You do realise that's essentially:

"Yes they're really good, but if you make them more expensive I'll have less other stuff".

Which is kind of the point!

Fair point on being assaulted though - it rarely happens to my Imp tanks so it's not something I thought of.



No it isn't, it seems you're also confused as to what's being discussed. I haven't mentioned the jetbike host once and don't think it's particularly overpriced actually, it's when you want to top it up by 100pts for a whole 450pts worth of squadrons that seems oddly costed.



So again - "You have to use your expensive stuff well or lose, so what I want is the expensive stuff to cost nearly half of its detachment price so I'm less affected when they perform badly".

I dunno, I'm not particularly swayed by these 'arguments', sorry. All I know is that every game I've ever played against Eldar has featured Tempests and the Windrider Host, and when something has a 100% inclusion rate there's clearly some major point efficiency going on.

I don't think it is the windrider host that is the problem, it is Siam Hann still having access to Tempests. Which I am going to re-iterate, is an issue for the Craftworld lists. We should be starting with the main army list and any issues with that before we start discussing the details of the Craftworld versions.

Also, thank god this isn't 2nd Ed where every eldar army had access to the 25 stand Wind Rider Host and the Tempest Host (that is what I played back in the day along with the free unit of Jet Bikes you used to get for being Siam Hann ). Now non Saim Hann lists only get the smaller host.

Matt

That's not what I said at all. Please re-read the quote, paying particular attention to the final part of the last sentence.



Imperial Tanks, are also a stronger with their CAF factor, and have better short ranged defences against infantry if my memory serves me correctly.



Then, it can be dealt with in discussions about the Saim-Hann codex separately.



I'm sorry, but I think that this is a tactical problem on your part, not a Tempest cost issue. You're interpretations of what I've said are also completely at odds with what I've written.



Every game I've fielded the Eldar, or seen other players using the Eldar has included the Windrider Host, Guardian Hosts, and Aspect Warriors of some type. These units are always included because they are the core of the Eldar army. By your logic, all of these units must be overpowered or too cheap, becuase they're taken all the time, yet that clearly isn't the case.

Regarding the Tempests, they can only be taken in games of 5000 points or more in my experience. Anything smaller than that, and they consume too many points which need to be spent elsewhere, usually on infantry or transports for the infantry.

I like Mattman's idea of focusing on the generic or core Eldar codex first. It seems to me that it's best to handle this before moving on to the craftworld lists. I don't play the craftworld lists, and they usually are more contentious, so I suspect that changes to those would be more appropriate. For the generic list though, I really don't think that there are a lot of problems, which is why I'm a bit surprised to be having such an intense debate at this early stage.

_________________

Hi!

Status Update:

If you choose to "lead" a particular army, just post a message on the respective army thread as to where you are on reading the books for corrections and such.

This is just to get an idea to see where we are all at.

Primarch

I'll get to this as soon as I can, I just have a lot on my plate at the moment work wise.

_________________

Hi!

No problem, just wanted to check in so you would think I'm asleep at the switch.

Thanks!

Primarch

I've been having a look at the rules again tonight and noticed that Space Marines have armour saves! I hadn't picked up on this change as I've still been using the old SM2 summary sheets.

But what does this have to do with Eldar? Glad you asked!

Howling Banshee psychic scream rules: "Models charged by Howling Banshees are destroyed and removed from play on a D6 roll of 5+ (this takes place before Close Combat is resolved). This attack is ineffective against targets with an Armor Save."

This makes Howling Banshees an unattractive option when playing against Marines. I don't know if this was an unintended consequence of reinstating Space Marines saving rolls from SM1, but frankly while this is the case, I'd always drop Banshees in favour of Striking Scorpions.

A simple fix would be to apply the same rule that applies to Striking Scorpions' mandi-blasters (who is this Mandi and what did she do to offend the Eldar so much that they created such a vicious weapon to slaughter her and her namesakes?), namely; "Unfortunately they do not have sufficient penetrating power to be effective versus armored targets such as vehicles, so when engaged with vehicles or larger units, they only roll 1D6 + CAF in Close Combat."

I'd reword it to "Unfortunately the psychic scream does not have sufficient penetrating power to be effective versus armored targets such as vehicles, so when engaged with vehicles or larger units, this attack is ineffective."

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Hi!

I think this is a good point. Banshees are underused in relation to scorpions. Now do you think the banshee should be able to take out a terminator this way?

I think the above rules came to be due to terminators and other such units that may be to easily dealt with via the banshees ability. How about dreadnoughts?

That is why the original change was worded this way, because back then we thought it should not work versus terminators and dreadnoughts.

How can it be redone to make it more useful, but not too useful?

Perhaps adding that versus infantry with armor saves the banshee ability to hit is 6 instead of 5?

I am open to suggestions.

Primarch

That's a good idea but do you think it might confuse things by setting levels of opponents for psychic screams?
I don't have a problem with it, but sometimes simplicity works better. Plus a 6+ roll against crappy Tactical Marines wouldn't make me want to take Banshees over Scorpions.

Part of the problem is that the Scorpions are so good. Let's face it, chances are that they'll take the Terminators apart anyway. To make the Banshees as attractive (they are the same points cost after all) you'd have to look at keeping them at a 5+ roll.

Hmph. I dunno, it's a difficult one!

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Hi!

Actually scorpions are a poor choice versus terminators, since terminators count as an armored target. They'd get only 1d6 versus them. That was the original intent of the rule change anyways.

It would seem both banshees and scorpions need clarifications.

Actually the EASIEST thing is to apply both abilities as is (5+ for banshees against all infantry, scorpions extra die) and leave terminators (and units deemed similar) to have added to their description that their armor is classified as "vehicle like". In other words a land raider, dreadnought and terminator would be immune to the banshee ability (scorpion gets 1d6 + CAF versus them).

Its easier to state terminator armor is "vehicle like" than to add exceptions to abilities.

Thoughts?

Primarch

That seems fair enough but maybe just simpler to put that in the description for both units? ie scream/mandi blaster bonus does not apply to Terminator infantry, walkers or vehicles?

I'm just thinking there are a lot of units you'd have to apply the vehicle-like armour status to, whereas if you put these descriptions in the two entries for Banshees and Scorpions you'd be able to do so much quicker...

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Hi!

That will work too.

Primarch

But what is classed as terminator infantry, ork nobs?, squat exo armour? And do warwalkers & sentinels count as walkers?
Since the marines have a save now, why not just make that the point the banshee and scorpion rules kick in, i wouldn't have thought it would effect much else, so something like, "these abilities have no effect against enemy units with either a save that is 4+ or better, or if it has a fixed save".

Matt

Hi!

You have a point. I like that statement "4+ or better or fix save". It encompasses all the units we don't want affected and leave in all the ones we do.

Simple and to the point.

Primarch