Board index » NetEA Development » NetEA Eldar

• Board index
• Search
• Register

Top

semajnollissor	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:10 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm Posts: 1673 Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA	It's my opinion that any special rule that modifies the effects of BMs, either directly like ATSKNF or grots, or indirectly like mob-up, spirit stones, and leaders, is more "valuable" than other types of special rules. By that I mean that these types of rules make the game "more-better" than other types of special rules do. I believe this because I think that the way BM's are generated and managed under the rules given in chapter one are seriously flawed. I think that they unfairly penalize small, elite units. That's why SM's need ATSKNF. ATSKNF isn't just a rule for fluff purposes, it is a required modification to the core rules needed to make the small formations of the SM's playable. IMO, the same is true of spirit stones. Now maybe the IG has some small units, but can they be considered elite? Certainly the eldar have some small units, are they more elite than the equivalent IG units? I say they are, because the eldar are supposed to be more elite than the mondane IG. That's why I don't see a problem with spirit stones from a fairness POV (outside of the point balance issues). As for the total number of special rules that the Eldar have, well, they need to have as many as it takes to get them to play in a specific way. One problem is that I think we also disagree on what that specific way ought to be. For example, in one of my earlier posts I pointed out that my typical eldar force only has one guardian host (that's actually a mistake, I typically take a min-sized 2nd Guardian host to fill points and make more troupes available, it just never does much). Someone else responded they they typically take 4 or 5. For my part, I just can't see why anyone would want to do that. Is that really a fun army to play? Is it really flexible enough to get the job done? I'd guess the answer to the second question is yes (I never claimed that the hosts were incapable, with or without spirit stones), but the answer to the first question is an opinion, and I have to say the answer is "no" for myself. I honestly and truly believe that an eldar army that is heavy in AV support troupe is at a significant disadvantage compared to one that has more hosts and WE's. The only problem I would have with switching from spirit stones to transferable leaders would be my concern that I couldn't cover enough support troupes to make those all-AV troupes worth taking. Now, if all that means is I'd have to switch from a Biel tan-based list to an Ulthwe-based list, then thats not a problem (as long as the number of Farseers in the ulthwe list isn't reduced as a further result of the rule change). All I ask is for you to keep that all-AV support troupe heavy eldar army lists in your thoughts.
Top

Fuzzymiles	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:15 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:16 pm Posts: 19	My typical army list runs something like this 1x Guardians with Wraithguard and Spirit Seer 2x Guardians with Wraithguard 2x Guardians 2x Night Spinners 1x Wraithgate 1x Storm Serpent (new addition 75cm move then a unit of guardians with wraithguard jumping out makes me a happy person) Then either 3x Fire Prisms or my Revenants or some other support units based on what I am facing. Just wanted to throw out that, overall, this list is both effective, I have something like a 13-1 record so far with em  , and, for me at least, is fun to play.  Without spirit stones or something related, it would quickly become an entirely different list because the support formations would quickly be replaced by engines of vaul or flyers.  As Eldar, our support formations just CANNOT stand up to incoming fire without Spirit Stones and people do target them with the knowledge that ONE kill renders that unit combat ineffective for at least one turn no matter what BM rules are in place.  My main point is that we can't just rip the Spirit Stones out without something for the Support Troupes, reguardless of how the army played in playtesting.  I have no idea how having your formation broken on turn one and rallying with 1 BM in playtesting then breaking AGAIN when it fails it's 3+ activation was considered a good thing because it happens to me way to much even WITH the Spirit Stones and cover . Anyway, the whole point of this is that while I believe that Warhosts and larger formations don't need Spirit Stones, one extra BM only matters at the 2 and 3 mark, taking them out and not replacing them with an alternative, even if the alternative only affects a smaller number of units, is not a good solution to the problem. Fuzzymiles
Top

nealhunt	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:31 pm
Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA	Fuzzy:  I don't understand how you can claim that they can't afford to lose something while citing a 13-1 record. I would say that not only says they can stand to lose something, but that they really need to have something taken out. _________________ Neal
Top

