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.

Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Moko is responding to the claim that not everyone plays Space Marines. His post is about frequency with which an army is played, not with which it places - showing that "Not everyone plays Space Marines" is even less valid than "Not everyone plays CWE".

There's no real argument being made that claims Eldar aren't doing better than Marines.

The argument is how OP DOOM is.

Nah. He was couching how OP Doom is not by using the BobbyG whataboutism to which I replied that BobbyG is pretty rare.

He tried to refute this with bad data showing Eldar being played less when the reality is a bit different.

No, Bharring is correct in my intent, which I noted above. Nice of you to just ignore that and determine my intent for me though. Cheers to that!

So I guess I should just ignore this sentence, because it means absolutely nothing? Cool.

RG allows re-rolls for everyone (UM) on EVERYTHING. Doom works on a SINGLE enemy unit. Guide works on a SINGLE Asuryani unit.

One has to compare like things in order to determine relative power levels. If there isn't a baseline, then how we cannot have a discussion from as there is no common ground. I've said before in this very thread that if I had a chance to adjust doom, it would only give drukhari and harlequin units re-rolls of 1 or I would be fine with it only affecting CWE units.

As for the data, while not complete, it is a potential baseline. Since you claim the reality of how many generals run Aeldari is different than that which is presented on BoLS, then by all means, please provide data to support such a claim.

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Moko is responding to the claim that not everyone plays Space Marines. His post is about frequency with which an army is played, not with which it places - showing that "Not everyone plays Space Marines" is even less valid than "Not everyone plays CWE".

There's no real argument being made that claims Eldar aren't doing better than Marines.

The argument is how OP DOOM is.

Nah. He was couching how OP Doom is not by using the BobbyG whataboutism to which I replied that BobbyG is pretty rare.

He tried to refute this with bad data showing Eldar being played less when the reality is a bit different.

No, Bharring is correct in my intent, which I noted above. Nice of you to just ignore that and determine my intent for me though. Cheers to that!

So I guess I should just ignore this sentence, because it means absolutely nothing? Cool.

RG allows re-rolls for everyone (UM) on EVERYTHING. Doom works on a SINGLE enemy unit. Guide works on a SINGLE Asuryani unit.

One has to compare like things in order to determine relative power levels. If there isn't a baseline, then how we cannot have a discussion from as there is no common ground. I've said before in this very thread that if I had a chance to adjust doom, it would only give drukhari and harlequin units re-rolls of 1 or I would be fine with it only affecting CWE units.

As for the data, while not complete, it is a potential baseline. Since you claim the reality of how many generals run Aeldari is different than that which is presented on BoLS, then by all means, please provide data to support such a claim.

The problem is that data is just that raw data, its not information as it's not collated or analysed in anyway. Like including events that are basically store level, damn I'm sure GK could win an 8 man event, but that still wouldn't make them any less broken and your not going to storm a 100 person event with them. But they woudl have won a tournament.

There is a reason people look at events of 20 or more people for balance discussions not any old event.

Ice_can wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.

Yvraine's offense is being able to cast "Word of the Phoenix" which is what allows a unit a free soul burst action. That ability is incredibly potent, and should perhaps get pushed up to WC9. As for the Craftworld Psykers, please explain why they are offensive and need a point increase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Spoiler:

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Moko is responding to the claim that not everyone plays Space Marines. His post is about frequency with which an army is played, not with which it places - showing that "Not everyone plays Space Marines" is even less valid than "Not everyone plays CWE".

There's no real argument being made that claims Eldar aren't doing better than Marines.

The argument is how OP DOOM is.

Nah. He was couching how OP Doom is not by using the BobbyG whataboutism to which I replied that BobbyG is pretty rare.

He tried to refute this with bad data showing Eldar being played less when the reality is a bit different.

No, Bharring is correct in my intent, which I noted above. Nice of you to just ignore that and determine my intent for me though. Cheers to that!

So I guess I should just ignore this sentence, because it means absolutely nothing? Cool.

RG allows re-rolls for everyone (UM) on EVERYTHING. Doom works on a SINGLE enemy unit. Guide works on a SINGLE Asuryani unit.

One has to compare like things in order to determine relative power levels. If there isn't a baseline, then how we cannot have a discussion from as there is no common ground. I've said before in this very thread that if I had a chance to adjust doom, it would only give drukhari and harlequin units re-rolls of 1 or I would be fine with it only affecting CWE units.

