The Specialist Arms Forum

Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Experimental Rules Feedback => Topic started by: RayB HA on April 14, 2010, 11:01:09 PM

Title: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 14, 2010, 11:01:09 PM
Hi Guys,

As the FAQ thread was getting heavy on CWE I'm starting this new topic.

FAQ proposed changes to CWE:

Flame of Asuryan:
Pulsars are now keel.
Launch bays have Vampires.

Eldar Hero:
Drop from 150pts to 100pts.

Dragonships:
EWB's decreasing to 12 or 14.
Torps increased to 8 from 6.

Shadow Hunter:
All weapons are plain vanilla.
Gains 3 turrets.

Cheers,

RayB  HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 14, 2010, 11:04:41 PM
Hi Guys,

As the FAQ thread was getting heavy on CWE I'm starting this new topic.

FAQ proposed changes to CWE:

Flame of Asuryan:
Pulsars are now keel.
Launch bays have Vampires.

Eldar Hero:
Drop from 150pts to 100pts.

Dragonships:
EWB's decreasing to 12 or 14.
Torps increased to 8 from 6.

Shadow Hunter:
All weapons are plain vanilla.
Gains 3 turrets.

Cheers,

RayB  HA


FoE:
No real beef here. I like the vampire idea

Eldar Hero:
I have to agree, LD10 is nice, but there is about 50 wasted points for something that really is not utilized

Dragonship:
Hell no. the reduction of batteries and increase of torps solves NOTHING.  St 6 torps are plenty powerful enough, and this is not a fancy shadow cruiser.

Shadow Hunter:
Don't touch it. The rules are just fine.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 14, 2010, 11:15:06 PM
Zelnik,

As the Dragonship has multiple options at the same price they have to be of roughly equal value.

1Pulsar = 4EWB's and 1Eldar Launch bay = 2 Eldar Torps. So that's where the weapons strengths come from. Now it could be argued that 1 Pulsar is worth a little bit more than 4EWB's hence the possibility of Str14 EWB's.

In your opinion are 3 Pulsars worth 16EWB's? or 4 ELB's worth 6 Devil Torps?


You think the Shadow Hunter is fine as is. Okay, why do you hate the turret idea so much?

Cheers,

RayB   
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 14, 2010, 11:25:09 PM
1. The Dragon ship is designed to be the flagship of the fleet if the FoE is not taken, Wraithships are little more then light cruisers.
Unlike pulsars and torpedo's. the WB still suffer from gunnery modifiers and rarely ever fire at maximum effectiveness add on top of that the requirement to defeat armor, the conversion between pulsar lances and batteries is not perfect. 

Here is some useless mathhammer.

A maximum number of pulsar hits from 3 is 9 hits. 
The most dice you can ever get from the batteries is 14. Defeating armor 5 or 6 armor reduces the number of chances to do damage considerably. you will be lucky to hit 5 times, maybe 7 if your locked on.

Why am i against turrets? THEY ARE ELDAR.  They don't use them.  Holofields give them a better save anyway.  Don't try and give a fleet more protection when it doesn't need them. 

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 14, 2010, 11:35:49 PM
Hi Guys,

As the FAQ thread was getting heavy on CWE I'm starting this new topic.

FAQ proposed changes to CWE:

Flame of Asuryan:
Pulsars are now keel.
Launch bays have Vampires.

Eldar Hero:
Drop from 150pts to 100pts.

Dragonships:
EWB's decreasing to 12 or 14.
Torps increased to 8 from 6.

Shadow Hunter:
All weapons are plain vanilla.
Gains 3 turrets.

Cheers,

RayB  HA

FoA: Would prefer pulsars were a combined Prow weapon. It's more like they were designed and they can be damaged that way. Keel gunnery for Eldar is rather awkward with their movement.

Eldar hero: Keep the cost at 150. Require the FoA to have a Pirate Prince or a Supreme Admiral to take. Keeps things simple while benefiting CWE stick with their fleet list.

Dragonship: Still not a fan of the edits on this one. You should rather be making the other options more attractive then nerfing down the current choices. Not sure though why this ship is being edited, not seeing a mass outpour over OMG Dragonships are OP.

Shadowhunter: Not a fan of the turrets either, they just aren't eldar. Boosting the anti-ordinance of the escort won't make it taken more often as that is what it currently is only good for.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 15, 2010, 12:38:01 AM
FoA's Pulsars: The reasons for the Keel allocation are because there are no port or starboard criticals for eldar hence why no other eldar ships have port or starboard weapons, also the fact that the pulsar strength is unaffected by circumstances that would halve thier firepower. Note: There's no change to thier arc, they still shoot forward.

Eldar Hero: The reason for the drop in price is quite simple, he's comparitavely too expensive. The Pirate Prince costs 100pts and is Ld10 unless a 1 is rolled, the Supreme Admiral costs 100pts and is Ld 10. The Hero has more expensive re-rolls than the other 2 unless he buys all 3. The ability to have reserves is rather limited as you will need to buy an extensive amount of the weaker parts of your primary fleet to field the best parts of the other.

Shadow Hunter: If they are going to have a bonus ordnance killing rule it should be close range as they don't have special weapons, they have special movement. Shooting AC even 1cm (1000km) away can't demnonstrate hightened manuverability! Giving them 3 turrets is simple, useful, true to background and isn't even a special rule.

Cheers,

RayB     
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 12:53:38 AM
FoA Pulars: Ok I fail on this one lol. Was thinking keel was rear, so perfectly fine with this change then.

Eldar Hero: Green light on this one. You won me over, though it kinda makes Supreme Admiral a rather pointless choice. If the HA doesn't approve of this change please fall back on the pirate prince/Supreme Admiral for FoA.

Shadow Hunter: I'm feeling a tad more comfortable about this one, though I don't think the change will make people more inclined to taking them. I wouldn't use the term turrets for the ability, need something more in the sense of maneuvering and fighting at close range which happens to count as turrets.

To clarify does this mean you could move into an ordinance to use turrets on it, fire at another ordinance, then in your ordinance phase move into another to turret again?

Dragonships: Still not seeing the benefit:
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 15, 2010, 03:18:10 AM
Eldar=Turrets no.

The shadowhunter is just fine where it is...
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 15, 2010, 07:46:29 AM
Okay.. Allow me to summarize the issues.


FoA: The changes you are proposing are reasonable. The Vampire hunter addition is a good balance for making the pulsar lances keel weapons.

The Eldar Hero point reduction is a good idea as well, bringing it in line with the Supreme commander.

Dragon Ship: Drop it. Shifting weapon strengths is just pointless in the end, and doesn't solve anything. 

Shadow Hunter:Don't even try.  Adding turrets to make it function better against escorts has no basis, the creators of the fleet gave them a great attack against ordnance, that's more then enough.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 15, 2010, 11:52:06 AM
BlueDagger,

Shadow hunters could attack with thier turrets as many ordy markers as they come into contact with, potetially all enemy ordy! They could also shoot at ordy with thier weapons if they wished.

Dragonship's benefit is having competetive weapon options.


Zelnik,

The intention of CWE design is to have a viable Eldar capital ship fleet. The intention of the Shadow hunter, beyond the nod to space fleet, is to be barely offensive but capable of killing ordy. In thier back ground the ordy killing ability is due to thier manuverability hence 'contact' ability rather than ranged. 

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 15, 2010, 01:11:25 PM
Okay then,
Flame settled. (keel pulsar, free vampires)
Hero settled. (100pts)

On the Supreme Admiral issue: has a cheaper re-roll (25pts).

Dragonship:
Hey, as a compromise 14 would work but still be better then 3 Pulsars in most cases.

Shadowhunter:
Also a no on the turret variant.

I'd advocate the current version (hit ordnance on a 4+) but with a better lance and maybe an added battery.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 01:20:06 PM
Yeah, the more I think about it the less I like the Escort changes. As is they are a barely viable option, except for filling points, and with the battery and rules change they will be taken even less. Going to have to go with Horizon's views on the Shadowhunters as it would make them a viable option to include in the fleet and more options is never a bad thing.

Btw thnx for you patience Ray and hashing things out with our feedback.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 15, 2010, 02:11:10 PM
Roy,

Please tell me why you dislike the turrets idea for the Shadow Hunters?

Would people be amenable to the idea of more firepower at 15cm range (1 pulsar or 4EWB's), but +5cm speed?

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 02:16:08 PM
A step in the right direction, but 15cm is ridiculously short ranged, so not sure if +5cm makes up for that.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 15, 2010, 05:57:43 PM
'ey.. these are eldar, not Orks ya git!

Horizon, I don't even know why your trying for a compromise.  Your asking for something that has no logical reasoning behind it. taking weapon strength away and putting it somewhere else doesn't solve anything as far as i can tell.   Also, this idea is LESS then popular as far as i can see.


When it comes to the shadow hunters, i am hesitant to agree on a weapon strength increase due to their description and size. These escorts are TINY, and were not meant to attack larger craft unless in large swarms. I don't get your "not viable" argument, since i have used them many times to superb effect.  I strongly suggest you stop comparing them to their corsair cousins.  The two fleets work VERY differently.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 15, 2010, 06:41:10 PM
By all Zelnik! Your argument has the same logical or non-logical reasoning as mine.

There are these options for the dragonship :
Make Pulsars 4 or Make Batteries 12.
Make Torpedoes 8 or Make Launch bays 3. (yeah oddball ;) ).

Like, poll this...

How do you know less popular? Huh? So far I have seen no Craftworld Eldar fleet with Pulsars on a Dragonship. And I scourge a lot of various web forums.

We four (Ray, Bluedagger, Zelnik, Horizon) are just a tiny representation of the whole BFG community and so far we are on a 50/50 draw with the battery strength. And yes, we all represent our own gaming groups afaik.

Yes, the fleets are different, and as said the battery upping on the Shadowhunter could be but isn't needed but as it stands there is a change needed for the lance.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 15, 2010, 07:43:52 PM
then drop it.

I have been trying to tell you that Eldar batteries and lances... eldar launch bays and torpedos... don't have any sort of accurate conversion. Like everything else, eldar weapons break the rules. 

A st 6 torpedo is the strongest salvo of any eldar craft in the game. That, alone, is absurdly powerful. Again, I don't see any call for an increase in power.

IF you want to set up a poll on this matter, by all means do it. I will abide by the decision of the community, but I am wondering why your worrying about this, when arguements on the Endeavor family have been plaguing the community since the orange book came out.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: fracas on April 15, 2010, 08:22:42 PM
i know there is no voting but
1. i think Str8 torpedoes is too much for a cruiser
2. the 3 turrets seems also too much for an escort
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 08:47:16 PM
Honestly at this point I would probably say leave the Dragonship and Shadowhunter as is. I would love to see the Dragonship with a s4 Pulsar, but 8 torps is prob a bit much. I would love to see Shadowhunters with a pulsar, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

A poll prob won't solve anything, because anyone would love to see a nerf of a fleet they don't play... it's human nature.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 15, 2010, 09:02:04 PM
Not true: Craftworld Eldar are my favourite fleet. :)

And I truly hope people will look at other fleets as their own with balance & fun as guidelines.

Xavi at Port Maw suggested to make fixed variants with each their own point value.

edit: 1 cheap measily fighter can take out all those 8 expensive torpedoes.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 09:19:01 PM
Xavi at Port Maw suggested to make fixed variants with each their own point value.

Bad idea, the FAQ is to edit broken or unclear things. Some of the things being put in are borderline rewriting our "codices", which mind you could stand to happen, but none of us are on GW's payroll to make that happen.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 15, 2010, 09:23:36 PM
With all these changes I have a feeling they will update the Craftworld Eldar pdf (Doom of the Eldar/Yriels Raiders) soon. And why not? It is just a pdf and not printed in a rulebook.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 15, 2010, 09:30:41 PM
Does anyone on the forums have the power to do such a thing officially? I doubt GW cares enough about the game anymore to put the effort into that.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: tinfish on April 16, 2010, 12:55:37 AM
Would it not make some sense to do a bit of play testing with the various options. Theory is fine, we all know what various weapons are supposed to be the equivalent of, but you still need a few games to get the feel of the various options.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 16, 2010, 03:56:34 AM
Zelnik,

The Dragonship weapons changes aren't a 'shift' it's an improvement of the torps to be comparable with the launch bays and decrease of the WB's to be comparable with the Pulsars.

Actually how come you haven't asked for an improvement of the Wraithships WB's to 10 at that rate? (It's not going to happen!)

But don't worry about the Shadow Hunter being changed, I'm excluding it from the FAQ as it's so radical. But please try to talk me out of it as it may happen in the future!  :P


The 15cm range is vaguely supported by the fluff, as at present they have the same range as cruisers. What if they had +10cm speed!?

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 16, 2010, 04:18:33 AM
On 8 Torps being too much: To be fair only the Voidstalker variant had 8 torps and that was a battleship! But it was 8 Torps replacing 4 LB's.

However, I see strength 10 and 12 Devil torps from Corsair Nightshade squadrons when ever I see them played! Assume we have a Corsair escort squadron with 2 Hemlocks and 4 Nightshades, that costs 240pts (Nightshades should be 45pts IMO), has the same firepower as a Dragonship and is arguably of similar survivability! All I'm trying to get across is that that many torps isn't going to unbalance the game any more than Eldar Corsairs already do.  :P

Fixed variants are a good idea, but could only be present in a re-do of the fleet lists pdf.

Weapons values in BFG are quite easy to compare with one another when on the same hull. Just run the probabilities and keep things like potential damage and gunnery effects in mind. Also in this case its direct firepower vs direct firepower and ordy vs ordy. So pretty darned is to compare!

Cheers,

RayB   
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 16, 2010, 05:36:36 AM
I'm amiable with a 15 range 1PL/4WB (eldar rules WB) 20/30/40 escort. At that point I'd consider them viable to take beyond points filling lol.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 16, 2010, 10:33:08 AM
....I could re-do the complete Craftworld Eldar fleet list pdf...

Also, we are forgetting: Ghostships!

The rules for these are so bad we all forgot about them since nobody uses them!

'Deer in the Headlight'

I shall post some fix ideas later.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 16, 2010, 01:20:32 PM
Roy,

Ah Ghost ships, there is too much that needs to be done to them to be resolved in an FAQ.

Sorry, they're just gonna have to stay dead, for now.


BlueDagger,

+10cm speed, so 25cm/30cm/40cm. However, your bands deserve merit.

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on April 16, 2010, 01:37:28 PM
Ah Ghost ships, there is too much that needs to be done to them to be resolved in an FAQ.

Sorry, they're just gonna have to stay dead, for now.
(http://cdn2.knowyourmeme.com/i/24481/original/i-see-what-you-did-there-ceiling-cat-27940-1250313420-23.jpg)

....I could re-do the complete Craftworld Eldar fleet list pdf...

This would have to be an official GW thing for people to follow it. There is a ton of home grown variants out there including yours, but if it's not official people won't pay attention to it. Moral of the story: Kidnap a GW employee and ransom them for BFG updates lol.

For the Shadowhunter, 15 cm range for 1 pulsar lance and 4EWB 25/30/40 I like even more if the HA is willing. I don't think anyone can deny that they would be move effective in that config.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 16, 2010, 07:18:00 PM
Nah, what I meant: I will make the pdf for the High Admirality/rules commitee. Ray is member of the HA. Then they can sent it to GW (Andy Hall) to replace it on the GW website.

