# Is the Eldar Codex broken?



## stormshroud (Apr 27, 2007)

I have this growing feeling that the new Eldar codex is broken, allow me to explain. 

My first issue is that GW didn’t include craftworld specific lists. I know that you can effectively play any craftworld due to the way the choices are split and maybe I’m just showing my age here but Pathfinders should be limited to Altaioc, Wraithguard as troops should be Iyanden and Guardian Jetbikes as troops should be for Saim-Hann only. Am I alone? It is an invitation for players to play armies that are against the character of their Craftworld and to completely avoid Guardian squads (which are becoming an increasingly rare sight).

GW seem to have placed a great deal of trust in its players not to abuse the open nature of the codex, unfortunately this doesn’t seem to have been the case. I am seeing the carbon copies of the lists with Jetbikes galore and super-resilient Falcons filled with Harlequins. I have no complaints with people using these lists it is their hobby and they are allowed to play their armies any way they like, it just seems to me that a lot of the variety, depth and background of the Eldar race is not being represented on the tabletop.

Secondly Warwalkers, duplicate weapons that aren’t twin linked? I can’t think of another example of this in any other codex (admittedly I don’t own them all so I am happy to stand corrected). The chance to lay down 24 shots a turn was just too much for me to resist. I have searched but can’t find an explanation as to why these aren’t TL weapons.

Thirdly (and this is a personal bugbear more than the others) Eldar Farseers should have remained T4 they are slowly turning to crystal before they eventually take their place in the Dome of Seers.

My penultimate point would be that I read before the release of the codex that the Aspect Warrior squads were being changed to be valuable in their own right and not simply an Exarch delivery system. Whilst I can see that this has worked for some of the aspects some (and Striking Scorpions spring to mind) still seem to be just that. This could just be the way I have seen them used.

Finally I dislike the removal of the armoury I appreciate that this is the way the new codices are moving but I don’t feel it is a good move, this removal of choice will lead to a more streamlined game but also a game that doesn’t reflect the vast varied nature of the galaxy. Codices of this nature will in my opinion mean the inevitable demise of the SM traits and the IG Doctrine system which would be a great shame, but that is a thread for another post.

The first point is probably my main concern with regards the codex being broken, the rest are bugbears and probably matters of personal taste. I would be interested as to what other people’s opinions are. 

Before the hate mail starts, I would just like to point out that I play an Eldar army, and enjoy playing it, I also enjoy the challenge of playing against the powerful new army combinations that the codex has brought to the fore; I just feel that the codex doesn’t really work.


----------



## matty570 (Jun 14, 2007)

I must admit fluff wise I dont like the new eldar codex as it does allow you to field unusual combinations. 

Regarding Warwalkers I could not understand this at all, with the new codex they are phenomenal, and do not see any real downsides to them!!

To be honest I share some of the other bugbears with the list however I dont necessarily think it is broken. Its just not as interesting as the previous codex, besides on the armoury note, I always thought the the previous eldar armoury was too small anyway.


----------



## anathema (Jan 24, 2007)

To correct a few points:



> It is an invitation for players to play armies that are against the character of their Craftworld and to completely avoid Guardian squads (which are becoming an increasingly rare sight).


Guardians should never have been included in the numbers they used to be. They are a civilian levy that are used as a last resort. The majority of the fighting should be done by Aspect Warriors. This codex has put that right.



> I have no complaints with people using these lists it is their hobby and they are allowed to play their armies any way they like, it just seems to me that a lot of the variety, depth and background of the Eldar race is not being represented on the tabletop.


There will always be some combos better than others in codexes. However in the new Eldar codex you have 3 _more_ units available than before and a lot of them have been made better and more viable. Unless you're going full on tournament hardcore and want to netlist then you actually have more choice than before.



> Secondly Warwalkers, duplicate weapons that aren’t twin linked? I can’t think of another example of this in any other codex (admittedly I don’t own them all so I am happy to stand corrected).


Er, maybe its race specific? I don't see anyone else getting Farseers either. War Walkers are hardly game-breaking units as it is.



> My penultimate point would be that I read before the release of the codex that the Aspect Warrior squads were being changed to be valuable in their own right and not simply an Exarch delivery system.


The only true Exarch delivery system that used to be about was Swooping hawks and that has been fixed. Everything else just utilised the exarch wargear in the same way as marines utilise vet sarges, Aspiring champions, guard officers etc. That's a normal part of the game.



> Finally I dislike the removal of the armoury I appreciate that this is the way the new codices are moving but I don’t feel it is a good move, this removal of choice will lead to a more streamlined game but also a game that doesn’t reflect the vast varied nature of the galaxy.


