I don't really think any of those changes in Ginger's post are going to break the list really. I'm not sure about 700 for a phantom either, but we are a long way from seeing tons of phantoms on the table. If it happens then it can be dealt with. In any case, I think "totally inappropriate" is a bit strong Ginger. I think it's good to always bear in mind that other people may disagree when giving our opinions, lest we come off too prescriptive.

The thing is, much of your objection seems to be predicated on the fact that the affected units are a "work in progress". Well, this is what progress looks like. At some point the list has to get into routine play, and as Greg says most of those changes have already done that in the EpicUK tournaments. You personally might say "300 is too cheap" for bombers, but clearly people disagree with you - and having been tempted into using them at that price in a tournament, I count myself amongst that number. 300 is still a significant points investment for what they give you, whatever theoryhammering on their stats tells you. I would say that 350 was simply way overpriced. But the salient point is this: at this level of granularity, who can ever say whether 300 or 325 is "right" anyway? You're never going to get everyone to agree on that. When they come in and get nice dice and your formation gets chewed up you're going to say "300? that's way too cheap!", and when you fail all your activations in your game you'll say "300? that's way too much!".

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

You are correct that I take part in the E-UK tournament scene (which I greatly enjoy - when my dice behave ).

However the point is that these are the *NetEA* Eldar stats, used by a slightly different community and potentially under different circumstances; even though we all tend to fight 'tournament games'. The E-UK team process various stats and changes at a much faster rate than the Net-EA group, quite possibly using slightly different criteria than the EEC. Much as I personally would like all the various communities to use a single set of army lists and unit stats, Kyrt is correct that many divergent opinions exist globally and this can colour opinions expressed on particular topics. For example, although the Scorpion was used more frequently in last years E-UK tournaments*** than previously, I thought there were a number of people outside that community who were testing other configurations, and AFAIK that debate had not been completely resolved on either range, number of shots or power.

I also agree with Kyrt that my comments notwithstanding, we are unlikely to see masses of Phantoms. In the 10 E-UK tournaments last year only 2 people took Phantoms for a total of 6 games which is hardly testing the stats. However, I do stand by the view that changing the Phantom cost is inappropriate because this messes with the balance of the list as a whole while it does not really make the Phantom much more attractive. As with the Banshees and War Walkers etc, we may need to accept the general view that the Phantom is a bit sub-optimal, or that we do not yet know how to use it well.

***FWIW, The latest Eldar changes occurred in April 2014, since when 5 people took 9 Scorpions in 4 out of 7 tournaments (for a total of 18 games out of an estimated 250-300 games). They also took 2 Cobras and 2 Storm Serpents apart from 15 Void Spinners, hence the hike in the Void Spinner price although that does not seem to have reduced its popularity greatly

Ok, that sounds weird. Where can I find that info? (I live in a small country and we always has play with the Tournament pack version. And in the European championship it was the same and UK do their own version and France do their so perhaps things is different in the slightly larger areas across the sea? )
If it is true, then why do we have an approval step? If people are ignoring it then perhaps we should take it away?
Just ignore submitting the changes to yourself and the other 4 guys in the ERC and the 4.2 will probably be used by the community...

And in all seriousness, all the talk about the Epic UK list being a good reference. Why not copy it and we will have the same list in both formats? With the changes proposed it will only be small differences between the two lists anyway... just a thought

And last, after studying my favorite subject, the Iyanden, on the EpicUK site.
The proposed changes to the Vampire will make all the lists ever submitted "useless", as they all includes at least one Vampire with Wraithguards. This is a big change for the Iyanden, please take it up in that thread before making the change (Still think it is a good alternative but it might be good to hear what other people say that actually play the list. And together with other changes that might come...)

The talk about changes to the Vampire stats sent me looking for the current version of the list v4.2

But I could not find it? Is it the first post in this Topic:
netea-eldar-biel-tan-2015-playstest.pdf

No hint in that about a change to the Vampire that would affect Iyanden.
What is the issue? Is it all buried in posts in this thread?

You still did not explain what the change would be and how it will affect the list. Exaxtly what will change in the wording and exactly how would it affect gameplay?

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Hope I do not sound to harsh but I do not understand what you are saying so I will try to make my questions/concerns clearer.

No I did not make an assumption, I stated that all tournaments I know of use the Tournament pack for the Eldar Biel-Tan list (If they play NetEA). You said that 80% of all tournaments do not use the TP so I want to know where you got that information as I only know of EpicUK as a resource to statistics and the do not use NetEA lists at all. (and I do not talk about other lists, we allow Worldeaters too but not the "playtest" version (in tournaments at least). Lets say there were a big tournament tomorrow would you play with the 4.2 version then?)

Say what? Sorry English is not my first language but I tried to suggest that we use the EpicUK list and your answer is something about world peace?

Not quite following you here...
You said the list (Biel-Tan 4.2) already has been sent to be approved by the ERC. That means if the changes goes through the Vampire will only be able to take 4 Wraithguards in all lists including Iyanden, right?
Mic hasn't made a single post about the list he is "champion" over so clearly step 3 and 4 is not going to happen before the change goes through or am I missing something?