This has been done quite extensively for Epic: Armageddon a few monts ago.

So I won't publish it, just make it for 'them' if they can't find nobody else.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 17, 2010, 02:10:14 AM
Roy, as always your contributions to the community are humbling.

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 19, 2010, 04:26:38 AM
Glad to see we have a path to making the changes official.. but we really need to reconcile the differences we have here...Should we touch the dragonship or not?

It's pretty clear we aren't touching the shadow hunter unless we have a damn good reason.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on April 19, 2010, 11:18:30 AM
Shadowhunter has the phantom lance that is not a phantom lance right? So why not make it into a Phantom Lance in the first place?
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 19, 2010, 01:56:53 PM
It is called a Shadowlance on the Shadowhunter.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on April 19, 2010, 02:09:39 PM
Eh? PDF I have says Prow Phantom Lance.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Don Gusto on April 19, 2010, 10:20:50 PM
On 8 Torps being too much: To be fair only the Voidstalker variant had 8 torps and that was a battleship! But it was 8 Torps replacing 4 LB's.

a bit offtopic but was that ever official? I would like that option, even if it were only 6 torps.
I think in Warpstorm the Voidstalker had the option of replacing its 4 lb's with 4 torps.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 20, 2010, 02:52:52 AM
The Shadow hunters 'lance' rules are explained next to it anyway.


Don Gusto,

I can't find my Warpstorm!!! Damn, I'll have a search when I have a few hours free.

But I'm positive it was Str 8 Torps.  ???

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 20, 2010, 07:19:43 AM
Yep,
in the BFG Compendium you can replace 4lb by 4 torps on the Void Stalker.

Currently Shadowhunter lance = Imperial Navy lance.

n the 8 torps for the Dragonship. It can be seen as too strong. What if it had the possibility of firing two, non-combinable, seperate strenght 4 markers?
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 20, 2010, 01:43:34 PM
Well.. then we replace an overpowered salvo, with an overcomplicated ruleset :)

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 20, 2010, 01:53:15 PM
What the heck is complicated with that???

choose one of the following options for keel weaponry:
launch bays - nightwing/phoenix - 30/20cm - 4
OR
keel - torps - 30cm - 4
keel - torps - 30cm - 4

In the grey box underneath:
The strenght 4 keel torpedoes cannot be combined into a single strength 8 wave.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 20, 2010, 03:40:10 PM
One.. people are going to wonder why we changed a very simple ship to something with a rule that does nothing but put more tokens on the table. 

Two... it really doesn't change anything.  Sure it gives the enemy a second chance to shoot something down, but it also gives the eldar another opportunity to knock out CAP's and do damage in the same turn.

Three.... I am utterly failing to see the need for this change anyway, since the dragonship is more then capable of trashing a ship with it's normal st6. 

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on April 20, 2010, 03:45:18 PM
8 torps is fine. It's just scary!
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 20, 2010, 06:59:22 PM
Hey, I was just raising an idea. :)

On three: well, have you ever seen someone take the strength six torpedo Dragonship variant?

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Zelnik on April 20, 2010, 09:50:43 PM
Honestly? no, because the dragonship is the best source for launch capacity in the fleet. 

Making the torpedo strength stronger won't change peoples use of the ship, since the wraithship is a poor place to invest in launch capacity. 

I HAVE however, seen folks use the pulsar lances on it to surprising effect.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on April 30, 2010, 07:42:55 PM
Are you suggesting that the launch bay option on the Wraithship is redundant?
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on May 03, 2010, 05:09:46 AM
It's just not as good as the torpedoes to most people, but the LAST things we are suggesting is another repeat of the Dragonship ship "fix".
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 04, 2010, 05:22:00 PM
The Dragonship needs a 'fix'. ;)

The wraithship launch bay option is ideal as the 'odd' option (3 Wraithships & 1 Dragonship within 750pts or such).
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 16, 2010, 01:47:10 AM
Right , I have actually signed up just to comment on this thread, Horizon commented on a discussion I am Involved in on another forum.

Played Gothic when it first came out Eldar , been off for a couple of years but just picked up the fleet again recently for a campaign at my club. yay !!

I had some issues with the Craftworld Eldar fleet before I came here.

I was just a bit sick of cruisers cruisers cruisers for Eldar , even the flame of Asuryan for some reason they could not bring themselves to make into a decent flagship Battleship class , Craftworlds have the resources and some could argue more need for larger capital ships, so why do corsairs get the voidstalker when there is not one single 'battleship' for the Eldar fleet , As far as I am aware the imperials have quite a number to choose from and everyone else has at least one.

To top it all of in order to take the Flame you have to pay an insane amount of points for a character in order to have it, making it rather underwhelming for its cost ... make it a proper battleship please or at least make it good for its points !!! or give us a 'vanilla' battleship with viable options to make interesting variants (like everyone else)

One of the guys on the thread I mentioned has put forward some really good rules and background for 'Phoenix' Battleships , I'm sure were someone to   check its balance  and put it in a tasty pdf (Hell I'll convert the model !!) GW would more than likely put it in the fleet .I would link the word documents here but I cannot figure this forum out would be happy to get them up for consideration.

Shall I just paste it into a post,would be interested to hear peoples thoughts  ?

The fleet is quite low on ships and kinda feels like an incomplete rushed hatchet job without a proper battleship and some more escort veriety and maybe some pre fall fun toys so that the Eldar have something in the same vein as the nova cannon etc , would just lend the fleet more depth/character I feel, and might result in more varied fleets popping up alongside some other suggestions being taken on board.

So my 2p on the current issues being discussed here:

Shadowhunters, No turrets please , just no , if it got put on I imagine I would avoid buying /using them any more as they would feel wrong , infact If the proposed nerfs to the dragonship happen too I would just Dump the list  entirely and use my craftworld models with the Corsairs list......

I think as they are the ONLY escort it would not kill to give them an actual pulsar without lock on they seem to average about 3-4 hits and with lock on its about 6-7 assuming the squadron is at full strength.

However as a compromise why not give them: shadowhunter pulsars = pulsars that can only do max 2 hits ?  and NO turrets  :P keep the 4+ ordy thing , that is a nice little characterful rule.

It makes them a little more flexible as you now have to choose going after ordy or going after ships or maybe buying several squads to do either where needed *gasp*

Flame:If its going to be the only 'big' ship Eldar get make it good , moving the pulsars to the prow or keel make sense so greenlight that for me
definitely should come with assault boats given Yriels penchant for assaulting things , I doubt he got so bad A** just sitting on a bridge sippping xenofruit wine.....

Personally I would like to see it with the same amount of hits as a stalker (maybe one less) and a set of torps , I expect to get flames for that but its just how I see/would like to see Yriels ship , considering he is possibly THE best Eldar Captain I don't see it as too much of a stretch .

Hero is overpriced and coupled with my other issues with the Flame makes them both a pretty unattractive prospect , Currently feel more inclined to go with the dragonship spam...

Ghostships:= fail

Dragonship:: There seems to be some debate about this ship , Its not OP so you cannot nerf any of it , the only option is to make some of the other choices more attractive : I don't think 4 pulsars is overkill ,it already exists on another ship (with longer range) however if you just cant see the sense in that, why not consider making the pulsars 45cms ? suddenly more attractive and already in existence on another Eldar ship (at str 4) I would certainly have trouble choosing between it and the EWB's ......torps and bays seem fine to me , I would love a str 8 Eldar torp on something but I feel that is battleship territory.


I'll 'rant off' now , seems I have written more than I intended , apologies.

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 16, 2010, 08:16:55 PM
Hi M (Kraken),

Welcome to the Forum.


Shadow Hunters with turrets: How do they feel wrong? The turret strength reps them getting in close and dog fighting with Ordy. I know this is an unpopular idea but people mostly seem to hate that it's the only eldar ship with turrets or that its just too rubbish.

Shadow Hunters Guns: This should be one of the weakest escorts out there, I think a normal Lance is about equal to 3EWB's. Any more would be too much for such a small escort.

BB's: The Voidstalker should be in the CWE List!(Not happening in the FAQ though, sorry) Excluding the character the Flame is nice for its points (you'll have to get a character anyway), and being a cruiser it can be squadroned with chaff wraithships. Range is a big thing with MSM, 45cm range Pulsars should be limited to BB's.

Ghostships: Yeah, they need too much work to be corrected in an FAQ.

Dragonships: You should compare the Dragonships to the Eclipse, Shadow and Wraithships. In that respect 4 Pulsars and 4 Lb's is too much!!! The Dragonship is more like a Battle Cruiser than a Grand Cruiser!   

Thanks for your input,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 16, 2010, 09:24:12 PM
Hi M (Kraken),

Welcome to the Forum.

Thanks , good to be aboard .


Shadow Hunters with turrets: How do they feel wrong? The turret strength reps them getting in close and dog fighting with Ordy. I know this is an unpopular idea but people mostly seem to hate that it's the only eldar ship with turrets or that its just too rubbish.

Is it not enough that the majority of eldar players just don't want turrets on it ? It's difficult to put in to words but no turrets is a feature of the eldar fleet , if you can find a way around it then ok , I still think a two hit lance would not be terrible statistically it only puts three ships upto an average of 2 ish hits rather than 1.5  and with lock on its going to be 4 ish , not terribly OP is it ?

Shadow Hunters Guns: This should be one of the weakest escorts out there, I think a normal Lance is about equal to 3EWB's. Any more would be too much for such a small escort.

Why should it be the weakest ?, its currently the only Escort the fleet has so why should it be rubbish , logic dictates it would be reasonably good or they would have need of variants ?

BB's: The Voidstalker should be in the CWE List!(Not happening in the FAQ though, sorry) Excluding the character the Flame is nice for its points (you'll have to get a character anyway), and being a cruiser it can be squadroned with chaff wraithships. Range is a big thing with MSM, 45cm range Pulsars should be limited to BB's.

BB's ? sorry you have lost me ? I assume you mean battleship ? why would a dragonship not utilise 45 CM lances ? the corsairs must have got them from somewhere ? the Flame is not so bad I suppose I was just disappointed to have yet another cruiser for the list/s

Ghostships: Yeah, they need too much work to be corrected in an FAQ.

Dragonships: You should compare the Dragonships to the Eclipse, Shadow and Wraithships. In that respect 4 Pulsars and 4 Lb's is too much!!! The Dragonship is more like a Battle Cruiser than a Grand Cruiser!

The Dragon ship is fine as I and others have said,and should not be compared to the corsair equivalents as they are different fleets(one has a battleship and good escorts the other does not) in its context the Dragon is fine, the weapons options just need internal balancing, 4 pulsars is possibly too much, so why not give them the extra pulsar range ?, it is the ideal compromise here. if there was a battleship class for the fleet a tiny nerf to the EWB's maybe 14 would be acceptable, but its the best ship CWE have please don't make it worse. I nearly used the corsair rules for my craftworld fleet as it is, we don't have emperor battleships and nova cannons and massive carriers blah blah blah if it's going to be a cruiser centric list then they damn well should be excellent cruisers !!  

Thanks for your input,

RayB HA



While we are here I'l pop up the rules I mentioned , what do you think ,I for one am desperate for a battleship class for CWE


(http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn27/Jormangundr_MJRL/Picture2.png)


(http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn27/Jormangundr_MJRL/Picture3.png)

Could this be put before High command ? I really feel it (or something in this vein) will help 'finish' the fleet and add to the game at large.

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 17, 2010, 11:04:12 PM
Kraken,

Shadow Hunters Turrets: Because others donít like it isnít a constructive reason. Sharing their opinion is however. :) They arenít literally turrets though, they just share the rules. This could be made as a Ďnoteí rather than a turret strength so as not to tarnish the ships stats.

Shadow Hunters Guns: Shadow hunters are the smallest and lightest Eldar escorts, thatís why they get weak armaments, itís that simple.
As to the logic of having a good escort because they only have one escort class: well CWE are a different extreme of the elder fleet so weaker escorts and heavier cruisers, to force you to have a cruiser fleet.

BBs (Battleships): The only Eldar BB is a Voidstalker (with possible variants). The Voidstalker in its background is actually a CWE ship! Corsairs shouldnít get it, unless they have a hero. This is a topic for after the FAQ though. You can argue the weak armour into its stats as a CWE BB as it would otherwise he too heavy to have Eldar manoeuvrability.
The Flame (and possible variants) is just a cruiser, a nice addition to be sure but not a BB replacement.

Dragonships: You have to compare the Dragonship to all the other Eldar cruisers as they are the closest ships in the game and background. +1 pulsar and 5+ armour over the Eclipse is plenty generous. Extra range is not going to happen while Eldar are still MSM! Itís only balanced with the Voidstalker as itís rare, vulnerable and expensive.

Phoenixship: Itís just a really heavy Voidstalker. Iím not a fan as I see Voidstalkers as the largest you can get without reverting to Blackstone style Eldar ships. But it is slow so that makes it at least somewhat balanced.
Basic problems I have are:
Range, all weapons should be at 45cm!
No Dorsals! Just Prow and Keel for Eldar.
4 Lbís instead of 5. Why 5 anyway?
No Phantom Lances, leave them for the DE.
Special weapons should only be on Ďuncustomisableí character ships.

Why not use the Voidstalkers stats as a template? 5+ armour with -5cm speed, but with weapon options similar in upgrade from the Eclipse to Dragonship.
So 2 options of 4 Pulsars LF/FR or 16WBís LFR, about equivalent at 45cm range.
And 4Lbís or 8 Torps.

Now this just seems too much to me and very similar to the stats presented. 8 Pulsars/32EWBís and 8 Torps/4Lbís is super scary! If I were to point it using the Voidstalker as the closest comparison, it would be a little under 500pts. Once again very similar to the stats presented.

This would be a cool House Rule ship but way too abuseble in normal games. CWE should have a choice of 2 Voistalker variants IMO, one with 4 Lbís and the other with 8 Torps. Nothing greater than that.

Cheers,

RayB HA    
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 18, 2010, 03:51:52 AM
Hi Ray

This is not actually my rules , just some that were shown to me and struck me as the sort of thing I would love to have at the head of a CWE fleet, given that as you say the Void stalker is a stripped down Corsiar version of the CWE one it seems a bit stupid that it is absent in the more 'capital ship centric' list.

Kraken,

Shadow Hunters Turrets: Because others donít like it isnít a constructive reason. Sharing their opinion is however. :) They arenít literally turrets though, they just share the rules. This could be made as a Ďnoteí rather than a turret strength so as not to tarnish the ships stats.

I think it can be safely surmised that turrets are unpopular choice, what is wrong with the 4+ to hit ordy ? if the pulsar is not to be touched then that is the only remaining 'issue'.

Shadow Hunters Guns: Shadow hunters are the smallest and lightest Eldar escorts, thatís why they get weak armaments, itís that simple.
As to the logic of having a good escort because they only have one escort class: well CWE are a different extreme of the elder fleet so weaker escorts and heavier cruisers, to force you to have a cruiser fleet.

Ok fine, poop escorts can be order of the day in the CWE list. So why (I do hate to go on) do they get poop escorts AND no battleship, its not like the cruisers are so earth shatteringly effective that the lack of escorts/battleship is really justified....

BBs (Battleships): The only Eldar BB is a Voidstalker (with possible variants). The Voidstalker in its background is actually a CWE ship! Corsairs shouldnít get it, unless they have a hero. This is a topic for after the FAQ though. You can argue the weak armour into its stats as a CWE BB as it would otherwise he too heavy to have Eldar manoeuvrability.

