Aeldari rumours

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.

**tneva82**

Iracundus wrote:
It is truly difficult to understand the outstanding level of derp to do this:

1) Tout in a WHC article how interchangeable the options are for the new kit, including how it is interchangeable with the old kit.
2) The artists make a Codex cover in the seeming belief that interchangeability is legal, so they make an Autarch with wings, glaive, and missile launcher.
2) Write rules that make it illegal to interchange options with the old kit, and thus also make the Codex cover illegal.

Way to go shooting down your own product feature.
People should request a FAQ amendment ASAP.

We seen the autarch datasheet in the codex already?

**Voss**

Are we incrementing the 'wait and see' counter already?

**Wha-Mu-077**

Voss wrote:
Are we incrementing the 'wait and see' counter already?

The counter started flying up the second the first picture of the datasheet was avalible.

**Mr Morden**

As I recall the did the same with the first version of the Canoness rules - lazy....

**alextroy**

I think we can safely agree on the following:

The available datasheet is awful in that aspect.

The Codex datasheet may or may not be the same.

We really hope it isn't but GW can be very inconsistent in these things.

There is a decent chance that if GW did the bonehead move of this is being the Codex datasheet, there is a high chance of errata to fix it.

So how about we wait and see and talk about something constructive rather than GW's ability to make boneheaded moves at times?

**Voss**

I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

**ursvamp**

Voss wrote:
I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

How is it "more constructive" to start making plans founded on uncertain data, when certain data is coming in X weeks?

**Nevelon**

What is going to happen is going to happen at this point. The codex is almost assuredly printed and sitting ready to go.

If this happens, we can add it to the book of grudges and let GW we are unhappy with it.

if it doesn’t happen, we can rejoice and model freely.

I generally expect the worst from GW, but am ready to be pleasantly surprised. I try (with mixed success) not to get bent out of shape over things that might happen. More than enough things that have/are happening for me to be torqued about.

**Fayric**

I have slowly come to accept some people are actually planning to waste a HQ slot on an autarch.

So my guess is you want the "reroll ones".

But now there seems to be debate about actual wargear option -as if the Autarch was expected to interact in the battle as more than just a reroll guy in the back field.

Even as a casual, mostly narrative, player Im amazed at this unexpected confidence in the hopeless role of the Autarch.

**Nevelon**

Thoughts/speculation on what the “resonator shard” keyword is for on the rangers? Not on the shroudrunners.

While looking at the leaks on the front page of the thread to see if anyone else had it (they didn’t) noticed the troupe master picked up haywire grenades. Not sure if that is new.

**The Red Hobbit**

Fayric wrote:
I have slowly come to accept some people are actually planning to waste a HQ slot on an autarch.

So my guess is you want the "reroll ones".

But now there seems to be debate about actual wargear option -as if the Autarch was expected to interact in the battle as more than just a reroll guy in the back field.

Even as a casual, mostly narrative, player Im amazed at this unexpected confidence in the hopeless role of the Autarch.

You never know, GW may make the Autarch into a glorious must have HQ model that bolsters the front lines. Unlikely, but you never know!

**Voss**

ursvamp wrote:
Voss wrote:
I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

How is it "more constructive" to start making plans founded on uncertain data, when certain data is coming in X weeks?

How is what GW deliberately wrote, selected and chose to print 'uncertain?'

**ursvamp**

Voss wrote:
ursvamp wrote:
Voss wrote:
I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

How is it "more constructive" to start making plans founded on uncertain data, when certain data is coming in X weeks?

How is what GW deliberately wrote, selected and chose to print 'uncertain?'

Rules printed in boxes like these aren't always the same as what shows up in the codex.

Is it more likely that the Autarch-rules will be the same in the eldar-codex than, say, that Chosen will still have 1w in the CSM'dex? Yes
Do we know for a fact that they will? no
But we will know for certain in about 2-3 weeks. So why work oneself up about it prematurely?

Edit:

Nevelon wrote:
If this happens, we can add it to the book of grudges and let GW we are unhappy with it.

if it doesn’t happen, we can rejoice and model freely.