All of the option in the armoury can still be taken as options for the few units that had access for the armoury before. Nothing has been lost (apart from removing the options for boxing Warlocks which was needed), its just moved.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Gotta agree with the man. The new Eldar codex is IMO the best one GW have ever produced and that's saying something really, as i think all the 4th ed codices so far have been really extremly good.


----------



## dakari-mane (Mar 9, 2007)

stormshroud said:


> Secondly Warwalkers, duplicate weapons that aren’t twin linked? I can’t think of another example of this in any other codex (admittedly I don’t own them all so I am happy to stand corrected).


Ork Dread weapons, Tau Hammerhead burst cannons, Imperial Guard Leman Russ Heavybolters, Marine Predator Sponsons....


----------



## stormshroud (Apr 27, 2007)

anathema - Given that Guardians are civilian levies why are so many of them zipping about the 40K battlefields on jetbikes rather than delivering pizzas or some such? 

Harlequins are travelling troupes that are a rare sight on a craftworld, why then are they appearing on every battlefield in such great numbers. If Guardians should be a rare sight surely so should Harlequins?

I totally agree that the variety is offered in the Eldar Codex but I haven't found that variety reflected on the battlefields. For example I have seen 1 unit of rangers since the new codex came out and all the rest have been pathfinders? I have seen a Biel-tan army whose troops where Pathfinders and Wraithguard, I suppose what I am saying is for me the craftworlds unique characters have been lost under the stamp of streamlining.


dakari-mane - Ork dread weapons are TL according to my codex, I will concede on vehicle sponsons though as I hadn't considered them. 

To clarify what I meant on the Warwalkers. I agree they aren't game breaking, but I just find them a perculiar exception to the general streamlining that is going on atm.


----------



## anathema (Jan 24, 2007)

> anathema - Given that Guardians are civilian levies why are so many of them zipping about the 40K battlefields on jetbikes rather than delivering pizzas or some such?


So you'll see 6 jetbikes, thats a damn sight less than the standard 42 bodies protecting the starcannons you'd get last time out. The options are there to opt for the Aspect warrior troops in DA, Wraithguard if you are that way inclined or the Ranger/Pathfinders who are more likely to be about on battlefields according to fluff. 



> Harlequins are travelling troupes that are a rare sight on a craftworld, why then are they appearing on every battlefield in such great numbers. If Guardians should be a rare sight surely so should Harlequins?


Depends if you field a Harlequin troupe themed army, in which case you can take the full 30 and model other units accordingly. 



> I have seen a Biel-tan army whose troops where Pathfinders and Wraithguard, I suppose what I am saying is for me the craftworlds unique characters have been lost under the stamp of streamlining.


Not so, the background is still there and you can still follow strict craftworld structure if you want. Its just not enforced rigidly now.

I think what you're actually complaining about is seeing lots of identikit lists on the battlefield. This is not down to the codex, but down to players army selections. There are certain builds that are stronger than others, just as in any codex. However you actually have more flexibility than before. All of the old restricted Craftworld lists can be easily done with the new Codex, just that you can make them more flexibly than before if desired.


----------



## dakari-mane (Mar 9, 2007)

stormshroud said:


> dakari-mane - Ork dread weapons are TL according to my codex, I will concede on vehicle sponsons though as I hadn't considered them.


Re-read. Only if you are buying 3 or more ranged weapons do they become twinlinked. You can just have 2 weapons & fire many many shots.


----------



## Hespithe (Dec 26, 2006)

From my POV, the Eldar 'dex is what the designers originally intended with the Space Marine 'dex. One standard list with the ability to customize an army to fit your particular style.

GW did ok with IG Doctrines, but they messed up just a bit with SM Traits. They did better with Eldar.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

What's the problem with space marine traits? I think they're fine and have never, ever thought they were in any way unfair.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

stompzilla said:


> What's the problem with space marine traits? I think they're fine and have never, ever thought they were in any way unfair.


*cough* 6 devastator squads *cough*


----------



## anathema (Jan 24, 2007)

Stella Cadente said:


> *cough* 6 devastator squads *cough*


If someone wants to put that many points into 6 Dev squads I'm a happy man and can dance away from their static arses picking them off one at a time. If however they choose to put their points into pods and Predators, I'm a bit more worried.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Concur.


----------



## dakari-mane (Mar 9, 2007)

stompzilla said:


> Concur.


Thirded.

TBH I am ATM in a really bad mood. My answer to this:


> Is the Eldar Codex broken?


