It's 9 x FF 3+ if you use the pulsar/powerfist option.

Best thing to do with this chap is to double him up to a key position on the battlefield and shoot with his fist lasers/MLs and Pulsar (ALWAYS IMO take the powerfist over the second pulsar). Then use him as a giant anchor around which to spring your other engagement units - Guardians in Wave serpents and Aspects and use him as kick ass support fire.

You'll find that getting the phantom stuck in and using him as part of your rolling engagements, combined with fast moving engagement units will yield you some really sweet results.

The Phantom is just as hard to kill as the Warlock and is still a monster in both FF and CC, has longer shooting range and is 100 pts cheaper (+ It also allows you to take some air in a 3000pts list) which is very nice indeed.

I will agree that the initiative is what balances Biel tan. The warlock is IMO usually overkill in assault, the move you describe is actually more efficiently performed by cheaper, better and faster mounted aspects, but the extra 200 points goes towards durability. I think it is costed correctly.

The rolling assault is my number 1 reason Eldar are my favourite army, and yet I very rarely pull it off. Simply because of initiative and strategy. The odds of rolling 2x 2+ is only about 2/3 and it drops to about 1/2 if there is a blast marker. If you get all your units in position unscathed AND your targets are suitably positioned AND you win strategy AND you still have your SC re-roll you may well pull it off, it will probably win you the game and will make you feel Luke an awesome general while your opponent mutters about overpowered Eldar special rules. Unfortunately it rarely happens that way, and if you try it you will more often than not leave your forces exposed - that will probably lose you the game.

In fact I would generalise further and say initiative is what loses me most if those I lose. That is not to say it's luck, necessarily, but can equally be failure to account for failures or over dependence on passing initiative tests. With Eldar, failing initiative in turn 2 or 3 often affects a whole sequence of events and is catastrophic.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

This is very true. It's not entirely out of your hands though. A very careful prep/set up for the rolling assault in the previous turn is key. Selecting the right units, getting them into position and avoiding blast markers are all neccessary. I like to go with Aspects, Warlock titan and then guardians (Or more aspects) for a 1+/1+/2+ (With a re-roll).

Sometimes though you just have to realise that you're not going to pull off an apocolyptic rolling engagement that game. The conditions are just wrong and the enemy's strategy rating is just too high.

Regardless though the Phantom does make for a terrific force multiplyer and is well worth it's points in an Eldar army.

Interesting. I've never played it that way, never really thought to in fact. It doesn't seem quite right to me, in flavour and in rules. For instance, the Commander rule says formations are only treated as one after the action test is passed:

"Make a single initiative roll for all the formations, counting a - 1 modifier if any have Blast markers. If the test is failed then the commander’s formation receives a Blast marker and must take a hold action, but the other formations are unaffected (and may take an action later in the turn).

"If the test is passed then all three formations may take an engage action. Treat the three formations as if they were a single formation for all rules purposes for the duration of the assault."

So to me, the commander takes an action test and if he passes THEN you do a combined engage. So you benefit from inspiring, but you don't suffer twice from a failed action test. For me, I'd be inclined to say you can't have it both ways

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I can see how you would read it that way, it's just not how I read it myself. To me, the first section is basically saying it's an action test for the commander with a specific note about the effects of blast markers. Especially because of what happens if the test is failed. Whilst it's possible to read it another way, taking this in combination with the next sentence about combining IF the action test is passed, I think the intention is fairly clear.

Horses for courses though.

What if it was a Farseer instigating a combined assault with some aspects? Would you allow the action test to be taken using the aspects' initiative? This is not prohibited by the rule either, and to me if you read the rule the way you are doing and allow one, you have to allow the other.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Simple answer, Eldar break all the rules again

Although by no means explicit in the rules I'd tend to side with Rug, seeing it as logical.

Probably worth getting an FAQ on it though.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

This is not correct Matt, the rule is quite precise that the formations only count as single formation for fighting the engagement. Not when you role the dice for the initiative check, as far as GW rules go its actually quite well written - dont use the -1 from any blast marker to extrapolate - if it is not specifically written then they are not a single formation until you are told they are (when fighting the engagement).

I've created a thread in the rules section to discuss the commander and modifiers discussion.

Black Guardian Farseers have commander, 1+ init and Farsight too!

As others have said, you only consider the 'commander' formation abilities when activating. As to setting up rolling assaults, you need carefull preparation:-
1. Create a list with a high activation count (min 10-11 formations) so that combining formations will impact your army less
2. BM management is vital, so hide behind terrain, Marshall when appropriate etc
3. Keep the SC re-roll for these occasions