Ok. The idea is to present a critique of the perceived problems with the list, preferably with some proposals on how to solve them.

Perhaps we could present these in the context of how we expect the list to work including the expected weaknesses as well as the intended strengths

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Honestly, i don't see any major problems with the list.

The only thing i'd like to see is some change to Howling Banshees to bring them up to par but it's not a burning issue for me.

I suppose the spacecraft are a bit crap too but again, that's all rather meh...

Apologies Ginger, i've just re-read your initial post properly.

I feel the Eldar work and play as intended tbh.

They are very fast and can strike out and maneuver away like a striking Cobra.  Their offensive power is staggering and if, as an opponent of the eldar you get tricked, can't stop their momentum and allow them to begin taking your army apart a piece at a time with well set-up rolling assaults then you're going to lose against Eldar.

Using my eldar is like coreographing (SP?!) an intricate dance where speed and misdirection is key as well as the order in which you instigate your retains and the role you allow your units to be used and can plan ahead to where your unit will be after this turn/activation.

With all this speed, offensive power and ability to misdirect the enemy of course there are some downsides.  Eldar armour is particulary thin and often the best defence when playing as eldar is simply not to get shot, or try to manipulate the enemy onto firing on your few survivable units (Wraithguard in cover, Phantom titans etc).  Formation sizes are small and blast markers can quickly stop intricate battle plan due to failed activations and broken units.  IMO that's how it should be.  Some armies are good at shedding blast markers and ignoring them, the dying race of the Eldar is not generally one of them.  If as an Eldar player you get caught with your pants down, you get severely punished which is also as i feel things should go.  The most effective way my group has found of neutralising my eldar is firstly  to slow their momentum down by not allowing units to become isolated and by putting whatever blast markers they can on the eldar early doors (No easy task).  Once a game devolves down to attrition, or a slug fest because the eldar have been denied the room/ability to dance things can become very ugly very quickly for the pointy ears.

Overall i'm a big fan and feel the Eldar play how they should and would not be especially enthused about any major changes

How?

The best they can get on turn 1 is 2 large pre-plotted templates (And no ability to planetfall).  I fail to see how that's worth 150 pts and is on a par with comparable strike cruisers from other races.  The Chaos devestation class cruiser and the imperial guard cruisers are 150 pts with a big template and a Pin point attack with the chaos cruiser allowing for drop podding.  Space marine strike cruisers also have 2 templates and are very flexible in what they can deploy by planetfall and thunderhawk drop ship.

Doh!  You know i never noticed it wasn't slow and steady.

It's still pretty crap for 300 pts though isn't it.

I want to second Stompzillas large post about Eldar play. I have generally the same feelings and I like it that way because it feels very eldarish. So I am too against major changes to the eldar list. In my group, Spacecraft are rarely used...but Eldar ones never. They seem to be underperforming for their pointcosts.

Not if you play corners and target the short part of the L. Something is probable going to be in that 60cm strip!

Grimgork

If you take orks as your Avatar suggests, I would definately take the 300 points to decimate a large portion of your force with 3 templates    

That could hit more than a few units and prevent them from moving across a table.

The 300 points would/could also severly hurt Imp Guard and Tau forces.

The points are hiding just how good this ship is.

Also, do not discount the 2x Pin Point attacks. They can be devastating to forces who will rely on war engines (with small shields or none) to secure a flank.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Yeah, that is right frogbear. But with this 300 points you can get a formation of something that is in play for the whole game and not only one turn. I think that is what scares the most of us off spaceships in general.

And I do play Eldar too  

Regarding the "activation" issues described here

The basic issue is that I expect the Eldar to move a lot, be elusive to target, strike hard 'from out of nowhere' and vanish almost as quickly. BUT if you can catch them they should crumble - the epitome of 'Soap bubbles armed with sledgehammers'. So I think we all agree on the principles.

Historically, the power of certain Eldar weaponry combined with the original Spirit Stones removal of a BM tended to result in a 'static' style of play, while removing Spirit Stones altogether tends to cause the army to fail to activate, which also results in a 'static' army albeit for different reasons.

However, I maintain that any enemy with even moderate long-range firpower can pick off formations or lay 2+ BMs which can stop the Eldar from moving at all (and frequently does in my experience) even when trying to shed BMs as Eldar are expected to. So I disagree that they play as they should. I find that it is too 'black and white'; either they work or they don't. I am looking for ways to reinstate their mobility without overly re-inforcing their offensive capabilities.

Options recently suggested:-
1) Allow Eldar to buy 'leaders' (perhaps 25 points each?)
2) Grant particular formations a 'leader' character, eg Farseers, Exarchs, Warlocks etc
3) Redefine Spirit Stones to ignore -1 for BMs
4) Redefine Spirit Stones to give -1 under particular circumstances (Marshall, double)
5) Redefine the Farseer rule to assist formations within 30cms

IIRC part of the original 'Spirit Stones' issue was the way that it caused the Eldar formations to bounce back, so I would tend to discount #2 adding 'leaders' for free (and I might add this is one reason I do not like adding 'leader' to titans).

Although more characterfull, I am unsure about assisting all activations because that will reinstate the static sustaining army, so for this reason I would tend to discount #3. Option #5 falls into this category, but is much more characterfull and is yet another incentive to have Guardian formations around - though probably open to abuse, so lets leave that to one side as well.

However I do like option #4 which will both encourage mobility while reducing the shooting capacity under these circumstances. I also like option #1 permitting you to pay for a character to be able to shed BMs more easily. The associated cost would minimise the number used, while allowing the player to put them on strategically important formations, and the upgrade definitions would prevent abuse (so perhaps not on Titans?)

Are there any other possible options?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Spaceships - they get taken by guys that pace highly in tourneys, so I'm not worried. my cut and paste contribution.

I think also there is a problem with internal balance between units. Void Spinners are by far and away the best SHT in the list. The aspects get overshadowed by certain combos.
Fire prisms in NetEA have lost I think any use with the dropping of AA - there are always other ground shooting formations you want. Thats not to say the Eldar should have them as AA - I prefer them not to! Its just whats left for them? Fighter bombers are just to pricey to use compared to nightwings. And finally war walkers are pretty scarce though don't know for what reason.

_________________
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

On Fire Prisms, I am not a fan of allowing them as an upgrade to Falcon fomations, because they do pack a big punch if allowed to fire, and especially if sustaining.

My preference would be to keep the existing Fire Prism formation of three, but drop the price slightly to 225 or just possibly to 200; or increase the formation to four and raise the cost to 300. It all falls into the principle that the Eldar formations have to be carefully protected until you want to use them.

Either way I would not fiddle with the range or remove AA either.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt