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.

Toreador wrote:Not much we can do about that. Certain armies like eldar are ultra hard for any list to really defeat, and I have had a decent run in the battles I have fought against them. Without Falcons it can be a fun, but Falcons are still just amazingly tough.

I see this complaint alot. About Falcons being tough.

Given how none of my balanced army lists have a problem crunching Eldar up, I don't get the problem.

Are people obsessed with trying to kill them, is that it?

I shoot them, stun them...and move on to shooting the other Falcons. If I get a weapon, great.

Quickly neutralized, I go back to shooting the rest of the Eldar up.

They're really quite fragile.

Rinse and repeat until just the Falcons are left.

What am I missing? What's the doom and gloom regarding Falcons all about?

Can't do anything about how the GW vehicle destruction system is more than a bit broken, and that Land Raiders are crap.

If you're playing an objective-taking mission, the Falcons are very tough to beat, representing ~600pts which are very difficult to kill, which will probably do some damage to you between shooting and Tank Shock, and which will usually be contesting or holding objectives at the end. They also do an excellent job transporting nasty squads (usually Harlies or Fire Dragons) to their appropriate targets intact and in good time.

Personally I think they just missed balancing them right this time. If they had just left Spirit Stones the way it was in the old codex (only a 50/50 shot of still moving if your opponent scores a Stunned), they'd be fine.

As it is, when I play my Eldar I can't bring myself to field more than one, or two if my opponent is particularly tough/dirty.

Mannahnin wrote:If you're playing an objective-taking mission, the Falcons are very tough to beat, representing ~600pts which are very difficult to kill, which will probably do some damage to you between shooting and Tank Shock, and which will usually be contesting or holding objectives at the end. They also do an excellent job transporting nasty squads (usually Harlies or Fire Dragons) to their appropriate targets intact and in good time.

Personally I think they just missed balancing them right this time. If they had just left Spirit Stones the way it was in the old codex (only a 50/50 shot of still moving if your opponent scores a Stunned), they'd be fine.

As it is, when I play my Eldar I can't bring myself to field more than one, or two if my opponent is particularly tough/dirty.

Pretty much what he said. A falcon's shooting is nice. But that's not what they are great for. Their great for delivering those small hard hitting units safely, and for ensuring you still have a good solid 250-750 victory points sitting on objectives.

I will say that people complaining about how hard they are to kill do annoy me. As an Eldar player, I am well aware just how fragile the rest of my units are. If your playing Guard, T3 isn't to bad when you've got 100 models to use. But my standard Eldar list never tops out above 60 models, so having those few models that can take a beating is really nice. If Eldar tanks wheren't as survivable, the army would be much, much harder to play.

There are a couple of issues at hand.

1) Falcons are unreasonably difficult to kill. Probably the most resilient unit in the game.

2) Falcons are scoring units.

3) Falcons are transports.

4) Falcons are tanks.

Now any one of these things isn't so bad in and of itself (although #1 will chafe no matter what) but when you combine them, things can get out of hand. Sure, you may be able to keep them from shooting every turn without too much difficulty, but that is far from neutralizing them. All that does is keep them from shooting at you. The falcon can still deliver its transported unit, capture objectives, and tank shock you (all in the same turn if conditions are right). It is an incredibly versatile unit that can not only do it all, but also live though it all too. Like several other "required" things in the 40k universe, its point cost is not in line with its utility.

Ah I hated the old rules.

A guy I played regularly would always roll a 6.

Drove me nuts.

I don't run armies vulnerable to tank shock, and 5 fire dragons is just a number crunching squad.

Harlies aren't effective imho.

At any rate, I run 2 Falcons in my tourney list but don't play it in friendly games. The locals don't like that army.

Objective based missions are a pita with them around, but if they are loaded with elites....can't you beat the other half of the Eldar army toot sweet, and then bring it with your whole army? I've never found glancing Eldar Falcons to be terribly difficult, and enough glances reduce their effectiveness over time.

I do agree with you they are a bit over the top, but at 200+ a pop I don't mind seeing them. I wonder what people will say in 3 years time? Everything else in the army is so easy to fold, sadly.

I find 3 Land Raiders or 3 Monoliths worse than 3 Falcons. They have a much higher on/off quotient to my armies I guess.