Is this:
No you are just shit :wink:


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

> as i think all the 4th ed codices so far have been really extremly good.


Really? So DA/BA and the future they hold for SM's in general?

Having Special Characters crammed down the throat, everything useful more expensive giving nothing useful in return, etc- you know the drill.


As for Eldar being broken, of course not, it's so easy to kill tanks that are more resilient and mobile than Land Raiders for a fraction of the cost, or deal with Space Clowns that you can't shoot, ignore cover, etc, etc.


----------



## cccp (Dec 15, 2006)

dakari-mane said:


> Quote:
> Is the Eldar Codex broken?
> 
> Is this:
> No you are just shit


personal attack. no need for it.


----------



## Engelus (Jul 26, 2007)

I dont know if I would say that its broken, But it is very good. I think the eldar in general have one of the better army lists, they have units that are good at shooting, and units that are good at assaulting. They have a railgun like weapon, and they all move fast.

as a Black Templar player I always find it very hard to compete with their common abilities like Defend and harlequins. The only strategy that Ive found that allows me to beat the harlequins is sacrificing a squad to them. but historically they always go first and they always slaughter my marines.

I don't know if the Black Templar codex is up to date, or if it is already outdated (especially compared to the DA codex) but I hope its as powerful as the eldar army in the future


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

BAs aren't so bad. I think DA was an experiment, and let's face it, it's not a mainstream codex. Codex Nids, marines, Tau and Eldar have all been pretty ace.

You know, i've never really struggled against Harlequins. I always kill them pretty good. I will admit falcons etc are pretty hard to kill but it's very easy to pull their teeth. I use 2 Fire prisms for fire support in my eldar and they never get to bloody shoot, which is quite annoying.

Wave serpents aren't particulary difficult to kill either and when that's 150 pts of none scoring transport and 150+ pts of very fragile aspect warriors i would say it all balances out, yes.


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

> BAs aren't so bad. I think DA was an experiment, and let's face it, it's not a mainstream codex. Codex Nids, marines, Tau and Eldar have all been pretty ace.


BA's are even more a one-trick pony than before. Now that they pay for Death Company, BA must now be a Death Company delivery system.
The only other 'powerful' things are Special Characters (there's a surprise) and taking Assault Marines as Troops (so not needed, at least Assault Marine sales will improve).

The thing with them not being 'mainstream' is that it is very likely Marines will have much of the BA/DA rules- the new points costs, Combat Squads, 5/10 man only, etc, etc.



> You know, i've never really struggled against Harlequins. I always kill them pretty good. I will admit falcons etc are pretty hard to kill but it's very easy to pull their teeth. I use 2 Fire prisms for fire support in my eldar and they never get to bloody shoot, which is quite annoying.


How is it easy to stop Space Clowns charging out of a Falcon, anything short of Destroyed won't stop them.
It's such an easy tactic, hurl Falcon forward on a flank, easily weather enemy firepower, unleash Harlies- game won.

I'll agree that Eldar firepower can be stopped temporarily, but in a game based on objectives having unkillable Skimmers wins out everytime. There's always a Skimmer left to fly over and claim the objective, how many non-Skimmer tanks survive that long...

I'll clarify, 95% of the Eldar Codex is fine, the other 5% are Holofields and Space Clowns. The Skimmer versus Ground Tank is the bad design of the 4th Ed rulebook, not an Eldar Codex problem.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Aye, the over relience on special characters is a pisser. Enforcing the combat squad rules onto codex SM will be big mistake in my opinion too.

Land vehicles are ok, i think what needs to change on that front is the Hull down rules need to revert to what they used to be. That'd even the slight imbalance out.

I've been using a fair amount of predators and Guard tanks of late and have not found them too bad at all. You really do have to pay the 5pts for Dozer blades though. :lol:


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

> Aye, the over relience on special characters is a pisser. Enforcing the combat squad rules onto codex SM will be big mistake in my opinion too.


Belial is the only way I can get a Captain in Terminator Armour.....and Terminators as Troops, go figure. He doesn't even get Terminator Honours, yet pays the same for Termie Armour as Marines- pretty much sums up the DA.

As for the Combat Squads, and the points costs changes- taken in a vacuum, as a stand-alone Codex, it fits SM's rigid organisation, and stuff like plasmaguns are worth more than meltaguns.

But when compared to the power and flexibility of other Codex's it's just pitiful.



> Land vehicles are ok, i think what needs to change on that front is the Hull down rules need to revert to what they used to be. That'd even the slight imbalance out.


