This question just cropped up during a game.

Why do Swords of Vaul need 2 firestorms in the formation? Eldar aren't short of AA already and not many army lists get 2 in a single fm. It's not like the SoV need more firefight dice. So what is the reasoning?

cheers

Can't the IG take 3 hydras in one formation? Orks can certainly overload on flakwagons. Marines can only take one hunter per formation, but it takes 2 BMs to suppress them.

I don't think the eldar NEED 2 firestorms per formation, but I don't believe having the option is a game breaker.

I'd assume it's also got to do with upgrade options.

In addition to Semaj's points, a Marine Hunter can go in Tacs, Devs, or any Armoured formation. In Biel-Tan, Firestorms can ONLY go in a Sword of Vaul formation.

I agree with Semaj that I don't think it's necessary, but it'd make for more static lists, given the other AA options available to Biel-Tan.

Morgan Vening

I generally see and use two Firestorms in Falcon formations as the standard and most commonly used Eldar AA. Eldar do have good AA but that's one of their strengths and I think overall they're balanced fine.

I think 2 in one formation and 1 in another is the most common only because GW sells them in packs of three.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Could be worse Dobbsy, for a while there was a shield of vaul formation that was a combination of firestorms and night spinners, up to three of either!

Ah, I misunderstood the OP. The reason why is most likely a carry over from the original Falcon formation which allowed up to 2 firestorms. In development I think Eldar were (rightly) seen as being highly susceptible to aircraft with their low armor values and small formations.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.