Or the Corsairs stripped it down for extra speed so it would work better with their escort heavy fleet and hit-and-run tactics , makes perfect sense to me.

The Flame (and possible variants) is just a cruiser, a nice addition to be sure but not a BB replacement.

No it's not (sadly)

Dragonships: You have to compare the Dragonship to all the other Eldar cruisers as they are the closest ships in the game and background. +1 pulsar and 5+ armour over the Eclipse is plenty generous. Extra range is not going to happen while Eldar are still MSM! Itís only balanced with the Voidstalker as itís rare, vulnerable and expensive.

Not so generous when you consider that the corsair escorts are really very good and the CWE are not. Directly comparing the ships serves no purpose really as they have to be considered in context as a part of the fleet they are in. The 'boost' to the cruisers are more than compensated for by being able to have a Voidstalker (45cm range !!) and excellent escorts some of which can carry full pulsars etc !!

Phoenixship: Itís just a really heavy Voidstalker. Iím not a fan as I see Voidstalkers as the largest you can get without reverting to Blackstone style Eldar ships. But it is slow so that makes it at least somewhat balanced.

I figured it was the non stripped down version of the VS , so heavier armour and slightly heavier load out.

Basic problems I have are:
Range, all weapons should be at 45cm!     interesting ...why ? helps to balance out the ship whilst separating it from the way the Corsairs use it ...

No Dorsals! Just Prow and Keel for Eldar.   Good point, Just an easily corrected oversight then ?

4 Lbís instead of 5. Why 5 anyway?  I imagine because 8 torps is better than 4 LB's and 5 then becomes a valid 'choice' rather than a redundant load out

No Phantom Lances, leave them for the DE.    I think he meant for them to be the same as the 'phantom lance's from the poop escort, sorry,shadowhunters....

Special weapons should only be on Ďuncustomisableí character ships.

 I particularly liked these, adds a nice bit of flavor and variety to the fleet rather than just more pulsar,torps,EWB's and LB's. It more or less is a character ship , in order to have one , and you can only ever have one (special wep)  in the fleet it has to be the flagship, both weps are pretty cool without being broken, at least I cannot work out how you would break them.

Why not use the Voidstalkers stats as a template? 5+ armour with -5cm speed, but with weapon options similar in upgrade from the Eclipse to Dragonship.

So 2 options of 4 Pulsars LF/FR or 16WBís LFR, about equivalent at 45cm range.
And 4Lbís or 8 Torps.

Now this just seems too much to me and very similar to the stats presented. 8 Pulsars/32EWBís and 8 Torps/4Lbís is super scary! If I were to point it using the Voidstalker as the closest comparison, it would be a little under 500pts. Once again very similar to the stats presented.

This would be a cool House Rule ship but way too abuseble in normal games. CWE should have a choice of 2 Voistalker variants IMO, one with 4 Lbís and the other with 8 Torps. Nothing greater than that.

I could pretty much agree with that as long as it was 5+ armour, slower and had something like those special weps as 'character ship' upgrades

RayB HA    


So How about:

450 pts


(http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn27/Jormangundr_MJRL/Picture1-3.png)


To be honest I prefer this as it is more balanced.

Cheers,

M.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 18, 2010, 12:19:19 PM
WAHAHAHAHAHA! Distortion Lance? WAHAHAHAHAHA! Pulsar Cannon? Not much worse. WAHAHAHAHAHA!

Seriously, Eldar do NOT need anything more which cheeses them up all the more.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 18, 2010, 03:18:41 PM
Kraken,

Shadowhunters Turrets: The reason why shadowhunters are effective at all against Ordy is because of their manoeuvrability not their fine tuned sensors!
****Another option is that BMís are not placed on holofields saves of 4 or more. (Just checked my written notes of 2007) This reps them dodging shots or killing (or half killing) ordy. In addition to this it should have a speed boost to 20/25/30cm.

Comparisons: You do have to take the whole fleet into consideration for balance. But Iím just talking about stat evolution and comparison, in this case you have to use the closest thing: the other cruisers. For fleet balance, Dragonships can chuck out the same firepower (with my changes) as a squadron of CE escorts.
CWE are fine with the 2 Cruiser sizes with my changes: Dragonships WBís reduced by 2, Torps increased by 2.     

Eldar Battleships: They should have 45cm range especially if they are slower. If they donít have 45cm whatís the point in having them over a squadron of cruisers, itís not as if they have better defences.

I donít see the Voidstalker as a toned down CWE BB, itís just a normal CWE BB.

Your BB is fine for HR games but it is too weird with its special weapons and too strong for stranger games.

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 18, 2010, 05:35:52 PM
WAHAHAHAHAHA! Distortion Lance? WAHAHAHAHAHA! Pulsar Cannon? Not much worse. WAHAHAHAHAHA!

Seriously, Eldar do NOT need anything more which cheeses them up all the more.

Thanks for the mature,eloquent and well thought out post....... Its not about cheese or even making the fleet more powerful, its about variety and parity with the selections available to other fleets. If you think those weps are broken you have clearly not read those rules properly or ever played against a Necron fleet (for example). I would not care if those phoenix ships were somewhat over-pointed as I feel that something like it is a glaring omission from the fleet. [/quote]

Kraken,

Shadowhunters Turrets: The reason why shadowhunters are effective at all against Ordy is because of their manoeuvrability not their fine tuned sensors!

****Another option is that BMís are not placed on holofields saves of 4 or more. (Just checked my written notes of 2007) This reps them dodging shots or killing (or half killing) ordy. In addition to this it should have a speed boost to 20/25/30cm.

Maybe just leave it alone, not sure you will ever reach an 'improvement' we may as well just get on with it as it is.....

Comparisons: You do have to take the whole fleet into consideration for balance. But Iím just talking about stat evolution and comparison, in this case you have to use the closest thing: the other cruisers. For fleet balance, Dragonships can chuck out the same firepower (with my changes) as a squadron of CE escorts.
CWE are fine with the 2 Cruiser sizes with my changes: Dragonships WBís reduced by 2, Torps increased by 2.

Looking at it that way the extra torps would be nice , less than 14 for WB's would not be a good thing ,I like pulsars always took em anyways.    

Eldar Battleships: They should have 45cm range especially if they are slower. If they donít have 45cm whatís the point in having them over a squadron of cruisers, itís not as if they have better defenses.

Fair point , so I took that into account when presenting my own prototype phoenix ship.

I donít see the Voidstalker as a toned down CWE BB, itís just a normal CWE BB.

 I did not say toned down , just to be clear it has been re purposed by the CE, not weaker per say Just more suitable to their needs/logistics and fighting style.

Your BB is fine for HR games but it is too weird with its special weapons and too strong for stranger games.

There are crazier ships in GW print ?! In fact they are pretty much based on existing rules ? this is just as you said , a Heavy fit Voidstalker which will cost 500 points if you want it to be 'weird', meh I'll prob make up a shiny pdf and model of it for use in a narrative scenario in our Gothic campaign , I suppose if my regular opponents will let me use it once in a while 'official' will mean squat.

Though I maintain and agree with you that a CWE Stalker variant should be available and that CE should have to go about getting their variant the same way CWE Eldar have to get the Flame.
[/color][/quote]

Regards,

M


Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 18, 2010, 07:56:03 PM
Ray,
by now you should have come to the conclusion we do not want turrets (under msm) on Eldar. And that most feel the only change needed to the Shadowhunter is a better lance (DE variant).
Better speed, okay, not needed.
And you can call the 4+ to hit ordnance an abstraction of good movement into the shooting rules. ;)

Though I will never ever use the Void Stalker model in my CWE fleet. Never.

I have to build my own battleship and... Wyrm Battleship from MMS. :)
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 18, 2010, 09:24:58 PM
Roy,

What's wrong with the Voidstalker model? It looks too much like the Corsair ships? You could always file off some of the detail  ;)

Shadowhunters Turrets: No one has actually stated a reason beyond no other Eldar ship has turrets to make me think it's a bad idea.
The BMless holofield save is a special rule that covers the same theme but isn't nearly as effective.

Shooting ordy on a 4+ is completely unrelated to its background, it should be removed!

The Shadowhunter should have some base contact ordy rule (turrets or a BMless save) or no ordy rule at all!

The Shadowhunter should also have a -1 boarding modifier like the Hemlock.

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 18, 2010, 09:26:40 PM
Yeah, the VS is too much Corsair.

You know what would be cool? If the CWE got rules for the old Spacefleet models, these fit right in.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 18, 2010, 09:40:47 PM
Yeah but you can't get them anymore. :( I think my brother has about 10 or so, he uses them as Wraithships or Auroras. But with 8 cruiser variants not including the Flame and its possible variants I think CWE have enough options.

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 18, 2010, 09:43:32 PM
10.... grrr... I still need the larger ones, the old Wraithships. I have the old Space Hunters.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Don Gusto on May 19, 2010, 07:48:15 PM
I would just like to point out that under the current rules you cannot engage fighters with turrets (thats page 29 the last paragraph).
Technically you couldnt chase bombers either with turrets, they are reactive. It works because bombers are forced to attack on base contact.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 20, 2010, 12:45:13 AM
Don,

It's fine, it covers them attacking each other. It's fair enough that fighters will avoid the escort if not part of a wave.

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 20, 2010, 04:40:16 AM
Thanks for the mature,eloquent and well thought out post....... Its not about cheese or even making the fleet more powerful, its about variety and parity with the selections available to other fleets. If you think those weps are broken you have clearly not read those rules properly or ever played against a Necron fleet (for example). I would not care if those phoenix ships were somewhat over-pointed as I feel that something like it is a glaring omission from the fleet.

Regards,

M

A weapon which is an NC but does not have the minimum range limit, ignores shields, does D6 damage under the hole, does d3 damage in the outer template and 1 automatic critical hit. In exchange it needs to be RO'd. In an Eldar fleet where LD values are almost off the charts?

Another weapon which functions the same as a pulsar lance but for every hit results in a critical hit on a 4+? Possible 1-3 criticals which can actually net you 10-12 on the crit table and so further damage?

On top of all the doodads the Eldar already have?

I don't know about you but my understanding of english is fine, thank you. Why do you think I laughed? And your justification is because you can't beat the Necrons? Well, now you know how most other races other than Necron and Chaos feel when going up against Eldar.

Sorry dude but those options DO cheese up the Eldar fleet. Do make it more powerful. Glaring omissions? What omissions? Eldar already has the most efficient weapons out there and you want to give them more? That's balance? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Ray is correct. Take the Void Stalker when the next Update or FAQ comes out that allows the CWE to take the Void Stalker. That's all the battleship Eldar needs.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 20, 2010, 01:41:02 PM
Thanks for the mature,eloquent and well thought out post....... Its not about cheese or even making the fleet more powerful, its about variety and parity with the selections available to other fleets. If you think those weps are broken you have clearly not read those rules properly or ever played against a Necron fleet (for example). I would not care if those phoenix ships were somewhat over-pointed as I feel that something like it is a glaring omission from the fleet.

Regards,

M

A weapon which is an NC but does not have the minimum range limit, ignores shields, does D6 damage under the hole, does d3 damage in the outer template and 1 automatic critical hit. In exchange it needs to be RO'd. In an Eldar fleet where LD values are almost off the charts?

Needs to be guess range, so far from a win button, and looses the ability to move in the ordy phase plus you could only ever have ONE of the special weapons in a fleet @ 500 points ? I'm fairly sure 2 dragonships costs less and puts down more hurt for less ?

Another weapon which functions the same as a pulsar lance but for every hit results in a critical hit on a 4+? Possible 1-3 criticals which can actually net you 10-12 on the crit table and so further damage?

How is this weapon much different from bombardment cannons ,given only one ship in the fleet could have it rather than every single ship and at 50 points,  in theory you need to roll 11 or more times on the crit table to guarantee extra damage ?! and again the ship costs loads.

On top of all the doodads the Eldar already have?

hmm you mean , NO battleship NO decent escorts NO shields, very few hits, in terms of the corsairs NO armour, Ghostships ? the list is longer, but you get the idea , it would not really be 'on top of' because in order to have it you will have less of the other stuff, if you were going to write a fleet for pure efficiency I doubt you would take a phoenix ship.

I don't know about you but my understanding of english is fine, thank you. Why do you think I laughed? And your justification is because you can't beat the Necrons? Well, now you know how most other races other than Necron and Chaos feel when going up against Eldar.

At which point did I say I could not beat them, true they are tough on Eldar , !? I was merely drawing your attention to their weapons /special rules etc in comparison, how is the phoenix ship worse than the Necron battleship or a planet killer or a hulk for that matter ?

Sorry dude but those options DO cheese up the Eldar fleet. Do make it more powerful. Glaring omissions? What omissions? Eldar already has the most efficient weapons out there and you want to give them more? That's balance? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Again you miss the point, to put a phoenix ship in an existing fleet would mean dropping at least one dragon ship and a bunch of other stuff (its probably not really playable under 1500, its actually easier to deal with than multiple faster ships , and to fire the weapons that are soo broken It cannot avoid your fleet , or at least its going to have a hard time , its no worse , just different.


Your point: "And your justification is because you can't beat the Necrons"? you justify your 'argument' with the fact you cannot beat the Eldar ?



Ray is correct. Take the Void Stalker when the next Update or FAQ comes out that allows the CWE to take the Void Stalker. That's all the battleship Eldar needs.

The Voidstalker is the CE variant, hence it looks the same and has the same AV as the rest of the corsair fleet a craftworld variant would be somewhat different and judging from the way the CWE cruisers differ from the CE ones its not a giant leap of logic to see that the CWE version if it follows the design precedents would have some more firepower and a 5+ save at the very least .
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 20, 2010, 02:01:46 PM
Needs to be guess range, so far from a win button, and looses the ability to move in the ordy phase plus you could only ever have ONE of the special weapons in a fleet @ 500 points ? I'm fairly sure 2 dragonships costs less and puts down more hurt for less ?

You do realize there's a reason why the guess range was dropped? Because there's lots of people out there who are very good at eyeballing ranges. Who cares if it's only one? The fact is it's available. Worse it's available on one of the hardest ships to kill.

How is this weapon much different from bombardment cannons ,given only one ship in the fleet could have it rather than every single ship and at 50 points,  in theory you need to roll 11 or more times on the crit table to guarantee extra damage ?! and again the ship costs loads.

Bombardment cannons are the weapons concession given to the SM to make them more competitive. In exchange they lose out on a regular cruiser. See how bad the disadvantage is? Also Bombardment Cannons are WB table dependent. Aside from which the range is only 30 cm. Again comparing the BC to what the Eldar have is a no contest. Eldar will generally laugh at SM and just massacre them with their Pulsar lances.

hmm you mean , NO battleship NO decent escorts NO shields, very few hits, in terms of the corsairs NO armour, Ghostships ? the list is longer, but you get the idea , it would not really be 'on top of' because in order to have it you will have less of the other stuff, if you were going to write a fleet for pure efficiency I doubt you would take a phoenix ship.

Void Stalker. Not available to CWE YET but it looks like you will get it. No decent escorts? Maybe. But they do have decent cruisers. No armor? CWE escorts have the typical CE armor unless they've become 3+ without my noticing. And then you have holofields and that crazy MSM. I would still bat that that escort (I forget the name) gets the regular Pulsar lance instead of a regular lance but that's about it. Do that and you have a fleet which can rival CE already. CWE still has access to all the other doodads of Eldar. You can't deny that. I would most certainly take a Phoenix, if only to put the NC lance. It's that powerful. I don't need no playtest to know that. Why? Because I use the NC extensively.