"by changes to the structure of the Iyanden formations" What changes? Have I missed a new Iyanden list thread or do you have a secret list somewhere?

No, Mic will be along soon with the first draft of the updated Iyanden. What he didn't want to do is post his revision to be shouted down by the AC and ERC.

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

I have no problem with that, I even think it is a very good approach.
The issue is that the Vampire change will not affect Biel-Tan but only Iyanden, as no other list will be limited by the new "4 Wraithguards" restriction. So basically you "develop" the Iyanden list in this thread without hearing what the players of that specific race think/want.

I think the change to the Vampire is kind of new as I haven't seen it until recently but it's not in the list but in the opening statement:
4) The wording in the notes section about transports on the Vampire raider, to say the following: Transport-May transport eight infantry without Mounted or 4 Wraithguard units.
The Wraithguards comes in formations of 6 units so it's basically says that Wraithguards can't fly any more

I know what you're saying uvenlord but I would just say this: try not to worry. I am sure you will get your say. It might not be when you want to, but it will happen.

Remember that the iyanden list is not approved. Yet it follows along from the biel-tan list. The existing iyanden list is not going to disappear from history, so it is just as valid to use one non-approved version of the list as it is any other non-approved version of the list. Clearly the new "proposed" (playtest) iyanden list will have this change to vampires in it - I consider this a "sneak peek". That change will inevitably be debated on the iyanden thread as would normally happen. Just because the change has been made "upstream" doesn't mean it can never be changed back again if it needs to because of the development of the Iyanden list.

Without wishing to speak on behalf of anyone else, it seems to me that the ACs and ERC took the view that the change to the vampire has to be made in the Biel-Tan list because it is a shared unit, and it makes sense to do it now because the Biel-Tan list is being updated first. Think of it this way: if the change were proposed the other way around (i.e. during Iyanden development) you would have people complaining of the opposite problem: "you aren't allowed to change that, it needs to be changed in the biel-tan list".

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

No problem, an answer within a couple of days is not slow!

I wont spam this thread with more Iyanden stuff as I obviously fail to make my point. I have nothing against the changes just how they were put forward. Don't have a good example but a change that only affects Dark Angels wouldn't have been made to the Codex Marines before it was mentioned and tested in the Dark Angel thread. It will probably take a while for the Iyanden to be approved so nothing stops the Vampire to be changed in the new Iyanden list only. I agree that we should have the same stats on all Vampires across the Eldar lists but that doesn't mean that some lists play around with playtesting stats on different units.
Like it is done with the Wraithguards right now.

Guessing I won't get an answer to my questions about statistics and how the community is going to have a chance contributing to the changes but that's ok.

Looking forward to hear how it went with the ERC and this list

Ah, but then it was a misunderstanding about the statistics I guess . When you said that 80% uses the 4.1 version I thought you had some source that I didn't know of as you spoke percentage and not "3 tournaments".
Didn't get that you spoke of your "local" Australian gaming scene, where I live 100% used the TP last year

It would also be interesting to see some battlereports or builds from the tournaments if you were in some of them? In my group we play a little differently when playing tournaments and we use a slightly more "aggressive" build when competing.

I hope you will let the community be a part of the process, it's key to have this board living. It's not that many people writing here but I personally didn't even know the changes was submitted to be approved until after it was done. And to my knowledge you are almost the only one who have submitted battlereports, usually there is a demand of 18 reports from 3 different player groups so I thought the approval was several month away...
The thing is that there are so many changes done at the same time with a "core" list so almost every one dislikes at least one change Also it makes playtesting very hard as one change might be affected by another and some changes might only be playtested in one or two games.

That said I want to thank you for pushing this list forward. You are a monster at delivering battlereports and that is good, as it is an active player I want to be in charge of list building. (Even though I sometimes think we have different strategies when playing )

So keep up the good work!

Regarding the last 3 tournaments run in Australia on the east coast I can offer some feed back from 2 of them. I was the TO for Castle Assault 14 and I played in CANCON 15 with BT v4.1.

This is the list I ran at Cancon,
ASPECT WARRIOR WARHOST [400]
8 Shining Spear, Autarch, Exarch

ASPECT WARRIOR WARHOST [325]
8 Shining Spear, Exarch

GUARDIAN WARHOST [150]
Farseer, 6 Guardians, Heavy Weapon Platform

RANGER TROUPE [100]
4 Ranger

RANGER TROUPE [100]
4 Ranger

SWORDS OF VAUL TROUPE [250]
3 Falcon, 2 Fire Storm

SWORDS OF VAUL TROUPE [250]
3 Falcon, 2 Fire Storm

NIGHT SPINNER TROUPE [175]
3 Night Spinners

ENGINE OF VAUL TROUPE [250]
Scorpion

ENGINE OF VAUL TROUPE [250]
Void Spinner

AVATAR [0]

PHANTOM TITAN [750]



I am happy to provide a summary of the games I played at Cancon 15 but I can also offer the lists for the two eldar players at CA14 if people want that info.

Cheers

Mic