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.

Full disclosure I haven't based this analysis on complex math hammer, but rather on plain and simple rules as written comparisons, point cost comparisons, and a little nod to fluff, though I'm not really appealing to the fluff all the strongly. The little fluff argument is that the eldar are supposed to be exponentially more advanced in there technology, far outpacing astartes, admech, and tau, and really only being rivaled by necrons, with even they lagging

behind a bit; but as we will see the imperium/tau equivalents are far more technologically advanced. End fluff bit, down to the common sense stuff. The wraithknight costs 510ish points with the double heavy wraithcannon loadout, which we'll consider the baseline loadout, with sword and board being a bit cheaper, and suncannon being quite a bit more expensive. This price point brings it over a standard imperial knight or riptide, but a bit below a

dominus class knight/ However the comparison isn't great because in the case of the imperial knights they have more firepower overall in the built in melta/flamers and turret mounted weapons, so if you try to make the wraithknight roughly equal by adding a few bright lances or starcannons to it it basically brings it into dominus points territory. For the price point the wraithknight is T8 (comparable), 24 wounds (standard knight, not dominus level), 3+ save

with no base invulnerable or stratagem support to compensate (this is where everything falls apart). IE it's flimsy as all get out. The knights, including dominus knights have access to 4++ with warlord trait and 3++ with stratagem. The riptide has access to a 3++ with ion overload or whatever it's called, as well as as much savior protocol drone support as you want to spend points on. The wraithknight has none of these options, and is priced at the ceiling

of this class of units in dominus territory. It seems fairly obvious to me that the defensive capabilities of the unit needs to be drastically buffed, giving it access to a 3++ or minimum 4++ through a stratagem or something, or it's total cost needs to top out at like 400-425 points if it's going to stay as is. Given it's competition among other codices it's wildly underpowered/overcosted/inefficient.

I'll be honest I'm still salty about how OP it was in 7th that it's current garbage tier status does not bother me as much as it probably should.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
I'll be honest I'm still salty about how OP it was in 7th that it's current garbage tier status does not bother me as much as it probably should.

I can appreciate the honesty.

I've never thought the WK should exist so I don't really care.

pm713 wrote:
I've never thought the WK should exist so I don't really care.

Unfortunately this comment is basically nonsensical and as such doesn't warrant any meaningful response.

Can I be salty over how no one ever uses paragraph breaks anymore and just posts giant walls of text like Dorn being asked to update his Spacebook status?

Seriously, it's a slog to read through dense text blocks like that.

That said, I don't know if you have a "beef" since you still have one of the strongest armies in the game even without the Wraithknight, but yes, there is valid concern for any unit that is basically "useless" in most metas.

Basically all we can do is bother GW about the weaker units via emailing (or writing a nice letter and dropping it in the post) them and offering feedback. The more data they have to highlight that there is something wrong, the more they're able to work back to the problem and try and fix it.

It is really unfortunate situation. It is a cool model and should be usable. I'd prefer if they buffed its performance somehow, even if that meant increasing the point cost. Eldar Knights should be more powerful than the Imperial ones.

They were a menace in the last edition, and as a result they got nerfed to the ground. Same thing happened to Centurions, they're unusable now too. It is really not a good way to handle things.

Its a cool model.

it suffers from its crimes in 7th as does the centurions

but like the centurions and imperial knights it shouldn't exist in normal 40k

the scale creep and eggs in a basket was and is getting out of hand.

basically game playablity vs fluff or whatever.

 Crimson wrote:
It is really unfortunate situation. It is a cool model and should be usable. I'd prefer if they buffed its performance somehow, even if that meant increasing the point cost. Eldar Knights should be more powerful than the Imperial ones.

They were a menace in the last edition, and as a result they got nerfed to the ground. Same thing happened to Centurions, they're unusable now too. It is really not a good way to handle things.

I don't know if they should be "more powerful" than the Imperial ones since they're basically two different kinds of units (on being a fast moving, but lighter, knight and the other being a heavy plodding tank), but something needs to be done to make them less pants for sure.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Can I be salty over how no one ever uses paragraph breaks anymore and just posts giant walls of text like Dorn being asked to update his Spacebook status?

Seriously, it's a slog to read through dense text blocks like that.

That said, I don't know if you have a "beef" since you still have one of the strongest armies in the game even without the Wraithknight, but yes, there is valid concern for any unit that is basically "useless" in most metas.

Basically all we can do is bother GW about the weaker units via emailing (or writing a nice letter and dropping it in the post) them and offering feedback. The more data they have to highlight that there is something wrong, the more they're able to work back to the problem and try and fix it.

