Yes, that would solve things nicely.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

With respect, I am not surprised that Summoning with Farsight was rejected because of the unwarranted boost it gives to the Warlock.

However, I would be very interested to understand why the other two suggestions were rejected (cheaper updates to EoV and Cheaper Prism replacement cost). Both seem appropriate and have been tested AFAIK

Neither is a new suggestion either - both changes (+200 per additional superheavy in a formation; costing Fire Prisms and Falcons the same) have been tested since Spectrar Ghost's v4.1 army lists were posted in 2012.

They've been used in the last 30 months of Eldar playtest games. Is there any feedback on why they were rejected (or what the committee would like to see done with them)? It feels a bit like general resistance to any change that reduces a points cost.

Does the list really need point reductions? Is it not competetive as it is?
Or is it to promote a more diverse selection of units?

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

I would also like to know the reasons for rejection.
My main "issue" it the 15 points for the Fire prism. Could we please move this to 25 or something nicer (if we still think it is better then the Falcon.)

I do not think this list needs a boost so perhaps next time you put things forward you might want to add a drawback also, to even things out? (Like making the Exarch cost 50 points instead of 25 or just allowing one Inspiring in each unit )

I started following the Eldar list development fairly late in the piece, but as I understand it the points changes aren't really to do with overall "competitiveness" of the list. They are aimed at increasing list diversity, and address two specific issues:

For the Engines of Vaul, many lists now recognise an "activation tax" that takes into account the advantage that an additional activation carries over fewer larger units (e.g. Imperial Guard superheavy singles vs. companies; Warhound singles vs. pairs). In most cases, two single superheavies are better than a unit of two. That led to the full cost for the first Engine of Vaul, and a reduced costs for additional models in that formation.

For the Swords of Vaul, Firestorms have a very tiny niche where they're better than Falcons (at extreme range, firing on reinforced armour vehicles), and are worse in pretty much all other situations. If you can take advantage of the niche, it's a nice bonus - but on the whole they're not a more valuable "upgrade" as they actively make the formation worse in many common scenarios.

As an unrelated issue, they're the only 15 point upgrade in the list - so if you take any you either upgrade the entire formation or end up with unspent points...

Thanks for the update Greg.

My opportunities for games are few and far between at the moment, but I will be able to get three battle reports against other Approved or Developmental lists from my games at the Heavy Bolter tournament in July. I haven't participated in any of the playtests so far, and though there's likely to be a bit of player overlap with other Aussie events, my games are likely to be against locals who also haven't been in other playtest groups.

I'm planning to use Iyanden, but can field Biel Tan if there's a stronger need for playtest games from the main list.

5pts may be ok, but 10pts or 15pts is horrible in a list where everything else is a multiple of 25pts.

I've been playing with the current 4.2 list and have had no problems (my win ratio is extremely poor), but doubt I can contribute much meaningful as a playtester (I'm still quite a new player, and only have one local opponent).

Would you be more comfortable with one for +25, three for +50 or five for +75?

Well, my 2p worth

E-UK have had the cheaper update for many years, though I cannot recollect seeing any taken. This in itself is an indicator of balance between higher activation numbers and the risks / costs associated with making the EoV your BTS.

Prisms are a historical bone of contention as far as I am concerned. E-UK lists retained the original 3x formation for 250 with AA capabilities, which is both distinctive and very balanced as far as I am concerned.

That said, I am also happy that others prefer the current Net:EA version allowing the replacement of up to 6x Falcons. Without AA and a much reduced firepower, I cannot see what the fuss is about. Sure they have a longer range and a better to-hit roll, but you are only getting 5-6x shots, not 15-18.

As for testing, I thought this had already been extensively tested in the past 3+ years since it was first proposed . . .

Proposing it is one thing, but I don't remember any reports actually testing it outside of those posted by PFE recently.

The vote was split pretty even for most of these. Prism cost reduction was 1-2-1. I was in the middle and put forward a reduction to +10 (or maybe +5 with most testing). The prisms have always been a step above the Falcons in our games. I definitely think the range and better AT lance shot is worth more with it going after high armor/cost units.

EoV was split as well, 2-1-1. Again, I was in the middle with a reduction to +225 for additional units. I didn't have a lot to go on here from my group, and would have liked to see more tests from groups other than PFE's before going down by a full 50 points.

Finally, for the Warlock/Avatar thing I counted two games where it was pulled off. In one, it broke a Warhound pack, in another it managed some support fire. I didn't think that was a big enough sample size to change it one way or another so I voted no change.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Engines of Vaul - I was fine with 200, I can't see it being taken much even at that prive
Prisms - haven't seen much testing of this. AT2+ 60cm Lance is an upgrade over falcons for me given that their usual task is hunting AV+small WEs. Also has a big affect with range stretching and is exacerbated by the ability to upgrade the formation to 6 vehicles.
Warlock - Summon was a no from me as IMO it would create confusion with daemon summoning which is different. Also why does the Warlock need it?

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