Yes, Nevelon said it better than me!
I probably just stirred up things unnecessarily. I apologise, Voss

**warpedpig**

What will the D cannon stats be? I wanna know if wraithseers and support cannons will be hitting like a ton of bricks with indirect fire.

**Argive**

The Red Hobbit wrote:
Fayric wrote:
I have slowly come to accept some people are actually planning to waste a HQ slot on an autarch.

So my guess is you want the "reroll ones".

But now there seems to be debate about actual wargear option -as if the Autarch was expected to interact in the battle as more than just a reroll guy in the back field.

Even as a casual, mostly narrative, player Im amazed at this unexpected confidence in the hopeless role of the Autarch.

You never know, GW may make the Autarch into a glorious must have HQ model that bolsters the front lines. Unlikely, but you never know!

I disagree. Before they nerfed it into legends autarch with reaper launcher + hunter trait+falochus wing+star glaive was a great sniper platform/combat back up
Really good as backline support with weapon platforms and tanks

Automatically Appended Next Post:

warpedpig wrote:
What will the D cannon stats be? I wanna know if wraithseers and support cannons will be hitting like a ton of bricks with indirect fire.

I believe its currently 3+D3 in the imperial armor book so its probably a good indicator.

**Shakalooloo**

Voss wrote:
ursvamp wrote:
Voss wrote:
I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

How is it "more constructive" to start making plans founded on uncertain data, when certain data is coming in X weeks?

How is what GW deliberately wrote, selected and chose to print 'uncertain?'

For an example from recent history:

Piety and Pain - from around this time last year - had an incorrect printing of the then-new Palatine datasheet. She had both a plasma pistol and a bolt pistol, and could swap the latter for a rosarius. In the final Codex printing, she has a BP and a rosarius standard, and can swap the former for a plasma pistol.

**Eldarsif**

Not sure if this has been posted here.

So the Shuriken Catapults are back to 18". That's at least something and I expect the DA Catapults to go to 24".

The stats on the Night Spinner look good with 48" 2d6 AP-2 and D2.

Crystal Targeting Matrix allows you to ignore all hit modifiers.
Spirit Stones double your remaining wounds for degrading comparison
Star Engines add 3" moves
Vectored Engines are used in the Command Phase to once per battle to give the vehicle Battle Focus, so vehicles have acces to Move-Shoot-Move.

**BorderCountess**

Voss wrote:
ursvamp wrote:
Voss wrote:
I dunno, it seems more constructive to get people to accept reality as printed and presented, rather than go through the 'wait and see' excuses.

How is it "more constructive" to start making plans founded on uncertain data, when certain data is coming in X weeks?

How is what GW deliberately wrote, selected and chose to print 'uncertain?'

Let's also keep in mind that the Codex version of the datasheet isn't going to say, "(see Codex: Aeldari)"

**Galef**

Eldarsif wrote:
Not sure if this has been posted here.

So the Shuriken Catapults are back to 18". That's at least something and I expect the DA Catapults to go to 24".

I haven't heard that DA catapults are getting a range bonus, but what we have heard is that they will be Assault 3 and AP-2 (so AP-4 if you roll a 6 to wound). Even with just 18" range and Battle Focus, that's pretty killy.

**Hellebore**

Galef wrote:
Eldarsif wrote:
Not sure if this has been posted here.

So the Shuriken Catapults are back to 18". That's at least something and I expect the DA Catapults to go to 24".
I haven't heard that DA catapults are getting a range bonus, but what we have heard is that they will be Assault 3 and AP-2 (so AP-4 if you roll a 6 to wound). Even with just 18" range and Battle Focus, that's pretty killy.

yes according to the new instruction leak

**Lord Perversor**

Fayric wrote:
I have slowly come to accept some people are actually planning to waste a HQ slot on an autarch.

So my guess is you want the "reroll ones".

But now there seems to be debate about actual wargear option -as if the Autarch was expected to interact in the battle as more than just a reroll guy in the back field.