I don't see people raise nearly the stink about Monoliths (which run nearly the same point cost as a kitted out Falcon). Those things are much harder to kill, can transport troops, and have a much better weapon output then the Falcon. If anything, I'd say the Monolith and Falcon are reasonably priced. It's things like the Land Raider thats to expensive for that price range.

Phoenix wrote:There are a couple of issues at hand.

1) Falcons are unreasonably difficult to kill. Probably the most resilient unit in the game.

2) Falcons are scoring units.

3) Falcons are transports.

4) Falcons are tanks.

Now any one of these things isn't so bad in and of itself (although #1 will chafe no matter what) but when you combine them, things can get out of hand. Sure, you may be able to keep them from shooting every turn without too much difficulty, but that is far from neutralizing them. All that does is keep them from shooting at you. The falcon can still deliver its transported unit, capture objectives, and tank shock you (all in the same turn if conditions are right). It is an incredibly versatile unit that can not only do it all, but also live though it all too. Like several other "required" things in the 40k universe, its point cost is not in line with its utility.

I agree with 2-4, and your general assumptions of being masters of all trades and surviving to excess.

However that said, I've played against several mech eldar armies and fearless 'hide the avatar' foot armies all with 3 falcons. I run 2 falcons and a fire prism myself.

Point being, all of current armies remove the Falcon shooty, and remove the rest of the Eldar army. Leaving...Falcons. Usually by turn 3, there's not much left of the Eldar army. While I use all bikes instead of wave serpents or foot sloggers, and essentially 'Tau' my way to victory...even with really good play, my balanced army lists pretty much ignore the Falcons and chew the Eldar army up.

Am I unreasonably lucky? Perhaps. Skill has a bit to do with how things play out, but I've just not had the problems alot of people seem to.

I compare the units strength vs the rest of the army. Falcons are very good, the rest of the Eldar army is....not so good. Very gimmicky.

Compare that with a Smurf list, are Vindicators or Predators as good as a Falcon? Well, no. But the rest of the army can hold up, even vs the Eldar torrents you can produce. But when the Smurfs open fire, the Eldar army (sans the Falcons) just dissipates.

Judged by themselves, Falcons might seem overpowering. So do Land Raiders. Even worse in 3's. But against the rest of the army, are they really that good?

I don't think so. Having nothing but Falcons left every game as a Eldar player is common, but when you face 2 or 3 Land Raiders aren't they just as potentially dangerous? Especially considering how flip floppy good both units can be against certain armies.

My godzilla list chews through the Eldar, but against multiple Land Raiders I can only hope I down them before my big gun fexes get blown away.
My marines, dark eldar, eldar, chaos, tau...they all have a field day against both armies. I'm actually more worried about my upcoming DA list and what it can handle than any of my old armies. Trying to limit oneself might seem strange but it's a real challenge to make something good out of that DA book. I foresee a pair of marine armies coming out of it. lol

Falcon's are too tough to kill given their points value.

Land Raiders need a further defensive upgrade, for instance a re-roll like Venerable Dreads get, at least when taking shots from the front.

I think most people don't raise a stink about Monoliths because they're so embarrassingly shoddy to play, and don't work well with 20 man troop units; that alot of players don't bring the point sinks. Now me I just spread out and hope I have S9 or S10 guns to bring them down. Just like LR's. Otherwise I ignore them.

Funny thing is, all of these units are really only effective when there are 3 of them; because it makes 'tight' armies with only 1 or 2 tank busting units really struggle to take them down where a more balanced army list just shrugs them off and deals with them in the course of play.

Of course, if making a balanced army list is difficult with a certain Codex then I can understand how these can be boogeymen units.

The other knock on Monoliths is that if you take two of them you're missing out on 500 points worth of Necrons towards your phase-out, altho this is made up for with the portal. At least I would guess it to be so, I have limited experience against Necrons other than getting totally spanked.

Good call about the LR's Taco. It is ridiculous that a tank that costs as much as a Mono. has no variation of the 'living Metal' Rule. I know that POTMS is ok, but BS2?

I hate Falcons, and keep shooting till they pop.

Hmmm I think Land Raiders are simply broken, and unfixable without a rules upgrade. Venerable is great if facing Lance weapons, which go right through Land Raiders.
Venerable would be bs for say a WH army, which has a hard time dealing with them--or a 'tight' army list with only 1 or 2 lascannons....and 3 land raiders to deal with.

