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 can't recall them ever providing any data on how many aspect warriors there are per capita. Have they?

yukishiro1 wrote:
I can't recall them ever providing any data on how many aspect warriors there are per capita. Have they?

Probably changes heavily from Craftworld to Craftworld. I suspect Biel-Tan is (was?) a higher proportion.

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar have never seemed like a dying race. Just sayin.

Maybe it's the way they use their civilians as cannon-fodder?

Which didn't really happen in 2nd ed.

Guardians had better armour than guardsmen (5+ flat rather 6+ and 5+ against blast). They were either using lasguns or catapults, both 24" range.

You could equip them with melee weapons instead, but you could quite comfortably build your squads as support units sitting in cover or as far back as possible.

The less squishy aspects would then take up medium and Close range positions.

In terms of army function guardians have only been chaff since 3rd almost entirely because of the requirement they carry 12" ranged weapons.


Going back to 24" and allowing 1 heavy weapon platform per 5 would be a better way to reflect their position. And not being able to ake them in squads of 20....

Yeah that doesnt help.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hellebore wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Eldar have never seemed like a dying race. Just sayin.

Maybe it's the way they use their civilians as cannon-fodder?

Which didn't really happen in 2nd ed.

Guardians had better armour than guardsmen (5+ flat rather 6+ and 5+ against blast). They were either using lasguns or catapults, both 24" range.

You could equip them with melee weapons instead, but you could quite comfortably build your squads as support units sitting in cover or as far back as possible.

The less squishy aspects would then take up medium and Close range positions.

In terms of army function guardians have only been chaff since 3rd almost entirely because of the requirement they carry 12" ranged weapons.


Going back to 24" and allowing 1 heavy weapon platform per 5 would be a better way to reflect their position. And not being able to ake them in squads of 20....

They were still cannon fodder

The Shuriken Catapults were pretty awesome though.

They really should be 24" range again.

A 2nd edition Eldar army could pump out a terrifying amount of 24” shuriken fire. They actually outshone Dire Avengers due to sheer volume of fire. They actually contributed as opposed to being meat shields in 3rd edition. They could shred a Tyranid hormagaunt horde. Even if admittedly the 2nd edition catapult was overpowered, a tweaked version but with still 24” range would still be better than the 12” useless 3rd edition version.

I remember even outfitting a squad of Guardians with power swords and power fists as a bodyguard unit for a Farseer, not because it was good or efficient but thematically to show more widespread dissemination of power weapons as compared to the Imperial Guard. Guardians from their beginning were basically Guardsman+1, much like how WHFB high elf infantry were human infantry+1. Part of the problem has been the shift of the comparison point from baseline normal human to MEQ.

To reflect how they are described I think you'd have to design the list to force players to take guardians rather than maker them an army.

As they are used to shore up the military because they don't have enough professional soldiers, they should only be taken as supporting elements to aspects (unless black guardians).

Ie you can take supporting guradians when you take dire avengers, but you can't have more of one than the other (for each avenger squad you'd have to have a guardian squad and vice versa).


Avengers can't deploy with the numbers so they are supported by militia. Same with the other aspects.



The Eldar army is the aspect host. Guardians shouldn't be considered their main fighting force and imo shouldn't really be available to do that excepting ulthwe.

Yeah, it's aspect warriors that should be troops choices and guardians that should be elites in the force organization chart, the same way that servitors are for space marines. But at the same time, aspect warriors should be buffed to be more primaris equivalent than minimarine equivalent.

I would hesitate to put restrictions on the army in that way. I think there's a place for armies to represent a less-than-ideal outing by a faction. Since a game of 40k is often just representing a tiny part in a larger conflict, it might be the case where the majority of the Aspect Warriors are off doing something else, and all of a sudden the Eldar are forced into a situation where they have to send in more Guardians because of some immediate need.

 Insectum7 wrote:
I would hesitate to put restrictions on the army in that way. I think there's a place for armies to represent a less-than-ideal outing by a faction. Since a game of 40k is often just representing a tiny part in a larger conflict, it might be the case where the majority of the Aspect Warriors are off doing something else, and all of a sudden the Eldar are forced into a situation where they have to send in more Guardians because of some immediate need.

Yeah I don't expect it to happen.

But I'd like them to rebuild the army from the perspective of aspects and make them function as the army, inserting the wraith and guardian units as clearly support units after the fact.