Added breaks for you. And yes, they are strong, it wasn't a critique on the state of the meta, or of 40k at large, but on a specific unit. Tyranids have been really strong also, but if a tyranid player complained about helldrakes being really bad now I'd have no problem commiserating with him.

 peteralmo wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Can I be salty over how no one ever uses paragraph breaks anymore and just posts giant walls of text like Dorn being asked to update his Spacebook status?

Seriously, it's a slog to read through dense text blocks like that.

That said, I don't know if you have a "beef" since you still have one of the strongest armies in the game even without the Wraithknight, but yes, there is valid concern for any unit that is basically "useless" in most metas.

Basically all we can do is bother GW about the weaker units via emailing (or writing a nice letter and dropping it in the post) them and offering feedback. The more data they have to highlight that there is something wrong, the more they're able to work back to the problem and try and fix it.

Added breaks for you. And yes, they are strong, it wasn't a critique on the state of the meta, or of 40k at large, but on a specific unit. Tyranids have been really strong also, but if a tyranid player complained about helldrakes being really bad now I'd have no problem commiserating with him.

Appreciated, the change makes reading much easier.

Helldrakes are a CSM unit so I'm not sure you're example works. Maybe if you said Harpies it fit more.

The point was that I feel a "beef" is much heavier than a concern. Eldar players having a beef, to me, suggest they have an unplayable army that is basically trash. I guess it's just the way I mentally weight descriptors or something, but I see this as less of a problem than, say, Vanilla Marines who don't run Guilliman or Grey Knights. It's a problem, sure, but it's not the biggest one in the game.

A thought about the massive points cost on the Wraithknight: it's likely pointed that way due to Eldar synergies. Much like how Vanilla Marines are points costed to balance for having Guilliman around, even if you're running another chapter who doesn't take him.

 peteralmo wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Can I be salty over how no one ever uses paragraph breaks anymore and just posts giant walls of text like Dorn being asked to update his Spacebook status?

Seriously, it's a slog to read through dense text blocks like that.

That said, I don't know if you have a "beef" since you still have one of the strongest armies in the game even without the Wraithknight, but yes, there is valid concern for any unit that is basically "useless" in most metas.

Basically all we can do is bother GW about the weaker units via emailing (or writing a nice letter and dropping it in the post) them and offering feedback. The more data they have to highlight that there is something wrong, the more they're able to work back to the problem and try and fix it.

Added breaks for you. And yes, they are strong, it wasn't a critique on the state of the meta, or of 40k at large, but on a specific unit. Tyranids have been really strong also, but if a tyranid player complained about helldrakes being really bad now I'd have no problem commiserating with him.

I'd be more concerned about why a Tyranid player was trying to run heldrakes in that case.

It actually makes perfect sense in his own subjective (read: opinion) and you did respond.

I too think that the Wraithknight was broken in 7th and as such don't care. It's not like Eldar players don't have a world of great stuff to choose from.

Take Alaitoc, there's your defensive buff.

Ok let me soften this up a bit. Given resources (attention) is limited, I'll admit it probably seems overpriced. But there are literally about 1,000 other things I'd rather have GW working on fixing before worrying about the Wrathknight. Again, it's not like CWE are hurting here.

What I would like to see happen is the WK gets probably about a 100 point base drop and the suncannon gets a big buff. It should just be straight up 2d6 shots str 9 ap-3 flat 3 damage.

The Wraith sword should be deadlier as well. Give it something special against titanic units. 2d6 damage vs titanic.

Just as a nitpick...adding breaks doesn't do any good if you're breaking up in the middle of a sentence. They're supposed to exist at the end of a sentence, and the next paragraph should be a new thought; not just a break to say "I broke it up".

In regards to the model, it's an awesome model and should not be useless at all. I've also heard horror stories about how bad it was in 7th (the only guy at my store who had it was on my "avoid at all costs" list, because of how much of a TFG he was). No model or unit should ever be useless; if it is, it needs to be adjusted. But it also shouldn't be as powerful as everyone said it was in 7th. If it's an auto-take, no matter what the situation, it needs to be tweaked as well.

The reason I am salty is because I had the WK has the same statline as an Imperial Knight, but doesn't have a comparable loadout.
An IK gets to be shooty, assaulting and have a 5++ all in the same build.
WKs have to pick 1 of the 3. That of itself is fine, Eldar are meant to specialized. But why on Khorne's red earth do we pay over 100pts MORE for the privilege of being LESS versatile.

WKs should have been even with IKs from the start of 8E and now they should actually be less because the IK strats and abilities are easily on par or better than any buff a WK "could" have.
Players should not be punished for GW's design mistakes of a prior editions, but that is the only explanation for the WK's cost in 8E

Drop the WK about 100pts, give it Spirit Stones at minimum and I'll be happy with the WK again.
As it stands, 3 Prisms are cheaper and cause over twice the damage a WK can do.