They've been so yes/no flipfloppy for so many years I've given up on them entirely.

Personally I think the way to handle Land Raiders is to make them 'glance only' for Ap2 through Ap6 weapons, with the exception of Ordnance weapons. So Lascannons, Railguns, and Lance weapons would still be able to take them on, but would reduce the ease with which these weapons eliminate very pricey vehicles. While a Vindicator would still make you cry...and Melta weapons would still have value close up.

Edit: I do realize Railguns are AP1, I just don't think they need to be. S10 at 72" range is indeed 'enough'. Perhaps making it simple and saying AP1 weapons would also be glance only, might see land raiders getting used again. I dunno.

If you are good at rolling 5/6, 6/5, and 6/6 with 2d6 on the glancing table then Falcons are not a problem.

- G

The quip about harlies and fire dragons being ineffective lead me to believe this guy is a troll...but I'll bite.

It seems to me that when you play eldar, you perma shake the falcons, and shoot up the rest of his army without any problem. I think you need to play eldar players that don't suck. If you can take out every non-falcon piece of your opponents army (by the third turn even), while dedicating fire to shake falcons, without taking any significant damage in return then you need to find people who know how to use the rest of their army.

Coming from the experience that I've gained with my "friendly" list with only one falcon, I can still use the rest of my army to bust up the enemy. In fact when i play with just one falcon, i roll so horribly for its shooting that its offensive abilities are almost not noticable. What I have done with it though is dropped off fire dragons that have annihilated multiple tanks per game, and contested/controlled 2 objectives (loot counters) at the same time.

In games where the objectives are worth a fraction of the game points rather than the scoring unit's value they become even more powerful (even more so with alpha). We're playing alpha cleanse and you have wiped out the rest of my army, besides the three falcons. You are sitting on two corners on your last turn, my last turn two falcons contest what you have and the third falcon grabs a quarter for me. I win, you lose, even though you destroyed my whole army and clearly outplayed me. Fair? I don't think so. Even in the case of gamma and omega the eldar player could easily pick up 750 VPs from using similar tactics (especially if he was a competent player and kept some of the rest of his army alive).

I also find tank shocking, then using the falcons to stay within 6" to herd the enemy off the board to be a little shady.

As an eldar player I find falcons to be quite cheesy/unfair/beardy or whatever the politically correct term is.

Though I think triple monoliths in 2k+ would be worse. So...many...WBB...can't kill...anything......

djones520 wrote:I don't see people raise nearly the stink about Monoliths (which run nearly the same point cost as a kitted out Falcon). Those things are much harder to kill, can transport troops, and have a much better weapon output then the Falcon. If anything, I'd say the Monolith and Falcon are reasonably priced. It's things like the Land Raider thats to expensive for that price range.

A Falcon with a Holofield is much harder to destroy (statistically) than a Monolith. Obviously the type of weapon you are firing at the vehicle changes the discussion, but in general you are very incorrect with that statement.


I would also like to discuss the notion that Stelek has mentioned that you can "deal with the rest of the Eldar army" after shaking Eldar Falcons each turn. This "argument" assumes that the rest of the Eldar army is completely ineffective, which is of course ludicrous. The Eldar player gets the benefit of having a nearly invulnerable fast moving gun platform that can safely carry a unit anywhere on the table and can tank shock with near impunity. Besides this, the Eldar player still has the rest of his army to move shoot and assault with.

The real power of the Falcon (as many others have already pointed out) is not the guns it carries (although they are pretty good too), but rather it is the ability to transport a vulnerable but deadly unit (such as Fire dragons, Banshees or Harlequins) to any point on the table and there is very, very little their opponent can do about it.

The Falcon can also tank shock several enemy units while facing very little danger to being killed by 'Death or Glory!' attacks and it is a scoring unit that can zip around the table to be where you need it to be at the end of the game to capture table quarters or game objectives.

In short a Falcon is a unit that can do just about everything all the while having very little worry about ever being destroyed. There simply has been nothing that has bypassed the amazing protection of the holo-field (although the Ork's grabba claw vehicle upgrade looks like it might be the first).

Whle the Monolith is very nasty (especially against armies that don't have high Strength weaponry) it is very slow and very vulnerable to S9 and especially S10 shooting weapons.


