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.

Sad at the removal of Autarch options. In an unusual instance of luck, my custom one has the wings, mandiblasters and fusion pistol and sword.

Drake003 wrote:
Do we know if Twin catapults are 0 cost or do we have to pay extra for them, for things like Wind Riders and Shining Spears etc..?

They dropped to 5 points, I believe (down from 10 in the index)

Yep, saw 5 points listed - and yes you still have to buy them.

Niiru wrote:

Kdash wrote:


it was FAQd a while ago i believe. If the item is listed in the abilities section and has a points cost, you have to pay the points cost as you would normally.

This was FAQ'd for a specific character/army, in one of the FAQ's, but was never made universal. So it doesn't effect any of the other armies, until they either add the rule to all the FAQ's or make the rule universal.

As a point of interest it was never FAQ'd just a bad answer to a bad phrased question wich lead to confusion.

It's worth to notice that by example such question is gone from the *spanish* FAQ and instead they added an errata that tells you to add Combat shield to the basic Wargear of company Champions.

Why they didn't bothered to add such errata to the English (and theorically main and official FAQ) and solve this is far beyond my understanding.

These changes do look good. Makes me excited to try my Eldar again, as I really did not like them with the Index. Points drops for everything, buffs to some units (remains to be seen if they are enough). I was going to do mainly Wraiths and like Guardians and tanks, so these seem good.

Drake003 wrote:
Do we know if Twin catapults are 0 cost or do we have to pay extra for them, for things like Wind Riders and Shining Spears etc..?

They cost 5 points now - down from the 10 they were previously.

Added it to my list of changes.

The pt drop of the Falcon is hugh. Does it make Falcons more playable. I dont have the index with me.

 wuestenfux wrote:
The pt drop of the Falcon is hugh. Does it make Falcons more playable. I dont have the index with me.

I don't know if i'm honest. I've not looked at them for a while, but i think it comes down to a choice. It's biggest issue is the Wave Serpent (as always). Giving the Falcon an AML and cannon puts it at 160 points, while a Wave Serpent with a twin AML and cannon is 167. The Serpent also has 1 extra wound and its shield.

I'm going to say no on the Falcon. It still doesn't really out shoot the Wave Serpent, isn't as survivable and has a smaller transport capacity, all for a similar points cost.

Falcon still feels lacking from what I've read. It's supposed to be a "main battle tank" with transport as extra, but doesn't do enough on the MBT side of things, and has lesser transport capacity to compensate. Not sure what it needs to bring it up though. If the Wave Serpent didn't already exist, I'd say the WS should have had greatly limited weapon options (or none at all) but since it does you can't retroactively do that.

Wayniac wrote:
Falcon still feels lacking from what I've read. It's supposed to be a "main battle tank" with transport as extra, but doesn't do enough on the MBT side of things, and has lesser transport capacity to compensate. Not sure what it needs to bring it up though. If the Wave Serpent didn't already exist, I'd say the WS should have had greatly limited weapon options (or none at all) but since it does you can't retroactively do that.

Personally, i think if the Pulse Laser was str 9 then it'd have it's own niche and be set apart from just spamming bright lances etc. Currently it's 2 shot, str 8 -3, 3dmg. A bright lance Falcon will do more damage than a twin bright lance Wave Serpent, but not by much (3.7 vs 3.1 when targeting something like a Rhino). But, even then, the Falcon would only start to do better vs T8.

I agree with you though. Its problem is that, on its own, its not really killing anything. And while the Wave Serpent isn't either, it also has another purpose and will survive longer.

That's a pity.
They could have given the Falcon the role of an Eldar gunboat, but they failed.
No one will buy an extra Falcon.

The falcon needed better armour (Toughness/ Save) and maybe an upgrade on the Pulse Laser.

Perhaps ignoring -1 for moving, Eldar tanks are meant to be mobile.

Disappointing they didn't address this correctly... just dropping the points but making WS *better* isn't going to get anyone switching over...

GeeDerpy.

zerosignal wrote:
The falcon needed better armour (Toughness/ Save) and maybe an upgrade on the Pulse Laser.

Perhaps ignoring -1 for moving, Eldar tanks are meant to be mobile.

