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 think I'd want to run Faolchu's Wing on a spiritseer over a farseer or autarch anyway. Farseer and autarch have access to improved mobility from their datasheets without needing a relic. Spiritseers don't have that option. While you could put the spiritseer into a transport, you then wouldn't be able to use the seer for any of its intended purposes (deny the witch/casting.)

xmbk wrote:
Frowny has it. Wings have a real opportunity cost, can't just throw them on a Farseer for free.

As for Reapers and Spears being the best, don't forget Hemlocks. They rival Reapers for best, Spears are a clear third.

As good as Hemlocks are (and they are very good), I'd argue that spear's bring more to the table overall. They can grab objectives, they can deal with hordes somewhat competently, and they can tie up non-CC units in combat if they don't kill them outright. Hemlocks offer a great combination of support and firepower, but Spears give more board control.

 Fafnir wrote:
Well, reapers and spears are far and away the best units in the codex (Spectres we're close before, but don't come close now). While I could definitely see some rebalancing in their future, with the silly heavy-handedness of the Spectre nerf, I worry for them. While still a very good value for their points, they're still very expensive for 1W models, and the last thing Eldar need is one of their anti-horde options to become too expensive to deal with hordes.

Specters were never in the codex, unlike reapers and spears, and that will be their and every other FW unit's issue going forward.

If the Index v Codex differences are indicative of their current overall direction, in that models/options you cannot purchase in a GW store are 99% not in the codex books, then I can understand the heavy handedness of the FW points changes.

I feel they are trying to further encourage players to buy models from the codex books over FW alternatives.

As long as they continue in this direction, I wouldn't hold my breath on anything FW ever maintaining its status as a "go to" or "must have" in any army for long. And once its changed, I don't see it returning in value beyond being just expensive enough to make you second guess choosing that option over a codex option instead.

Of course, this is just my opinion and I could be wrong. But this first round of rather heavy handed CA changes to FW point values in multiple factions makes me lean that direction.

 Marius Xerxes wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
Well, reapers and spears are far and away the best units in the codex (Spectres we're close before, but don't come close now). While I could definitely see some rebalancing in their future, with the silly heavy-handedness of the Spectre nerf, I worry for them. While still a very good value for their points, they're still very expensive for 1W models, and the last thing Eldar need is one of their anti-horde options to become too expensive to deal with hordes.

Specters were never in the codex, unlike reapers and spears, and that will be their and every other FW unit's issue going forward.

If the Index v Codex differences are indicative of their current overall direction, in that models/options you cannot purchase in a GW store are 99% not in the codex books, then I can understand the heavy handedness of the FW points changes.

I feel they are trying to further encourage players to buy models from the codex books over FW alternatives.

As long as they continue in this direction, I wouldn't hold my breath on anything FW ever maintaining its status as a "go to" or "must have" in any army for long. And once its changed, I don't see it returning in value beyond being just expensive enough to make you second guess choosing that option over a codex option instead.

Of course, this is just my opinion and I could be wrong. But this first round of rather heavy handed CA changes to FW point values in multiple factions makes me lean that direction.

I think what will be most telling is Forgeworlds first dedicated publication, if such a thing still exists. The 'Imperial Armour' equivalent for 8th edition...

I think GW make decent money off printed publications, so they would be hesitant to discontinue all FW books.

 Korlandril wrote:
Novalance can only be taken on a Skyrunner Autarch with a Laser Lance.

Even more, he must be <Saim-Hann>. It's a tricky relic to take without giving up doctrine bonus on him and his detachment, WL traits and so on.

Has anyone had a game against codex Tyranids yet? How well do CWE match up in general especially in dealing with Genestealer heavy lists?

 Shadenuat wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
Novalance can only be taken on a Skyrunner Autarch with a Laser Lance.

Even more, he must be <Saim-Hann>. It's a tricky relic to take without giving up doctrine bonus on him and his detachment, WL traits and so on.

