I tend to agree Jim (and Mic). In other lists, Aspects provide the capability of a triple retain (together with titans and Avatar which the lists have in common). In this list list the Aspects are weaker, so having the Wraithseer with this capability is not excessive IMHO. The Eldar triple retain is always a fearsome beast when executed with major formations - but it is hard to set up especially against mobile opponents.

My only other comment is that Aspects in this list are possibly too weak / cheap. Has anyone tried spamming them (it could be an "interesting" test)? I think I would possibly prefer the E-UK approach of formations of six Aspects for 250, if only because it would prevent this (Note I have not yet tried this . . .)

I appreciate the irritation of the 2+ initiative, however Aspects don't have the farsight rule so are not auto retaining and as most people only play small point games (3000) with a few crucial engagements per turn it's an unnecessary buff. Also it forces the use of portals for the eldar player and has a little risk strategy that can produced big wins.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk

True Aspects don't have farsight but the Iyandens first activation rarely have 1+ initiative so its kind of similar...

The risk is the Stormserpents, if they loose the strategy roll or if the enemy has scouts that is in the way, the Stormserpents is a big target to deathstrikes and spaceships to name a few. Once lost the enemy just has to keep a good distance to the remaining gate to be kind of "safe". And depending on the number of formations in the warp the Iyanden might also suffer from a big activation drawback if they can't field all formations on turn 1.
Its a sometimes boring 1 shot weapon, I agree. (tripple move SS, engage 1, engage 2 =almost win or loose the game) But there are several armies with this kind of strategy and you need to roll 2+ two times to pull it off, the first roll without a reroll.

The thing that strikes me as perhaps too powerful is their ability to move full speed when they consolidate. This makes the tripple retain/engage much more powerful as you are more likely to get into supporting range.

Anyone keeping track on how the Iyanden is doing? (win/loose ratio) Perhaps they need a nerf, they feel kind of stable to me but I might be wrong ...?

Ok fair enough I don't have an Iyanden army so don't want to poke holes in it's composition. I would also like to see a win/lose ratio that might change my opinion.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk

Fresh Battle report

viewtopic.php?f=84&t=30191&p=572324#p572324

4-0 to Iyanden in 3 turns vs Thousand Sons

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

The Wraithseer 1+ didn't have much effect in this game, but it does feel wrong playing with it.

When playing with Iyanden they are very powerful especially against forces with limited longthe last range shooting, as shown in two games I've played with them.

One game they failed to get initiative in the first three turns, but pulled out a draw. Last game they won the firsttwo turns which really hurt the Thousand Sons who had limited shooting back.

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

That looks like its overpowered to me.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk

You cant base if something is OP just of winrate. You need to factor in if the rule had and significance in each report and who the opponent is, as i doesn't matter how good or bad the list is or a rule is if the user is more skilled at epic in general then the opponent or vice versa.

I know in the games I have played vs Iyanden and the ones I have seen maybe in 2 out of i think roughly 8 has the rule had an impact and even in those 2 being 1+ or 2+ would not have changed the outcome of the activation or the game.

To me if you think triple retaining is OP with 1+ look at the triple retain as every Eldar army has some way of doing something similar to what the Iyanden do.


But hey these are just my lowly pleb thoughts so take them with a grain of salt

Caz

I was assuming that these factors balance out, experienced players vs inexperienced players and a variety of different armies in 54 games. It's a small thing that gets out of hand, mainly born out of a irritation of 2+ initiative after all the formation would be retaining on a 2+ anyhow.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk

Yes that seems about right, I'll stop my whinge shall I.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk

FWIW, the E-UK stats tend to have a higher-than-average Draw rate due to the time pressures in the tournament environment. 48% - 41% (26 wins - 22 losses) seems pretty good so far

Interesting stats I am surprised that there are not more draws.

I'd say that the EUK stats show more draws as a result of evening out of player skills more than time nowadays

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

Just to avoid misunderstandings this time
Where did you get these numbers from?
Do we really got 50+ play tests with this list?
Also it is a little bit confusing when the numbers is turned into %. Did you really aim at 50% win when counting draws? If you only count win/loss ratio its about 54% win and 46% loss. Not that bad on such a small sample rate...

I wouldn't look too much at EpicUK, the two lists look very different now and about half of all games played with UK list is played by RichardL. If you take away his results the win ratio is only about 30%

Anyway its a too small sample, both UK and NetEA but we might see a trend...