As for the data, while not complete, it is a potential baseline. Since you claim the reality of how many generals run Aeldari is different than that which is presented on BoLS, then by all means, please provide data to support such a claim.

The problem is that data is just that raw data, its not information as it's not collated or analysed in anyway. Like including events that are basically store level, damn I'm sure GK could win an 8 man event, but that still wouldn't make them any less broken and your not going to storm a 100 person event with them. But they woudl have won a tournament.

There is a reason people look at events of 20 or more people for balance discussions not any old event.

Right, and I never said anything about Eldar's power level in reference to that data. I was showing that the Aeldari faction is not cracking the top 10 most popular armies over those two weeks. They are not being spammed ad naseum across the meta like many people think. Perhaps they are overused in your meta, but that doesn't mean its the case everywhere.

Ice_can wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I think we have a handful of reasonable people at risk of talking past eachother here.

Some claims:
I think it's very defensible to claim:
-SM gets played more than CWE
-CWE is "more OP" than SM
-Bobby G's aura is better than a Doom/Guide Farseer before considering points

I think most of us would agree with those 3 points easily. They're each very well grounded.

What we disagree on:
-How OP is DOOM?

Some of us feel it's not as OP as others think for the following reasons:
-It can only impact *one* unit
--This limits it's overall impact
--The game needs more FUs to LoWs and Deathstars, not less
-SM can do something equivelent
--Bobby G does much better
--ChapterMaster/LT does better
--I'd argue that reroll 1s auras for hits/wounds is better than 2 high-WC powers that target 1 unit each - certainly debateable

The big counters to these are
-Deathstars/LoWs are the meta
--Counter-counter: Should they be? Shouldn't we have *more* things that hose them?
-Aeldari are doing really well
--Counter-counter: Aren't IoM Soups doing as well as Aeldari Soups?
-DE/Harlies bring in 1 Farseer and maybe a Troop for DOOM
--IMO, that suggests it's a little overtuned.

I could see a minor uptune of doom (WC9 or +pts to the Farseer), but it's not all that OP as is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On the "CWE units have their points adjusted for Psykic Powers": I'm not sure I buy that.

1. Reapers and Spears aren't overcosted if you suddenly ignore Psykic powers.
2. Storm Guardians and many other things in the book are bad even *with* the powers

Combine that with:
3. Many things in the book (DAs, for example) are fine even without powers

And I think the better take away is that CWE points are all over the place. The problem with that is that CWE have so many so wildly different unit choices, that if there's any variability in their viability, then some are going to naturally be OP compared to others.

I think the CWE book *doesn't* take Psyker powers into account when balancing the non-psykers. I think that they tracked the book fairly closely to balanced sans-powers, but the variance meant some are naturally OP.

Can't say I've see spears or reapers outside of the Free double double Ynnari detachment to know how balanced they actually are when played as pure craftworld units.

I play themw ithout Ynnari when i do play them, they are well balanced and not scary outside of Ynnari.

 mokoshkana wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.

Yvraine's offense is being able to cast "Word of the Phoenix" which is what allows a unit a free soul burst action. That ability is incredibly potent, and should perhaps get pushed up to WC9. As for the Craftworld Psykers, please explain why they are offensive and need a point increase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Spoiler:

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Moko is responding to the claim that not everyone plays Space Marines. His post is about frequency with which an army is played, not with which it places - showing that "Not everyone plays Space Marines" is even less valid than "Not everyone plays CWE".

There's no real argument being made that claims Eldar aren't doing better than Marines.

The argument is how OP DOOM is.

Nah. He was couching how OP Doom is not by using the BobbyG whataboutism to which I replied that BobbyG is pretty rare.

He tried to refute this with bad data showing Eldar being played less when the reality is a bit different.

No, Bharring is correct in my intent, which I noted above. Nice of you to just ignore that and determine my intent for me though. Cheers to that!

So I guess I should just ignore this sentence, because it means absolutely nothing? Cool.

RG allows re-rolls for everyone (UM) on EVERYTHING. Doom works on a SINGLE enemy unit. Guide works on a SINGLE Asuryani unit.

One has to compare like things in order to determine relative power levels. If there isn't a baseline, then how we cannot have a discussion from as there is no common ground. I've said before in this very thread that if I had a chance to adjust doom, it would only give drukhari and harlequin units re-rolls of 1 or I would be fine with it only affecting CWE units.

As for the data, while not complete, it is a potential baseline. Since you claim the reality of how many generals run Aeldari is different than that which is presented on BoLS, then by all means, please provide data to support such a claim.