I think Skimmers have established that always Glancing Only is too powerful, much like 3rd Ed, if Ground Tanks had the 3rd Ed Hull Down they would never leave terrain- and with the Difficult Terrain roll they would never move.

I think the current Obscure rule should be applied to Skimmers- 4+.

I also think the Vehicle Terrain roll shouldn't be so harsh, Immobilised not only usually renders the vehicle useless stuck behind terrain, but also hands half it's VP's to the opponent and makes it non-scoring all in one swoop.

I'd make it on a 1 consult chart:

1-2 Immobilised
3-6 Can't shoot, halts movement and Crew Stunned next turn.

I'd get rid of the 'Oh know, the Storm Bolters jammed, everybody disembark and get shot' rule.

Finally make Deep Strike and Infiltrate something special/more expensive/etc so that taking Transports is actually worth doing.



> I've been using a fair amount of predators and Guard tanks of late and have not found them too bad at all. You really do have to pay the 5pts for Dozer blades though.


IIRC, you lost to Skimmer Eldar with them, and your not one to lose frequently.

I have found that tanks scare people who aren't use to seeing them, so much firepower put into empty Rhinos as the rest of my army actually does stuff.

DA Dozer blade are 15pts......just kidding.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Skimmers die to 1/3 of all glancing hits and are VERY expensive.

Take away the glancing only and you then need to either pump up the cost of land vehicles (140 pts is a frikking steal for a predator!) or lower the extortionate cost of skimmers.

It is annoying to move a tank into cover, risking the terrain roll only to have it penned anyway. :|


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

We both know that's not true with Decoy Launchers and Holofields.

We also know that 'extortionate cost' is around 30-40pts to completely ignore terrain, to be near immune to troops in close combat and of course to be so much more resilient than ground tanks- it's like having smoke launchers every turn, whilst still being able to shoot.

Not to mention moving 12" and still firing.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

They're vehicle upgrades specific to each codex though, and decoy launchers aren't fantastic. Tau skimmers are fairly easily pooned.

There's also the downside too - they can't hide in terrain, they have less firepower, they HAVE to move over 6" a turn, you can't hide troops behind them (And generally the troops need hiding T3 4+ anyone?) and immobilised kills you, rather than just takes half your points and turns you into a pillbox. All for 40 extra points.

Seriously, just change the hull down rule back to what it was and stop being so cheap and pay the 5 pts for dozer blades and you'll see a difference.

Holofields are a bit of a pisser but Eldar lists do generally lack any staying power apart from the skimmers (Which are cheaper than HHs :? ) You know i'm not going to argue with you over the Falcon Harlie combo - which is why my Eldar remains clown taxi free, but take said clowns out of the equation and it's really not that bad.

Slightly OT here but combat squads do actually give you the means to lay clown smackdown much better than standard marines you know.


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

> There's also the downside too - they can't hide in terrain, they have less firepower, they HAVE to move over 6" a turn, you can't hide troops behind them (And generally the troops need hiding T3 4+ anyone?) and immobilised kills you, rather than just takes half your points and turns you into a pillbox. All for 40 extra points.


Why would you want to hide in terrain, if you can hide behind it and then move out over it without risk?



> Seriously, just change the hull down rule back to what it was and stop being so cheap and pay the 5 pts for dozer blades and you'll see a difference.


No, godammit, I can't afford to spend 5pts on Dozers, :lol: 



> Holofields are a bit of a pisser but Eldar lists do generally lack any staying power apart from the skimmers (Which are cheaper than HHs ) You know i'm not going to argue with you over the Falcon Harlie combo - which is why my Eldar remains clown taxi free, but take said clowns out of the equation and it's really not that bad.


Agreed, on the Space Clowns + Falcon = Easy Win. I don't know, maybe it's just the general sentiment that Eldar are a finesse army, requiring skill above and beyond other armies, when in truth they tactics are just as simple as everyone else.



> Slightly OT here but combat squads do actually give you the means to lay clown smackdown much better than standard marines you know.


Your kidding me right? Because SM's don't have the compacity, or the Troops space to field 5xman squads with a Special or Heavy?
They don't for a reason.


Are Skimmer Tanks a problem, or are they balanced?

I can only say that most of Flame On is now turning to Eldar or Tau armies, the most powerful or resilient tanks in the game are Skimmers. Outside of Flame On I rarely ever see ground tanks fielded.

This is Skimmer Edition.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

You'll also find that most of said flame-oners also have marines as a first army. It's pretty much part of the gamers progression to want to expand a little and play with the xenos. DE have no support and horrible models and Ork's aren't for everyone, with them being all brutish and slobbering and all.