The cynic in me feels like because aspects are like marines in eliteness, GW deliberately leaves them crappy so they don't compete for customer dollars with their favourites... Because a full expanded aspect warhost army list (and plastic miniatures) would be amazing and give marines a run for their money in the coolness factor.

For the OP.

GW has expanded the Eldar. There are now realized codecies for both Drukhari and Harlequins, in which they can be played alongside Craftworlds. GW introduced the Ynarri, another Eldar (Aeldari) faction.

The Aspect Warriors are in a weird spot right now. I am not sure what direction GW wants to take with them. With the Howling Banshee and Jain War release, I feel it was just a marketing tactic to help clear out older models as well as gauge consumer interest in buying new Aspect Warriors. I suspect based upon sales figures, GW would then determine the most profitable time for them to release more. I think the next codex with new models release will be dictated on their anticipated sales. Great sales could prompt more risk in producing and releasing more Aspect Warriors. Poor sales could detract from releasing more.

I think lots of folks want new Aspect Warriors; I'm hopeful they met GW sales target. Howling Banshees sales will likely be a key factor on when we see more releases.

Rules wise, I'm not too fussed. I'd love for every unit to have equal utility. But, that does not occur in any of the 20+ armies out there. Luckily, Craftworlds has such a wide array of units, it has ben able to be very playable in every edition.

But rules are what sells models, on the whole - this has been demonstrated again and again, most notably with thunderfire cannons. I would be very surprised if the new banshees sold even vaguely decently, given that the rules remained as underwhelming as before.

 Sarigar wrote:
For the OP.

GW has expanded the Eldar. There are now realized codecies for both Drukhari and Harlequins, in which they can be played alongside Craftworlds. GW introduced the Ynarri, another Eldar (Aeldari) faction.

The Aspect Warriors are in a weird spot right now. I am not sure what direction GW wants to take with them. With the Howling Banshee and Jain War release, I feel it was just a marketing tactic to help clear out older models as well as gauge consumer interest in buying new Aspect Warriors. I suspect based upon sales figures, GW would then determine the most profitable time for them to release more. I think the next codex with new models release will be dictated on their anticipated sales. Great sales could prompt more risk in producing and releasing more Aspect Warriors. Poor sales could detract from releasing more.

I think lots of folks want new Aspect Warriors; I'm hopeful they met GW sales target. Howling Banshees sales will likely be a key factor on when we see more releases.

Rules wise, I'm not too fussed. I'd love for every unit to have equal utility. But, that does not occur in any of the 20+ armies out there. Luckily, Craftworlds has such a wide array of units, it has ben able to be very playable in every edition.

Id love me some plastic swooping hawks and new scorpions(not warp spiders coz I have a lot of them in metal and they have a sick carapace pattern). Like Id spend a lot of money on those lol. Hawks are the only ones I don't want to get coz metal and wings just doesn't Mesh and scorpions are hard to find in metal for cheap

 Arschbombe wrote:

Wyldhunt wrote:

* Banshees: I've fielded a lot this edition (I play Iybraesil).

Consider that image stolen.

 Argive wrote:

 Sarigar wrote:
For the OP.

GW has expanded the Eldar. There are now realized codecies for both Drukhari and Harlequins, in which they can be played alongside Craftworlds. GW introduced the Ynarri, another Eldar (Aeldari) faction.

The Aspect Warriors are in a weird spot right now. I am not sure what direction GW wants to take with them. With the Howling Banshee and Jain War release, I feel it was just a marketing tactic to help clear out older models as well as gauge consumer interest in buying new Aspect Warriors. I suspect based upon sales figures, GW would then determine the most profitable time for them to release more. I think the next codex with new models release will be dictated on their anticipated sales. Great sales could prompt more risk in producing and releasing more Aspect Warriors. Poor sales could detract from releasing more.

I think lots of folks want new Aspect Warriors; I'm hopeful they met GW sales target. Howling Banshees sales will likely be a key factor on when we see more releases.

Rules wise, I'm not too fussed. I'd love for every unit to have equal utility. But, that does not occur in any of the 20+ armies out there. Luckily, Craftworlds has such a wide array of units, it has ben able to be very playable in every edition.