The problem is that data is just that raw data, its not information as it's not collated or analysed in anyway. Like including events that are basically store level, damn I'm sure GK could win an 8 man event, but that still wouldn't make them any less broken and your not going to storm a 100 person event with them. But they woudl have won a tournament.

There is a reason people look at events of 20 or more people for balance discussions not any old event.

Right, and I never said anything about Eldar's power level in reference to that data. I was showing that the Aeldari faction is not cracking the top 10 most popular armies over those two weeks. They are not being spammed ad naseum across the meta like many people think. Perhaps they are overused in your meta, but that doesn't mean its the case everywhere.

Again if a farseer is correctly prices for their psychic powers why are drukari and Harlequin players bolting them on even as Aux detachments at the cost of CP or taking a supreme comand detachment of jetbike psychers.
It implies that they over perform for their cost.
To be frank bar alitoc - to hit Airwing and rangers most craftworld stuff doing consistently well at tourneys is Ynnari so that really does throw off judging the craftworld stuff as balcanced.

However given farseers do show and the aspect warriors etc don't generally that to me says GW got the point too high on units and low on the casters.

I think auto-including a Farseer skews the list harder towards anti-LOW/anti-deathstar, but is powerful enough to not be a big cost vs other lists.

If the meta weren't so LOW/deathstar heavy, I'd think the Farseer would be an attractive option, but not an autotake.

Call me when I can manifest Doom against chaos or any Imperium army that bothers to leverage a Culexus. Meanwhile Bobby G laughs as everything is doomed.

Let's stop acting like doom is the problem here. The problem are shiny spears, reapers, and Ynnari.

Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Knight players don't get to complain, fething period. They're running absurd overpowered cheese and can freaking deal with there being exactly 1 counter to their ridiculous nonsense.

Your T8, 28W model that has a 3++ invulnerable save should have some weaknesses. Deal with it.

Don't want Haywire to kill your Knights? Admit that dedicated anti-tank should be able to hurt it.

I like how you say knight's players then list off the imperial soup formation of choice. A pure knights list is never running a 3++ dominus class as it's way too many CP from their limited number. Much harder when you dont have guard providing 12 CP and screening. Because the 3++ disappears in CC.

People need to stop talking about "pure" lists like they have innate value, and that they must be protected and respected.

This game isn't about pure lists, and it never has been.

It's not my fault if you can't find the 180 points to get infinite command points for your silly cheeseball army, because literally everyone else can.

And oh, let's all cry and wring our hands for the T8, 28W, relic-stuffed monstrosity that only has a PATHETIC 4++ invulnerable save, and a 6+++, and can stand back up after being killed. Moment of silence, please.

I actually fully agree with you. If GW isn't going to balance soup, which they said they aren't, then there is no way to balance some monster list blending together powerful elements of 3 different dexes, without ONE of those dexes getting nerfed. The game is getting balanced around the way it's played, and that is with zero ally restrictions. It can't not be or else the game gets stupid at highest levels. Its the problem with the ally rules it means that dexes from larger factions have to be weaker solo or overall balance will get crushed and one army will win every event, like we saw with the Caspellham list

 SHUPPET wrote:

Marmatag wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Knight players don't get to complain, fething period. They're running absurd overpowered cheese and can freaking deal with there being exactly 1 counter to their ridiculous nonsense.

Your T8, 28W model that has a 3++ invulnerable save should have some weaknesses. Deal with it.

Don't want Haywire to kill your Knights? Admit that dedicated anti-tank should be able to hurt it.

I like how you say knight's players then list off the imperial soup formation of choice. A pure knights list is never running a 3++ dominus class as it's way too many CP from their limited number. Much harder when you dont have guard providing 12 CP and screening. Because the 3++ disappears in CC.

People need to stop talking about "pure" lists like they have innate value, and that they must be protected and respected.

This game isn't about pure lists, and it never has been.

It's not my fault if you can't find the 180 points to get infinite command points for your silly cheeseball army, because literally everyone else can.

And oh, let's all cry and wring our hands for the T8, 28W, relic-stuffed monstrosity that only has a PATHETIC 4++ invulnerable save, and a 6+++, and can stand back up after being killed. Moment of silence, please.