At which point did I say I could not beat them, true they are tough on Eldar , !? I was merely drawing your attention to their weapons /special rules etc in comparison, how is the phoenix ship worse than the Necron battleship or a planet killer or a hulk for that matter ?

And did you notice that Necrons are limited to 3 capital ships? And out of the 3 capital ships, only the Scythe is really worth while. I wouldn't take the Tombship unless it was a really high points game. Again, you're having a problem with Necrons? Well again, I point out that IN is way marginalized vs Eldar, much more so than Eldar is against Necron (and I even feel that is doubtful). Tell ya what. Let my short ranged IN ignore all the Eldar advantages by getting the speed I need to catch with Eldar and/or ignore holofields even with just my NC then I'll agree to the Phoenix and its NC.

Again you miss the point, to put a phoenix ship in an existing fleet would mean dropping at least one dragon ship and a bunch of other stuff (its probably not really playable under 1500, its actually easier to deal with than multiple faster ships , and to fire the weapons that are soo broken It cannot avoid your fleet , or at least its going to have a hard time , its no worse , just different.

So what? The trade off is good enough. I WOULD take this ship over a Dragonship any day just to have access to either of those two weapons. Even the Planet Killer would quake against the Phoenix and it's Eldar NC. Get the Phoenix into range with the NC. Shoot it up with the NC then follow up with the Pulsars and other weapons at your disposal then run away again to the rear of the PK.

The Voidstalker is the CE variant, hence it looks the same and has the same AV as the rest of the corsair fleet a craftworld variant would be somewhat different and judging from the way the CWE cruisers differ from the CE ones its not a giant leap of logic to see that the CWE version if it follows the design precedents would have some more firepower and a 5+ save at the very least .

So fine, get the 5+ arm. I don't mind. DE already have holofields and 5+ armor so there is a precedent.I designed a 5+ armor DE battleship myself so I don't think it's a problem. But the special weapons of the Phoenix? No way.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 20, 2010, 03:59:33 PM
You do realize there's a reason why the guess range was dropped? Because there's lots of people out there who are very good at eyeballing ranges. Who cares if it's only one? The fact is it's available. Worse it's available on one of the hardest ships to kill.

So you are saying they have toned down the accuracy of weapons of this nature , so whats the problem? you can have multiple NC's  I 'might' take one NC equivalent, I really don't think it is that game breaking..

Bombardment cannons are the weapons concession given to the SM to make them more competitive. In exchange they lose out on a regular cruiser. See how bad the disadvantage is? Also Bombardment Cannons are WB table dependent. Aside from which the range is only 30 cm. Again comparing the BC to what the Eldar have is a no contest. Eldar will generally laugh at SM and just massacre them with their Pulsar lances.

Marines have a bunch of other stuff too , like 6+ armour , I was not aware the marine fleet was particularly poor.


Void Stalker. Not available to CWE YET but it looks like you will get it. No decent escorts? Maybe. But they do have decent cruisers. No armor? CWE escorts have the typical CE armor unless they've become 3+ without my noticing. And then you have holofields and that crazy MSM. I would still bat that that escort (I forget the name) gets the regular Pulsar lance instead of a regular lance but that's about it. Do that and you have a fleet which can rival CE already. CWE still has access to all the other doodads of Eldar. You can't deny that. I would most certainly take a Phoenix, if only to put the NC lance. It's that powerful. I don't need no playtest to know that. Why? Because I use the NC extensively.

I did actually specify that it was CE  that had poor armour, well at least we agree on the escort , although I wanted a mini 2 hit max pulsar as a full one would be a little OTT.

Thing is you can have multiple NC's , are you just anti the distortion lance because you use NC alot ? the planet killer has an uber NC ? don't hear you complaining about that.


And did you notice that Necrons are limited to 3 capital ships? And out of the 3 capital ships, only the Scythe is really worth while. I wouldn't take the Tombship unless it was a really high points game. Again, you're having a problem with Necrons? Well again, I point out that IN is way marginalized vs Eldar, much more so than Eldar is against Necron (and I even feel that is doubtful). Tell ya what. Let my short ranged IN ignore all the Eldar advantages by getting the speed I need to catch with Eldar and/or ignore holofields even with just my NC then I'll agree to the Phoenix and its NC.

CWE are limited to 2 usable capital ships and one escort, I would only take a phoenix at 1500 and above to be honest, so same same but different..... in has access to loads of weps over 30 cm range they have a truly massive amount of ships to choose from, IN have a tool for everything and there is great fun trying out different fleet builds , which you cannot really do with CWE . just sounds like you like NC's and are running a fleet/fleets that struggle with Eldar and are somewhat bitter about it. CWE is LESS competitive than CE.



So what? The trade off is good enough. I WOULD take this ship over a Dragonship any day just to have access to either of those two weapons. Even the Planet Killer would quake against the Phoenix and it's Eldar NC. Get the Phoenix into range with the NC. Shoot it up with the NC then follow up with the Pulsars and other weapons at your disposal then run away again to the rear of the PK.

The 'NC' is one gun, it will miss , it just will ,can hardly be relied on as a win button ... and you would be wasting the whole 500 point ship just lurking around out of range, what about the rest of its guns ?



So fine, get the 5+ arm. I don't mind. DE already have holofields and 5+ armor so there is a precedent.I designed a 5+ armor DE battleship myself so I don't think it's a problem. But the special weapons of the Phoenix? No way.

Ahh well we are getting somewhere , at least there is general agreement that CWE need a BB and it should be a stalker variant and 5+ armour makes sense.

I would like limited special weps in the fleet.
[/quote]
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 20, 2010, 08:42:49 PM
CWE have 8 useable capital ships, 9 with the Flame added. Yes, now the weapons are screwed that's why the torps on the Dragonship need to go up and the batteries down.
If the Ghostship got some good rules it'll be 16 variants really.

I can build many variant fleets with the CWE and even more under this FAQ2010 (per proposed changes from Ray Bell).

The Space Marines are indeed a weaker fleet and the Imperial Navy good but needs a good admiral (player).

From what I know admiral d'artagnan uses 1 NC per 500pts. This mostly because the NC rules are not very effective since FAQ2007/latest rulebook.

On the battleship: I would want a battleship but I do not think the fleet needs a battleship to be varied and/or good/effective enough. Small difference I like to state. I want it because I love painting models and the CWE just looks plain cool.

Everyone struggles with Eldar. Mainly because of the rulesystem.

I still advocate a dropping of the msm rules in the Craftworld rules and replacing them with MMS. Since it is pdf only and not printed in the rulebook or armada no one will be 'hurt' with such a change.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 21, 2010, 02:00:11 AM
CWE have 8 useable capital ships, 9 with the Flame added. Yes, now the weapons are screwed that's why the torps on the Dragonship need to go up and the batteries down.
If the Ghostship got some good rules it'll be 16 variants really.

Just to add the flame means you have to buy an over priced character , if that were not the case I might agree , I am actually sort of in agreement about the batteries dropping to 14 but the torps going to 8 however I would prefer balancing the lances against the batteries.

16 variants ? really ? you can technically make 4 'variants' with the Dragonship and four with the Wraithship , thats 8. Gostships cannot have launch bays and smoke the Fail-pipe, but if you want to include it then you can build three more 'variants' this way , so we are squeezing for 11 but in all honesty 8 is what you technically have to choose from and I doubt you even use that many, possibly two from each of the non ghost ship 'variants' .

You still actually only have 2 cruisers at the same points really, its not the same as having an actual selection of ships to choose from at different points values with distinct uses. advantages and disadvantages, not to mention a few of the little grey box 'character' ships ?

Ray , as an FAQ type fix , why not just , make the wraithship option reduce the points of the doner ship ? kinda fits with the whole 'not ideal but lets us put up more ships' thing ?



I can build many variant fleets with the CWE and even more under this FAQ2010 (per proposed changes from Ray Bell).

I'm sorry I was not aware we were getting more ships ? I pray for at very least CWE access to a 5+ armour Stalker with a torp option. The proposed change to the Dragonship may mean you play the pulsar variant a bit more but I do not see how you would create 'many more' fleet builds , maybe with a decent points drop for wraith ships then you could certainly play around , I doubt your more 'competitive' fleets will change much.....
 

The Space Marines are indeed a weaker fleet and the Imperial Navy good but needs a good admiral (player).

From what I know admiral d'artagnan uses 1 NC per 500pts. This mostly because the NC rules are not very effective since FAQ2007/latest rulebook.

As you say , they are less effective so what is the problem with a single NC type weapon being available to CE at a premium. Four at 2k is quite alot , makes me feel less bad about maybe one @ any points size.... ?

On the battleship: I would want a battleship but I do not think the fleet needs a battleship to be varied and/or good/effective enough. Small difference I like to state. I want it because I love painting models and the CWE just looks plain cool.

The Battleship is really nothing to do with effectiveness for me , as I said before I would  pay over the odds in points as I feel the fleet is more complete with the option of having one. Its like not having a captain/librarian/chaplain not available in a marine dex. I think a CWE Battleship would be a really cool project to convert and paint . I just have no reason to do it atm as I only paint what I can/will play with.

We are far from the only Eldar players who want one......

Everyone struggles with Eldar. Mainly because of the rulesystem.

If you say so , that may apply to some players.

I still advocate a dropping of the msm rules in the Craftworld rules and replacing them with MMS. Since it is pdf only and not printed in the rulebook or armada no one will be 'hurt' with such a change.

What is the problem with MSM really ? if you take it away they wont be as mobile but also you will have to make them less fragile and possibly give them turrets (bleurgh), which I dislike, I play Eldar I like tricksy and fragile. I play em in 40k for the same reason, as soon as the army ever starts getting AV13-14 and 3+ saves everywhere and less 'glass hammer' like I'll consider dropping 40k, seriously, no other army handles the same or has a design ethic that appeals to me nearly enough to make me put my hand in my pocket over and over again.

With all due respect I like the work and the thought you have put into your MMS rules but its not for me IMO it does not 'feel' right. I know that is an abstract concept but that is something important for me as a gamer both in game and army choice , I did not play 40k for 3rd Ed and most of 4th subsequently.

Andy chambers did a great job with gothic !!

So what is the current set of proposed changes to Eldar as of now ?

Cheers

M.

Edit: Here is a quote from another player on a different forum where this FAQ is being talked about just so Its not just me banging on about the same things.

"There aren't enough variants when some variant choices are uncompetitive, either in performance or cost, and as a result are rarely if ever taken.

Nerfing the competitive choice doesn't solve the problem. It just means the situation reverses. The situation is analogous to the 3rd ed. Eldar Codex for 40K. It had a mix of too good and too bad choices under the false assumption that players would take a mix and thereby achieve "average" performance for cost. What really happened was people gravitated to the good options and completely ignored the bad, resulting in cookie cutter armies. So much for variation. When the next Codex nerfed some options, people then just gravitated to the next best thing. For there to be variety, all options have to be worthwhile. Right now, the CWE ship list doesn't have that because there are hardly any "real" choices to make, since some of the choices are clearly better while some (such as making Ghostships) are clearly worthless."

This chap actually suggested the points drop as a compromise on a 'fix' for Ghostships.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 21, 2010, 02:57:03 AM
Kraken,

The re-jig of the weapon options balances all the options so that there are no 'no-brainer' options. The escorts for CWE are intentionally rubbish for normal ship combat and are only really there to use up extra points and hunt Ordy (if you really want to). This is so the CWE are a cruiser heavy eldar list.

The CE have the problem that the good escorts are slightly too cheap and the cruisers are too expensive, I never win the argument that Nightshades and Hemlocks should cost 45pts (with the Hemlock gaining a WB), and Hellebore and Aconite should be reduced by 10pts.

Ghostships suck and need to be redone: suffer crits on a 6+ instead of 4+, always count as having a BM in contact (right shift for gunnery weapons, -1 ld, -5cm speed), immune to damage from BM's but can't use command rerolls or launch bays. (so only 3 variants)

MSM is broken: This is due to the utter dependance of terrain and scenario. The difference between a win and a loss is usually determined by this, not in the actual game!

Off topic On 40K Eldar: There are so many options for Eldar now, I have an army of jet bikes, warp spiders, shining spears, Warwalkers and Wraith lords. Excluding the Warwalkers everything has a 3+ armour save, and over half my army has MSM (but this isn't as important as in BFG)! Thankfully Eldar miss out on good anti-armour so I do have a weakness.

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 21, 2010, 04:09:05 AM
The CE have the problem that the good escorts are slightly too cheap and the cruisers are too expensive, I never win the argument that Nightshades and Hemlocks should cost 45pts (with the Hemlock gaining a WB), and Hellebore and Aconite should be reduced by 10pts.
Why can't you win that argument? The Nightshade & Hemlock should be 50pts at least. Eldar players who tell otherwise are cheese heads.
The Hellebore should just have a fighter launch bay instead of torps to make it an option.

Ghostships suck and need to be redone: suffer crits on a 6+ instead of 4+, always count as having a BM in contact (right shift for gunnery weapons, -1 ld, -5cm speed), immune to damage from BM's but can't use command rerolls or launch bays. (so only 3 variants)
Gotta ponder this idea.

MSM is broken: This is due to the utter dependance of terrain and scenario. The difference between a win and a loss is usually determined by this, not in the actual game!
And that if you play MSM like you should games tend to be boring in the hands of a good Eldar admiral.

And Kraken, I still, heavily disagree on the variant options (yes 16 was too high as I counted a Ghostship with laucnh bays oops), there are enough available.
However, the Hero will be 100pts, that is nowhere overpriced for Ld10. The Flame is awesome itself.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 21, 2010, 04:15:58 AM
Kraken,

The re-jig of the weapon options balances all the options so that there are no 'no-brainer' options. The escorts for CWE are intentionally rubbish for normal ship combat and are only really there to use up extra points and hunt Ordy (if you really want to). This is so the CWE are a cruiser heavy eldar list.

My only worry with said re-jig is that the good load outs will be nerfed rather than improving the rarely chosen option , these tweaks as i understood it were not about making the ships overall worse for the same points ?

The CE have the problem that the good escorts are slightly too cheap and the cruisers are too expensive, I never win the argument that Nightshades and Hemlocks should cost 45pts (with the Hemlock gaining a WB), and Hellebore and Aconite should be reduced by 10pts.

Interesting , I could see that working .....

Ghostships suck and need to be redone: suffer crits on a 6+ instead of 4+, always count as having a BM in contact (right shift for gunnery weapons, -1 ld, -5cm speed), immune to damage from BM's but can't use command rerolls or launch bays. (so only 3 variants)

Is that a list of current the negatives !? I looked at the rules once and have never used them since , they really do suck to an epic degree? if that is your list of proposed changes why on earth would anyone use them ?


Off topic On 40K Eldar: There are so many options for Eldar now, I have an army of jet bikes, warp spiders, shining spears, Warwalkers and Wraith lords. Excluding the Warwalkers everything has a 3+ armour save, and over half my army has MSM (but this isn't as important as in BFG)! Thankfully Eldar miss out on good anti-armour so I do have a weakness.

