Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Eldar Titan Pulsars

 Post subject: Re: Eldar Titan Pulsars
PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Hena wrote:
I don't like the idea of 3x pulsar at all in terms of being opponent to it.

I don't like the idea of facing a Warlock Titan kitted out for assault either... ;D

This isn't about "liking" the idea, it's about *testing* the idea. Have you faced many dual Pulsar Phantoms in actual play Hena? What, if any, were your and your opponent's experience with them?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Eldar Titan Pulsars
PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
Obviously a 3x MW3+ Pulsar will favour the Phantom more than either Scorpion or Warlock because the former only has one weapon, while the latter works best with a Fist in CC rather than a single Pulsar (IMHO). In part at least, this is supported by the UK tournament stats where the Warlock is used more than the Phantom. So the main question is whether the Phantom would be OTT.

The initial complaint was that the original Pulse rules encourage these titans to act in an 'un-Eldar' like manner by standing still and sustaining rather than being mobile. This was certainly true of Revenants and partly for the twin Pulsar Phantom; though here at least, lurking near the deployment zone is a legitimate tactic given the range of the weapon. Indeed it is still the usual tactic of twin Pulsar Phantoms - changing pulse has not changed the tactic here at least, just nerfed the unit.

I agree with Hena that twin Pulsar Phantoms will be nasty to any armoured formation now, and upping the firepower will increase the impact - but I am not convinced it will be OTT. It might also redress the balance against the Gargant and Great Gargant. However you should note that statistically there is only ~33% chance of getting 6x hits when sustaining on this configuration, and significantly less if advancing or doubling (or using my dice :)). Also as others have said, it is much less usefull against infantry targets.

Sadly I am not in a position to test this for a few weeks, but will try if I can.

Finally on the 50pts reductioin, I am dead against this in any configuration. The thing is that the Eldar list has always worked better with higher value armies (3500+), mainly because the player can then afford to get multiples of favoured formations providing redundancy and economies of scale. Though seemingly trivial, reducing the Phantom by 50pts would partially unbalance the entire list, making both Revenants and Warlocks less desirable, while not really achieving anything else.

For my part, a change I would prefer to try is 0-1 Revenant for 350pts - but that is a completely different debate :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net