I know that what I've said is basically a regurgitation of what many other people in this thread have already said, but that's just because the hype is true: Falcon holo-fields are a joke.

And like I already stated before, given the over all fragility of the ENTIRE Eldar army, it needs something like the Holo-Fields to balance it out. Otherwise, it would be pretty simple to waste the entire army. If you could realistically drop a Falcon with 1 shot from a Krak missile, A. That would be a huge waste of more then 200 points, and B. that would leave nothing in your army to draw fire away from your low toughness infantry core.

Sure there are a lot of low Toughness armies about their, but they usually have weight of numbers. Eldar do not have that. They've usually got just as many or fewer bodies as a standard Marine force (if you play an Aspect or Mech army) and not nearly the survivability.

The holofields taken alone, by themselves at face value? A joke. But when put with an Army that has a huge handicap in it's survivability, it becomes a real handy tool.

djones520 wrote:And like I already stated before, given the over all fragility of the ENTIRE Eldar army, it needs something like the Holo-Fields to balance it out. Otherwise, it would be pretty simple to waste the entire army. If you could realistically drop a Falcon with 1 shot from a Krak missile, A. That would be a huge waste of more then 200 points, and B. that would leave nothing in your army to draw fire away from your low toughness infantry core.

Sure there are a lot of low Toughness armies about their, but they usually have weight of numbers. Eldar do not have that. They've usually got just as many or fewer bodies as a standard Marine force (if you play an Aspect or Mech army) and not nearly the survivability.

The holofields taken alone, by themselves at face value? A joke. But when put with an Army that has a huge handicap in it's survivability, it becomes a real handy tool.

Well, I disagree. Eldar have potent weapons and fast manuevarability. The Holo-field should make the tank difficult to destroy but not nigh-impossible.

For example, if the Holo-field simply reduced the roll on the damage chart by -1 (with a roll of '1' doing no damage at all) then every hit would still have a 1 in 6 chance of immobilizing the Falcon with no chance of destroying it outright (provided it moved over 6" the previous turn).

That would make the tank pretty durable but wouldn't make it abosolutely ridiculous to the point it is now where the Eldar player doesn't even have to be concerned about what weapons are facing his Falcon. Eldar players now regularly just fly their Falcons right up the middle of the table like some sort of big impervious juggernaut that totally takes away how Eldar are supposed to play.

Supposedly Eldar use their speed and potent weapons to move into good positions to strike the enemy while limiting the line of sight of what enemy units can fire back at them.

While the army may have needed to have its points costs recalibrated it clearly was a ridiculous decision to make one unit in the army into the most durable unit in the game, especially when that unit can do just about everything.

I agree that the Eldar aren't very tough, but they move like the wind in the right build, and they hit like a ton of bricks. You can get tougher marines or more numerous guard, but don't tell me the Eldar aren't competitive without the super falcons. After playing against an army with three of these, I'm building one myself. I can recognise an outrageous battlefield advantage when I see one...

I think I need to start playing with some of you folks.
Or, have my usual opponents dice checked......

There is a reason for my S/N: When I play my Eldar, the vehicles seem to draw every flipping flashlight err, Lascannon, on the board! And even with my opponents rolling 2D6 for Damage, I usually end up losing vehicles left and right.

And don't even get me started on the super robot monkey tau farce ......

Well I must apologize.

I must have missed the super durable units in the Eldar army besides the Falcon.

Can you please enlighten me what they are?

I sure hope you mean Wraithguard with conceal and fortune....man that's a super unit.

Can you also explain to me how wonderful the harlequins are. They survive easily in close combat and against shooting, I need to know how that trick works on T3 models with a 5+ invulnerable save. I won't hold my breath waiting for the normal "What do you know response", I already got it waiting for an Eldar player that doesn't suck. Maybe...it's who YOU play that sucks? Even if they have 5 GT wins under their belt, mate.
Sorry for being rude, just returning the favor.

I never said Fire Dragons sucked. I use them myself. They are, however, simply number crunch units. By that I mean, if I see a dangerous unit coming up and I can burn 3 or 4 guys out of it...the number crunch that unit can perform is burned down a bit. That's all I meant.

Fire Dragons > Harlequins or Howling Banshees.

My Eldar army is very powerful. I daresay it can take any army out. Barring luck or scenario, it's got quite a kick to it--not least of which are the 3 Falcons.

