Guys

Eldar "Spirit Stones" was considered too powerfull as it effectively provided 'Leader' to every formation, so it was removed over a year ago.

IMO this has nerfed the Eldar too much because, by causing too many failed Activations it has robbed them of their speed, one of the things that distinguishes the Eldar from other races. With a 2+ initiative, '1' in '6' formations fail to activate and have to move slowly or not at all. With a BM, this means '1' in '3' formations are hamstrung (and before it is mentioned I am aware of Aspects & titans).

Could we consider reviving Spirit Stones in a modified form, by allowing Eldar to ignore '1' BM when activating? The main effects of BMs would remain but at least they would be more likely to move. The wording might look something like this Eldar formations with two or more Blast markers get a -1 modifier when carrying out an action test. (this supercedes the normal modifier in 1.6.2)

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I play Guardian and Falcon heavy Eldar, and the loss of Spirit Stones hasn't really hindered me at all; one just has to be a bit more careful is all.

Have you actually been having trouble in play, or is this just theory?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

As a huge supporter of the spirit stones when this was the Great Debate, I can honestly say I don't miss them. I almost forgot they were around to be honest. Perhaps it is because after playing the Dark Eldar for so long I've grown accustomed to that type of problem in my game.  But in any case, I think the Eldar play more like Eldar now.  You have to go out of your way not to collect BMs, to not depend on support formations getting that guaranteed move, to use marshalling orders to drop BMs, to be more Eldar-ish.

Maybe the other Eldar lists are in need of a bump of some type, but my experience with Biel-tan is that they are just fine now.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

Spirit stones were a very late addition and I haven't missed them at all.

If something were added, and I don't believe its needed, maybe the chance for more Eldar formations to buy a leader of some form.

As somebody who has only seriously played eldar since they lost spirit stones I haven't found BMs or activating particularily problematic. That you desperately need to avoid BMs just forces the eldar player to use the eldar movement, skimming etc to preserve your formations as well as to set up assaults.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Haven't missed them at all.  I think Eldar are a lot more fun now you actually have to be a bit more careful.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Well, there are two parts to the answer.

Firstly, I have been having problems with the Eldar in the games I play, both tournament and friendly, mainly due to missed activations. While often due to appauling dice roles, I agree that army design and play style do play a part: I tend to play without titans and only 2-3 Aspects, so the vast majority of my forces are 2+ initiative, and I also tend to avoid the SC both to save cost and also because it is too hard to choose just when to use the reroll. So Steve may remember his 5-0 game against me last Feb with BL, followed by one with E&C where I failed something like 15 activations in two games.

Secondly, I think this goes against the intent behind the original design. When Spirit Stones were originally added, I understand that they replaced some form of leader. Its effect was to return lightly suppressed Eldar formations to parity with their opponents in terms of initiative. But it effectively gave all formations a 'Leader' and moreover one that could not be killed.  

While I absolutely agree with you that this proved OTT from most perspectives, I still contend that the loss of Spirit Stones removes too much initiative from the Eldar player. The point is that, apart from IG all other races generally have a 1+ initiative to move, and most have a 1+ initiative to assault or shoot, while the Eldar generally start at 2+. Adding a BM from shooting raises most races to a 2+ activation, but raises Eldar to a 3+ activation with a 1:3 chance of failure - which then robs the Eldar of their ability to move faster than their opponents, or indeed to do anything except Rally and remove BMs while staying stock still; Very un-Eldar like.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

The problem with any kind of similar rule is that while it is nice for the 2+ init horde eldar, for the elite 1+ init aspect and titan army it's overpowering.

Aspect warriors and titans definately don't need any kind of initiative boost.

Ginger: Given your legendary activation failure rate, why not consider restructuring your army to counter it? More aspects and an SC would mitigate the problem to a large extent.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Well, I have indeed thought about army restructuring as well. My understanding of Eldar is that they work best as a counter-punch army. The few games I have won have often come about precisely because turn #1 activation failures left my army on the base-line while my opponent advanced. But more importantly, this means that the Eldar need to start with and maintain an activation advantage.

To do this, IMO they need to have 10-12 formations while most other armies including Marines average out at 8-11. Doing the maths, this means that the average cost of Eldar formations must be 250-300 points, and thus means two 200 point formations for every 350 point Aspect - or at most some 4x Aspects in a 3000 point 12 formation army (less if you put them in Wave Serpents).
(I should add that here in the UK, having anything less than '8' activations tends to be suicidal as it means that a significant portion of the enemy will activate late and out-manoeuver the other force.)

So, this means that 2:3 of all Eldar formations will have 2+ initiative and fall into the category suggested. With BMs, on average nearly '3' of the '8' will fail to activate, or potentially up to '9' failed activations in a game. While the presence of the SC would possibly reduce that to '6', that is still much higher than any other races except perhaps the IG.

However, the same formation ratios also means that in game terms the impact of the proposal on Aspects and Titans will be minimal as there will only be 1-4 of them in the same army, and they are already more likely to pass their activation anyway; with BMs they have a 1:6 chance of failure, perhaps 1-2 failed activations in the game.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Could you post a "typical" army that you'd field at 3000 points, Ginger?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

OK, here are a few 3000 point alternatives:-

Revenants                      650
Aspect (WS) +2x Exarch   350
Guardians + Wraithguard   300
Guardians                      150
Storm Serpent                250
Storm Serpent                250
Scorpion                        250
Falcons                         250
Windriders                      200
Night Spinners                175
Rangers (5)                    125


Guardians + WG + WL         475
Aspect (Mixed) + Exarch     325
Aspect (SS) + Exarch         325
Aspect (WS)                     300
Storm Serpent                   250
Storm Serpent                   250
Windriders                         200
Windriders                         200
Falcons                             250
Falcons                             250
Rangers (5)                       125
Wraithgate                          50


And a 4000 point variant:-
Aspect (mixed +2x SS)
+ Exarch + 3x Wave Serpent  475
Aspect (SS) + Autarch          375
Guardians + Wraithguard       300
Guardians                            150
Cobra                                  250
Cobra                            Ã‚      250
Falcons                                250
Windriders                           200
Night Spinners                      175
Night Spinners                      175
Rangers (5)                    Ã‚     125
Rangers (5)                         125
Phoenix Bomber                     400
Night wings                          300
Night wings                          300
Vampire                               200
Vampire                               200
Wraithgate                      Ã‚      50

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Looking at last years tournament stats Eldar were not a popular army. But most tournaments had at least one army place in the top 6. Now your Eldar results do buck that trend  

I really don't think changes are needed in this case, sorry Ginger.

Which may indeed be because those players are better than I in some respect or another (including using 'left-handed' dice ). If you check, you will find they performed better in the hands of the 'usual suspects'. But that does not necessarily alter the case behind this proposal.

I do not think I am suggesting anything totally outrageous - in my terms it would mean that instead of an average of '9' failures, there would now be '6', which is still worse that the majority of races.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

9 failures assumes a bm on every formation for every activation. That's pretty unlikely. With a SC and hiding from the enemy to avoid bms you're more likely looking at 3-4 failed over the course of a game, which is pretty normal for most armies.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Actually, I said '9' failures in a game; I am assuming ~'3' per turn

(I often average rather more, but that is a different story   )

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt