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.

Well, I'm looking for some ideas about a competitive Eldar list.
The army should have a strong fire base, say consisting of support batteries, Reapers and whatnot.
Screening is key here say by using Rangers.
The army also needs some units able to advance, to occupy mission objectives and eventually hold the center or other spots on the battle field.

An implementation of this concept can be seen by the army of Peteralmo: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/785827.page
He uses tough units such as Wraithlords, Night Spinners, and Serpents to implement this idea.
Any further thoughts here?

If you're looking to cheese expert crafters, a bunch of vibro cannon platforms is hard to beat. The benefit they get out of the trait is just unreal. Though they do give up "kill more" very easily in ITC, and it's a very tedious way to play.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I'm looking for some ideas about a competitive Eldar list.
The army should have a strong fire base, say consisting of support batteries, Reapers and whatnot.
Screening is key here say by using Rangers.
The army also needs some units able to advance, to occupy mission objectives and eventually hold the center or other spots on the battle field.

An implementation of this concept can be seen by the army of Peteralmo: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/785827.page
He uses tough units such as Wraithlords, Night Spinners, and Serpents to implement this idea.
Any further thoughts here?

Im looking to run a variation of this at our next tourney:

yukishiro1 wrote:
That's all true. But it's what I don't like about it. I would have really preferred if PA gave us more ways to play the existing options we already had rather than just throwing up its hands and giving us something that makes obsolete the whole identity of the race. It feels like lazy design to me, especially in the way that instead of improving the traditional craftworlds it just threw in the towel on the lore having any relationship to the game.

I mean like if they really were committed to the "you get a reroll! you get a reroll! everybody gets a reroll!" thing, they could have at least allowed it to be accessed within the normal Eldar play options - say, by letting you swap out traditional guide and doom for more diffuse versions that each go on three different units instead, but with a more limited bonus, or something like that.

I totally understand that lots of people have different feelings on this than I do. But I can't help feeling like it's a big shame and a huge failure of imagination.

I think the power of Expert Crafters is getting a little over exaggerated, it has not made MSU the only option, or even the best. Lists that use one or two large units to receive buffs, backed up by MSU Crafters is the best option. PA1 has made more units viable without invalidating our previously strong choices. Big units of Dark Reapers and Shining Spears are still strong, so are the flyers, but now things like Wraithlords, War Walkers, Vibro-cannons and Falcons are good too.

Big units that require psychic buffs also got helped by PA too. Focus Will and Children of Prophecy have made it much safer to rely on these strategies, and Ghostwalk has made deepstriking Spears, Conclaves, and Wraithblades more viable.


Dark Reapers are a good example of how the old strategies still compete with EC. 3x3 Reapers with EC (as in the list above) are very nice, and don't need much support. They are not necessarily better than a blob of 10 with Guide and Doom though. After running the former for a while I've now gone back to the latter. A Farseer can easily get +3 to cast (Seer Council + Focus Will) to match the EC rerolls, but you also get Fire and Fade, LFR, Protect, and Forewarned as options.

Well, the thing with EC is how hugely and unevenly it buffs certain units. I mean sure, there are certain units that can work both ways - dark reapers being the primary example, maybe shining spears too. But then there are all these other units you basically have to take as EC if you want to be remotely competitive with them. Support platforms are the most obvious example, going from deeply marginal without EC to arguably broken with it, but they're hardly the only ones. One trait choice shouldn't improve a unit's performance by 50% or more over any other trait choice, that's really not very thoughtful game design. The fact that many of the units that benefit from EC were not very good before EC was a reason to buff those units directly, not a reason to keep them lame with every other craftworld but borderline overpowered with EC.

I generally dislike "this unit only works with this sub-faction" balance, especially when it's not even one of the lore sub-factions. It makes the old pressure to take alaitoc for certain units look negligible in comparison, and that's not a great direction to be taking the faction in my opinion.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Well, the thing with EC is how hugely and unevenly it buffs certain units. I mean sure, there are certain units that can work both ways - dark reapers being the primary example, maybe shining spears too. But then there are all these other units you basically have to take as EC if you want to be remotely competitive with them. Support platforms are the most obvious example, going from deeply marginal without EC to arguably broken with it, but they're hardly the only ones. One trait choice shouldn't improve a unit's performance by 50% or more over any other trait choice, that's really not very thoughtful game design. The fact that many of the units that benefit from EC were not very good before EC was a reason to buff those units directly, not a reason to keep them lame with every other craftworld but borderline overpowered with EC.

I generally dislike "this unit only works with this sub-faction" balance, especially when it's not even one of the lore sub-factions. It makes the old pressure to take alaitoc for certain units look negligible in comparison, and that's not a great direction to be taking the faction in my opinion.