 Galef wrote:
WKs had to pick 1 of the 3. That of itself is fine, Eldar are meant to specialized. But why on Khorne's red earth do we pay over 100pts MORE for the privilege of being LESS versatile.

<snark>Eldar tax.</snark>

More seriously, it's likely due to the studio trying to balance the benefits from synergies in the Eldar book (Fortune, -1 to hit army trait, ect) regardless of what you actually take and use.

Basically the issue, much like the issue Vanilla Marines face, is being forced to pay for a tax the wrong way: on the units that might be affected by a certain option over charging for what gives you the option.

We'd be seeing a lot less of this kind of problem if army traits cost points, and models that provide buffs were more expensive over making the models that can be buffed more expensive.

 peteralmo wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've never thought the WK should exist so I don't really care.

Unfortunately this comment is basically nonsensical and as such doesn't warrant any meaningful response.[/quote
My comment made perfectly good sense. Why the need to lash out?

pm713 wrote:

 peteralmo wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I've never thought the WK should exist so I don't really care.

Unfortunately this comment is basically nonsensical and as such doesn't warrant any meaningful response.

My comment made perfectly good sense. Why the need to lash out?

Eldar tears? </snark>
More likely that it doesn't contribute to the discussion in what most see as a meaningful way much like how if someone posted that they don't think Primaris should exist in a thread discussing the balance issues of primaris. I mean, cool, that's your opinion and all, but does it do anything to discuss if there is a balance issue or not? Not really.

I think many players see their army as more specific things than just 'Craftworld Eldar' or 'Space Marines'. My Space Marine army is a non-ultramarine Primaris army, and existence of Guilliman does not help me in any way. Similarly my fledgling Eldar army is (or was about to be) Iyanden style wraith construct army, so there being some powerful builds that do not fit that theme doesn't help me. All units in the codex should be usable, period.

Lol, not sure how I managed to pair helldrakes with nids hehe, brain fart.

 Crimson wrote:
I think many players see their army as more specific things than just 'Craftworld Eldar' or 'Space Marines'. My Space Marine army is a non-ultramarine Primaris army, and existence of Guilliman does not help me in any way. Similarly my fledgling Eldar army is (or was about to be) Iyanden style wraith construct army, so there being some powerful builds that do not fit that theme doesn't help me. All units in the codex should be usable, period.

I (and my Primaris Imperial Fists) definitely agree. The problem is how GW is balancing the books is based on the most powerful possible build over what we're actually running. I bet if we saw points for army traits we'd see a lot of units fit better in the meta by not charging them for it directly.

The Black Templar codex did a pretty good job of this as an example. You were required to take a vow, and those vows cost points. This helped balance them amongst each other while also balanced the army. This wild west of free bonuses just slaps units around that aren't always benefiting from the best options resulting in a lot of stuff that would otherwise be alright being worthless due to paying a points tax for options they aren't using.

Basically this is just another thing in 8th edition that I feel could be tighter than it is and would help tighten the game up more.

I don't give a rats arse what people thought about the WK in 7th, we're in 8th now so please try to keep up. As for Eldar army being top tier, great unless you don't play Alaitoc and field Reapers/Spears. The rest of the codex (shall we say the VAST majority) is average, which is fine by me.

However, the wraithknight is not average, it's junk. There are so many things that need to happen to make it better. I'm hoping we see something in the next Chapter Approved, but in all honesty I wouldn't be surprised if we see an Eldar Knight codex down the line, especially with how popular the Imperial one is. Simplest short term solution would be a significant points decrease to tie it over. The suncannon is a joke, for that points it should be a flat Heavy 12, not 2D6.

Eldar Knights should be more powerful than the Imperial ones.

This is an opinion that adds nothing to the discussion. More Advanced =/= more powerful. While I agree it should be worth its points, I do not agree it should be more powerful. Mostly it should work differently. Factions should feel different.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:
WKs had to pick 1 of the 3. That of itself is fine, Eldar are meant to specialized. But why on Khorne's red earth do we pay over 100pts MORE for the privilege of being LESS versatile.

<snark>Eldar tax.</snark>

More seriously, it's likely due to the studio trying to balance the benefits from synergies in the Eldar book (Fortune, -1 to hit army trait, ect) regardless of what you actually take and use.

Basically the issue, much like the issue Vanilla Marines face, is being forced to pay for a tax the wrong way: on the units that might be affected by a certain option over charging for what gives you the option.

We'd be seeing a lot less of this kind of problem if army traits cost points, and models that provide buffs were more expensive over making the models that can be buffed more expensive.

