pic that basically nailed the Biel-Tan Attribute could have been just a lucky guess since they left off that it was Aspects only for the Ld bonus.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point you're missing is that there is no guarantee that Ynnari units will retain the Asuryani keyword.

No, I think this is basically guaranteed. I'm not sure why anyone would suspect otherwise. You're suggesting that most Warlock and Farseer powers would stop working in Ynnari armies -- we've even seen an example of a Warlock power from the new codex, which buffs only Asuryani units. And, again, even Grey Knights still have ADEPTUS ASTARTES and they're an entirely separate codex with their own stratagems. It's also very implausible that Ynnari units would lose <Craftworld>, since this is how Wave Serpents and Autarchs work. Any change to these keywords that still keeps transports and psychic powers functional seems to risk allowing Dark Reapers to ride in a Fortuned Raider.

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.

But that is because the space marine stratagem says "This stratagem only effects Blood angels", and Grey Knights aren't blood angels. If you take no Wraiths in your Ynnari army, you also won't be able to use the Wraith stratagems, same as a Grey Knight player can't use Flakk missile stratagems because they don't have them. Bad luck for Grey Knights.

Your version of events would mean that Blood Angel players should be in the same situation as Grey Knights. True on one front - they can only use generic stratagems and ones for blood angels. But wait, they do get Captains and combat squads, so they suddenly get magical access to more stratagems!

This is more about Grey Knights being different, than anything else. Irrelevent to the subject though, as Grey Knights don't lose access to these stratagems because GW see them as a seperate army, but instead because GW gave them so many different options that the stratagems don't overlap as much. They are still Imperium soup.


On your other comment - Is this something that GW -should- implement in order to limit Imperial Soup? Yeh, maybe. But are they going to test run it on the already weak Eldar force, just when they're trying to push Ynnari as an army choice, after releasing the overpowered Imperial Guard codex with NO SUCH LIMITATIONS?

No. They won't. Because so many players would be angry at them. I mean, limiting Imperial Soup by actually stopping Ynnari being a playable race? This is a level of stupidity that even GW wouldn't stoop to. They'd have Xenos players screaming at them. Imperial Soup would still be stupidly overpowered, and GW would be nerfing a completely unrelated race to fix the issue? No.

Just No.

If they do end up making this change, it'll be in a chapter approved, and it will be universal, effecting Imperium at the same time. But to be honest, I doubt it will be done at all. GW have already known how they want factions to interact, and 8th edition is the time of the Soup.

So yeh, pretty certain you'll keep your Asuryani keyword. GW aren't that suicidal.


Edit: Additional. If you had said that going Ynnari would remove the <craftworld> keyworld, then I might have agreed that it would be possible. Unlikely, but possible. But losing the Asuryani keyword is a definite no.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.

I mean, we'll see I guess, but I feel like you're about as deeply in denial here as you were the other day when you were insisting that the pic that basically nailed the Biel-Tan Attribute could have been just a lucky guess since they left off that it was Aspects only for the Ld bonus.

You mean the one that basically got the Saim-Hann one wrong?



I mean I guess it can be a summation but y'know...

Yeah I don't even feel the need to respond to that. I think everyone can look at the pic and the Saim-Hann Attribute and decide whether they think it's more likely that the pic was just guessing or whether it's from someone with real information who garbled a detail or two.

Well this got out of hand quickly.

Quick question for tomorrow:

What do Fire Prisms have to do with the Alaitoc craftworld?

I thought we would see it in today’s post or yesterday.

Soooo with the Saim-Hann trait I could take a SH skathach wk place it in deepstrike, and it will have reroll charges? Increases change of success from 33% to just over 55% that's decent. Do the same with Scorpions and spend 2CP to reduce their charge to 7" with a re-roll. If they drop scorpion costs (unlikely because they have always been roughly 17 - 19 points) then this would make them a very efficient first turn harassment unit like AL berserkers. Could be useful for going after heavy weapon squads and the like. Cause some panic in opponent backfield meanwhile the rest of the army gets to run around and cap objectives. Or have some shinning spears fly up the board to offer some aid in CC.

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point you're missing is that there is no guarantee that Ynnari units will retain the Asuryani keyword.

No, I think this is basically guaranteed. I'm not sure why anyone would suspect otherwise. You're suggesting that most Warlock and Farseer powers would stop working in Ynnari armies -- we've even seen an example of a Warlock power from the new codex, which buffs only Asuryani units. And, again, even Grey Knights still have ADEPTUS ASTARTES and they're an entirely separate codex with their own stratagems. It's also very implausible that Ynnari units would lose <Craftworld>, since this is how Wave Serpents and Autarchs work. Any change to these keywords that still keeps transports and psychic powers functional seems to risk allowing Dark Reapers to ride in a Fortuned Raider.