Not really. Just take a Command detachment with a Skyrunner Autarch and 2 other HQs, preferably 2 more Autarchs with Reaper launchers.
Skyrunner Autarchs with Reaper launchers are the only models in the entire range that take full advantages of both the Saim-Hann bonuses anyway

-

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
Has anyone had a game against codex Tyranids yet? How well do CWE match up in general especially in dealing with Genestealer heavy lists?

Poorly. Tyranids are basically Xenos versions of everything OP about Astra Militarum, except even more versatile.

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
Has anyone had a game against codex Tyranids yet? How well do CWE match up in general especially in dealing with Genestealer heavy lists?

Still trying to figure out how to deal with huge turn 1 CC alpha strikes and massive hordes.

darkarchonlord wrote:

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
Has anyone had a game against codex Tyranids yet? How well do CWE match up in general especially in dealing with Genestealer heavy lists?

Still trying to figure out how to deal with huge turn 1 CC alpha strikes and massive hordes.

2-3 Sacrificial Ranger units deployed about 5" away from and surrounding your army is about the best choice. It flat out stops turn 1 alpha assaults on your more valuable stuff and it leaves units out in the wind right in front of all your guns after they devour your Rangers.
Eldar should never have sacrificial units, but this edition kinda requires it.

-

Mr. Funktastic wrote:
Has anyone had a game against codex Tyranids yet? How well do CWE match up in general especially in dealing with Genestealer heavy lists?

Played against them twice (I play Ynnari FWIW) and while the games have been tough I've won both. One list was a literal gant wall with roughly 120 gants, the other was about 40 Stealers plus associated support.

 Galef wrote:

2-3 Sacrificial Ranger units deployed about 5" away from and surrounding your army is about the best choice. It flat out stops turn 1 alpha assaults on your more valuable stuff and it leaves units out in the wind right in front of all your guns after they devour your Rangers.
Eldar should never have sacrificial units, but this edition kinda requires it.
-

A few Rangers does absolutely nothing. They'll be dead long before the assault phase on turn 1. And that's only if it's a fighting Tyranid army. Tyranids shoot as well as AM too and can ignore pathetic Rangers to just kill your important stuff.

 Galef wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:
Novalance can only be taken on a Skyrunner Autarch with a Laser Lance.

Even more, he must be <Saim-Hann>. It's a tricky relic to take without giving up doctrine bonus on him and his detachment, WL traits and so on.

Not really. Just take a Command detachment with a Skyrunner Autarch and 2 other HQs, preferably 2 more Autarchs with Reaper launchers.
Skyrunner Autarchs with Reaper launchers are the only models in the entire range that take full advantages of both the Saim-Hann bonuses anyway

-

Probably better to take an Outrider, so that the Spears escorting him can benefit from rerolls. Reaper launchers still make you 6" slower, think I'd prefer the Fusion gun.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Galef wrote:

2-3 Sacrificial Ranger units deployed about 5" away from and surrounding your army is about the best choice. It flat out stops turn 1 alpha assaults on your more valuable stuff and it leaves units out in the wind right in front of all your guns after they devour your Rangers.
Eldar should never have sacrificial units, but this edition kinda requires it.
-

A few Rangers does absolutely nothing. They'll be dead long before the assault phase on turn 1. And that's only if it's a fighting Tyranid army. Tyranids shoot as well as AM too and can ignore pathetic Rangers to just kill your important stuff.

Alaitoc Rangers are -2 to-hit, so 'Nids and AM are hitting on 6's a lot. They won't make that big of a dent from shooting and thus, they are a roadblock. Plus, Hemlocks.

Alpha strikes can be stalled with good deployment.