Setting aside the fact that some abilities cost the price of a Psyker to cast said powers, IK now have synergy with Houses, strats and WL traits
So as far as I am concerned, both have comparable synergies and one should not pay more than the other just because said synergies exist.
You should pay for the synergies, you shouldn't have to pay for the POSSIBILITY of the synergies

The reason I feel WKs should be at least slightly cheaper than IKs is because no WK build (outside of the even more expensive FW versions) can be shooting, assaulty and have a 5++.
The Sword and Shield option only get 2 measly shoulder guns and is way more expensive that an IK with only melee weapons
The dual HWC WK doesn't have an invul AT ALL
The Suncannon/Shield option is the closet to an IK but is nearly 200pts more and is still weaker than a Gatling IK

If Chapter Approved does not fix this in the next update, my WK will be making a one-way trip to eBay, which is sad because its a great model.

-

 Galef wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Galef wrote:
WKs had to pick 1 of the 3. That of itself is fine, Eldar are meant to specialized. But why on Khorne's red earth do we pay over 100pts MORE for the privilege of being LESS versatile.

<snark>Eldar tax.</snark>

More seriously, it's likely due to the studio trying to balance the benefits from synergies in the Eldar book (Fortune, -1 to hit army trait, ect) regardless of what you actually take and use.

Basically the issue, much like the issue Vanilla Marines face, is being forced to pay for a tax the wrong way: on the units that might be affected by a certain option over charging for what gives you the option.

We'd be seeing a lot less of this kind of problem if army traits cost points, and models that provide buffs were more expensive over making the models that can be buffed more expensive.

Setting aside the fact that some abilities cost the price of a Psyker to cast said powers, IK now have synergy with Houses, strats and WL traits

Most psykers are pretty cheap and they don't pay for their powers which can lead to other imbalances, which seem to be soaked up by points costing the potential targets of said buffs to compensate. Which is a bad way to get a tightly balanced game. Sure you pay for the ability to use X powers a turn and deny X on your opponent's turn, but you don't pay for the specific powers themselves and that's where the real issue comes from.

At least the knights are being charged for their best possible synergy combos as well, which has killed some builds due to not getting enough return for the possible buffs they can have.

 Galef wrote:
So as far as I am concerned, both have comparable synergies and one should not pay more than the other just because said synergies exist.
You should pay for the synergies, you shouldn't have to pay for the POSSIBILITY of the synergies

Agreed 9,001%. The problem is we're definitely paying for the possibility right now, which is what drags decent units down via rather unreasonable price tags. It only gets worse if the unit gets cheaper because then the unit isn't costed properly when people DO use those synergies.

 Galef wrote:
The reason I feel WKs should be at least slightly cheaper than IKs is because no WK build (outside of the even more expensive FW versions) can be shooting, assaulty and have a 5++.

I can agree with this. Specialization should be cheaper to a point, or be balanced in other ways.

 Galef wrote:
The Sword and Shield option only get 2 measly shoulder guns and is way more expensive that an IK with only melee weapons

Even a melee only Knight still has a heavy stubber or melta gun. But yes, there is a bit of a problem here.

 Galef wrote:
The dual HWC WK doesn't have an invul AT ALL

That feels pretty silly. A built in 5++ or maybe a save versus hits (holofields) would fit the model pretty well and should be built in.

 Galef wrote:
The Suncannon/Shield option is the closet to an IK but is nearly 200pts more and is still weaker than a Gatling IK

Definitely a balance issue.

 Galef wrote:
If Chapter Approved does not fix this in the next update, my WK will be making a one-way trip to eBay, which is sad because its a great model.

If playing this game for any amount of time has taught me anything: never ebay anything if you're still playing the army. Stuff makes a come back all the time.

Do Eldar have stratagems or spells that can compensate for its stupid price? Also, automatic -1 to hit with the Altoic chapter tactic wouldn't hurt or the 1/2 effect from damage table from Iyanden. Points vs points alot of Eldar units seem like a ripoff, but not every army can just make a unit -3 to hit for a turn.

I think those factors may contribute to its high cost - but it is still overpriced.

I think it suffers from the same caution GW used with knights cost when the edition started. Knights were pretty over-costed before the codex. I bet WK will get a price drop when the FAQ comes out.

Once again we have a unit paying for its sins in a different edition. That's just how GW operates.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Once again we have a unit paying for its sins in a different edition. That's just how GW operates.

I feel like it's more a unit paying for the sins of how broken it could be given specific circumstances. Considering the playtesting being done I feel like we're paying for how great a unit COULD be over how good it actually IS in other lists.

Well, combining the Alaitoc strat with Lightning Reflexes (I believe it's got Fly) would give you -2 to hit. But where are you getting -3?

Conceal? Not infantry, can't target.
Drain? CC only, can't stack with Alaitoc
Baharroth? No way to make that impact ranged attacks

The army can do a -3 or worse (much worse), but not many at once, and I'm not sure they can do it on the Wraithknight.