I'm happy with my eldar atm , I do feel they have fallen behind the creep and the viable builds shrink with each successive codex release , but half the fun of playing them for me now is beating shiny new lists with my 'tired' one in fact my current list EATS Blood angels. There are however a ream of changes I would make/expect in the next book. as for anti armour ,I'm really not struggling with that in my list atm. but they are certainly not the masters of energy weps the book would have you believe they are , the star cannon and bright lance are a complete joke for their points...

MSM is broken: This is due to the utter dependance of terrain and scenario. The difference between a win and a loss is usually determined by this, not in the actual game!
And that if you play MSM like you should games tend to be boring in the hands of a good Eldar admiral.

Thats always been the way with Eldar ,very good in the hands of a skilled player but no good to a novice or someone who cannot engage with their style of play they should also be very fragile and subsequently unforgiving of mistakes (or even sometimes bad luck with the dice at the wrong time)


And Kraken, I still, heavily disagree on the variant options (yes 16 was too high as I counted a Ghostship with laucnh bays oops), there are enough available.
However, the Hero will be 100pts, that is nowhere overpriced for Ld10. The Flame is awesome itself.

The Hero IS currently a gajillion points , so no flame for me ...  I don't see them as true variants they are really only two ships with a downgrade option (ghostship) if you claim there are loads of variants of ONE ship, but if everyone only actually use the same 2 variants I would argue that the list does truly lack diversity, a tactical squad is still a tactical squad regardless of what special weapon you opt for........


I'm not the only one who feels the CWE lack variation (see previous inserted quote) , maybe with a battleship another escort and possibly another cruiser the list could be considered 'complete'



Ray, when will you be submitting for the FaQ ? and will you post a complete final list of the proposed changes before it 'goes' ?

Thankee

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 21, 2010, 04:32:31 AM
So you are saying they have toned down the accuracy of weapons of this nature , so whats the problem? you can have multiple NC's  I 'might' take one NC equivalent, I really don't think it is that game breaking..

Why don't you try it? I already know how ineffective the NC is which is why I take lots of them. Your NC removes ALL the drawbacks. It IS that gamebreaking since you're already using Eldar which is a game breaking race already.

Marines have a bunch of other stuff too , like 6+ armour , I was not aware the marine fleet was particularly poor.

And that is why you don't know what you are talking about when you are comparing SM to Eldar. 6+ armor? Against your 4+ multi shot lances? Please.

I did actually specify that it was CE  that had poor armour, well at least we agree on the escort , although I wanted a mini 2 hit max pulsar as a full one would be a little OTT.

I don't see why CWE should not get the full pulsar. Give it to them They only have limited escort types anyway.

Thing is you can have multiple NC's , are you just anti the distortion lance because you use NC alot ? the planet killer has an uber NC ? don't hear you complaining about that.

And do you know why the IN can get multiple NC? It's because of their pathetically short range which can't touch your Eldar even without terrain. Even the current NC rules can't touch your Eldar. Do you know that?

CWE are limited to 2 usable capital ships and one escort, I would only take a phoenix at 1500 and above to be honest, so same same but different..... in has access to loads of weps over 30 cm range they have a truly massive amount of ships to choose from, IN have a tool for everything and there is great fun trying out different fleet builds , which you cannot really do with CWE . just sounds like you like NC's and are running a fleet/fleets that struggle with Eldar and are somewhat bitter about it. CWE is LESS competitive than CE.

I don't mind you getting the Void Stalker. That's it. I don't want Eldar to get any more cheesier by getting a ship with weapons that further break them. You would take the phoenix at 1500 up. I would take it at 1000 points and up. Heck I would take it at sub 1000 point games.

Bitter? Yes, I am bitter when I see Eldar players who want to cheese up their faction all the more. Whether I play with multiple NCs or torp heavy, IN can never hope to win over Eldar except on an EXTREMELY lucky day. CWE is less competitive? Maybe it's you the player instead of the fleet? I see a faction with 5+ arm on their cap ships, much better than DE weapons wise and has holofield and MSM protection. And you think other players won't be as bitter if that Phoenix of yours gets approved? Riiiiiight.

The 'NC' is one gun, it will miss , it just will ,can hardly be relied on as a win button ... and you would be wasting the whole 500 point ship just lurking around out of range, what about the rest of its guns ?

That NC of yours is one gun which ignores shields and does an auto crit among other things. Really, my suggestion now is go play an IN fleet with none, one or two and NC heavy against Eldar. Then come back here and talk about how balanced the Eldar NC of yours is.

Not a win button? Hahaha! With your NC, I can charge in, shoot my NC against any Necron, IN, Chaos, Ork, Tau or whatever battleship, hell even the Planet Killer then follow up the shot with Pulsar Lances or Eldar WB or Eldar torps. I would NOT be wasting the whole fleet because I would crash that ship into the enemy lines. How can it miss? You already said it was a guess weapon. Then might as well charge into pointblank range where even a half blind player can eyeball the range easily. And you end up with one dead, D-E-A-D battleship. Then afterwards? Why the Phoenix can just move away, avoiding a lot of trouble. Meanwhile the rest of my fleet can crash in also and further punish whatever else my opponent brings. Clearly you have no idea how bad such a ship can be.

Ahh well we are getting somewhere , at least there is general agreement that CWE need a BB and it should be a stalker variant and 5+ armour makes sense.

I would like limited special weps in the fleet.

You don't need limited special weps because the Eldar already has special weapons in every category.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 21, 2010, 01:40:16 PM
Why don't you try it? I already know how ineffective the NC is which is why I take lots of them. Your NC removes ALL the drawbacks. It IS that gamebreaking since you're already using Eldar which is a game breaking race already.

Why would you take something that you know to be ineffective multiple times , 100 x crap = lots of crapness ? if you are freaking out I have to assume that you think NC's are actually very effective otherwise you would not be fussed about the proposed D Lance ? If you have to take multiples to in some way mitigate their ineffectiveness and I can only take one at premium points what is the problem ? what drawbacks does it remove ? it is EXACTLY the same as an NC with a shorter range , yes it ignores shields other than that and one of the hits being an auto crit it is the same , certainly more effective but just as likely to miss ? and undoubtedly more expensive, do you NC's half your speed too ?

And that is why you don't know what you are talking about when you are comparing SM to Eldar. 6+ armor? Against your 4+ multi shot lances? Please.

A str 2 lance is no where near as good as say 6 normal lances infact str 3 is less reliable... IN can spam more and longer range lances than CWE, so I cannot understand why you would whine, I was not comparing SM to Eldar I was just pointing out some reasons why they are not complete rubbish as far as I am aware marines can put quite a few bomb cannons on the table. ok so they are not an ultra competitive list but in fairness marines should be all about the planetary assault and boarding actions , they should really be treated as (yet another) fleet option for the IN

I don't see why CWE should not get the full pulsar. Give it to them They only have limited escort types anyway.

I think everyone agreed that a slight boost to the pulsar is probably in order but no one seems to think that a full pulsar is balanced/the way to go , hence I suggested a compromise , it's not even rules heavy or clunky .

And do you know why the IN can get multiple NC? It's because of their pathetically short range which can't touch your Eldar even without terrain. Even the current NC rules can't touch your Eldar. Do you know that?

Yeah , we have already established that you feel nc's suck but insist on fielding as many as you can in this knowledge. perhaps if you opted for a more balanced fleet ? fielding  NC spam should have some kinda downside, wargames should always have a paper to someone's rock, or scissors to someone's paper thats why there is a need to write balanced all comers lists ?

 A quick browse through the available IN ships shows me that there are no less than 11 ships available to you with 60cm WB's , pitiful short range ? ..... please (not to mention all the 45cm stuff)


I don't mind you getting the Void Stalker. That's it. I don't want Eldar to get any more cheesier by getting a ship with weapons that further break them. You would take the phoenix at 1500 up. I would take it at 1000 points and up. Heck I would take it at sub 1000 point games.

It wont make them cheesier. The points will be going somewhere you consider cheesy regardless of whether the Phoenix is in or not, except now there are 500 points you can more easily catch and kill (even more so than a stalker), plus your opponent will actually have more firepower/hits/mobility if he simply takes 2 dragonships, under the proposed faq change a squadron of two dragon ships will be able to deliver a str 16 Eldar torpedo salvo ......

Maybe phoenix ships would 'have' to be taken in games of at least 1500 points

Bitter? Yes, I am bitter when I see Eldar players who want to cheese up their faction all the more. Whether I play with multiple NCs or torp heavy, IN can never hope to win over Eldar except on an EXTREMELY lucky day. CWE is less competitive? Maybe it's you the player instead of the fleet? I see a faction with 5+ arm on their cap ships, much better than DE weapons wise and has holofield and MSM protection. And you think other players won't be as bitter if that Phoenix of yours gets approved? Riiiiiight.

I have stated repeatedly that I have no wish to power up the fleet just to give it some degree of diversity and similar 'basic' ship options as EVERY other fleet. I have even asked to make the escorts less powerful than you would have them (with the pulsars you whine about) and that I would pay over the odds in points to be able to field it ?

Don't play such lopsided lists then ?

 I want ONE just ONE decent battleship for my fleet that actually fits with the fleet, that is hardly much to ask , you have access to a Bewildering array of battleships to suit any need/build /opponent , I came across an IN battleship with 2 sets of 6 !? launch bays today, I would cut off my left ball to have a ship that could launch half as many craft available to my fleet. The IN list is wonderfully diverse not to mention having the option of reserve admech/marines/inquisition


That NC of yours is one gun which ignores shields and does an auto crit among other things. Really, my suggestion now is go play an IN fleet with none, one or two and NC heavy against Eldar. Then come back here and talk about how balanced the Eldar NC of yours is.

As you have said though, they are no good due to inaccuracy so you take 4 to compensate. I have ONE and it will miss just as much , 4 nova cannons @ 2k is cheesy against any list but Eldar,  if your regular opponents feature several different fleets including eldar you should be considering this meta when writing your fleets.

Not a win button? Hahaha! With your NC, I can charge in, shoot my NC against any Necron, IN, Chaos, Ork, Tau or whatever battleship, hell even the Planet Killer then follow up the shot with Pulsar Lances or Eldar WB or Eldar torps. I would NOT be wasting the whole fleet because I would crash that ship into the enemy lines. How can it miss? You already said it was a guess weapon. Then might as well charge into pointblank range where even a half blind player can eyeball the range easily. And you end up with one dead, D-E-A-D battleship. Then afterwards? Why the Phoenix can just move away, avoiding a lot of trouble. Meanwhile the rest of my fleet can crash in also and further punish whatever else my opponent brings. Clearly you have no idea how bad such a ship can be.

I got muddled up with the original NC rules it works exactly the same as an NC not a planet killer or a guess wep , just an NC . if it ignores the shields then anything you follow up with will still hit shields 3-4 hits including a critical is hardly D-E-A-D now is it ? (if you account for the inaccuracy and brace for impact saves its unlikely to do a huge amount), putting it in range of your entire opponents fleets wb's would not be an act of deep intelligence ... was not talking about wasting your fleet but if you were going to just sit the phoenix ship out of usual engagement range and fire the D lance once every other turn (given the aforementioned accuracy gripe) you are basically letting your opponent fight say 1500 ish points of your fleet with 2 k of his, nice one ! I think I see why you struggle against eldar Cheesy NC spam is no doubt lethal against any other fleet , if you had a more balanced/less crutchy list you would be able to play and win against Eldar, you do have the tools available to your fleet ?

I would like limited special weps in the fleet.

You don't need limited special weps because the Eldar already has special weapons in every category.[/quote]

The Thing you have missed really is that they have proportionately less of everything (firepower/hits) pulsars are not as good as just having say 6 lances and they are made of wet paper and are prone to crits, they need this to work like glass hammers to actually BE an eldar fleet.  having access to one special weapon in a fleet (of any size) is hardly game breaking, having as many as you can squeeze in might be considered so, but with my proposal it is not spammable or abuseable, just characterful

Best

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 21, 2010, 01:56:03 PM
Huh, there is no such thing as an official Imperial Battleship with two sets of six launch bays.

To add: 4 Eldar launch bays are as good as 6-8 normal bays. With the fact that both Wraithships & Dragonships have ordnance an opponent will see himself many times on the defensive and can not spend a lot of time hunting Eldar with bombers.

They do not have less weaponry. 8 Eldar batteries (always count as closing) equals 16 (!) normal batteries when going against an abeam capital ship. I mean... that is a Wraithship with 8 batteries for 160pts operating on battleship levels.
What is less? Yeah, 8 is less then 16... but...

A Dragonship comparision goes off the chart (gunnery table).

2 Pulsars is indeed not as good as 6 lances, but which ship has 6 lances for 160pts? The Gothic has 4 at 180pts.

Yes, their resilience is less but their speed is good and the second m (msM) the best defence in the game.


4 Nova Cannon in 2000pts is hardly cheese I think.

An untailored Imperial Navy fleet will have a rough day against any Eldar fleet.

And I hate tailoring.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 21, 2010, 04:18:54 PM
Huh, there is no such thing as an official Imperial Battleship with two sets of six launch bays.

Nemesis class fleet carrier , was in planet killer issue 1 ?

To add: 4 Eldar launch bays are as good as 6-8 normal bays. With the fact that both Wraithships & Dragonships have ordnance an opponent will see himself many times on the defensive and can not spend a lot of time hunting Eldar with bombers.

No they are nearer six in terms of statistics. 4+ to stay on = 50%  the bombers probably work out as 50% more effective in terms of damage due to them survivng turret fire better but their max damage is the same (6) they are reliable tho.  

They do not have less weaponry. 8 Eldar batteries (always count as closing) equals 16 (!) normal batteries when going against an abeam capital ship. I mean... that is a Wraithship with 8 batteries for 160pts operating on battleship levels.
What is less? Yeah, 8 is less then 16... but...

A Dragonship comparision goes off the chart (gunnery table).

2 Pulsars is indeed not as good as 6 lances, but which ship has 6 lances for 160pts? The Gothic has 4 at 180pts.

4 is as good as 2 pulsars and actually more reliable  as if you do not have lock on and whiff the dice you will get no hits four are twice as likely to do 'something' (and likely have longer range)

4 lances without lock on average 2 hits , with lock on its 3   ,2x pulsar without, averages 1.75 (ish) and with = about 3.5 so pulsars hae a higher max damage but IN lances tend to have longer range and better reliability .
 

Yes, their resilience is less but their speed is good and the second m (msM) the best defence in the game.


4 Nova Cannon in 2000pts is hardly cheese I think.

A potential 4d6 hits at extreme range is pretty cheese, if you have a good run with the hit dice you can gimp your opponents fleet before they are ever in range

An untailored Imperial Navy fleet will have a rough day against any Eldar fleet.

I maintain a balanced list with 'some' long range WB's will suffer less than a NC/torp heavy list ? and still play fine normally

And I hate tailoring.

Ditto , hence I preach balanced all comers lists


Hell if we can all agree on a 5+ Av stalker variant with sensible torp option Ill crawl back to the geek cave without the zappy death weapons....

The balancing on the dragonships is fine, if thats what the general consensus is I'm definitely coming round to the idea. I would still be great to have a lance upgrade on the escorts (2 his) and a negative points modifier for being a gimp(ghost)-ship.