Just out of curiosity - who exactly are we talking about here? The only ones i can think of are Ben (Smurf player*), Matt (Guard and BA player*) and Bob (Bob's just special :wink: Guard and Orks*). *= primarily

You rarely see ground tanks fielded?! So did you walk around the GT final with your eyes closed, because i saw and fought against plenty. I also had plenty of skimmers killed.

"Why would you want to hide in terrain, if you can hide behind it and then move out over it without risk?"

By using terrain you can hide 6" in, cutting down the return fire coming the way of your tank - shielding it from those tank hunting autocannons etc, whilst being able to strike at your target of choice. Not so for skimmers because they can never actually BE in cover, so the whole board can feel free to have a go at you.

What also never seems to get mentioned is the role that said skimmers play within an army. Whilst marine lists can take heavy and special weapons from troops choices - which after Kroot are the second best troops in the game, as well as fast attack, elites and heavy support they're never short of firepower or the right tool for the job. Eldar and Tau on the other hand get very expensive and fragile elites and heavy support and that's it. If my AV12 fire prisms get stunned - which they always do, that leaves me somewhat lacking i.e. bereft of, in the antitank dept. Why do you not take dreads again Si? Is it because AV 12 is not that good? I think it is. Without the holofields i would see my army fall very rapidly due to inability to take out tanks.

This is 4th edition you've just got a new favourite subject to whinge about. :wink:


----------



## anathema (Jan 24, 2007)

> Land vehicles are ok, i think what needs to change on that front is the Hull down rules need to revert to what they used to be. That'd even the slight imbalance out.


Do this and ground tanks become viable again. The trade off between losing mobility but gaining higher front armour becomes a valid one. They should never have changed it.



> Outside of Flame On I rarely ever see ground tanks fielded.


Really? I see pred after pred wherever I go. 

Like I was talking about at the weekend, if you can give me a viable alternative to holo-fields then I'm all ears. Without the fields, Eldar tanks die all of the time, and quickly. What _can't_ glance AV12? My Wave Serpent usually dies every game and thats with Vectored engines and downgrading everything to S8. If you want, borrow my Eldar and try it without holo-fields (you'll have 105 points spare). See what happens. 

My guess is that by turn 3 or 4 at the latest you'll have lost around 425 points of grav tanks and most of the Harlequins. And most of your anti-tank. And mobility. And pretty much all AP2 bar the fire dragons.

If you can come up with a rule which gets the balance between survivability and vulnerability, then go for it. At the moment its either or. One thing that they really shouldn't have done is allowed Vectored engines and holo-fields to be allowed at the same time. Killing once every 9 glance is do-able. Killing every 36 isn't on.


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

> You'll also find that most of said flame-oners also have marines as a first army. It's pretty much part of the gamers progression to want to expand a little and play with the xenos. DE have no support and horrible models and Ork's aren't for everyone, with them being all brutish and slobbering and all.


Not really no, the only people I know of that now use Marines are me, Ben, Matt, Jimmy. Lee did, but doesn't come in anymore on Tuesdays.

On the other hand Tau and Eldar are played by you, Dave, Chris, Ben, Matt, Gothkid, Gaz, Ade plans too I think, Greater Harliequin, etc, etc.

It's not a question of not liking Orks, it's a simple truth that Skimmer Tank armies benefit most from 4th Ed rules and so are most popular.



> By using terrain you can hide 6" in, cutting down the return fire coming the way of your tank - shielding it from those tank hunting autocannons etc, whilst being able to strike at your target of choice. Not so for skimmers because they can never actually BE in cover, so the whole board can feel free to have a go at you.


So not worth the risk of your vehicle being rendered useless, non-scoring and giving away VP's on a single dice roll. Better to use the edge of terrain to LOS block much like Skimmers can.



> What also never seems to get mentioned is the role that said skimmers play within an army. Whilst marine lists can take heavy and special weapons from troops choices - which after Kroot are the second best troops in the game, as well as fast attack, elites and heavy support they're never short of firepower or the right tool for the job. Eldar and Tau on the other hand get very expensive and fragile elites and heavy support and that's it. If my AV12 fire prisms get stunned - which they always do, that leaves me somewhat lacking i.e. bereft of, in the antitank dept. Why do you not take dreads again Si? Is it because AV 12 is not that good? I think it is. Without the holofields i would see my army fall very rapidly due to inability to take out tanks.


2 wound T 4 3+ save with Inv save shield drones and jet packs- very fragile. For what they do I wouldn't call them expensive either.

Eldar Elites your statement is more accurate, except for Space Clowns.