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.

But that is because the space marine stratagem says "This stratagem only effects Blood angels", and Grey Knights aren't blood angels. If you take no Wraiths in your Ynnari army, you also won't be able to use the Wraith stratagems, same as a Grey Knight player can't use Flakk missile stratagems because they don't have them. Bad luck for Grey Knights.

Your version of events would mean that Blood Angel players should be in the same situation as Grey Knights. True on one front - they can only use generic stratagems and ones for blood angels. But wait, they do get Captains and combat squads, so they suddenly get magical access to more stratagems!

This is more about Grey Knights being different, than anything else. Irrelevent to the subject though, as Grey Knights don't lose access to these stratagems because GW see them as a seperate army, but instead because GW gave them so many different options that the stratagems don't overlap as much. They are still Imperium soup.


On your other comment - Is this something that GW -should- implement in order to limit Imperial Soup? Yeh, maybe. But are they going to test run it on the already weak Eldar force, just when they're trying to push Ynnari as an army choice, after releasing the overpowered Imperial Guard codex with NO SUCH LIMITATIONS?

It has more of those restrictions than you might think. "Consolidate Squads", for example, mandates you have <Regiment> and "Inspired Tactics" and "Mobile Command Vehicle" both require <Regiment> as well(since they're for issuing Orders). "Aerial Spotter" affects Basilisks and Wyvern, Vortex Missiles affect Deathstrike Missiles...the list goes on.

Also, if every model doesn't have the same <Regiment> but isn't on the Advisors and Auxilla list--no Regimental Doctrines for you.

No. They won't. Because so many players would be angry at them. I mean, limiting Imperial Soup by actually stopping Ynnari being a playable race? This is a level of stupidity that even GW wouldn't stoop to. They'd have Xenos players screaming at them. Imperial Soup would still be stupidly overpowered, and GW would be nerfing a completely unrelated race to fix the issue? No.

Just No.

If they do end up making this change, it'll be in a chapter approved, and it will be universal, effecting Imperium at the same time. But to be honest, I doubt it will be done at all. GW have already known how they want factions to interact, and 8th edition is the time of the Soup.

So yeh, pretty certain you'll keep your Asuryani keyword. GW aren't that suicidal.

Most of the Imperium stuff is already being affected. As we get books, there are things which require specific keywords and the like.

Do you really think that Ynnari won't have something to limit them for when they get a full book?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yeah I don't even feel the need to respond to that. I think everyone can look at the pic and the Saim-Hann Attribute and decide whether they think it's more likely that the pic was just guessing or whether it's from someone with real information who garbled a detail or two.

You know how carnival fortune tellers and people like John Edwards work, right?

They make guesses and take information that is available to them and then couch it in the most likely terms so that if the information isn't necessarily right then they get the benefit of the doubt.

I mean, was anyone expecting Ulthwe to only affect Psykers? Iyanden to only affect Wraith units? Saim-Hann to only affect Jetbikes?

Can someone explain to me why a fat, underdeveloped Leman Russ does not receive a penalty on hit while firing a plump 120mm ballistic weapon twice after moving and any Eldar grav tank does while firing a laser?

I am curious on what GWs plans are to improve a Fire Prism(and also the other grav tanks) to a level that it is what an eldar vehicle should be: fast, deadly, fragile. What do the want to do to show superior,fast, eldar tech? BS 2? Add another 12" movement? 4d6 hits for a prism cannon? This is crazy stupid.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Well this got out of hand quickly.

Quick question for tomorrow:

What do Fire Prisms have to do with the Alaitoc craftworld?

I thought we would see it in today’s post or yesterday.

name it as a unique fireprism referred to as longbow, hide it turn 1 then guide it, doom it's target and then use the new stratagem to move it out destroy it's target and relocate behind cover again. Sniper tank.

But apparently unless I can do that exact move several times a turn every turn it is some how bad according to this thread....

 Imateria wrote:


When I have to use the Ulthwe trait to get the most out of my Wraith army, you know something has gone wrong.

Exactly.

I'm fortunate that I painted my Iyanden army bone and black instead of blue and yellow, so it can work as Ulthwe, but I'm not happy about playing them as Ulthwe.

The Eldar Codex--so far--seems lackluster, as if the lead designer wasn't inspired by the Eldar at all. You can also tell different designers are working on different codexes. A lot of love went into the Astra Militarum Codex. I'm not seeing much so far in Eldar. Hoping the full release proves me wrong.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

The point you're missing is that there is no guarantee that Ynnari units will retain the Asuryani keyword.