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 21, 2010, 05:01:14 PM
Quick: Nemesis is unofficial.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 21, 2010, 05:10:39 PM
Well it looked damn official !! oh well I suppose that explains the truly ludicrous amount of launches it has.....
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on May 21, 2010, 07:31:05 PM
As Eldar have MSM consider thier range to be increased by the medium speed band on average. So their Pulsars and Torps have a decent effective range, especially for escorts or light cruisers!

The Ghostship I proposed basically is immune to BM's but has most of the negatives and positives built in. It is harder to shoot at with gunnery weapons (pretty decent for Eldar) and suffers crits far less often. IMO this is a straight out 0pt 'upgrade'.

Cheers,

RayB 

 
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 21, 2010, 07:50:12 PM
Official = everything you can download at the GW site. And the FW rules for their models of the Tau are widely accepted as official. The FAQ2007 is a forgotten GW item...

On attack craft:
with all their special things added they are better then 6 normal markers. But alas, that's marginal since a lot depends on how the battle flows and if the Eldar can attack or must defend (vs Tau for example). The biggest Eldar nemesis are Necrons, long range batteries (Chaos) and individual bomber markers (Tau / Chaos).

4 Nova Cannons in 2000 really isn't cheese. It scatters, it hits, shields protect, bfi, etc. So 24 hits is max but you will hardly get there. The NC is a psychological weapon foremost, a damage weapon later.

I consider this an allround non-tailored IN fleet which I would take if I attended a tournament (1500pts):
Emperor
2x Dominator
2x Gothic
6x Sword
3x Cobra

Check this batrep:
http://www.sg.tacticalwargames.net/forum/index.php?topic=49.0

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 22, 2010, 12:46:52 PM
Why would you take something that you know to be ineffective multiple times , 100 x crap = lots of crapness ? if you are freaking out I have to assume that you think NC's are actually very effective otherwise you would not be fussed about the proposed D Lance ? If you have to take multiples to in some way mitigate their ineffectiveness and I can only take one at premium points what is the problem ? what drawbacks does it remove ? it is EXACTLY the same as an NC with a shorter range , yes it ignores shields other than that and one of the hits being an auto crit it is the same , certainly more effective but just as likely to miss ? and undoubtedly more expensive, do you NC's half your speed too ?

It's called playing the odds. The NC can do lots of damage. When it hits and even then it has to punch through the shields. But there are lots of built in protection to keep this from happening on a regular basis that you need to bring them in multiples. You're removing ALL the protective measures in a fleet which already has so much advantages to begin with.

And I don't even know where you get the idea that NCs halve your speed.

A str 2 lance is no where near as good as say 6 normal lances infact str 3 is less reliable... IN can spam more and longer range lances than CWE, so I cannot understand why you would whine, I was not comparing SM to Eldar I was just pointing out some reasons why they are not complete rubbish as far as I am aware marines can put quite a few bomb cannons on the table. ok so they are not an ultra competitive list but in fairness marines should be all about the planetary assault and boarding actions , they should really be treated as (yet another) fleet option for the IN

Sure it's nowhere near as good. So where are these 6 lance ships you seem to think exist?

IN can spam long range lances. What are those going to do against your holofields? And yes against SM, IN is heads up with the long range lance availability. But Eldar lances when they hit are still mroe efficient on a 1:1 basis. Yes SM can put quite a FEW bombard cannons on the table. So few that you need to mass them up to make efficient use out of them. But my point was you seem to be comparing Eldar pulsar lances with SM bombards. They are nowhere at the same efficiency.

I think everyone agreed that a slight boost to the pulsar is probably in order but no one seems to think that a full pulsar is balanced/the way to go , hence I suggested a compromise , it's not even rules heavy or clunky .

Up to you guys. I'm just saying I don't think Eldar NEEDS another special weapon. If you want to go that route, then I guess just use the Dark Eldar Phantom Lance if you want something different.

Yeah , we have already established that you feel nc's suck but insist on fielding as many as you can in this knowledge. perhaps if you opted for a more balanced fleet ? fielding  NC spam should have some kinda downside, wargames should always have a paper to someone's rock, or scissors to someone's paper thats why there is a need to write balanced all comers lists ?

Fielding NC spams by itself already is a downside. Less AC. Less long range WBs. Less effective battleship. It has nothing to counter an AC heavy fleet. It has NOTHING to counter Eldar. That's the problem already. But I am in the camp of improving the NC but limiting their availability as by fluff it is a rare weapon.

A quick browse through the available IN ships shows me that there are no less than 11 ships available to you with 60cm WB's , pitiful short range ? ..... please (not to mention all the 45cm stuff)

Emperor, Retribution, Oberon, Apocalypse, Vengeance, Overlord. 6 ships. Where's the other 5? Out of those 6 ships, you need 220 points at least first to get the cheapest option in. With the battleships, it becomes 330 points. Not that cheap.

It wont make them cheesier. The points will be going somewhere you consider cheesy regardless of whether the Phoenix is in or not, except now there are 500 points you can more easily catch and kill (even more so than a stalker), plus your opponent will actually have more firepower/hits/mobility if he simply takes 2 dragonships, under the proposed faq change a squadron of two dragon ships will be able to deliver a str 16 Eldar torpedo salvo ......

Maybe phoenix ships would 'have' to be taken in games of at least 1500 points

Even at 1500 points, it's a very efficient ship. Sorry, I would not agree to this ship.

I have stated repeatedly that I have no wish to power up the fleet just to give it some degree of diversity and similar 'basic' ship options as EVERY other fleet. I have even asked to make the escorts less powerful than you would have them (with the pulsars you whine about) and that I would pay over the odds in points to be able to field it ?

Diversity, fine. Additional cheesy weapons? Not fine.

Don't play such lopsided lists then ?

And what would you have IN play against Eldar? Any IN list is a lopsided list in favor of the Eldar.

I want ONE just ONE decent battleship for my fleet that actually fits with the fleet, that is hardly much to ask , you have access to a Bewildering array of battleships to suit any need/build /opponent , I came across an IN battleship with 2 sets of 6 !? launch bays today, I would cut off my left ball to have a ship that could launch half as many craft available to my fleet. The IN list is wonderfully diverse not to mention having the option of reserve admech/marines/inquisition

The Void Stalker is a more than decent battleship which can run rings around any IN battleship. Out of 4 battleships, putting a BM on 3 of them results in them NOT TURNING unless they Burn Retro. BTW, The Nemesis is NOT OFFICIAL.

As you have said though, they are no good due to inaccuracy so you take 4 to compensate. I have ONE and it will miss just as much , 4 nova cannons @ 2k is cheesy against any list but Eldar,  if your regular opponents feature several different fleets including eldar you should be considering this meta when writing your fleets.

How can your NC miss? You already said it was a guess weapon right? Even with the present NC rules, your ship will just move so close to your target that you won't miss that much and when you hit it will hurt the target. After which the battleship will just pulsar it to death.

I got muddled up with the original NC rules it works exactly the same as an NC not a planet killer or a guess wep , just an NC . if it ignores the shields then anything you follow up with will still hit shields 3-4 hits including a critical is hardly D-E-A-D now is it ? (if you account for the inaccuracy and brace for impact saves its unlikely to do a huge amount), putting it in range of your entire opponents fleets wb's would not be an act of deep intelligence ... was not talking about wasting your fleet but if you were going to just sit the phoenix ship out of usual engagement range and fire the D lance once every other turn (given the aforementioned accuracy gripe) you are basically letting your opponent fight say 1500 ish points of your fleet with 2 k of his, nice one ! I think I see why you struggle against eldar Cheesy NC spam is no doubt lethal against any other fleet , if you had a more balanced/less crutchy list you would be able to play and win against Eldar, you do have the tools available to your fleet ?

Really? And if your battleship uses AC as well as torps? Turrets can only attack either or. What need for shields then? It's a D-E-A-D battleship no matter how you look at it. Necrons have no shields. Battleships typically have 4 shields. Pulsar lances on Lock On are nasty.

You are still not getting it. IN whether taking all NC, whether taking NC and torp balanced, whether taking NC lite, they all cannot handle the Eldar fleet, not unless the Eldar player screws up big time. I don't just use the NC heavy fleet. My fleet lists are usually as balanced as they can be. Why? Because I do not like to tailor.  What may work against one fleet will most likely not work against another.

The Thing you have missed really is that they have proportionately less of everything (firepower/hits) pulsars are not as good as just having say 6 lances and they are made of wet paper and are prone to crits, they need this to work like glass hammers to actually BE an eldar fleet.  having access to one special weapon in a fleet (of any size) is hardly game breaking, having as many as you can squeeze in might be considered so, but with my proposal it is not spammable or abuseable, just characterful

Best

M.

You haven't seen the all Nightshade or all Aconite fleet have you? Horizon, maybe you can enlighten him more since you are an Eldar player. Wet paper and prone to crits are their weakness. When they can are hit. Eldar players, the ones I know about, tend not to make this happen if they can help it. Point is though, Eldar can't have everything. Are you really losing with your Eldar fleet that much that you need something to boost their broken-ness all the more?

Lastly, I do not see where the characterful comes in. You want a battleship. Fine. We agree on that. For the last time, take the Void Stalker, put 5+ armor on it (heck, we agree on this as well) and have fun with it.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 22, 2010, 07:44:04 PM


It's called playing the odds. The NC can do lots of damage. When it hits and even then it has to punch through the shields. But there are lots of built in protection to keep this from happening on a regular basis that you need to bring them in multiples. You're removing ALL the protective measures in a fleet which already has so much advantages to begin with.

And I don't even know where you get the idea that NCs halve your speed.

If you had actually read the rules on the phoenix ship 'special' weps that you have been freaking out about, you would have realized that firing them stops them being MSM that turn, so " half movement" and removing a great deal of the 'protection' you would normally expect from the second move. so my one single NC equivalent halves my ships speed/protection , I was asking if your spammable NC's did the same ?

People whine about the MSM ,So when I create weapons of which as I have repeatedly noted you can only ever have one per fleet,that also stops the ship being MSM do you still complain ? I just don't see how it can be that game breaking.

Sure it's nowhere near as good. So where are these 6 lance ships you seem to think exist?

Dunno if people are recognizing gothic magazine as 'official' on here, I thought anything that was in a GW publication would be. So lets just say that even str4 lances are  more reliable than str 2 pulsars although of course the max damage is higher for pulsars. *sidenote* Eldar energy weps are supposed to be really really good btw.


IN can spam long range lances. What are those going to do against your holofields? And yes against SM, IN is heads up with the long range lance availability. But Eldar lances when they hit are still mroe efficient on a 1:1 basis. Yes SM can put quite a FEW bombard cannons on the table. So few that you need to mass them up to make efficient use out of them. But my point was you seem to be comparing Eldar pulsar lances with SM bombards. They are nowhere at the same efficiency.

Against eldar , sure the bomb's loose a major advantage as 4+ crit is the same whatever however the ability to generate criticals on a 4+ from 4+ to hit is pretty damn good for all comers.......


Up to you guys. I'm just saying I don't think Eldar NEEDS another special weapon. If you want to go that route, then I guess just use the Dark Eldar Phantom Lance if you want something different.

Phantom lance would do as well.

Fielding NC spams by itself already is a downside. Less AC. Less long range WBs. Less effective battleship. It has nothing to counter an AC heavy fleet. It has NOTHING to counter Eldar. That's the problem already. But I am in the camp of improving the NC but limiting their availability as by fluff it is a rare weapon.

On that we agree, I LIKE special weps they make the game more interesting , but they should be ,rare ancient/forgotten tech and non spammable , I think allowing lock on to be used for the scatter dice would be fair for NC's  that way higher leadership (better crews) being better shots is kindov accounted for..... but only allow 1 per 100pts or part thereof , so one in 0-1000 , two in 1000-2000 and so on.

Emperor, Retribution, Oberon, Apocalypse, Vengeance, Overlord. 6 ships. Where's the other 5? Out of those 6 ships, you need 220 points at least first to get the cheapest option in. With the battleships, it becomes 330 points. Not that cheap.

Start there : http://yenlowang.free.fr/warhammer-forum/BFG/BFG_-_Additional_Ships_Compendium_1.4.pdf

 Then look through the main book and Armada although I think we are possibly having headaches with what is 'official' as far as me and my gaming group are concerned GW publication = official

Even with 'only' six the tools are there plus what is wrong with 45cm WB's ?

Even at 1500 points, it's a very efficient ship. Sorry, I would not agree to this ship.

Tell you what ,why not try playing it a few times (remember it looses MSM when using the spec weps, its in the rules) , then if it completely breaks the games and sucks fair enough and your opinion will be borne out by actual experience, but if you do , please be honest. I will be getting some friends to test it in a few games soon so I get some objective feedback myself.

Old proverb: "Don't knock it till you have tried it...."

Diversity, fine. Additional cheesy weapons? Not fine.

prove they are cheesy , the numbers say not....

And what would you have IN play against Eldar? Any IN list is a lopsided list in favor of the Eldar.

If you say so, I have been playing eldar off and on for years , I still get punished and loose if I drop the ball , good yes , forgiving of mistakes or using them 'wrong' no....

The Void Stalker is a more than decent battleship which can run rings around any IN battleship. Out of 4 battleships, putting a BM on 3 of them results in them NOT TURNING unless they Burn Retro. BTW,

The Nemesis is NOT OFFICIAL.

Yes, I think we had established that a while back ........


Really? And if your battleship uses AC as well as torps? Turrets can only attack either or. What need for shields then? It's a D-E-A-D battleship no matter how you look at it. Necrons have no shields. Battleships typically have 4 shields. Pulsar lances on Lock On are nasty.

So you are now saying wether I get my NC variant or not your ship will die ? so the NC variant makes no difference then ? Whats the problem ?

You are still not getting it. IN whether taking all NC, whether taking NC and torp balanced, whether taking NC lite, they all cannot handle the Eldar fleet, not unless the Eldar player screws up big time. I don't just use the NC heavy fleet. My fleet lists are usually as balanced as they can be. Why? Because I do not like to tailor.  What may work against one fleet will most likely not work against another.


You haven't seen the all Nightshade or all Aconite fleet have you? Horizon, maybe you can enlighten him more since you are an Eldar player. Wet paper and prone to crits are their weakness. When they can are hit. Eldar players, the ones I know about, tend not to make this happen if they can help it. Point is though, Eldar can't have everything. Are you really losing with your Eldar fleet that much that you need something to boost their broken-ness all the more?

But we are talking about the CWE fleet and having a battleship for it , how is discussing the admittedly powerful CE fleet going to bear relevance to our debate. As previously stated my motivation here is to pursue a more 'complete' fleet not more or less powerful , Just want a BB , having the special weps or battleship wont mean I win any more or less than I currently do , but it will mean I derive more pleasure from my fleet , how it looks on the table , the process of fleet selection, and most importantly ,how it feels

Lastly, I do not see where the characterful comes in.

Read some Eldar fluff , look at the weapons and technology that gives them flavour and makes them unique in 40k, obviously Gw and FW feel that D weapons and devastating laser weapons are both flavorful and characterful for Eldar.


You want a battleship. Fine. We agree on that. For the last time, take the Void Stalker, put 5+ armor on it (heck, we agree on this as well) and have fun with it.

Chuck in a torp option , and we're cooking !!
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 23, 2010, 07:12:12 AM
If you had actually read the rules on the phoenix ship 'special' weps that you have been freaking out about, you would have realized that firing them stops them being MSM that turn, so " half movement" and removing a great deal of the 'protection' you would normally expect from the second move. so my one single NC equivalent halves my ships speed/protection , I was asking if your spammable NC's did the same ?

