I'd agree with Steve54 on this build. Checkout the
E-UK championship site for
Codex Marine lists, there are a lot of variations on this theme.
========================
And back on topic, while Steve / Beefcake's list of 10 'advantages' is partially usefull, it does not really describe how they are used. I was hoping for more comments like those of Elsaurio above
Elsaurio wrote:
Apocolocyntosis wrote:
I didn't get many outright kills in assaults, most of it was done on resolution. That said, my shooting rolls, even when token, were probably above average in accuracy (blind scorpions excluded
).
Interestingly there were two assaults where eldar rolled 1-1 for resolution and a third with a 1-2 roll … all three still won by eldar (this isn't a balance point, just very a very unlucky set of assault res rolls which amazingly fell in situations where it didn't matter)
I think Apoc may have hit on the fundamental aspect of what the opponents are feeling when facing this particular build.
As it relies on placing disrupt blast markers and high static combat res, then the Eldar army isn't really relying on the dice - they can flub their rolls and still get the desired outcome. This gives an almost guaranteed outcome that no other army build relies on.
It also leads to the frustration of the opposing player - there aren't many formations or combos of formations that can shrug off Void Spinner hit or a pre-prepped ex-ex-shining spear clipping engagement. (My emphasis)This eloquently describes a
'problem', that we can then use to consider potential fixes to the list; eg
- Reducing the number of Inspiring characters to 0-1 per Aspect formation
- Reducing the number of VS formations permitted in the 3K lists
- Removing disrupt from VS
- Making VS 'slow firing'
- etc
All of which reduce the potential for an Eldar player to rely on a near certain outcome in a 'clipping' assault under these conditions.
Obviously, the opponent can also avoid the 'clipping' assault in the first place through
- carefull placement of all units to prevent a few being 'clipped'
- keeping other formations in support range of key formations
- placing BMs on the VS and especially on the Shining Spears
- having key defensive formations on OW to place at least one BM on the Shining Spears as they assault
- etc
And it may be that the community think these strategic and tactical tips sufficient - or insufficient - to fix the stated 'problem'.
The point is that we really need solid examples of how the BT list can and is being 'abused'. Merely saying that they have the best Assaulters / Scouts / Free units etc (all of which can be disputed) does not really help us pin down the exact things to fix, without which we will end up in a series of endless, unsatisfactory, subjective discussions that won't resolve the issue to everyone's satisfaction.
Personally, I
really want to avoid a repetition of the years of rancorous and heated debates that accompanied the original Eldar discussions for 2-3 years before the original changes were made to the list in 2008. Not least, because the Aussies need to be helped, either with appropriate fixes, with more appropriate hints and tips or some mixture of the two.