semajnollissor	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:50 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm Posts: 1673 Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA	Hey Fuzz, I didn't mean to single you out, especially since it's obvious that we agree on our main points. that being said - wow, thats a lot of activations in your army. I assume you hide 5-6 of those formations in the webway. My typical list is: 1xwraithgate 1xguardians with everything 1xaspects with exarch and autarch and serpents 1x guardians with support platforms 2xfalcons (no firestorms yet - don't know If they're worth it) 2xfire prisms 2xnight spinners So you see, by the structure of my list, those two main hosts are so large that they don't care about spirit stones either way, but the rest typically need it, especially those Falcons, which get used in support a lot. If spirit stones were swapped for farseers with transferable leader, I'd have to switch to an Ulthwe-based list (no problem there). I'd trade out my 2xfalcons and 1xaspects for 2xaspect in falcons, and then take black guardian hosts instead of normal guardian hosts to get more farseers. If Falcons could be purchsed for 125 pts for 2 to transport aspects, I'd probably drop the support platform on the minor guardian host, and trade one serpent for two falcons. As it is, there are no 75 pt formation upgrades.
Top

Moscovian	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:34 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm Posts: 6414 Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA	Obviously Eldar is going to go through some change whether we like it or not.  My biggest concern is that six formations are going to get their points bumped and the updated rules are going to affect them and the Spirit Stones are going to get taken away and we're going to shove corks in their tail pipes and whip the players who win with them... There are a lot of voices crying out for the dismantling of the Eldar and yet they are only at a 60% win ratio on the battlestats.  With 148 games input, that's a good sized indicator that the list is NOT broken.  Bent, perhaps? If the Spirit Stones are that big of an advantage, will removing them tip the balance of the army to a losing percentage?  Will the haters-of-Stones be satisfied with just that change? Making point changes on the Titans is one thing, but increasing the prices on many formations while taking away the spirit stones in a setting where the rules are about to be played differently means that this army could easily break in the exact opposite direction. When the final decisions are made, I would hope that we give the list a nudge, not a boot in the @ss. _________________ author of Syncing Forward and other stories... It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
Top

semajnollissor	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:04 am
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm Posts: 1673 Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA	Well, I don't think there is universal support for changing point values as much as there is for getting rid of spirit stones. And then, the support for ditching stones is conditional on getting some toned down alternative. All the talk for point changes has just been lists of opinions, not an actual debate. I would think the number of formations that will get point bumps is closer to 2, not 6. Also, at least on my part, I think there is the assumption that both the Feral orks and the Siege IG armies will get toned down, as well. I feel that if they don't get toned down, there isn't much point of toning down the eldar. However, I do think that it is a good thing that we are learning how to handle this type of situation, because there are similar issues with the lists currently under development. It seems like the conditions that resulted in the armies in the swordwind supplement are even more exaggerated now.
Top

nealhunt

Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 12:05 am

Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA

There are a lot of voices crying out for the dismantling of the Eldar and yet they are only at a 60% win ratio on the battlestats. I don't think that is an accurate statement.  None of the serious playtesters and developers are calling for more than tweaks, and most of that is driven by the feel of the army. Even Jaldon, while being dogpiled in this thread, is talking about allowing the transfer-leader.  While that is obviously lower in raw power, probably ~1/3 as many BMs removed, it is very flexible and will obviously be used where Spirit Stones would have been most effective anyway.  What he is talking about is effectively a reduction of probably 50% of the real Spirit Stone bonus, depending on army composition. The issue is not that the Eldar are heinously overpowered.  They're not.  I'd put it at only ~10% or so off in points.  The problem is that they are slightly overpowered and feel too hard in play. _________________ Neal

Top

Fuzzymiles	Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:11 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:16 pm Posts: 19	Quote (nealhunt @ 16 Feb. 2006 (21:31)) Fuzzy: ?I don't understand how you can claim that they can't afford to lose something while citing a 13-1 record. I would say that not only says they can stand to lose something, but that they really need to have something taken out. Neal, I am in no way saying that we can't stand to loose anything, but I do believe we shouldn't go ripping Spirit Stones out without something to replace them. ?Revenants were only added about halfway through the process of my list, maybe about game 6 or 7 . I took them out for my last game so far after they got crushed by 2 Termie formations. ?(As a side note, there is a Bat Rep on my most recent game up on the EA discussion forums on the standard site). ?The main two issues I can comment on with my experiences are that Revenants points should be 700 for 2 and I think the points for Wraithguard/ Wraithlords need to be reversed 175/ 150 instead of 150/ 175. ?I also agree that we don't NEED Spirit Stones on Warhosts, but I do think that the small formations of vehicles do NEED something to help them. ?This being my opinion, I think having the Farseers/ Exarchs having the transferable leader skill to support the smaller units cuts the number of removed BM's while still keeping the smaller vehicle units from becoming all but un-usable on a battlefield. ?The only other way to fix this issue, that I can see, would be to increase the formation size of the smaller formations so a single kill doesn't break them, but this increases the firepower of the unit by too much and really removes the feel of being Eldar from the list. Fuzzymiles
Top