Id love me some plastic swooping hawks and new scorpions(not warp spiders coz I have a lot of them in metal and they have a sick carapace pattern). Like Id spend a lot of money on those lol. Hawks are the only ones I don't want to get coz metal and wings just doesn't Mesh and scorpions are hard to find in metal for cheap

Me as well. Swooping Hawks are my favorite Aspect Warrior aesthetic. I bought two boxes of Banshees when released separate of the larger box set. I hope sales are/were a strong enough indicator. I'll gladly replace my old metal versions for new plastics.

I would really love to see some options for the aspects exploring their fighting philosophy.

Dark reapers aren't the aspect of missile launchers, they're the aspect of khaine the destroyer. Missile launchers are just one physical representation of that philosophy. Maugan Ra uses a shuriken cannon, so obviously if the founder of the aspect considers it representative of khaine the destroyer, then it's totally in keeping for reapers to use them.

Swooping hawks could have access to a range of grenade options (which they did in 2nd ed). They represent khaine the retributive, as demonstrated by taking the image of the hawk (which is an Eldar sign of retribution). They could carry different types of laser weapons that bring retribution from near or far. They could wear weaponised wing packs that create vibro blasts as they swoop in for the kill. They could all be armed with power swords as their lord is.


GW manages to invent new marine unit types and weapon types, slicing them ever finer between units.

And the Eldar who are supposed to be overly complicated in everything they so, with layers of meaning in the simplest of gestures and philosophies so esoteric humans struggle to under stand them, are relegated to sword guys or missile guys.

No exploration of their shrines, how they fight, how they organise, how exarchs train, why exarchs carry different weapons, the special skills manifested by these devotees of khaine.

Just 'these gun guys and their squad leader are your troops choice, these sword girls are your elites'.

It's not just space marine players that want to learn the minutiae of their armies structure, the different ranks and levels etc.

I refuse to believe that a striking scorpion aspect warrior squad is the sum total representation of the striking scorpion aspect shrine. The Eldar are far too complicated for that to be true.

You're way overselling marine variety.

Striking Scorpions have to spend decades unlearning everything they learned to be the gimps they are in 8th edition, it's hard work.

 Galas wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galas wrote:

Bolter marines have always been ablative wounds for the special/heavy weapons guys. Heck in devastators even the sargeant is the first to go. Theres nothing wrong with that. Someone has to die first.

Disagree. The members of Aspect squads should be pretty competent themselves, esp. as this was their original design and legacy.

Also, the basic Bolter guy is pretty solid these days. With the ability so split fire and use of Doctrines, they're doing great. They sure seem to fare better than the Aspect Warriors that they used to be in the same league as.

Banshees should be worth more, and cost more, than Scouts.

Why? Theres many more banshee on the universe than scouts.

You keep making this assertion - what's your source?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
You're way overselling marine variety.

I totally agree that marines aren't that varied - but GW has spent a tone of time and money creating variation out of them anyway. I'm simply pointing out what GW has written and what they've models of. The sheer number of marine units, and variations within units.

I totally agree that intercessors and their 3 different bolters are not as varied as the philosophical training ideology behind a Scorpions claw vs a biting blade.

But it's the bolters that got miniatures and rules, not Scorpions.

 Sarigar wrote:
For the OP.

GW has expanded the Eldar. There are now realized codecies for both Drukhari and Harlequins, in which they can be played alongside Craftworlds. GW introduced the Ynarri, another Eldar (Aeldari) faction. .

GW has expanded the Imperium. There are now codexes for both Sisters of Battle and Admech, in which they can be played alongside Space Marines. GW introduced Custodes, another Imperium faction.

Whilst I'm not so sure about the masses of varying armaments (they are RITUAL weapons after all), I am intrigued by having the relationship between exarch and warriors feel more like Teacher and Pupils. So if you picked skill X for your exarch, it has a lesser effect on the squad. Or - or perhaps as well as - if that Scorpion exarch has the Fist, it means this shrine follows the Way of The Single Strike - fewer attacks than normal, but more powerful. The biting blade - large sweeping weapon, so this shrine has more attacks; or give them a 'pushback' mechanic like those new hammer elves get, and resurrect the Chainsabres as the Way of the Exploding Attacks. Maybe even alter the exact weaponry; if that DA exarch has a diresword, the shrine may carry Aeldari Blades like the Storms do.

We won't get this latter one, seeing as it would mean potentially recutting the DA and Banshee kits (or selling upgrade blisters), and in any case I'd be wary of diluting that special feel they have, but it would be something a bit different.