I must have missed the super durable units in the Eldar army besides the Falcon.

Can you please enlighten me what they are?

HQ: Avatar, Warlock Bodyguard with Fortune (I also toss in a Conceal)
Elite: Wraithguard, Conceal helps mitigate their points cost giving you a couple saved Wraithguard for the cost of the Warlock. Plus you get the Warlock.
Troop: Largish Guardians with Conceal, Pathfinders
Fast: None, really.
Heavy: Falcons, Wraithlords, Support Weapons are also surprisingly resilient, especially if you take them with Embolden.

You can also include Scorpions, Jetbikes and Warp Spiders on a good day. And many of these options can be fortuned.

While only about half of the available units can be classified as 'resilient', there are many options available.

To continue what Yakface was saying, I would say that Eldar units are meant to be resilient and slow-moving, or high priced, medium reslient and high offence with mobility. A Falcon is like someone's obnoxious brother in law who shakes the table everytime he puts his elbows on it and doesn't get why it bothers people. It's just a little bit _too_ reliable. Nobody cares if Fire Prisms are high priced and won't go down but Falcons have expensive cargo inside.

How did this change from a "Falcons are quite fragile" argument to a "Eldar don't have any other durable units in their army" argument?


The original claim was that Falcons are easy to deal with, rather fragile really, and that an Eldar army with them is easily beaten as once the Falcons are nuetralized for the turn, the rest of the army is then dealt with.


All of those claims are simply false.

Falcons are statistically the most durable unit in the game, period.

Only a Falcon's ability to shoot can be nuetralized each turn. It's ability to safely deliver a lethal squad to the spot of the owner's choice with almost no worry about losing that unit cannot be reliably nuetralized, nor can the Falcon's ability to tank shock multiple enemy units with little fear of being destroyed by a Death or Glory! attack, nor can the Falcon's ability to make long-range last turn objective grabs.

Therefore, even if a Falcon cannot shoot for a turn, it still contributes to the army and moreover there isn't any reason why the rest of the army shouldn't also be doing damage.

Stelek wrote:
Can you also explain to me how wonderful the harlequins are. They survive easily in close combat and against shooting, I need to know how that trick works on T3 models with a 5+ invulnerable save. I won't hold my breath waiting for the normal "What do you know response", I already got it waiting for an Eldar player that doesn't suck. Maybe...it's who YOU play that sucks? Even if they have 5 GT wins under their belt, mate.
Sorry for being rude, just returning the favor.

I never said Fire Dragons sucked. I use them myself. They are, however, simply number crunch units. By that I mean, if I see a dangerous unit coming up and I can burn 3 or 4 guys out of it...the number crunch that unit can perform is burned down a bit. That's all I meant.

Not sure who you are being intentionally rude at.

Harlies: best usage is akin to the previous incarnation of Daemonettes - IF you can deliver them to a target, even a small number of them can rip the heart out of an expensive unit. They don't do well against Orks or swarms of gaunts, and aren't points-efficient against Genestealers. Those aside, though, they are quite effective at dealing with, e.g., expensive terminator squads, HQ characters, monstrous creatures of most types (certain C'tan excluded). Dropped into a gunline and played with at least a little skill, they can chew up line squards of marines or Guardsmen and hop from combat to combat (careful pre-charge positioning can do wonders for keeping your hth troops out of fire). And the Falcon is an excellent way of so delivering them.

The nasty thing about triple Falcons with cargo: that's 6 scoring units. Absent some statistically unlikely dice rolling, the Eldar player will have all 6 of those scoring units available as the game comes to an end. In any objective-based scenario, he can deliver his scoring units 24" (or often 36") at will. When they arrive, assuming the game isn't over, the following turn he can disembark these tiny little Harlie and Fire Dragon squads. Those units can focus on just a target or two, and have a decent shot at removing the targets of his choice. And given that you *might* have one turn left to deal with the aftermath, it doesn't really matter too much how fragile the Harlies and Dragons are - they've probably already done their work. And the Falcons aren't dead yet.

And that neglects that there is, in fact, more to the Eldar army. Even if it's just Fortuned Guardians in trees or buildings (perhaps made fearless by the Avatar), you probably have to exert some effort to dig them out of there.

Well there were a handful of 'Stelek is dumb' posts, so it was a scattershot back.