No, I think this is basically guaranteed. I'm not sure why anyone would suspect otherwise. You're suggesting that most Warlock and Farseer powers would stop working in Ynnari armies -- we've even seen an example of a Warlock power from the new codex, which buffs only Asuryani units. And, again, even Grey Knights still have ADEPTUS ASTARTES and they're an entirely separate codex with their own stratagems. It's also very implausible that Ynnari units would lose <Craftworld>, since this is how Wave Serpents and Autarchs work. Any change to these keywords that still keeps transports and psychic powers functional seems to risk allowing Dark Reapers to ride in a Fortuned Raider.

Well gee, why might someone suspect that they try to do something that has been suggested elsewhere as a way to mitigate Imperial Soup...hrmh...

You missed my statement again though:
There's a small number of C: SM Stratagems that would affect Grey Knights. Some of them likely won't affect GK because they lack the weapons for it(Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells) and some of them won't affect GK because they don't have the <Chapter> keyword(Empyric Channelling, Wisdom of the Ancients). There's 26 Stratagems in C: SM, with 6 being applicable to Grey Knights on the basis of them having the "Adeptus Astartes" keyword. 7 if they have "Captain" as a keyword instead of "Brother-Captain" and one of them is also dependent upon them having the "Combat Squad" rule.

I don't have the GK book to check, but I do have the SM one handy and the idea that you can just throw any ol' SM Stratagem onto Grey Knights thus there will be no possible change to the Ynnari is ridiculous...because there are more C: SM Stratagems that won't affect Grey Knights than there are that will.

But that is because the space marine stratagem says "This stratagem only effects Blood angels", and Grey Knights aren't blood angels. If you take no Wraiths in your Ynnari army, you also won't be able to use the Wraith stratagems, same as a Grey Knight player can't use Flakk missile stratagems because they don't have them. Bad luck for Grey Knights.

Your version of events would mean that Blood Angel players should be in the same situation as Grey Knights. True on one front - they can only use generic stratagems and ones for blood angels. But wait, they do get Captains and combat squads, so they suddenly get magical access to more stratagems!

This is more about Grey Knights being different, than anything else. Irrelevent to the subject though, as Grey Knights don't lose access to these stratagems because GW see them as a seperate army, but instead because GW gave them so many different options that the stratagems don't overlap as much. They are still Imperium soup.


On your other comment - Is this something that GW -should- implement in order to limit Imperial Soup? Yeh, maybe. But are they going to test run it on the already weak Eldar force, just when they're trying to push Ynnari as an army choice, after releasing the overpowered Imperial Guard codex with NO SUCH LIMITATIONS?

It has more of those restrictions than you might think. "Consolidate Squads", for example, mandates you have <Regiment> and "Inspired Tactics" and "Mobile Command Vehicle" both require <Regiment> as well(since they're for issuing Orders). "Aerial Spotter" affects Basilisks and Wyvern, Vortex Missiles affect Deathstrike Missiles...the list goes on.

Also, if every model doesn't have the same <Regiment> but isn't on the Advisors and Auxilla list--no Regimental Doctrines for you.

Eldar already have this though. You wouldn't be able to put kabalites in the same detachment as a craftworld unit, as they would lose their craftworld trait. Harlequins can't go in the same detachment either, for the same reason. Also, like your last sentance, you can't put Ulthwe units in an Iyanden detachment, otherwise they will both lose their traits. These limitations already exist.

The only sticking point is Yvraine herself. But we have already said that she would just need to have a detachment of her own (maybe with some kabalites) and then put all the craftworld units in their own detachment. Craftworld gets traits, Yvraine makes everyone Ynnari.

No. They won't. Because so many players would be angry at them. I mean, limiting Imperial Soup by actually stopping Ynnari being a playable race? This is a level of stupidity that even GW wouldn't stoop to. They'd have Xenos players screaming at them. Imperial Soup would still be stupidly overpowered, and GW would be nerfing a completely unrelated race to fix the issue? No.

Just No.

If they do end up making this change, it'll be in a chapter approved, and it will be universal, effecting Imperium at the same time. But to be honest, I doubt it will be done at all. GW have already known how they want factions to interact, and 8th edition is the time of the Soup.

So yeh, pretty certain you'll keep your Asuryani keyword. GW aren't that suicidal.

Most of the Imperium stuff is already being affected. As we get books, there are things which require specific keywords and the like.

Do you really think that Ynnari won't have something to limit them for when they get a full book?