The Dread- it can't move 12" and still fire, it can't ignore terrain, it isn't always Glancing Only, it isn't immune to troops in close combat, it can't boost 24" to claim an objective, it's overpriced, AV 12 is far down on the list of reasons why Dread's are shit.



> This is 4th edition


And it gets more simple by the Codex. See you in Warhammer, where sitting behind cover makes you harder to hit, firing over long distance makes it harder to hit, not every creature moves at the same speed, and armour degrades proportional to the strength of the attack to name a few rules removed from 40k being considered too complicated.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Jeridian said:


> Not really no, the only people I know of that now use Marines are me, Ben, Matt, Jimmy. Lee did, but doesn't come in anymore on Tuesdays.
> 
> On the other hand Tau and Eldar are played by you, Dave, Chris, Ben, Matt, Gothkid, Gaz, Ade plans too I think, Greater Harliequin, etc, etc.


Tau are Ben's second army, same for Chris, Gothkid is a guard player - Tau are also his second army, Ade is making a guard list at present, Gaz, me and Dave have always been Eldar players. So what i said is pretty much true. 


> So not worth the risk of your vehicle being rendered useless, non-scoring and giving away VP's on a single dice roll. Better to use the edge of terrain to LOS block much like Skimmers can.


With dozer blades the chance is pretty damned slim and by being in terrain you get your obscured roll. Also have you seen the size of most skimmers compared with preds/ Russes? They're not that easy to hide.



> 2 wound T 4 3+ save with Inv save shield drones and jet packs- very fragile. For what they do I wouldn't call them expensive either.


The suit you just described cost nearly 100pts. 100pts for what amounts to 4 marines in terms of wounds and save (Less if he gets hit by anything that causes instant death), with practically zero close combat ability and a low LD that has 1 plasma gun and 1 short ranged autocannon. It's also 1 of only 3 spots you have for special weapons. I'd call that pretty expensive



> The Dread- it can't move 12" and still fire, it can't ignore terrain, it isn't always Glancing Only, it isn't immune to troops in close combat, it can't boost 24" to claim an objective, it's overpriced, AV 12 is far down on the list of reasons why Dread's are shit.


Hahaha, yeah Whatever Si. 

We've been over all this plenty of times before and it all boils down to the fact that you have a bee in your bonnet about skimmer tanks. Sitting there with your fingers in your ears, going Lalalalalalalalala when the arguments are presented to you doesn't win anyone over.

Through your style of argueing it's very easy to rant about anything. What shall we do next? How about marines? Marines are terribly broken. For 5 pts more than my FWs you get 2 more points of WS 1x BS, 1x S, 1x T, 2X I, 1 X LD and 1 x AS, as if that wasn't enough they get ATSKNF and the ability to take vet skills, special weapons, heavy weapons and CC upgrades! Beard much! 3 pts over my DA gets you an extra 6" range, + 1T, +1S and +1 AS and ATSKNF and again, vet skills, special weapons and heavy weapons, not to mention options to buy grenades. WTF! What about landspeeders compared to Vypers or even Pirahnas (Lets just not go there). When was the last time a librarian instakilled himself with a perils test etc, etc.

(The above is entirely tongue in cheek and not to be taken too seriously, please lets not let this descend into marine bashing - i'm just trying to prove a point. Skimmer tanks do have a slight advantage over ground ones but it comes at a cost, both in cost, weaponry, armour, other disadvantages mentioned earlier and generally much less resiliant and ill equiped infantry.)



> And it gets more simple by the Codex. See you in Warhammer, where sitting behind cover makes you harder to hit, firing over long distance makes it harder to hit, not every creature moves at the same speed, and armour degrades proportional to the strength of the attack to name a few rules removed from 40k being considered too complicated.


Oh, and you can't beard out at fantasy? :roll:


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

I think the new Chaos Codex will be a pivotal 40k moment.

As you've said before, the DA and BA Codex's are specialist/supplements- GW can afford to screw them over and not royally piss off a large fan base.

The Chaos Codex will be the first mainstream book under 40k 4.5th Edition, Jervis' reign.

As for Fantasy, that's a different argument- I should't have brought it up here.



> Hahaha, yeah Whatever Si.


Errm, you initiated this?! You asked why I don't take Dreads, making a point that Falcons/Wave Serpents and Dreads have the same Armour Values. So I stated some reasons why AV 12 works for a Skimmer Tank and not for a walking bullet magnet.



> We've been over all this plenty of times before and it all boils down to the fact that you have a bee in your bonnet about skimmer tanks. Sitting there with your fingers in your ears, going Lalalalalalalalala when the arguments are presented to you doesn't win anyone over.