Pilum wrote:
Whilst I'm not so sure about the masses of varying armaments (they are RITUAL weapons after all), I am intrigued by having the relationship between exarch and warriors feel more like Teacher and Pupils. So if you picked skill X for your exarch, it has a lesser effect on the squad. Or - or perhaps as well as - if that Scorpion exarch has the Fist, it means this shrine follows the Way of The Single Strike - fewer attacks than normal, but more powerful. The biting blade - large sweeping weapon, so this shrine has more attacks; or give them a 'pushback' mechanic like those new hammer elves get, and resurrect the Chainsabres as the Way of the Exploding Attacks. Maybe even alter the exact weaponry; if that DA exarch has a diresword, the shrine may carry Aeldari Blades like the Storms do.

We won't get this latter one, seeing as it would mean potentially recutting the DA and Banshee kits (or selling upgrade blisters), and in any case I'd be wary of diluting that special feel they have, but it would be something a bit different.

Totally. The very fact that the teachers of the shrines don't restrict themselves to the ritual weapons of the shrine shows the variety of interpretation in the philosophy of the aspect. This would thus be expressed as you say by different teaching styles leading to a wider variety of unit expression than we currently get.

Why is everyone dunking on Scorpions so much? Let's take the cheap as chips version: a biting blade/scorpion's sting exarch with 9 in tow for 91pts, in an expert crafters detachment.

They natively deepstrike, and ghost step is pretty easy to tag them with, hopefully giving them a 7+ charge. Nice.

Against a squad of 5 Intercessors, ignoring cover shenanigans (marines are out in the open) we see: 3 mortal wounds from mandiblasters, 2 wounds from scorpions, 2 wounds from biting blade for a total of 7 wounds average. The sarge is left untouched with a squaddie on one wound.

Marines strike back with 8 attacks, killing 2 scorpions. At the start of the next fight phase, if they're still in combat, the scoprions are in with a good chance to kill the remaining intercessors before they even get to swing, doing an average of 2.67 mortal wounds.

That's a great outcome for the Scorpions, no? Pretty nice for 91pts.

Are they the best of the best? No. But that's an unrealistic demand to make of a unit - a better question is, does the unit bring some utility to your list? Here the answer is yes, it does: turn-3 objective grabber, infantry or character hunter, disposable 3+ bodies that can sling mortal wounds very effectively.

 grouchoben wrote:
disposable 3+ bodies

This is the part people have problems with as it isn't evocative of what Eldars should be. Without checking your maths, if the same squad could achieve the same thing at the 5 models size (change the points per model of course), I think there would be less talk about how aspect warriors feels garbage. It also doesn't help that aspect warriors had way deadlier incarnations on the tabletop in the past.
Also, this unit cost 66€/82$, 95/110 for a squad of 10 banshees, they deserve to be something else than "disposable bodies" imho.

 Hellebore wrote:
This would thus be expressed as you say by different teaching styles leading to a wider variety of unit expression than we currently get.

Hmm. You know, I was just going to indulge my inner GM and see if I could come up with a matrix for each aspect but - it's almost there already. If you have a copy of the PA book, look at some of those Exarch skills; a surprising number already say "if exarch then squad gets X", a lot more than the Exarch Superstar type. Assuming the blurb about "PA will get carried forward" is true, the thinking is clearly leaning in this direction. While I doubt it'll go as far as weapon variants, I'll give them credit for at least trying to jazz things up a bit.

Maybe this is one of those pendulum swings you get in wargaming; swishing back and forth between streamlined simplicity and RPG-esque ultra-detail.

if they did hopefully the weapons would stay on theme, my aged Reaper Exarch cares not for his web of skulls

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
web of skulls

 Daedalus81 wrote:
You're way overselling marine variety.

.....Side-eyes eighteen discreet boltgun profiles, eight missile launcher variants, and twelve plasma weapons in codex: Space Marines alone....

I really loved the web of skulls as it showed a really esoteric side to the aspect fighting styles. Imo the weapon options these days are very vanilla.

I loved the idea that an exarch had taken the philosophy of the aspect they were currently following and interpreted it through really bizarre weapons that no one else would understand let alone be able to use without the crazy exarch skills they've learned.

They've been plumbing the depths of 40k nostalgia with all sorts of stuff recently (including the throwback catapult on the new inquisitor), I'd like to see this return.

Maybe if they made an independent exarch lord that had more freedom in weapon options we'd see something like it