Is it considered some kind of heresy around here to field the Dark Reaper Exarch with a Shuriken Cannon as ablative wounds?
I need the 17 points saved from it (It was a Tempest Launcher before) and, while I lose some nice anti-infantry, the other 4 DR will shoot unmolested for the first two wounds they take.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Galef wrote:

2-3 Sacrificial Ranger units deployed about 5" away from and surrounding your army is about the best choice. It flat out stops turn 1 alpha assaults on your more valuable stuff and it leaves units out in the wind right in front of all your guns after they devour your Rangers.
Eldar should never have sacrificial units, but this edition kinda requires it.
-

A few Rangers does absolutely nothing. They'll be dead long before the assault phase on turn 1. And that's only if it's a fighting Tyranid army. Tyranids shoot as well as AM too and can ignore pathetic Rangers to just kill your important stuff.

What are you talking about? Having a shield of Rangers 4-5" in front of your army guarantees that deep striking units are more than 12" away from the core of your army. It doesn't matter that the Rangers immediately die, because they WERE on the board when those units had to be deployed.
If the opponent waits a turn, GREAT, you now get more of a turn 1 advantage.

-

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Galef wrote:

2-3 Sacrificial Ranger units deployed about 5" away from and surrounding your army is about the best choice. It flat out stops turn 1 alpha assaults on your more valuable stuff and it leaves units out in the wind right in front of all your guns after they devour your Rangers.
Eldar should never have sacrificial units, but this edition kinda requires it.
-

A few Rangers does absolutely nothing. They'll be dead long before the assault phase on turn 1. And that's only if it's a fighting Tyranid army. Tyranids shoot as well as AM too and can ignore pathetic Rangers to just kill your important stuff.

If you're putting nothing but units on the table with a -1 at a minimum to be shot at you can stymy a lot of their shooting. That's a lot of how I cut out some of their first turn shooting and then I deal with sacrificing a few less important units to keep my drivers up and running.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

A few Rangers does absolutely nothing. They'll be dead long before the assault phase on turn 1. And that's only if it's a fighting Tyranid army. Tyranids shoot as well as AM too and can ignore pathetic Rangers to just kill your important stuff.

Err... Units with Ranger like deployment rules are mandatory for any army that doesn't have cheap hordes for screens. They stop turn 1 deep strike shenanigans. If you don't use something like that you're not going to compete. I have considered just relying on Serpents as whatever can kill a serpent after deep striking is probably expensive enough to make it an ok exchange.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Alaitoc Rangers are -2 to-hit, so 'Nids and AM are hitting on 6's a lot. They won't make that big of a dent from shooting and thus, they are a roadblock. Plus, Hemlocks.

They're -1 to hit and have a 5+ save against Jormungandr shooting. Being within 12" is a given since they get to move before they shoot and you're recommending putting the Rangers even closer to them than you're own deployment zone.

Also, Biovores and Sporecysts don't care about penalties to hit against the rest of your army. Neither do Zoanthropes/Neurothropes.

I'm not sure you guys have seen a dedicated shooting Tyranid army.

The rangers are for protection against the T1 assault type nids. They don't help vs shooty nids.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Alaitoc Rangers are -2 to-hit, so 'Nids and AM are hitting on 6's a lot. They won't make that big of a dent from shooting and thus, they are a roadblock. Plus, Hemlocks.

They're -1 to hit and have a 5+ save against Jormungandr shooting. Being within 12" is a given since they get to move before they shoot and you're recommending putting the Rangers even closer to them than you're own deployment zone.

Also, Biovores and Sporecysts don't care about penalties to hit against the rest of your army. Neither do Zoanthropes/Neurothropes.

I'm not sure you guys have seen a dedicated shooting Tyranid army.

If it is a dedicated shooting 'Nid army, then I am not sweating their T1 Alpha Strike, since that isn't what they do.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:


If it is a dedicated shooting 'Nid army, then I am not sweating their T1 Alpha Strike, since that isn't what they do.

There shooting can be so powerful it is a bit alpha strikey, but yeah. They do tend to have 36" range on the really nasty stuff so staying out of range helps. I've found the Phantasm strat handy against them.

