I would take 3 falcons and 2 firestorms over the scorpion any day of the week.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I would generally agree that the Void Spinner is better than Night Spinners - which is why they are cheaper. However, the comparisons blur as you increase the numbers, so 3x Night spinners are getting to be on par with 2x Void Spinners because of the additional activation and larger firepower (initially). Best is to have both treating the Void Spinner as 'Heavy' artillery, while Night Spinners are 'Medium' artillery.

However, all Eldar WE are susceptible to assault both because of their weaker FF capabilities and weaker armour. Skimmer does help, but for instance if you assault an IG Shadow Sword with an Eldar WE, the Shadowsword should win every time because of it's 4+RA vs the Eldar 5+RA.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

There has been much debate on this very subject, and it really depends on how they are used.

The Scorpion is much more resilient and does not lose firepower with BMs, has a longer range and more powerfull weapons. However the Falcons are faster, kick out a greater volume of fire, have better assault stats and can also provide brilliant AA (until it is supressed of course).

The two formations really have slightly different roles with the Falcons working best against medium and light AVs and mechanised infantry, while the Scorpions (and Fire Prisms) work better against small RA targets.

That said, There was also much talk about increasing the number of Fire Prisms in a formation to make them more resilient, and at least one of the potential problems this raised was whether the Scorpion was actually under armed / over-priced. Part of this issue lies in the desire for a single price for all Eldar WE to allow formations to mix-&-match (which I have never seen I might add), but it does raise the question what if the stats were raised to 3x MW2 60cm weapons, would that now be well OTT?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

wow, didn't realise I hit such a bone of contention! From my limited experience with Scorpions (and Chris is right, didn't make a fig of difference in this game, though you could argue that for all of my actions a range boost to 75cm would be enough for me. 60cm is just not quite enough and somewhat limited my option. Would also fit better in my mind with the low shot high impact role.

One thing I do like is the consistent stats between Eldar vehicles, so I wouldn't be in favour of tweaking individual models to fix balance issues.

_________________
numquam culum es

This really ought to be in the "EA Eldar" section of the forum, as it's more a unit design discussion than a "rules" discussion.

I'm considered upping the Scorpion's attack value to "3x" as under the old Pulse rule, it was highly likely to actually get the three shots and that's what its point value seems to suggest.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

sorry, feel free to move as appropriate - the original intent has been answered and it's evolved into something else

_________________
numquam culum es

Just for fun, a few numbers:

The average number of hits when a scorpion fired under the pulse rules was 2.1 ((0*1/6)+(1*(5/6)*(1/6))+(2*(5/6)*(5/6)*(1/6))+(3*(5/6)*(5/6)*(5/6))). Under the current system it averages at 1.7 (2*5/6). That's a significant (~20%) downgrading, but not quite as bad as it looks at first. On a double, or against targets in cover, the difference is much smaller: 1.4 with pulse ((0*2/6)+(1*(4/6)*(2/6))+(2*(4/6)*(4/6)*(2/6))+(3*(4/6)*(4/6)*(4/6))), versus 1.3 (2*4/6) now. When doubling and firing against targets in cover, a Scorpion actually does better under the current system, scoring on average 1.0 hit rather than the 0.9 it would score with pulse.

With three shots, the average number of hits goes up to 2.5, 2 and 1.5, which represents a slight improvement over its performance with pulse without modifiers, and a significant boost with them.

Personally, I haven't used Scorpions enough to be sure whether they're under-powered for the points at the moment or not. They don't look hugely tempting on paper, though. With three shots I'd be a lot keener.

_________________
"Good ale, the true and proper drink of Englishmen. He is not deserving of the name of Englishman who speaketh against ale, that is good ale."
- George Borrow

Exactly.

With Pulse Scorpions and Pulse Falcons, the Scorpion was a no-brainer.  It just plain killed more units of different varieties (since MW hits inf and vehicle).

Pulse also strongly favored "stand and deliver" tactics because of the exponential effect of to-hit mods.

Now, both Scorpions and Falcons are less hindered by 'shoot and scoot' tactics and the comparison goes back to typical WE vs normal unit comparison for EA - normal units (falcons) pack more firepower for the points while WEs (Scorpion) are tougher overall.

_________________
Neal