Even as a casual, mostly narrative, player Im amazed at this unexpected confidence in the hopeless role of the Autarch.

We still need to wait and see but the rumours hinted that Autarchs with some warlord traits and relics could become quite a beatstick but of course those rumours also claimed they were putting lies to throw off GW trail from the original source.

P.S: some leaks hint D weapons like Wraithcannons and such getting extra mortal wounds when rolling 6 to wound...

**Billicus**

Probably late to the party on this but wow, "harlequin weapons that are all identical until you use a strategem" is peak 9th edition shittiness, isn't it? Not impressed with that at all.

**The Red Hobbit**

Lord Perversor wrote:
Fayric wrote:
I have slowly come to accept some people are actually planning to waste a HQ slot on an autarch.

So my guess is you want the "reroll ones".

But now there seems to be debate about actual wargear option -as if the Autarch was expected to interact in the battle as more than just a reroll guy in the back field.

Even as a casual, mostly narrative, player Im amazed at this unexpected confidence in the hopeless role of the Autarch.

We still need to wait and see but the rumours hinted that Autarchs with some warlord traits and relics could become quite a beatstick but of course those rumours also claimed they were putting lies to throw off GW trail from the original source.

P.S: some leaks hint D weapons like Wraithcannons and such getting extra mortal wounds when rolling 6 to wound...

In the leaks one of the relic swords could turn the Autarch into a high attack beatstick, certainly something I was interested in.

**Iracundus**

FWIW, WHC states WD 473 will have rules for Altansar. If so this will be the first time Altansar has ever received Craftworld specific rules. I hope they will actually get some background exploration, and not just vague hints going nowhere of them being all "sinister" for no specific reason. Show don't tell.

**Dysartes**

Based on previous Index articles, you're probably looking at 4-6 pages of background material? Even if some of that has to cover off Maugan Ra recovering it (am I remembering the right Craftworld here?), there should be room for some exploration of why they are like they are.

**ph34r**

Iracundus wrote:
FWIW, WHC states WD 473 will have rules for Altansar. If so this will be the first time Altansar has ever received Craftworld specific rules. I hope they will actually get some background exploration, and not just vague hints going nowhere of them being all "sinister" for no specific reason. Show don't tell.

Their sinister past of falling into orbit around the Eye of Terror for 10,000 years and finally being led free will no doubt translate into some amalgamation of words involving "on a 6" and "mortal wound"

**warpedpig**

If d cannons are 3+D3 wounds plus mortal wounds on 6. I’m gonna be doing support cannot spam. Lol. It’s super annoying to face 9x indirect fire with that much hitting power. D3 shots per cannon. No line of sight needed.

**Iracundus**

ph34r wrote:
Iracundus wrote:
FWIW, WHC states WD 473 will have rules for Altansar. If so this will be the first time Altansar has ever received Craftworld specific rules. I hope they will actually get some background exploration, and not just vague hints going nowhere of them being all "sinister" for no specific reason. Show don't tell.
Their sinister past of falling into orbit around the Eye of Terror for 10,000 years and finally being led free will no doubt translate into some amalgamation of words involving "on a 6" and "mortal wound"

Well actually under the old custom Craftworld rules, I would have thought Altansar would have best suited (on purely background) to have Warding Runes (5++ against MW) and Grim (re-roll Morale).

**Wha-Mu-077**

ph34r wrote:
Iracundus wrote:
FWIW, WHC states WD 473 will have rules for Altansar. If so this will be the first time Altansar has ever received Craftworld specific rules. I hope they will actually get some background exploration, and not just vague hints going nowhere of them being all "sinister" for no specific reason. Show don't tell.
Their sinister past of falling into orbit around the Eye of Terror for 10,000 years and finally being led free will no doubt translate into some amalgamation of words involving "on a 6" and "mortal wound"

Clearly, their undead nature will allow them to ignore mortal wounds on a 6.

**H.B.M.C.**

Eldritch Omens by unit, if you prefer just one or two things from the box.