So fine, you lose the second half of your MSM move. NC armed ships generally move only their minimum movement in order to maximize their range because if they get within 30 cm, then the NC becomes useless. USELESS. So NC armed ships DO generally move at half speed. And LOSE the NC once it gets within 30 cm. So now what?

People whine about the MSM ,So when I create weapons of which as I have repeatedly noted you can only ever have one per fleet,that also stops the ship being MSM do you still complain ? I just don't see how it can be that game breaking.

Yes, I still complain. Because again, you are adding a broken weapon into an already broken fleet. Sorry, not happening.

Dunno if people are recognizing gothic magazine as 'official' on here, I thought anything that was in a GW publication would be. So lets just say that even str4 lances are  more reliable than str 2 pulsars although of course the max damage is higher for pulsars. *sidenote* Eldar energy weps are supposed to be really really good btw.

Yes they're supposed to be better. That's not the problem here. You don't see me shouting nerf the Pulsars. No, I've accepted they should be better. I am objecting to adding anything more that can boost the advantages of Eldar even if it is only one.

Against eldar , sure the bomb's loose a major advantage as 4+ crit is the same whatever however the ability to generate criticals on a 4+ from 4+ to hit is pretty damn good for all comers.......

SM Bombards are actually pointless against Eldar since Eldar take damage on 4+, which the bombards do, and crit on 4+, which the bombards do. SM bombards are better against other races giving them a chance to win games.

Phantom lance would do as well.

See, we agree on another thing again, which I don't think makes CWE broken.

On that we agree, I LIKE special weps they make the game more interesting , but they should be ,rare ancient/forgotten tech and non spammable , I think allowing lock on to be used for the scatter dice would be fair for NC's  that way higher leadership (better crews) being better shots is kindov accounted for..... but only allow 1 per 100pts or part thereof , so one in 0-1000 , two in 1000-2000 and so on.

I wouldn't even mind taking only 1 NC in 1000 if it becomes an accurate and deadly weapon. Have to retool the Gothic fleet though since the Dominator there can be taken in spades or make the Dominator a torp ship and then add the option for NC.

Start there : http://yenlowang.free.fr/warhammer-forum/BFG/BFG_-_Additional_Ships_Compendium_1.4.pdf

 Then look through the main book and Armada although I think we are possibly having headaches with what is 'official' as far as me and my gaming group are concerned GW publication = official

Even with 'only' six the tools are there plus what is wrong with 45cm WB's ?

Additional Compendum, not official. Sorry. BFG manual, Armada and PDFs found in SG site only.

Again, those 45 cm WBs come at a premium of at least 110 points, unless one takes the Tyrant and even then one needs 195 points to field one effectively. Am not a fan of the Tyrant myself. So long range IN weapons come at a high cost, which is fine. I understand and accept that. Price of doing war in BFG.

Tell you what ,why not try playing it a few times (remember it looses MSM when using the spec weps, its in the rules) , then if it completely breaks the games and sucks fair enough and your opinion will be borne out by actual experience, but if you do , please be honest. I will be getting some friends to test it in a few games soon so I get some objective feedback myself.

Old proverb: "Don't knock it till you have tried it...."

I follow this: "If the race is broken, don't further break it". I would rather you play IN with NC against every race then figure out whether your proposal is broken or not. Really. Or better yet, you try it out and see how bad it can get.

prove they are cheesy , the numbers say not....

I've already proven it but you don't see it focusing only on the "limited" availability because you are an Eldar player. Look at it from another faction's player.

If you say so, I have been playing eldar off and on for years , I still get punished and loose if I drop the ball , good yes , forgiving of mistakes or using them 'wrong' no....

"If you drop the ball." That's all I need to read.

So you are now saying wether I get my NC variant or not your ship will die ? so the NC variant makes no difference then ? Whats the problem ?

No, I am saying if you add that weapon into a ship with AC, shields won't be effective. But hey, let's say you take all lances and torps. Even with 4 shields, this weapon supported by 6 lances which potentially can have a total of 18 shots, EIGHTEEN, esp on Lock On which you would do anyway since you will be losing your second move plus torps or AC, will result in a dead ship.

But we are talking about the CWE fleet and having a battleship for it , how is discussing the admittedly powerful CE fleet going to bear relevance to our debate. As previously stated my motivation here is to pursue a more 'complete' fleet not more or less powerful , Just want a BB , having the special weps or battleship wont mean I win any more or less than I currently do , but it will mean I derive more pleasure from my fleet , how it looks on the table , the process of fleet selection, and most importantly ,how it feels

Yeah but I'm pointing out Eldar weaponry is very effective even though you may not think so.

Of course you will derive pleasure from it. Now take a look from your opponent's point of view. That is how ships and weapons should be judged. Not from your own. Heck I could create an escort ship with 1000 as the strength of all its stats and I would derive pleasure from it. But my opponent's would beat the heck out of me if I put that on the table.

Won't mean you win any less, I would agree. Won't win any more? You're mistaken there. Without the ship, it's not a sure guarantee. With the ship, wins become almost guaranteed.

Read some Eldar fluff , look at the weapons and technology that gives them flavour and makes them unique in 40k, obviously Gw and FW feel that D weapons and devastating laser weapons are both flavorful and characterful for Eldar.

I've never seen Eldar fluff of them having a long ranged weapon. It's never their style. Disruption weapons tell me that it can disrupt something, not destroy something. You laser weapons in BFG are already devastating. You do not need to add any more.

Chuck in a torp option , and we're cooking !!

Fine, give it a torp option. I don't mind if they can take whatever weapons they can from CE, CWE or DE. Pick from there and run with it.

But none of that D stuff and improved lances.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 23, 2010, 11:21:44 AM

So fine, you lose the second half of your MSM move. NC armed ships generally move only their minimum movement in order to maximize their range because if they get within 30 cm, then the NC becomes useless. USELESS. So NC armed ships DO generally move at half speed. And LOSE the NC once it gets within 30 cm. So now what?

 you get no extra protection from movement your ships dont take crits on a 4+ it's not even remotely related , you know why loosing the second move is important to eldar , makes no odds to you , as you say , you WANT to go slower to keep at longer range ......

Yes, I still complain. Because again, you are adding a broken weapon into an already broken fleet. Sorry, not happening.

most people will agree that they are tough to play against IF your opponent is good , but broken ?!  no ..

Yes they're supposed to be better. That's not the problem here. You don't see me shouting nerf the Pulsars. No, I've accepted they should be better. I am objecting to adding anything more that can boost the advantages of Eldar even if it is only one.

le sigh, again for the last time , if i don't get the 500 point ship with the special wep then I just buy 500 points worth of other 'broken' stuff, the list as far as you are concerned will be broken either way and you will call 'cheese' and 'broken' if the ship is in or not , I really doubt having a battleship will make the slightest difference to the power level of the fleet . corsairs arguably work better without a stalker ?


Against eldar , sure the bomb's loose a major advantage as 4+ crit is the same whatever however the ability to generate criticals on a 4+ from 4+ to hit is pretty damn good for all comers.......

SM Bombards are actually pointless against Eldar since Eldar take damage on 4+, which the bombards do, and crit on 4+, which the bombards do. SM bombards are better against other races giving them a chance to win games.

I just said the benefits of bombards are marginal as Eldar take crits on a 4+ anyway ?! but great for allcomers , you just said the same thing as me but different ?


I wouldn't even mind taking only 1 NC in 1000 if it becomes an accurate and deadly weapon. Have to retool the Gothic fleet though since the Dominator there can be taken in spades or make the Dominator a torp ship and then add the option for NC.

See you only want for your fleet what I want for mine , an interesting and cool characterful special wep that actually works and is actually special because you can only get one (maybe) two of them.

Additional Compendum, not official. Sorry. BFG manual, Armada and PDFs found in SG site only.

For years and years GW publication = official , i was not aware that had changed at any point .


Again, those 45 cm WBs come at a premium of at least 110 points, unless one takes the Tyrant and even then one needs 195 points to field one effectively. Am not a fan of the Tyrant myself. So long range IN weapons come at a high cost, which is fine. I understand and accept that. Price of doing war in BFG.

That seems pretty cheap to me given that the cheapest CWE ship other than escorts is 160 .... you NEED long range batteries in your fleet, I imagine there is a good reason for them costing a bit more.... 

I follow this: "If the race is broken, don't further break it". I would rather you play IN with NC against every race then figure out whether your proposal is broken or not. Really. Or better yet, you try it out and see how bad it can get.

Thing is you are assuming that any changes would further break it without sitting on any evidence to support it , I wanted to see for myself rather than argue with you so i have arranged for some playtests , if it does indeed perform as you 'theorize'  over the course of several games I will gladly concede your point.

I've already proven it but you don't see it focusing only on the "limited" availability because you are an Eldar player. Look at it from another faction's player.

I'm sorry But I must completely and totally disagree that you have in any way 'proved' it is broken . you have indeed argued against it with theory but you have no playtesting no nothing to honestly base your argument on . you have just had a knee jerk reaction to the possibility of another fleet getting access to an NC type wep, you have completely skimmed over or marginalized the negatives. Play a few games I will be interested to hear your feedback and thoughts.


"If you drop the ball." That's all I need to read.

Any general that plays any army/fleet who 'drops the ball' deserve to loose , eldar are less forgiving of mistakes ...

No, I am saying if you add that weapon into a ship with AC, shields won't be effective. But hey, let's say you take all lances and torps. Even with 4 shields, this weapon supported by 6 lances which potentially can have a total of 18 shots, EIGHTEEN, esp on Lock On which you would do anyway since you will be losing your second move plus torps or AC, will result in a dead ship.

2 dragonships can have six pulsars six torps and 4 AC's at present and are faster and have more hits , they will achieve the same result in the scenario you put forth but for nealy 100 less points, they will get away further too . just to put it into context for you ....



Yeah but I'm pointing out Eldar weaponry is very effective even though you may not think so.

 I think it is effective ,I have at no point said there is anything wrong with Eldar weps i just wanted something a bit different ..


Of course you will derive pleasure from it. Now take a look from your opponent's point of view. That is how ships and weapons should be judged. Not from your own. Heck I could create an escort ship with 1000 as the strength of all its stats and I would derive pleasure from it. But my opponent's would beat the heck out of me if I put that on the table.

Won't mean you win any less, I would agree. Won't win any more? You're mistaken there. Without the ship, it's not a sure guarantee. With the ship, wins become almost guaranteed.

Hot air and wind , you say it is broken based on your theory and experience I say the opposite , maybe no one is right and no one is wrong , the only way we will know is by playing with it , my opinion will not be objective, so I have asked my friends to play it , I have not even told them I wrote it as I do not wish to effect the outcome in any way. I still think you should play some games VS and see if it is actually as bad as you 'think' it might be.


I've never seen Eldar fluff of them having a long ranged weapon. It's never their style. Disruption weapons tell me that it can disrupt something, not destroy something. You laser weapons in BFG are already devastating. You do not need to add any more.

D- weps are advanced vortex weps , they are deadly in 40k and destroy the hell outta titans in apocalypse (they also inflict instant death and ignore shields)

Fine, give it a torp option. I don't mind if they can take whatever weapons they can from CE, CWE or DE. Pick from there and run with it.
[/color]
Just as Ray suggested str 8 torps exchangeable for the launch bays, thats all.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 24, 2010, 07:13:21 AM
you get no extra protection from movement your ships dont take crits on a 4+ it's not even remotely related , you know why loosing the second move is important to eldar , makes no odds to you , as you say , you WANT to go slower to keep at longer range ......

Uh huh but if you are firing from the range of the NC, you get 2-3 turns of no one being able to shoot back at you, unless you are playing on a small table. Then when combat is near, the battleship can forgo firing the NC, zip to the back arc of the enemy fleet and then  next turn be in a position to hit the opposing fleet from behind where the opposing fleet can't do much to hurt you.  Trust me when I say i know the tactical maneuverability of Eldar and how to make it work for me.

most people will agree that they are tough to play against IF your opponent is good , but broken ?!  no ..

Eldar is broken. It wins prolly 80% of the time at the hands of an average player esp on a table with terrain. In the hands of an ace player, they can be hardly beat. That's how broken it is. You already imply how well your win-loss ratio is.

le sigh, again for the last time , if i don't get the 500 point ship with the special wep then I just buy 500 points worth of other 'broken' stuff, the list as far as you are concerned will be broken either way and you will call 'cheese' and 'broken' if the ship is in or not , I really doubt having a battleship will make the slightest difference to the power level of the fleet . corsairs arguably work better without a stalker ?

And again, for the last time, I don't care if you get only one of it. That's still one too many. Again, the question is not about the battleship but the weapon. And yes, even Horizon will say that with a Stalker, the CE fleet works as well if not better coz now I have 45 cm pulsar lances to use.

I just said the benefits of bombards are marginal as Eldar take crits on a 4+ anyway ?! but great for allcomers , you just said the same thing as me but different ?

Yup agreeing with you on that and in return, SM do not have a regular sized cruiser, only have 30 cm bombards and only have two capital ships to choose from.

See you only want for your fleet what I want for mine , an interesting and cool characterful special wep that actually works and is actually special because you can only get one (maybe) two of them.

The difference is you're adding something to your already broken fleet. You DON'T need it. I dislike NC spams and would like to do something about it. Increasing it's efficiency, not overwhelmingly but limiting it's availability is what I want done. You can check the old Warp Rift mags for my ideas for change in the NC rules. I kept most of the limitations but only bumped up the effectiveness by a bit. I am not ask for shield ignoring, no minimum range, autocritting NC shots even though IN need it more than Eldar.

That seems pretty cheap to me given that the cheapest CWE ship other than escorts is 160 .... you NEED long range batteries in your fleet, I imagine there is a good reason for them costing a bit more....  

Cheap? How so? For me to get 45 cm using a basic Tyrant, I need 185 points and that's not even the efficient one. In an Armageddon fleet list, I have to pay 120 points on top of the 245 points for an Armageddon and 230 points for an Overlord so it comes out to 365 and 350 points respectively. I won't even get into the Mars. And that's just for cruisers. But yes, as I said, that's the price IN pays for doing war.

Thing is you are assuming that any changes would further break it without sitting on any evidence to support it , I wanted to see for myself rather than argue with you so i have arranged for some playtests , if it does indeed perform as you 'theorize'  over the course of several games I will gladly concede your point.

Actually the burden is on you to prove that adding those two weapons won't break Eldar further. Hey it's what you want. Prove it then ask me to play it.

I'm sorry But I must completely and totally disagree that you have in any way 'proved' it is broken . you have indeed argued against it with theory but you have no playtesting no nothing to honestly base your argument on . you have just had a knee jerk reaction to the possibility of another fleet getting access to an NC type wep, you have completely skimmed over or marginalized the negatives. Play a few games I will be interested to hear your feedback and thoughts.

Showing that a weapon which is like the NC without the limitations is proof already of how broken it can get. I've given you scenarios on how it can singlehandedly destroy a battleship. The negatives are hardly enough to offset the positives added. You still won't accept that, fine. But you haven't played it and against it yourself so we're both on the same plane. You have no right to ask me to play a few games then give my thoughts when  you haven't even played it and against it yourself (while using a non-Eldar fleet).

Any general that plays any army/fleet who 'drops the ball' deserve to loose , eldar are less forgiving of mistakes ...