I was playing support platforms before EC and they were decent enough. Certainly not as good but good enough.

I'm sure EC will get FAQ'd to being the only trait you can take. It is just that good especially when combined with ignore cover to take it to 11 in choice of traits.

It has undoubtedly changed the utility of more units than any single rule we've had before IMHO. For example my BL vyper hasnt left my army since I started using it. Where as before it would rarely have been considered.

I'm of the mind that it's too good and won't last in it's current form.

I'm not convinced it's so overpowered it'll be nerfed (I mean, it's not like the game is very balanced right now in the first place, or that EC is the big thing everyone is angry about)...but I am afraid it'll stop us getting any other more creative and more needed attention, because EC alone is so powerful it'll keep Craftworld lists competitive, so GW won't see the need to do anything else.

Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively. Id certainly prefer a chaptermaster aura lol...

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

I can see it helping MSU more but when combined with an autarch it's nearly as good as a chapter master. I had 3 squads of 7/8 DA's and that combined with bladestorm it became really nasty.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

Things like achieving overhelming firepower type objectives. Its dead easy if you just need to kill 2 storm guardian squads and a unit of DA

 Karhedron wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

Does it really matter? This is a tactics thread where the main focus is going to be tournament and other competitive play which ITC will be the dominant missions used.

You can still use expert crafters on big units if you want and don't have to be MSU

 Korlandril wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

Does it really matter? This is a tactics thread where the main focus is going to be tournament and other competitive play which ITC will be the dominant missions used.

You can still use expert crafters on big units if you want and don't have to be MSU

Believe it or not, plenty of people on these forums don't play in tournaments at all, and yes there is tactics involved in a game with a friend using rulebook missions. 'Competitive' isn't the same as 'tournaments'. Nor are the two terms always hand-in-hand.

Anyone played brigade recently ?

 Korlandril wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

Does it really matter? This is a tactics thread where the main focus is going to be tournament and other competitive play which ITC will be the dominant missions used.

You can still use expert crafters on big units if you want and don't have to be MSU

In america. Last time I checked america isn't only country in the world.

GW doesn't balance things around ITC so if it's too good in non-ITC then ITC having kill point bleeding is and SHOULD be irrelevant for balancing game.

tneva82 wrote:

 Korlandril wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Yeah as mentioned it does have its downsides. MSU style of play tends to give up kill pts easier and you cant really buff things effectively.

But how many GW missions use kill points? I don't know about ITC but if they are more common here, I can't see GW weighing that into the balance as ITC is basically a set of house rules (albeit a weidely used one).

Does it really matter? This is a tactics thread where the main focus is going to be tournament and other competitive play which ITC will be the dominant missions used.

You can still use expert crafters on big units if you want and don't have to be MSU

In america. Last time I checked america isn't only country in the world.

GW doesn't balance things around ITC so if it's too good in non-ITC then ITC having kill point bleeding is and SHOULD be irrelevant for balancing game.

Its still relevant if you plays ca 2019 missions with tac objectives
I.e overwhelming firepower etc.

 Argive wrote:
Anyone played brigade recently ?

Yes!

https://clawhammer2020.wixsite.com/website/post/january-game-3-shane-vs-neil

Brigade is really hard to make work for anything competitive. The sacrifices you have to make for that extra 2CP vs just taking two battalions (because let's face it, you're going to want at least 4 HQs anyway in an eldar army, so it's not like that's an issue) are generally not worth it. And two battalions lets you maximize craftworld bonuses too, whereas with a brigade you have to commit to one.

Even putting aside the issue of having to choose a single craftworld for all of them, it's hard to see any competitive list where you'd want 6 troops choices *and* 3 elites, honestly. Wraith lists (I'm not sure you can call them competitive anyway, but for the sake of argument) aren't going to typically want to go that heavy into troops, nor are they typically going to want to split their wraiths into three squads. Maybe an asurmen bubble that also takes an avatar and banshees...but even then, three squads of them? And in that list you're not going to have room for the 3 fast attack/heavy support even though there are plenty of good options in those slots.

Yeah I hear your points. I have come up with some ideas. However the elite choice really throws a spanned in the works. Not sure I agree about wanting 4 HQ techincaly.

Currently all of my lists have a core ynnari wraithseer element so I suppose that's not strictly true.. But pure CWE characters don't really do enough outside of Farseer/warlock combo. PLs are sadly too expensive. Had a bit of fun with maugan ra recently and got an idea for a brigade with Asurmen.

Expert crafter brigade + x brigade seem like a fun idea. Ive been slotting in Minimal spectre units with prisms blasters and abonesinger or minimalist scorpions squads. But essentially the elites slots are bit of a pts waste.