We shall see, with Chaos soon to be neutered the coming tournaments will show a marked increase of Taudar, particularly in the high spots if I am right.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

It's simple maths Si. With over 60% over entrants being marines it helps if you build to kill marines, yet are not a marine yourself.

Guard and nids have as high an entrant rate and there's not a skimmer tank in sight.

The main argument against dreads is that they are only AV 12, i didn't ask for a comparison with skimmers. Obviously the two are not comparable. They have different roles to play but again on most forums the reason why most people argue against dreads is because of the low AV. Now imagine the same AV on 170pts worth of big, hard to hide model, which is the ONLY reliable antitank you have and you start to get the picture.

The average tourney marine list usually has around 6-9 vehicles in it (Admittedly some of those are speeders) and i've played these lists up high on the top tables and believe me it wasn't easy beating them. So if ground based vehicles are so bad, why are so many people taking them?

I'm not entirely sure chaos will be neutered you know. I'm pretty confident that there's still going to be some very hard combos out there (I'm working on a few ATM :twisted: )


----------



## Jeridian (Jan 4, 2007)

I call bullshit on IG and Nids being as popular and as effectivee at UK tournaments.



> I'm not entirely sure chaos will be neutered you know. I'm pretty confident that there's still going to be some very hard combos out there (I'm working on a few ATM )


You have the new Codex?


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Nids and Guard were at the GT in similar nos to Eldar and Tau. In fact the very last game of the tournament had Nids and chaos battling it out on the top table for the championship, so you can call whatever you like bullshit but you are wrong.

I call your whole little "Skimmer edition" rant bullshit.

What were the results again? Chaos, marines, Eldar, Nids, Chaos, Tau, DE (Can't remember the rest of the top 10). Hardly what i'd call dominated by skimmer tanks.

I don't have the codex no, but am instead working from the rumours (which're usually pretty damned accurate)


----------



## Lord Alkmie (Jan 10, 2007)

Jeridian said:


> 2 wound T 4 3+ save with Inv save shield drones and jet packs- very fragile. For what they do I wouldn't call them expensive either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, but then SM don't get to potentially “duck out” and stay out of line of sight while they get to shoot themselves, and that is worth so much. 
You are also able to move twice the distance of a SM unit and still fire every thing you have. And the weapon options are better. 

And when I play my friends Tau list he usually have twice the number of special weapons that I have and sports 3-4 rail guns, that also gets to fire on the move. 

And I also think that Tau plasma is so much better then the SM version, as you won't kill yourself with it.
Tau is in my opinion the most broken army out there right now. Eldar are not even close. 

And if you look at the tables in the assault section you will see that the stats are not that bad for the suits, the biggest problem is the low initiative. 
This can prove to be a problem if you loose the fight, but most of the times the above average Ld will stop this from happening.


----------



## anathema (Jan 24, 2007)

Actually the Tau's relatively low Ld is one of their major weaknesses. Tau and both types of Eldar are some of the few armies which are likely to fail ld test more often than not. Every other army have ways to avoid it or have very high ld.


----------



## Lord Alkmie (Jan 10, 2007)

Hey, low and low?!?
They have 7 or 8 depending on "vet. sgt." or not. That is average or above and they also have the Ethereal to help with missed Ld-tests.

And then they have about the same chance (or even better) to pass a Ld-test as marines have with a Commander in the army.

So, my experience is that they will most likely pass the test, but there is always a risk of failure even with Ld 10 and re-roll (you can ask my Farseer :wink: ).

If you don’t believe me do the math and you will see, here is the result:
With an Ld of 10 there is a 33/36 = 91,67% chance to pass
and with Ld 8 and a re-roll there is 26/36+(10/36x26/36)=299/324=92,28% chance to pass.
This proves that Ld 8 actually have a greater chance to pass if you get the re-roll then a unit testing on Ld 10.

So, with the Ethereal in place Tau should almost never run, if not presented with overwhelming numbers in an assault.


----------



## dakari-mane (Mar 9, 2007)

Lord Alkmie said:


> So, with the Ethereal in place Tau should almost never run, if not presented with overwhelming numbers in an assault.


Yes but then you have an Ethereal in the army & that is its own punishment.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

Not really. An Ethereal may be a minor liability, but as long as you have him sitting around with a unit of Fire Warriors (or Veteran Fire Warriors, if you can find the points... that BS4 is rough with pulse rifles) he's probably pretty safe. And if he dies... the army gets pissed. No big deal. In fact, I'd probably run him forward into a whole big mess of close combat goodness just to make the army pissed off and get that nice leadership buff.