I don't believe in Harlies. I believe in Fire Dragons. Primarily for the very reason you listed--last turn shenanigans. Harlies can't surprise anyone like Fire Dragons can on the last turn. Here's an example:

Harlies must get out where the Falcon *was* last turn, in order to assault. Same with HB. Will your opponent be surprised? Unable to react? I don't think so. 6" + Fleet + Deploy + 6" is avoidable. Or are you standing on top of the other guys army because you think you're invulnerable to melta assault squads or other anti-tank nasties? They aren't, you know.

Now Fire Dragons, those are truly dangerous. They can cover far more distance, 12" + Deploy + 12" beats the harlies every time.

There is usually 1100-1300 points more to the Eldar army. If all you aim for is nullifying the shooting of a Falcon, you should have alot of shooting left to take out the rest of the Eldar army, which even with a protection scheme is still T3. Anti-infantry fire does indeed do them much harm.

Frankly until Biel-tan returns, I don't fear any Eldar army but my own.

1) Falcons are unreasonably difficult to kill. Probably the most resilient unit in the game.

2) Falcons are scoring units.

3) Falcons are transports.

4) Falcons are tanks.

2 things you forgot

5) falcons are skimmers

6)falcons are (incredibly) fast vehicles


On the flip side of this argument if they didn't make them survivable then nobody would take them and GW would not sell models.
much like the tau the eldar operate best as a fast moble or mechanized force. but unlike the tau they actually have some very good CC and tank killing units.

Stelek:

There is usually 1100-1300 points more to the Eldar army. If all you aim for is nullifying the shooting of a Falcon, you should have alot of shooting left to take out the rest of the Eldar army, which even with a protection scheme is still T3. Anti-infantry fire does indeed do them much harm.

The rest of the army could be T3--or it could be AV12.

tegeus-Cromis wrote:Stelek:

There is usually 1100-1300 points more to the Eldar army. If all you aim for is nullifying the shooting of a Falcon, you should have alot of shooting left to take out the rest of the Eldar army, which even with a protection scheme is still T3. Anti-infantry fire does indeed do them much harm.

The rest of the army could be T3--or it could be AV12.

Ah fish of fury eldar style.

Its how i would build it as i am a tread head and i love the look of eldar vehicles(but hate thier troops)
Kitted out-3 prisms and 5 or 6 serpents with dire avengers and a farseer makes for a nasty armored company indeed.

Friend of mine plays a big tourney player down here in Oz on a semi-regular basis. This guy is big in both Fantasy and 40K circles, and he usually does quite well for himself.

He always loses to my friend however whenever he takes 3 Falcons.

He wins tournaments with ease, yet he hates Falcons.

There's a problem here guys, and it starts with 'H' and ends with 'olo Fields'.

BYE

You can shake Falcons easily enough, and you can deal with their contents too. However that is not an excuse to say Falcons can be 'dealt with'.

Shaking a Falcon is relatively easy, but it still requires anti tank firepower against Av12....each turn.

This is the main point, once you mission killed a vehicle you can fire at something else, once a squad is half strength and broken you can (normally) ignore it. Your supressive firepower used against falcons must be redesignated each and every turn. Overall the firepower required to supress falcon firepower, and onlytheir firepower is so inefficient that enemy forces, getting real kills for the same volume of fire, creep ahead. By the time you have reached turn four or so it gives the eldar a significant advantage, they are pulling down more firepower than their enemies and to make matters worse you might have not got enough guns left to supress the Falcons, so they shoot too.

All in all shaking a Falcon is of lesser tactical value than ignoring one and shooting something else.

Orlanth wrote:

This is the main point, once you mission killed a vehicle you can fire at something else, once a squad is half strength and broken you can (normally) ignore it. Your supressive firepower used against falcons must be redesignated each and every turn. Overall the firepower required to supress falcon firepower, and onlytheir firepower is so inefficient that enemy forces, getting real kills for the same volume of fire, creep ahead. By the time you have reached turn four or so it gives the eldar a significant advantage, they are pulling down more firepower than their enemies and to make matters worse you might have not got enough guns left to supress the Falcons, so they shoot too.

All in all shaking a Falcon is of lesser tactical value than ignoring one and shooting something else.

Well said, that's exactly what the problem is. And you didn't even mention tank shock.