Disappointing they didn't address this correctly... just dropping the points but making WS *better* isn't going to get anyone switching over...

GeeDerpy.

I disagree, the Falcon is fine ruleswise. It just needs to be costed appropriately. It's on the same chassis as the Fire Prism and Night Spinner, so how would you explain it having more toughness or a better save? The Wave Serpent has a larger hull and the Serpent Shield, which explains why it's different. The Falcon has none of that.

The Pulse Laser is a great weapon, I really like that you don't need to roll random damage.

I would certainly approve of the grav tanks ignoring the move and fire penalty, but again, this should apply to all the grav tanks, if any.

The Falcon's pulse weapon should be two lascannon shots.
This would be decent.

Or a better solution would be to give the Falcon the same rule as the Prism. I mean the rule is even called "Pulsed Laser" Discharge.
What's the main weapon of the Falcon again? Oh, yeah, the "Pulse Laser"

Also I wish they had added back the guardian's grav platform move and fire without penalty, it's kinda silly it hovers but suffers a penalty. In fact I feel battle focus is still pretty lacking since as far as I can tell it didn't change at all.

 wuestenfux wrote:
That's a pity.
They could have given the Falcon the role of an Eldar gunboat, but they failed.
No one will buy an extra Falcon.

I bought 3 right near the end of 7th to try the cloudstrike formation with. Feelsbadman.

How can the falcon be worse than the serpent if you give it a Lance as it's secondary weapon?
However, I plan to use my 2 with starcannon.

 Galef wrote:
Or a better solution would be to give the Falcon the same rule as the Prism. I mean the rule is even called "Pulsed Laser" Discharge.
What's the main weapon of the Falcon again? Oh, yeah, the "Pulse Laser"

I thought the impression was that the falcon would gain this ability too?

If it does then that makes it a comparable option to the WS.

With the Falcon price drop - I'll take one just because I have the model and I like it. Loaded out with the pulse laser, a missile launcher and shuriken cannon...it puts out enough firepower for me. Admittedly the price drop was drastically needed.

I don't care much about Mathhammer, etc...but it is very tough to justify throwing away 50-60-70 points (as with the Index) for no real increase in performance over a similar vehicle. I stilled used Falcons anyway, but it was painful.

Lord Perversor wrote:

Niiru wrote:

Kdash wrote:


it was FAQd a while ago i believe. If the item is listed in the abilities section and has a points cost, you have to pay the points cost as you would normally.

This was FAQ'd for a specific character/army, in one of the FAQ's, but was never made universal. So it doesn't effect any of the other armies, until they either add the rule to all the FAQ's or make the rule universal.

As a point of interest it was never FAQ'd just a bad answer to a bad phrased question wich lead to confusion.

It's worth to notice that by example such question is gone from the *spanish* FAQ and instead they added an errata that tells you to add Combat shield to the basic Wargear of company Champions.

Why they didn't bothered to add such errata to the English (and theorically main and official FAQ) and solve this is far beyond my understanding.

Yes, since I posted this I once again found the text I was referring to, and it was actually just a page on the Warhammer Community blog essentially. So it's hardly an official FAQ, but everyone treats it as gospel (especially on the IG and Marine threads).

Personally I think it should only be for times when a whole datasheet for a model is missing (eg. Chaos Lord on Juggernaut), but the Dreadnought example implies wargear option too which is tricky.

A lot of players are saying that it's for wargear too, which means Autarch with Reaper Launcher is still fine. Sniper Rockets here we come.

Although, even if you take it to mean datasheets... the Autarch with Warp Generator was a datasheet, that has now gone. So that means you can take him, with a Warp Generator, and use his rules (which includes all the weapon options anyway).

And I think that if he has a Banshee Mask it would work with the newer rules.

Points are to be the newest version
If a rule was 'weakened' ....all the players would say the index should follow the new rules. I say that if the rule is made more favorable then so to for the index units.

They always have the option to faq the index unit datasheet to raise or lower the cost or to make any other notes. Till then the Autarch with Warp Jump Generator is a sweet deal point wise, has option to the Banshee Mask, can take the Reaper Launcher at the new lower point cost and still use the Warlord traits and other goodies to be a real badass!