I actually fully agree with you. If GW isn't going to balance soup, which they said they aren't, then there is no way to balance some monster list blending together powerful elements of 3 different dexes, without ONE of those dexes getting nerfed. The game is getting balanced around the way it's played, and that is with zero ally restrictions. It can't not be or else the game gets stupid at highest levels. Its the problem with the ally rules it means that dexes from larger factions have to be weaker solo or overall balance will get crushed and one army will win every event, like we saw with the Caspellham list

Yeah, it's an unfortunate consequence for those who do not want to use allies.

I still think they should have some restriction on allies. Whether that be a points limit, or a specific allied detachment, or something, i'm fine with that. Of course I also think FW should be banned from competitive play, too, so i'm obviously taking crazy pills. In b4 "BuT My DeAtH KorPs oF KRIeG"

Ynnari isn't even that scary anymore with the Word of Power nerfs. Reapers will only ever double shoot ~40% of the time with the cast failing outright 60% of the time, wasting a cast on an expensive backfield psyker warlord/warlord trait that pretty much has zero additional function in the list. On top of that only one unit gets to soulburst each turn, so it's not that different from any of the myriad double action abilities that other factions have. Yes, Eldar are competitive, but in terms of mashing an auto-win button they still don't come close to the simplicity of plopping a Castellan + some guardsman on a the board.

The Wraithknight buff is welcome but in competitive terms it still sucks.

You can't have Knights without allowing Forgeworld. That's why FW is allowed nowadays.

I agree on restriction to allies. It's such a mindnumbingly stupid system currently that seems designed to sell models more than improve gameplay.

Ice_can wrote:

Spoiler:

 mokoshkana wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.

Yvraine's offense is being able to cast "Word of the Phoenix" which is what allows a unit a free soul burst action. That ability is incredibly potent, and should perhaps get pushed up to WC9. As for the Craftworld Psykers, please explain why they are offensive and need a point increase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:
[spoiler]

Bharring wrote:
Can't say I've seen Ultramarines in a tournament outside Bobby G's command.

I still think Reapers are fine and Spears need to go up just a few PPM to be balanced sans-Ynnari.

That said, I find it particularly bad form to argue that Space Marines should be balanced sans-Bobby G, but CWE should be balanced assuming Ynnari. I actually think Bobby G and Cat Lady are best viewed in the same light.

I Actually expected them to be rather meh to overcosted frankly.
I'm not arguing against A number of eldar units getting cheaper while the offending Charictors like Catlady and Psychers go up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 mokoshkana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Moko is responding to the claim that not everyone plays Space Marines. His post is about frequency with which an army is played, not with which it places - showing that "Not everyone plays Space Marines" is even less valid than "Not everyone plays CWE".

There's no real argument being made that claims Eldar aren't doing better than Marines.

The argument is how OP DOOM is.

Nah. He was couching how OP Doom is not by using the BobbyG whataboutism to which I replied that BobbyG is pretty rare.

He tried to refute this with bad data showing Eldar being played less when the reality is a bit different.

No, Bharring is correct in my intent, which I noted above. Nice of you to just ignore that and determine my intent for me though. Cheers to that!

So I guess I should just ignore this sentence, because it means absolutely nothing? Cool.

RG allows re-rolls for everyone (UM) on EVERYTHING. Doom works on a SINGLE enemy unit. Guide works on a SINGLE Asuryani unit.

One has to compare like things in order to determine relative power levels. If there isn't a baseline, then how we cannot have a discussion from as there is no common ground. I've said before in this very thread that if I had a chance to adjust doom, it would only give drukhari and harlequin units re-rolls of 1 or I would be fine with it only affecting CWE units.

As for the data, while not complete, it is a potential baseline. Since you claim the reality of how many generals run Aeldari is different than that which is presented on BoLS, then by all means, please provide data to support such a claim.

The problem is that data is just that raw data, its not information as it's not collated or analysed in anyway. Like including events that are basically store level, damn I'm sure GK could win an 8 man event, but that still wouldn't make them any less broken and your not going to storm a 100 person event with them. But they woudl have won a tournament.

There is a reason people look at events of 20 or more people for balance discussions not any old event.

Right, and I never said anything about Eldar's power level in reference to that data. I was showing that the Aeldari faction is not cracking the top 10 most popular armies over those two weeks. They are not being spammed ad naseum across the meta like many people think. Perhaps they are overused in your meta, but that doesn't mean its the case everywhere.

From a collected sample size of the largest tournaments dating back to BAO this year (almost 4,500 different lists), Aeldari has consisted of 20% of the meta. 1 in 5 lists have been Aeldari.