Jaldon

Post subject: What are the issues with Spirit Stones? Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 3:52 am

Brood Brother Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am Posts: 720 Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.

This is a reply I am not ripping anyone, or anything, apart however I do want to be clear. Anyone that wishes to can go back along this thread and see I have remained consistent in the following views. Obviously Eldar is going to go through some change whether we like it or not.  My biggest concern is that six formations are going to get their points bumped and the updated rules are going to affect them and the Spirit Stones are going to get taken away..................... I am with Sem here, at the most it would probably be two formations that get bumped. Yes, but the updated rules will effect everybody, and if the results do cause a breakdown in the Eldar Army then I will support changes to even things out because of them. There are a lot of voices crying out for the dismantling of the Eldar and yet they are only at a 60% win ratio on the battlestats.  With 148 games input, that's a good sized indicator that the list is NOT broken.  Bent, perhaps?

My issue from day one has been Spirit Stones and Holofields working in CC.

Now the CC thing I have stated more then once I am not demanding it's removal, only that I am having a difficult time rationalizing the fluff.

Spirit Stones I do have a serious problem with and I do want them replaced with something else. Preferably something different then what the other armies have so that it is Eldar only, but also not all encompassing like Spirit Stones

This is a far cry from calling for a dismantling of the list, in fact I would be opposed to any action taken to remove Hit and Run, Pulse Weapons, etc.....

Making point changes on the Titans is one thing, but increasing the prices on many formations while taking away the spirit stones in a setting where the rules are about to be played differently means that this army could easily break in the exact opposite direction.


I would oppose across the board points increases, and in fact have yet to find anyone calling for it. Again Spirit Stones are not being taken away they are being replaced with something else. No doubt the Eldar do need something to handle BMs on small formations, I just don't feel it should be across the board like Spirit Stones are.

I don't think that is an accurate statement.  None of the serious playtesters and developers are calling for more than tweaks, and most of that is driven by the feel of the army.


Yes, and no more then that.

Neal, I am in no way saying that we can't stand to loose anything, but I do believe we shouldn't go ripping Spirit Stones out without something to replace them.

I do believe that the discussion has been about finding a replacement for them, not for their total removal with nothing to replace them.

This being my opinion, I think having the Farseers/ Exarchs having the transferable leader skill to support the smaller units cuts the number of removed BM's while still keeping the smaller vehicle units from becoming all but un-usable on a battlefield.

This is the effect I believe they will have and is the intent of the transfer idea. Only playtesting can determine if it is true, and I only suggested giving it a try.

Also, at least on my part, I think there is the assumption that both the Feral orks and the Siege IG armies will get toned down, as well. I feel that if they don't get toned down, there isn't much point of toning down the eldar.


Yes, much talk indeed, in fact the Siege AC himself has said that his creation needs to be toned down a bit. I think most agree so do the Feral Orks. And you are very correct in pointing out that if they don't get toned down there is really no point in toning down the Eldar.

The issue is not that the Eldar are heinously overpowered.  They're not.  I'd put it at only ~10% or so off in points.  The problem is that they are slightly overpowered and feel too hard in play.

I agree 100% with this and............

To which I would like to add, as an Eldar player, they don't play like the fluff says they should, and IMHO Spirit Stones are at the core of that issue.

The only other way to fix this issue, that I can see, would be to increase the formation size of the smaller formations so a single kill doesn't break them, but this increases the firepower of the unit by too much and really removes the feel of being Eldar from the list.

I agree I wouldn't like to see this either.

Jaldon