Warp Spiders are good but I think the Aspects are pretty balanced. If you take a look at the Eldar lists people are using at Epic-UK tournaments the other aspects you mention are getting regular use (same stats for both apart from HB).


They're not allowed to be transported by them in 40k. Their wings make them too bulky to fit in (same reason why Assault Marines can't be transported in Rhinos).

Dobbsy - you can typically add Hunters to more than just one type of support formation, though. If you could slap a Firestorm into a bunch of different Warhosts and Troupes I'd be inclined to agree... Imagine if Hunters could only be attached to Predator squadrons?

Glyn - interesting numbers on the two big titans. Widening the points difference even further would make for an interesting choice when building lists... under the old stats, there was almost no reason to ever take a Phantom (+100 points for Farsight, Inspiring and the Psychic Lance that made you even better in assault...). Making it a 200 point gap forces a hard decision, which I think is always a good thing for a list to do.

Spectrar Ghost ran the numbers for Fire Prisms vs Falcons (linked in one of the earlier discussions, when the move to scrap the +15 point surcharge was made). Fire Prisms actually perform worse than Falcons in almost all situations, except for a slight improvement in AP damage (greater reliability), and the obvious niche of +15cm range and Lance. They're better if they get to play a very long-range game against reinforced armour; worse against regular AT targets, and worse in assaults. Consensus in that thread was that they're worth essentially the same as a Falcon.


Link: http://taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/view ... 24&t=24167

Edited to add link

Spotted another typo: the Avatar's critical should have it be destroyed and 1 BM placed on Eldar formations in LOS. Currently you only mention the second part.

I think the Warlock wins over a Phantom for two reasons, Inspiring and Farsight. Though I don't see farsight listed on the ref sheet here?

Don't think I ever remember a Warlock shooting for much effect, but once they get into assault then support one or two more turn 2 they are devastating.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

I always assumed they could!

When did Fire Prisms lose the AA? They were always the option for an independant AA formation. So no more indpendant AA and a desire for only 1 firestorm, have people been having their thunderhawks shot down?

This happened around 2008, when Sotec decided to change things. The logic was that the FP formation of three was too fragile, over-priced at 250, and rarely taken. So, why not add them as an option to the Falcon formation. Thus the SoV formation was born and was allowed to increase to 6x vehicles.
BUT, 5x FPs kick out a *lot* of AA at 75cm, it is very hard to suppress the entire formation and there were other arguments about the 'fluff' . . . so AA was dropped and the weapon range revised.

Unfortunately E:A game mechanics do not support the 40K FB mechanics, and without AA, the FP role sits uneasily between the Falcon and Scorpion, resulting in a debate on their cost and stats ever since.

A nice touch might be to allow FP range to be increased in increments as more vehicles shoot, possibly with some cap on numbers / ranges - - - BUT that adds a lot of complexity and yet another 'unit rule' which people tend to dislike, for very little gain in terms of the actual game.

I'm with you here, in the E-UK we have stayed with the original Swordwind formations, and FPs do make a regular appearance. They provide long-range AA cover and are a nice deterent against RA targets, thus occupying a different niche from Scorpions and Falcons.

So I would really like to undo this option to the SoV and revert the FP back to a single formation, with AA.

Wow, Xmas is coming Everyone has some wishes..

So guys, just cool down a little bit -some restrictions are different than in 40k -because of the scale ,abstraction, greater number of units present, etc. Just don't follow the 40k trends every time -in that way, we'll have to change the lists in every 2 year, which is nonsense.. I think this is the reason why Guardinas only have WS, but not Falcons -they are available in the Ulthwé list however, to keep that list "special", or a bit more like a base (Biel-Tan) list. Some regulations/hard decisions should be made, to keep the different lists alive.

Epic eldars have their own flavor, they are strong enough -they don't need to be more flexible, they don't need new units -they just need a little points balance to fix things, which are already known -and not fixed, because of the missing AC. Keep the specialized units to the specialized craftworlds -to make them an alternative..

So my humble advice is to keep the list as it is now, with only a few changes, according to the experiences -there's little need of a 0-1 Firestorm restriction, keep the number of new upgrades (like the Lynx, etc) low, but the fixing of the Cobra and the Phantom is a good idea. Please be aware of that eldar are a powerful enough race in EA, thanks to the flexibility of the lists -with new units, they can easily be too powerful!

+1 to Pati's comments

That's not quite the case. Since fourth edition in 40K, Guardians have not been able to use the Falcon as a transport, because their minimum unit size is greater than the Falcon's transport capacity. I agree with your point that Guardians should be able to use Falcons as transports in Epic though, be the Falcons either part of the formation, or separate (a bit like being able to choose the old Warhost with Falcons and/or Defenders + Falcon Troupe combination from Space Marine).



I definitely fall into this group.



I'd rather they were left out. Don't get me wrong, I see where you're coming from, and they were part of my old SM2 Eldar list from time-to-time, but the Eldar army has more than enough Aspect Warriors to cover any assault role, and Harlequins really are best employed as a separate army, rather than as a bit part of an Eldar list in my opinion. In addition, in terms of the background, they don't have strong ties to Biel-Tan, so if you were going to have them, they'd be better off being an option for some of the other craftworlds with closer ties to the Harlequins, such as Alaitoc.

_________________

Over the years several people have dabbled with Harlies, myself included. They fall into the category of unit that is very hard to balance because their powers / abilities are so OTT. As such, I agree that it is unwise to try to add them to existing Eldar lists

For those who want to try them out, I think we got a good way towards a balanced Harlequin Grande Mask list here, though this definitely needs testing.

DRM Vulturs: http://www.darkrealmminiatures.co.uk/st ... t=6&page=1



IME...Spiders are awesome, but the fact that they can't use Wave Serpents leaves a big niche for other Aspects (that is largely taken by Avengers with Reaper exarchs).

Warlocks are totally awesome. You can build great armies with it as a centrepiece (as I did for the EEC). 900 points wouldn't be amiss, but an important thing to note is that they are the only one of the original four "battle titans" (Warlord, Great Gargant, Phantom, Warlock) that is regularly fielded - what should the impact of an 850 point model be?

Also, what makes it awesome isn't it's attack stats or defenses, but the speed and Hit and Run rules which lets it actually bring those attacks and defenses to bear on critical situations in the game. A Phantom will never be an assault titan (because the Warlock will always be better at it), and the game rules and Eldar rules heavily favour assaults as a way for expensive formations to really make an impact worthy of their cost.

Hey, less hate for the great gargant, they get fielded and are perfectly fine as well... Just because Warlords and phantoms aren't as good

Going by EUK, Ghazgkhul's War Horde has a record of 28%/41%/31% overall (w/l/t) and 19%/27%/53% with a great gargant. There are two ways you can look at that: It turns some of your wins and more of your losses into ties, or it reduces both your wins and your losses by about a third. I'm not sure if that qualifies as "fine"?

edit: I'm hoping to bring Orks to the EEC next year. Based on this I'm going to leave my Great Gargant at home, my team should be better served by some wins.