 SHUPPET wrote:
From a collected sample size of the largest tournaments dating back to BAO this year (almost 4,500 different lists), Aeldari has consisted of 20% of the meta. 1 in 5 lists have been Aeldari.

Is that a bad thing tho? They are one of the first in 40k in general, with 30 yrs, being good army for tournaments (even if Orks are top tier many wont play them and we all know it and know why), so why is it surprising they are 1/5 of all players in tournaments? I bet SM's make it into a 1/5 as well in some way or another.

 SHUPPET wrote:
From a collected sample size of the largest tournaments dating back to BAO this year (almost 4,500 different lists), Aeldari has consisted of 20% of the meta. 1 in 5 lists have been Aeldari.

Is that a lot?
There are roughy 24 different major factions, assuming you count all the various different colored Marines as different factions (and exclude the ones that can't even field a full army). 3 of those are Aeldari (not including Ynarri), which means they are 12.5% of available factions.

It's hard to get upset that 12.5% of available armies are accounting for a total of 20% of tournament attendees. It's not overwhelmingly disproportionate, it's barely noticable.

I myself do not like soup...but an occasional ally is very fluffy.

So perhaps they make an Allied Detatchment....something completely new....with like only 1 elite, 1 FA, 3 troop, 1 HQ, 1 HS and/or 1 flyer/LoW. This would limit some of the abuse.

If Marines or guard cannot take each other or imperial agents, etc that would be a huge loss for the flavor of the game.
If Craftworld could not take Harlequins....ditto
IF GSC could not take Guard or Nis.....ditto
If Chaos could not take Chaos Marines, vice versa, or Renegades....ditto.

There is a place for soup....just limit it via CPs or an Allied Detachment or something.

THE MAIN REASON I THINK SOUP IS DESIRED BY THE GAME DESIGNERS....

It is a gateway mechanism to get players to start a fledgling new faction and eventually goad them into buying yet another army and books and etc.

 Creeping Dementia wrote:


It's hard to get upset that 12.5% of available armies are accounting for a total of 20% of tournament attendees. It's not overwhelmingly disproportionate, it's barely noticable.

I wouldn't call 60% barely noticeable. Now, with tournaments people are selecting less for style and more for performance so that makes it more prominent.

If you do it by faction then Aeldari average 6.7%. All other armies average 3.8%, which makes them close to double.

Obviously the real numbers aren't exactly like that. I'll wager IK/IG takes up a huge chunk right now, too.

 mokoshkana wrote:
Aeldari are all intertwined in a fashion. If I could adjust doom, I would have it so that Drukhari and Harlequin units only rerolled rolls of 1. This is a good representation of different Aeldari units working together, but not benefiting from maximum synergy as they are not the same faction. However I would also be just as fine with it being limited to units from the CWE codex.

This is probably the best answer I've seen. People so easily forget that Aeldari don't have natural reroll to wound auras like other races. It relies on psychic powers to generate these auras and can only be applied to one unit per turn, period. It also requires a 7 to cast and is not automatic (can be denied), yet apparently Farseers are too powerful and need to be nerfed, lol. Their main job is psychics, that's it, so they'd better be good at it. They suck in combat and are not resilient, and do not offer any surrounding buffs. Please be realistic and keep the Eldar-hate in check. Pretty sure marine players (that includes me) would not like it if their reroll auras were limited to one unit only.

I do like the above suggestion, reroll all failed wounds for Craftworld, Reroll ones for other Aeldari. I could live with that.

 Marmatag wrote:
Call me when I can manifest Doom against chaos or any Imperium army that bothers to leverage a Culexus. Meanwhile Bobby G laughs as everything is doomed.

Let's stop acting like doom is the problem here. The problem are shiny spears, reapers, and Ynnari.

Quinn bikers - also a problem.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Call me when I can manifest Doom against chaos or any Imperium army that bothers to leverage a Culexus. Meanwhile Bobby G laughs as everything is doomed.

Let's stop acting like doom is the problem here. The problem are shiny spears, reapers, and Ynnari.

Quinn bikers - also a problem.

No, they are not. They are basically the only real answer harlies have against vehicle heavy lists. Sure, fusion works....if the unit isn't screened of course, but Harlies are massive glass cannons, they need Haywire to be effective. Nerf harlie bikes (because of soup) and you completely nerf the harlequin army. This cannot happen. Soup needs to be addressed, not harlie bikes.

As long as knights exist, haywire needs to exist.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Call me when I can manifest Doom against chaos or any Imperium army that bothers to leverage a Culexus. Meanwhile Bobby G laughs as everything is doomed.