 DanielFM wrote:
Is it considered some kind of heresy around here to field the Dark Reaper Exarch with a Shuriken Cannon as ablative wounds?
I need the 17 points saved from it (It was a Tempest Launcher before) and, while I lose some nice anti-infantry, the other 4 DR will shoot unmolested for the first two wounds they take.

I think this was a lot more appealing with the index when Reaper Launchers were more expensive and all of the Reapers were going to be Ynnari anyway and would Soulburst if something near them died. This still seems reasonable but ultimately Reapers are just not that efficient at shooting without the Exarch contributing his tempest launcher.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 DanielFM wrote:
Is it considered some kind of heresy around here to field the Dark Reaper Exarch with a Shuriken Cannon as ablative wounds?
I need the 17 points saved from it (It was a Tempest Launcher before) and, while I lose some nice anti-infantry, the other 4 DR will shoot unmolested for the first two wounds they take.

I think this was a lot more appealing with the index when Reaper Launchers were more expensive and all of the Reapers were going to be Ynnari anyway and would Soulburst if something near them died. This still seems reasonable but ultimately Reapers are just not that efficient at shooting without the Exarch contributing his tempest launcher.

Well, we are talking about Warwalker with Bright Lances + sacrificial DR Exarch or Warwalker with Shuriken Cannons and Tempest Exarch. The latter sounds better, even if it doesn't help me much with anti-tank.

Now that I think about it, I could give those same SC to my Wraithknight and save 50 points from the War Walker hull I feel like I don't get much value from fielding the WW if I don't take advantage of the Bright Lance option.

While it is not strictly a tactics subject, I would invite all Eldar players to take part in the survey below and let GW know what we want from the Craftworlds range/rules moving forward:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/11/30/say-big-community-survey-nov-30gw-homepage-post-1/

If we present a united front, we CAN get our finecast Aspect Warriors replaced! Khaine wills it!

 Marius Xerxes wrote:


Specters were never in the codex, unlike reapers and spears, and that will be their and every other FW unit's issue going forward.

If the Index v Codex differences are indicative of their current overall direction, in that models/options you cannot purchase in a GW store are 99% not in the codex books, then I can understand the heavy handedness of the FW points changes.

I feel they are trying to further encourage players to buy models from the codex books over FW alternatives.

As long as they continue in this direction, I wouldn't hold my breath on anything FW ever maintaining its status as a "go to" or "must have" in any army for long. And once its changed, I don't see it returning in value beyond being just expensive enough to make you second guess choosing that option over a codex option instead.

Of course, this is just my opinion and I could be wrong. But this first round of rather heavy handed CA changes to FW point values in multiple factions makes me lean that direction.

Good news! You’re wrong, at least for Shadow Spectres anyway. They were way undercosted. Now on a points/MEQ-kill basis they are on par with Reapers, which just about everyone thinks are fab. And they have a whole lot more versatility than that.

Splog wrote:
Good news! You’re wrong, at least for Shadow Spectres anyway.

Wrong how?

Were they ever in the codex? No.

Are they still an auto include? No.

Are other codex options now more appealing due to their change in points? Yes.

Spartacus wrote:
While it is not strictly a tactics subject, I would invite all Eldar players to take part in the survey below and let GW know what we want from the Craftworlds range/rules moving forward:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/11/30/say-big-community-survey-nov-30gw-homepage-post-1/

If we present a united front, we CAN get our finecast Aspect Warriors replaced! Khaine wills it!

I answered finecast as the worst part of the hobby or some question worded like that and maybe another. It would make me buy more of their stuff if it was metal or plastic I hope they take this on board.

Then I can get on the Dark Reaper train.

So now they kill 1W MEQ at the same rate as a unit who's bread and butter is multi-wound targets... Sounds like a pretty crap deal.

Spectres may have been undercoated before, but they're just plain bad now.

No way Spectres are bad, that's just silly. GW got that points adjustment about right.