I got a brigade list at 1850 pts I might run at our next tourney lol.
Was wondering if anyone has had some success.

I have this mad idea to build around EC + Students of vaul..

3 bonesingers as elites, Fusion storm guardians and shredding fire DAs as troops. Vypers, platforms and war walkers for the fast and heavy slots. with the Ynnari wraithseers running point. plus a wave serpent or two if pts allow.

The idea is to move the wraithseers and stormies up the board with the psychic core for MW and taking the middle of the board wave 1.
Hopefully this will absorb all of the fire power and inreturn can take the heavy guns out wth dakka or charge whatever is in range.

The wave two is to move the DAs and the rets of the stormies to slow down anything coming in all the while blasting from the backline platforms, walkers, vypers and serpents.
Hopefuly by later turns there just wont be enough damage to chew through the wounds on various things due to target saturations, fire lanes and the healing.

Obviously this is subject to Legends.

I have always considered legends and competitive play mutually exclusive.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I have always considered legends and competitive play mutually exclusive.

Depends on TO's. My local allows them.
However in the example above ID probably run triple/double min squads of shadow specters instead(if double go for bare bones scorpions). EC prism blaster is a nice little bit of dakka.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I have always considered legends and competitive play mutually exclusive.

Why would you.
I have an Autarch on jetbike with a reaper launcher.
I've mounted her on a vyper and used the missile launcher as the reaper launcher.
GW has led me play that model in a GT. It's legendary.

I've got a new list I want to try but I'm having a really hard time deciding what Craftworld to use for it:



I want the same Craftworld for everything and there are quite a few that fit well:

Masters of Concealment: Tanks love having a 2+ Sv and it ups the durability of the Avengers a bit more. I have the command points for Concealed positions turn one though, and if the Avengers have a 4++ then cover only helps against AP-1.

Masterful Shots: With a lot of high volume of fire, low AP shots this seems essential for everything except the Prisms.

Master Crafters: Usually the best trait, but with lots of high volume of fire units and linking Prisms I'm not sure it's as well suited to this list.

Hail of Doom/Superior Shurikens: There are a lot of Shurikens in this list so either of these seem good, I'm leaning towards the extra range rather than AP.

Ulthwe!: Am I mad?! I feel like this could actually be a good choice. Effectively 20% more wounds per tank is very good, and the Avengers would enjoy a 4++ followed by a 6+++.

Well, if you equipped all Serpents with shuricannons, then I would suggest Biel Tan.
Rerolling 1's is too good to pass.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, if you equipped all Serpents with shuricannons, then I would suggest Biel Tan.
Rerolling 1's is too good to pass.

I did think of that too, and I would be changing to Shuricannons on the serpents if I go with anything that buffs them. The warlord trait and relic are also very appealing, but I feel like Master Crafters + Ignore cover would probably give a bigger damage increase than reroll ones:

-With Biel Tan 12 shots from Avengers get to reroll 2 ones on average, so 2 extra shots.

-EC gets one reroll to hit, but also a reroll on the wound, which is worth 1.5 hits, so works out at 2.5 extra shots. Then you get to ignore cover on top of that.

Id try mixing and matching. You can always take 3x 10 dire avengers in one battalion and take the second with a bunch of storm guardians/rangers for CP and make that EC for heavy weapons etc..

Trying to fit everything under one craftworld just isn't optimal IMO.

I'm not normally fussy about everything being from the same craftworld, but because this list has 6 Avenger squads sharing 3 Wave Serpents I don't have much choice; one Wave Serpent has to carry two units from different detachments.

I could make this a battalion + spearhead without changing any units. That way the Prisms could get EC and MoC, while everything else gets ignore cover + superior shurikens. I'd be losing 4 CP though.

You guys are giving me more choices, not whittling them down! Thanks though.

I don't think superior shurikens is worth it with DAs, especially not if they're in transports - they have so much threat range anyway. The trait seems built for guardian bombs - being able to DS from 16 inches instead of 12 is game-changing, and it also allows you to usually shoot them T1 even if you so first, if you choose to put them on the table. Masterful shots is an auto-take in nearly any list IMO, it's deceptively powerful and makes clearing anything that double its cover save hugely easier.

I think if I was building a DA centric force(like 40+ DA) for Asurmen Id have to go with ether alitoic or ulthwe max squads with the power that improves hitting and wounding as you loose troops. Then you also need autarch so thats 213pts for 2 characters to make something like 400+ pts of 1W T3 STr4 weapon wielding infantry efective.

I just can't sell it to myself and justify doing this. Do need to test it out but not sure If getting more DA just to run this gimmick is worth it. I can do 5x5 man squads with dual cats currently so might run it in a brigade once I paint some Vypers.