Let's stop acting like doom is the problem here. The problem are shiny spears, reapers, and Ynnari.

Quinn bikers - also a problem.

Nerf harlie bikes (because of soup) and you completely nerf the harlequin army. This cannot happen. Soup needs to be addressed, not harlie bikes.

Same can be said for a lot of other factions. They should be nerfing soup itself.

Creeping Dementia wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
From a collected sample size of the largest tournaments dating back to BAO this year (almost 4,500 different lists), Aeldari has consisted of 20% of the meta. 1 in 5 lists have been Aeldari.

Is that a lot?
There are roughy 24 different major factions, assuming you count all the various different colored Marines as different factions (and exclude the ones that can't even field a full army). 3 of those are Aeldari (not including Ynarri), which means they are 12.5% of available factions.

I wasn't making a statement on the stats. Accurate stats were asked for concerning the amount of Aeldari players. I wasn't even following the argument to understand what measure or debate was being had about their usage, I just decided to contribute some facts. How you choose to interpret the stats is on you. It definitely suggests Aeldari are one of the more popular armies, whether the reasoning for that is balance or other reasons is up to personal interpretation I guess.

However it is also worth pointing out that after IG and Knights, Drukhari and CWE are the 3rd and 4th most popular armies in the competitive scene, shortly followed by T'au at #5, and then barely a single army even having more than around HALF as much players as EITHER craftworlds or Drukhari. And that's not even including Ynnari (or Harlies but tbh they aren't very popular).

So if I was going to weigh in my opinion,it's probably safe to say that yes, Aeldari are extremely popular, and being that the majority of those IG detachments are just imperium guard batteries and not real detachments, it would actually put them well below T'au if you factored that into consideration, only really being beaten by the super popular Knights. I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised by that though, Eldar are one of the oldest factions in the game, have always been extremely cool aesthetically and a lot of fun to play, but more importantly have been the most consistently powerful army in the game for an extremely long time (being somewhere between high tier and best army in the game for every edition within entirety of 2 decades that I have played for, and are still now currently potentially the strongest army in the game, with Ynnari having the highest win rate in the competitive scene), so it makes sense that they have so many players. Are people arguing that they don't? That would seem like an odd argument to make.

Creeping Dementia wrote:It's hard to get upset that 12.5% of available armies are accounting for a total of 20% of tournament attendees. It's not overwhelmingly disproportionate, it's barely noticable.

Is anyone upset? I've chimed in late to this conversation, so feel free to point me to who you are referring. If it's directed towards me, I'll ask you to stop the gaslighting right where it starts, as I had literally only posted factual statistics without comment attached, thanks. You using emotional language like that in response to hard facts would suggest that the only personal to be upset by anything would be yourself.

There was 31 different factions recorded. 3 armies is actually 9.5% of the sample. However, I'm not sure why we wouldn't include Ynnari, that seems a weird decision as they are almost definitely the strongest faction in the keyword, so the stats is more like 13%, contributing 20% of the meta.

Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

 Elbows wrote:
Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

That's fine, wounds vehicles on 2+ with -4 save instead then.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

That's fine, wounds vehicles on 2+ with -4 save instead then.

so like... rapid fire Lascannons? Except with S16? and assault?

...and a better AP...

 SHUPPET wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

That's fine, wounds vehicles on 2+ with -4 save instead then.

so like... rapid fire Lascannons? Except with S16? and assault?

No.. it wounds "vehicles on 2+ and has -4ap" otherwise its S4 -1ap duh...

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

That's fine, wounds vehicles on 2+ with -4 save instead then.

so like... rapid fire Lascannons? Except with S16? and assault?

No.. it wounds "vehicles on 2+ and has -4ap" otherwise its S4 -1ap duh...

are you ever anything less than totally obnoxious? Please stop quoting me with this air of superiority, thanks.

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Gonna have to disagree with the harlequin bikes being "needed". Simply put, no basic weapon in the game needs to be doing mortal wounds on 4+s, etc. That's obnoxious.

That's fine, wounds vehicles on 2+ with -4 save instead then.

so like... rapid fire Lascannons? Except with S16? and assault?

No.. it wounds "vehicles on 2+ and has -4ap" otherwise its S4 -1ap duh...

are you ever anything less than totally obnoxious? Please stop quoting me with this air of superiority, thanks.

lol so mad over something you fail to see? calm down, we all know you like to start fights.

"what like S16" So thats not a troll answer? grow up.