The last two posts by Pati and Kyrt sum up my points nicely - the list is flexible but hard to use well and the Eldar formations hit hard but are brittle. The 2+ activation for most formations are a weakness that is relatively easy for opponents to exploit but which a good player can mitigate to some extent. That Pati's opponents think he is 'cheating' suggests both that he knows how to use the list well and his opponents are less able to exploit the weaknesses.

To be fair, this is part of the joy that is E:A. You cannot just pick a "super army" expecting to wipe out all opponents, you also need to understand appropriate tactics and unit positioning, and how to place objectives and exploit terrain. Using cheap scouts to contain titans is a superb example open to many lists, but there are many others.

However, the need to use appropriate tactics also makes it so much harder to balance units and formations across lists. An army champion that constantly loses games to better opponents could easily be tempted to boost things until he started winning. The reverse is also true; a superb army champion could be tempted to nerf things (though this is far less usual ). This is why the E-UK tournaments and database is so valuable, because the conditions used in the many years of playing have remained constant together with many of the players, allowing a far more objective view on the relative balance of the lists.

Sorry, I was trying to mention their effectiveness in killing something (no AT -next to multilaser armed Sentinels), not the usefulness of their ZoC

Of course, screening is scouts main job!

Personally (and as an Eldar player too) I would say our play group has found exactly the opposite - eldar are by far the quickest for new players to get the hang off and the hardest to learn to beat. It's a fairly small group but of the 4/5 of us relatively regular players everyone thinks eldar are the toughest army to beat virtually whoever is playing them.

They seem to have all the best of everything and as everything is so specialised, as long as you make sure you use every formation to do its job (and seeing as you have some of the best support - transports, fliers, AA, etc - they normally can) then it's pretty easy going.

That said, we noticed most epic UK boards are more open than we generally used. Eldar power is significantly affected by terrain, and when using eldar we are now meticulous in sticking to the tournament set up and using terrain shadowing very intensely to avoid giving them a major advantage. It's a shame as normally like a quite dense board, but while sparse/dense set ups balance for other armies with pluses and minuses for both, we eldar its all to their advantage.

They are still strong though.

I really like the current BT list.
With the possible exception of the infiltrating HBs (I don't think it's necessary or backed up by the fluff).
And the eldar are by far my favorite army to play, I almost took them to cancon but decided to try out my marine army with two landing craft seeing as though my eldar list ate through Spaz Marines, Guard, Crons, AMTL and another Crons list at Castle Assault.

The eldar are flexible and hard hitting, but soft and squishy when they get hit. Which is a great balance!

@Dobbsy IIRC the Aspects didn't completly destroy them and had the assistance of some supporting fire and the Aspects with exarch and autarch are 400 points and the DKOK are only 425 (don't get me started on how OTT 20 inf stands with 2 dc3 Warengines with a 4++ save and a bogus critical is) so in a points to points match up of two assault focused units the Aspects should always do alright depending on placement etc.

I would hate to see night wings increase in points... but 250 for two would probably be acceptable.

Id just like to raise that dobbsy is a hard working community member and doesn't deserve some of the vitriol dished out by people in this thread. It is possible to have differing opinions.

Cheers,
Jim

Here's the thread for the battle stats tracker I mentioned:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=21695

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

So sorry for being repetitive PFE100 but where do we stand now?

Are the changes stable in this version? (i.e can we start using them in the other Eldar lists?)
Are these changes so big that we need the "18 games" for approval or can you just implement them?
I'm guessing yes on both questions as you have begun battlereporting but no one else seems to follow. I will try and get a game or two with a Biel-Tan list in the following week but I do not really have a lot of aspect warriors (or most of the other units that got changed)
Anyway anything special you want me to try out in that case? (I can proxie things)

Umm, please do not take thi the wrong way, but I would not be happy for the revised cost to the Phantom being approved for many reasons. I also do not think you have received sufficient testing from other people to confirm or reject this or the other changes, and your own games often do not provide sufficient testing of the proposed changes either (though they are entertaining).

ok, good to know. But if the list already is put forward why do you need more battlereports? (Or do you just want the feedback )

I have nothing specific against any of the changes but overall it seems like all the changes (besides the Voidspinner) is for the better. Do you think the Biel-Tan needs the boost? In my mind the list is balanced so these suggestions should come with some nerfs also, to keep the balance and to prevent power creep.

Also as an Iyanden player. The change to the Vampire is a good suggestion but is this the right place? The change will only affect Iyanden as far as I know and not a word about this in that thread? Some of the most powerful Iyanden builds include 3 Vampires with wraitguards and with this change you are removing that option and render some models and collections almost useless...

That said I hope some of the changes goes through and the list becomes stable so we can move on

Like I said, you do not need to justify the changes they look good and I agree on those that I have any experience with. Especially the Fire prism points change!
But we need to compare 4.2 with the one in the TP not with 4.1 (as it was never approved) to get the right picture about "power creep". In tournaments around where I live we have played with the TP edition for the last years. Have you played it differently?

Well, I agree that thee are some suggestions that are worth accepting, but in fact the 4.2 version represents a considerable number of changes, and that in itself causes me concerns - I guess it depends on whether the EEC can approve some unit / formation changes in isolation rather than the whole list, though I think that is unlikely. The alternative might be for the EEC to identify to you those parts that are potentially acceptable, and for a series of mini-changes to be passed.

Personally I suggest that the following parts are probably acceptable:

• EoV 2nd and 3rd units for 200
• Void Spinner removed to be a singleton for 275
• Fire Prism reduced to 50 in the SoV
• War Walkers 150 for 4, with 0-2 for 25 each (though I cannot recall anyone actually using them on the boards)
• The Vampire transport re-wording

The Howling Banshee changes may work, certainly they provided some entertaining engagements in battle reports, though whether they work appropriately is the subject of much debate.

Changes that IMO should not be approved are

• Scorpion EoV Pulsar
  The changes to the stats of this weapon are definitely still a work in progress, so should not be approved until this process is complete,
• Phoenix bombers at 325
  These are also a work in progress. IMO this is better than the E-UK cost (300) which is too cheap, but it is far from clear whether 325 is appropriate.
• Changing the Phantom titan cost to 700
  This is totally inappropriate for many reasons; It allows other aerospace formations (nightwings and spaceship) as well as impacting Revenants cost as well.
  And going to 725 is cosmetic IMO, it will not influence the player to take the Phantom over something else.
• The Phantom Pulsar
  The revised stats are also more a work in progress that needs more testing and confirmation by the community.

Please bear with the ERC PFE100 has actually identified more proposed changes than I, for one, initially thought were coming through. This is taking longer to go through than a couple of minor changes in a list would normally take. We will get there though more testing on some changes may be requested.

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