Niiru wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Niiru wrote:

Red Corsair wrote:This thread is funny. Like every other thread nobody is happy until the stratagems are busted out. Seriously, it's the stratagems in every book that take things to the next level. Most traits from any of the books so far are not that great barring a select few.

For Imperial Guard, stratagems make a lot of difference. This is because they can easily get 15-25 CP's, and burn through 3 or 4 stratagems every turn.

Eldar... I dunno. I think the most I've gotten in my random list theory builds is 9 points total, and the list was very minmax and not very good. 7 or 8 is probably the more common end result, if not more like 5 or 6. Depends on if people bother with troops in their lists (which might become more useful in the codex with points drops etc).

Which means Eldar can use 3 or 4 stratagems PER GAME. Compared to IG using that many every turn.

Stratagems make a lot more of a difference to an IG army. For Eldar, they're just a novelty. Especially if they're all like that Avatar one, which is pretty situational and very expensive.

Sorry but this is so daft. I have been playing a ton of 40k against all the newest books as of late and sure some armies can spam CP's more then others but that isn't nearly what your making it out to be. Most books have a half dozen really glowing statagems and most of them are amazing because they are 1cp. Since you can only use them once a turn in matched play and some are situational, having 25 is totally unnecessary. Also, as a guy that ownbs a ton of guard going back to 2nd ed, thats a bullcrap claim as well. I can make a list that gets around 16 and that is with some major holes in my army, to get to 25 I'd be fielding garbage, something every army can do. You know how I know thats BS btw, because in matched play your stuck with 3 detachments meqaning you would need 3 brigades... Also you can try to claim 9 CP's somehow equates to 3-4 Strats per game.... but we both know what your doing there. It's more likely 8 or even 9 stratagems per game because we all know it's bullcrap that your gona burn your CP's on 3 point stratagems.

Basically, just relax and wait to see what really matters that they are not leaking. I am sure this book is going to be strong.

Ok, I rounded my numbers a bit much on the IG front, should really have been more like 15-21. I've seen a few lists used with 21 CPs, but 15 is more common. Maybe a more common range would be 12-18 instead. So lets say 12-18.

A more common range for Eldar is 5-7. So still less than half the CP's.

You seem to think the only stratagems that are good are the ones that cost 1 CP. And yet you say IG can't use 3 or 4 per turn. Say a 5 turn game... 15 CP's... 3 stratagems per turn. So I was spot on.

You disagree when I say Eldar can only use 3 - 4 per game. Ok, I was wrong. It was more like 5-6. Means that, unlike IG, they have no option to use any stratagem that -isn't- only 1CP to use.

So you disagree with everything I said, fine. I tweaked my numbers to be more precise, just to please your pedantry, and everything I said is still completely accurate. Eldar can not compete with the use of stratagems.

You were not accurate or precise and I think you need to learn the definitions of both.

You were incorrect about every number you listed, then to make it worse your speculating entirely about how many stratagems and how useful they will be for a book that isn't out. I'd say your post was a good example of everything wrong with this thread. The only part missing is where someone decides the traits are not fluffy until someone else proves it is and they go around and around moving goal posts between what is useful for net building and what is fluff.

If power is based on strategems as you claim, the army with more strategems is more powerful. That army will never be the Eldar because of unit costs.

 General Kroll wrote:
I agree with the Red Corsair, there’s way too much hyperbole in this thread. It seems that unless something is OP, it’s always considered “Garbage.”

It’s no surprise to me that the new Eldar codex hasn’t given tonnes of free buffs. The amount of whining about Eldar as an army in 7th has clearly had an influence on the design team, and while they haven’t nerfed them completely, they have tried to balance things out a little.

I don't need OP buffs, but I'd like to have some that even the playing field with previous codexes. My biggest issue is that the design does not match the fluff of the Craftworlds. It seems almost as if the designers knew little about the Eldar.

the cosmic serpent wrote:
Soooo with the Saim-Hann trait I could take a SH skathach wk place it in deepstrike, and it will have reroll charges? Increases change of success from 33% to just over 55% that's decent. Do the same with Scorpions and spend 2CP to reduce their charge to 7" with a re-roll. If they drop scorpion costs (unlikely because they have always been roughly 17 - 19 points) then this would make them a very efficient first turn harassment unit like AL berserkers. Could be useful for going after heavy weapon squads and the like. Cause some panic in opponent backfield meanwhile the rest of the army gets to run around and cap objectives. Or have some shinning spears fly up the board to offer some aid in CC.

Unfortunately the +2" to charge is the Biel-Tan stratagem, so you wouldn't be able to use it on the Saim-Hann units.