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

No Tau player in their right mind fields an Ethereal now. They just aren't worth it for so many reasons.

As to the comment about Tau being the most broken codex, I call bullshit. I am a Tau player and, I think, a slightly better than average player and it isn't like I just roll my opponents over without breaking a sweat continuously. Tau advantages (mobility and shooting) are well balanced with disadvantages (horrible CC ability, no special/heavy weapons in squads, reliance on vehicles). Just watch what happens when a Bloodthirster, C'tan, or any other CC killing machine gets into combat with a Tau unit. If you aren't careful you will watch as your entire army folds to a single model/unit. 

The jump ability of the Crisis suits is the Tau army's single biggest advantage and used to good effect can be devastating enough, but it is not enough to win you the game out of hand. Fast moving cc units, landspeeders, indirect fire, etc, will put those suits out of the game faster than you can believe and once they are going, the list is sunk. It is that simple. Without the jumping Crisis, and to a lesser degree Stealth, suits a Tau army is pretty much hosed.

Powerful in the right hands? Absolutely. Broken? Not a chance.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

Here, here.


----------



## Lord Alkmie (Jan 10, 2007)

OK, I agree that totally broken is not a right thing to say, but a list that has an advantage to offset the whole concept of how you play 40k is broken or border lining on broken.

The ability to shoot but not get shoot, when used to the maximum is broken.

If we at least had over-watch so that you could skip your shooting and lock areas of the table from Jet packing/biking it would be OK. But as it is now your only chance is to try moving up out of line of sight and hope that you get with in assault range.

The real problem is that against a Tau list you really have to be good at assault or you will be owned, and that is OK. But I would say that as assault got so much worse in 4ed then 3ed that Tau is at advantage even against a good CC-list.

Also I still can't see why Tau got Stinkwings as assault should not be a Tau tactic and also should be the thing they have to fear.

___

And as far as Ethereals go they are boring but effective, I would us them any day.

50 pts to have Ld >10 on most every unit is worth it. You have to guard him or stick him with a unit like Rail-heads so he won't get picked out to effortlessly and still be central on the board to give his moral boost.

Edited: Clearifing my point. Wrote this in a hurry this morning.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

This just sounds like you've been slapped around by the Tau a few times.

You have to realise when playing against Tau and Eldar that you are not playing against marines. They require a different approach and different tactics and these can take some time to get the hang of.


----------



## stompzilla (Mar 8, 2007)

The ability to be good at assault is not a good thing against Tau either. They are so poor in assault that even normal troops can quickly club them down.

The more points you put into assaulting the more points you don't have for shooting or mobility and the more the Tau player loves it.


----------



## Lord Alkmie (Jan 10, 2007)

"This just sounds like you've been slapped around by the Tau a few times. "

Yes, I have.

And yes I am like most people, so I tend to think that my problem is the worst and that I did draw the shortest straw.

That is why I feel that Eldar isn’t broken compared to Tau, Eldars have gotten some things that are better and the wraith lord is still powerful but they also lost one shoot from the star cannon and it cost more to field. So I think all things balance out nicely. Tau on the other hand was neither over nor under powered in 3ed, maybe a bit boring and lacking options but they could stand their ground!

Now they have a good counter assault unit and almost all units that field heavy and special weapons can move and shoot without penalties.

And I have beaten Eldars more times then loosing against them and been beaten while playing with my Eldar army.

The only things that are a bit abusive are the Harlequins and Falcon with Holofield, but they are not that broken as they cost almost one third of a 1500 pts army. And yes both can be killed...


_Hope you see that in the end its my dice that are the most broken thing on the table..._


----------



## Lord Alkmie (Jan 10, 2007)

stompzilla said:


> The ability to be good at assault is not a good thing against Tau either. They are so poor in assault that even normal troops can quickly club them down.
> 
> The more points you put into assaulting the more points you don't have for shooting or mobility and the more the Tau player loves it.


????
First of Tau is not that bad in assault, take a look at the assault rules and you will see that WS2 don't really make that big of a difference compared to having WS3 or 4...

The only thing they have to worry about are the I2 as it will most likely spell doom if they loose the fight and miss the Ld-test.

But if you have a Etheral don't worry, you have a Ld comparable to 10.


And it is impossible to out shoot a Tau army if you aren’t a Tau or IG player, so assault must be the best and almost only option.

___

But as I almost always get creamed playing against Tau, you probably shouldn't listen to me :lol:

Happy gaming any way!


----------