But this is more emphatic when it comes to Eldar. That is the only way Eldar will lose. Other fleet actions involving other races have equal opportunities for each player to win even without dropping the ball.

2 dragonships can have six pulsars six torps and 4 AC's at present and are faster and have more hits , they will achieve the same result in the scenario you put forth but for nealy 100 less points, they will get away further too . just to put it into context for you ....

6 30 cm Pulsars and 6 torps and 4 AC vs 6 45 cm Pulsars, D6 NC shot with autocrit and either 8 torps or 4 AC. 520 points vs 450 points. I don't see how it's 100 points less. You also have to add the Wraithships for the Dragonships whereas the Phoenix can fit automatically in 1000 points (or 1500, doesn't matter). It's your choice what you want to play, Dragonships or the Phoenix. It all comes down to playstyle. It doesn't mean either option is not effective and the Phoenix obviously comes out to be more effective on an individual ship basis.

I think it is effective ,I have at no point said there is anything wrong with Eldar weps i just wanted something a bit different ..

That's the price you pay with already better and effective weapons. Any further additions will not be well received.

Hot air and wind , you say it is broken based on your theory and experience I say the opposite , maybe no one is right and no one is wrong , the only way we will know is by playing with it , my opinion will not be objective, so I have asked my friends to play it , I have not even told them I wrote it as I do not wish to effect the outcome in any way. I still think you should play some games VS and see if it is actually as bad as you 'think' it might be.

I say broken because the entire community basically agrees Eldar're broken literally (as in breaks a lot of the rules) and figuratively (they win godawful lotsa times). Tell us. What's your win-loss ratio? My IN would roughly be in the 60-40 Win-Loss. Now add these weapons you want. Doesn't broken+broken lead to all the more broken?

D- weps are advanced vortex weps , they are deadly in 40k and destroy the hell outta titans in apocalypse (they also inflict instant death and ignore shields)

Titans are minute in comparison when compared to 5km long battleships, 3km long cruisers or even 1km long escorts with weapons designed to kill ships. Even a Firestorm can obliterate a Titan from orbit with it's lance weaponry.

Just as Ray suggested str 8 torps exchangeable for the launch bays, thats all.

I don't mind that either. So how about you play with the Void Stalker Heavy first before you decide Eldar NEEDS, not wants, weapons like those.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 24, 2010, 07:41:59 AM
The Compendium is an unofficial thing. A collection of vessels which have been published in various magazines and from which some it made into an official book.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: BlueDagger on May 25, 2010, 08:46:18 AM
Lol I don't pay attention to the thread for a bit and stuff goes crazy again lol. Why are we considering adding more ships and more drastic changes? Just a reminder this is an FAQ which i thought Ray got under control before .

Admiral, yes IN have a rough time against Eldar, Eldar have a rough time against Necron, Necron have a rough time against Chaos. I think we can all agree there is a LOT of aspects of BFG that are hardly balanced. You have a chip on your shoulder from fighting escort spam CE and we are fully aware, but please don't go into more nerf talk because you believe CE/CWE are broken.

Also, no offense but I'm not a fan of MMS either. Too many changes from the original design.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 25, 2010, 09:14:10 AM
Quote
Lol I don't pay attention to the thread for a bit and stuff goes crazy again lol. Why are we considering adding more ships and more drastic changes? Just a reminder this is an FAQ which i thought Ray got under control before .
This thread is a CWE specific spin-off from the FAQ where Ray is testing the waters for a CWE pdf change.
More ships: well, that is Kraken who wants a CWE battleship. Ray says the CWE are getting the Void Stalker (FAQ). Unofficialy I'd like to add the old Space fleet models.
More Drastic changes: which ones?

Quote
Admiral, yes IN have a rough time against Eldar, Eldar have a rough time against Necron, Necron have a rough time against Chaos. I think we can all agree there is a LOT of aspects of BFG that are hardly balanced. You have a chip on your shoulder from fighting escort spam CE and we are fully aware, but please don't go into more nerf talk because you believe CE/CWE are broken.
CE & CWE are broken (hey, I played with msm :) ). The rule system is broken. Necrons do not have a paticular rough time against Chaos. Necrons negate everything Eldar MSM has.

[quoteAlso, no offense but I'm not a fan of MMS either. Too many changes from the original design.[/quote]
No offense taken. Too many changes? Which ones... :)

But, anyhoo.,, those changes are needed since the original design is flawed & broken & bad & etc.

Title: Re: moncler vest
Post by: jingjing on May 25, 2010, 10:27:21 AM
 am just passing through, but I think I will be your feelings these words long.

Thankmoncler vest (http://www.shoptraveljackets.com/) you, so that I can share with you.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 25, 2010, 10:34:58 AM
Admiral, yes IN have a rough time against Eldar, Eldar have a rough time against Necron, Necron have a rough time against Chaos. I think we can all agree there is a LOT of aspects of BFG that are hardly balanced. You have a chip on your shoulder from fighting escort spam CE and we are fully aware, but please don't go into more nerf talk because you believe CE/CWE are broken.

And where did I say that I wanted Eldar nerfed? Point it out to me please. On the contrary, even with the Eldar being powerful as they are, I already pointed out that I accept the advantages they have. I even agree that CWE should get a Void Stalker-esque battleship with 5+ armor and access to all the existing Eldar weaponry. I even said, let the CWE escort have the regular pulsar. If not the DE pulsar. Are those about nerfing Eldar, whatever variety? No.

What I am against is adding that NC and Pulsar special weapon or any other weapons which may result in even more broken Eldar.

Please READ the posts before you make accusations which are patently false.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 25, 2010, 06:45:44 PM

And where did I say that I wanted Eldar nerfed? Point it out to me please. On the contrary, even with the Eldar being powerful as they are, I already pointed out that I accept the advantages they have. I even agree that CWE should get a Void Stalker-esque battleship with 5+ armor and access to all the existing Eldar weaponry. I even said, let the CWE escort have the regular pulsar. If not the DE pulsar. Are those about nerfing Eldar, whatever variety? No.

You did not and I also feel we have reached some kinda happy compromise, however I have to agree with blue dagger somewhat, having never being involved with a forum discussion with you before I did find the 'chip-on-your-shoulder) a little difficult to get past myself....

What I am against is adding that NC and Pulsar special weapon or any other weapons which may result in even more broken Eldar.

As usual I still feel that any special weps will not change the power balance one jot......


Please READ the posts before you make accusations which are patently false.

I must say sometimes I have felt you have not read or mis-read my posts and subsequently gone off on one, tis good advice for anyone that uses a forum

This thread is a CWE specific spin-off from the FAQ where Ray is testing the waters for a CWE pdf change.
More ships: well, that is Kraken who wants a CWE battleship. Ray says the CWE are getting the Void Stalker (FAQ). Unofficialy I'd like to add the old Space fleet models.

I too would not mind seeing the old Space fleet models , they are very elegant and much more like how eldar ships still appear in art. IN real life one of my loves is yachts so choosing to use the eldar fleet was not difficult ....


[quoteAlso, no offense but I'm not a fan of MMS either. Too many changes from the original design.

I do not want to ruffle any feathers but I must cast my vote in favor of MSM.(not saying it is perfect)

But, anyhoo.,, those changes are needed since the original design is flawed & broken & bad & etc.

flawed yes , most wargames rules to some degree are , if you have been playing GW games for any length of time you will be familiar  with the syndrome.

Uh huh but if you are firing from the range of the NC, you get 2-3 turns of no one being able to shoot back at you, unless you are playing on a small table. Then when combat is near, the battleship can forgo firing the NC, zip to the back arc of the enemy fleet and then  next turn be in a position to hit the opposing fleet from behind where the opposing fleet can't do much to hurt you.  Trust me when I say i know the tactical maneuverability of Eldar and how to make it work for me.

Mine is much shorter range than the usual NC.... you said you had read the rules ?

Eldar is broken. It wins prolly 80% of the time at the hands of an average player esp on a table with terrain. In the hands of an ace player, they can be hardly beat. That's how broken it is. You already imply how well your win-loss ratio is.

My win loss ratio is pretty much identical in 40k with Eldar, which is not considered a broken army, they play very differently from other armies too but no one is trying to re write them into a space marine type list because that is what people are used too....

most of the armies/fleets in either game are tough to beat in the hands of an ace player, believe  


And again, for the last time, I don't care if you get only one of it. That's still one too many. Again, the question is not about the battleship but the weapon. And yes, even Horizon will say that with a Stalker, the CE fleet works as well if not better coz now I have 45 cm pulsar lances to use.

A few posts ago you were expounding the power of escort only lists, we all know they are much worse than a stalker list in the right hands, so don't change your tune now just because it suits your stance.....


The difference is you're adding something to your already broken fleet. You DON'T need it. I dislike NC spams and would like to do something about it. Increasing it's efficiency, not overwhelmingly but limiting it's availability is what I want done. You can check the old Warp Rift mags for my ideas for change in the NC rules. I kept most of the limitations but only bumped up the effectiveness by a bit. I am not ask for shield ignoring, no minimum range, autocritting NC shots even though IN need it more than Eldar.

The reason I made it ignore shields was not  to cheese it up, but in fact because that is how D-weps work, there is a precident within existing published games workshop rules for D weps functioning in this manner.

1 crit is no big deal, try having everything being crit on a 4+ all the time

Thing is you are assuming that any changes would further break it without sitting on any evidence to support it , I wanted to see for myself rather than argue with you so i have arranged for some playtests , if it does indeed perform as you 'theorize'  over the course of several games I will gladly concede your point.

Actually the burden is on you to prove that adding those two weapons won't break Eldar further. Hey it's what you want. Prove it then ask me to play it.

No problems as I said I have already made some effort towards supporting my claims and will report back at some point. I think you are just afraid to be proved wrong  :P

Showing that a weapon which is like the NC without the limitations is proof already of how broken it can get. I've given you scenarios on how it can singlehandedly destroy a battleship. The negatives are hardly enough to offset the positives added. You still won't accept that, fine. But you haven't played it and against it yourself so we're both on the same plane. You have no right to ask me to play a few games then give my thoughts when  you haven't even played it and against it yourself (while using a non-Eldar fleet).

There are plenty of limitations , you just cannot see them .I'm waiting for objective opinions from other people before i play with or against it, im hardly going to be the most un biased judge now am I ??



But this is more emphatic when it comes to Eldar. That is the only way Eldar will lose.

Thats flat out fiction , I have lost games when I have played near perfectly,some people are very good/lucky with their fleets you are also forgetting that the dice can also wreck the best laid plans.

2 dragonships can have six pulsars six torps and 4 AC's at present and are faster and have more hits , they will achieve the same result in the scenario you put forth but for nealy 100 less points, they will get away further too . just to put it into context for you ....

6 30 cm Pulsars and 6 torps and 4 AC vs 6 45 cm Pulsars, D6 NC shot with autocrit and either 8 torps or 4 AC. 520 points vs 450 points. I don't see how it's 100 points less.

I said 'nearly' , 70  is the best part of 100 so 'nearly'?

You also have to add the Wraithships for the Dragonships whereas the Phoenix can fit automatically in 1000 points (or 1500, doesn't matter). It's your choice what you want to play, Dragonships or the Phoenix. It all comes down to playstyle. It doesn't mean either option is not effective and the Phoenix obviously comes out to be more effective on an individual ship basis.

Yes well it would be a pretty poor BB if it was not ....

That's the price you pay with already better and effective weapons. Any further additions will not be well received.

By you, what gives you the right to put words in the mouth of every single person that plays BFG, most of the people I have shown it so far thinks it is pretty cool, some even said they would enjoy the challange, some people said it would need limiting ie one per fleet and only at 1500 plus. Everyone has at very least been constructive.

I say broken because the entire community basically agrees Eldar're broken literally (as in breaks a lot of the rules) and figuratively (they win godawful lotsa times). Tell us. What's your win-loss ratio? My IN would roughly be in the 60-40 Win-Loss. Now add these weapons you want. Doesn't broken+broken lead to all the more broken?

Not being funny but I don not loose much , at any of the wargames I play , I have a regular pool of at least 30 opponents and do wargames at least three times a week . I also run the local games club, my win-loss ratio has nothing to do with the fleet I use.

A bad workman ......


D- weps are advanced vortex weps , they are deadly in 40k and destroy the hell outta titans in apocalypse (they also inflict instant death and ignore shields)

Titans are minute in comparison when compared to 5km long battleships, 3km long cruisers or even 1km long escorts with weapons designed to kill ships. Even a Firestorm can obliterate a Titan from orbit with it's lance weaponry.

Yes so if a lance = a ship sized lascannon.... what would a ship sized D-cannon do !? pulsars in 40k function almost the same as in gothic , why would a d cannon not ?



I don't mind that either. So how about you play with the Void Stalker Heavy first before you decide Eldar NEEDS, not wants, weapons like those.
[/quote]

Seriously, quite happy with this as a compromise , but as I stated before my intention was to give a bit more 'flavour' but a CWE (5+) stalker variant is good and fluffy enough for me, with the torps it will actually 'BE' a variant.

Regards

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 25, 2010, 08:43:36 PM
Leaving the discussion msm vs mms (or equivalent) aside (I do enjoy such things though).... what would a Void Stalker with 5+ armour cost?

When the Void Stalker rules where released in one of the mags it had the option to swap 4 launch bays fr 4 torps at no cost... (yeah right...).

Is your intention launch bays + torps or a swap option like the CWE ships? The Void Stalker model has both systems on the model.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 26, 2010, 12:10:33 AM
Leaving the discussion msm vs mms (or equivalent) aside (I do enjoy such things though).... what would a Void Stalker with 5+ armour cost?

Well I was thinking 420, the thinking here is that it will technically have 16.66% more hits, but as we know hits do not a whole battleship make, it does not have 16.66 percent more firepower,speed etc so I opted to make it ten percent (rounding up) more expensive so + 40 points ? if it had more firepower (like the Phoenix) I would have said 450 flat

What do you think ?

When the Void Stalker rules where released in one of the mags it had the option to swap 4 launch bays for 4 torps at no cost... (yeah right...).

That always confused me too....

Is your intention launch bays + torps or a swap option like the CWE ships? The Void Stalker model has both systems on the model.

Hmm, my original thoughts on this pretty much ran to just making it a 5+ armour stalker  the the option to swap 8 torps  for 4 bays. this also ties it together with the way the rest of the CWE fleet is chosen ie multiple options on the same hull.


Having both systems on the ship at the same seems a little OTT .
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 26, 2010, 04:36:20 AM
You did not and I also feel we have reached some kinda happy compromise, however I have to agree with blue dagger somewhat, having never being involved with a forum discussion with you before I did find the 'chip-on-your-shoulder) a little difficult to get past myself....

That chip only comes out when people want an already broken race to be given more weapons to add to it's already broken arsenal.

As usual I still feel that any special weps will not change the power balance one jot......

Yes it will.

I must say sometimes I have felt you have not read or mis-read my posts and subsequently gone off on one, tis good advice for anyone that uses a forum

I miss out on some of the rules but neither have I not read or mis-read your post. Out point of contention stands and there is no misreading there.

Mine is much shorter range than the usual NC.... you said you had read the rules ?

Still one to two turns of shooting. Aside from which your escorting ships can focus on the ships which can attack the battleship. Even if you don't fire the second turn, zip to the enemies rear then. Advantage is still yours.  

My win loss ratio is pretty much identical in 40k with Eldar, which is not considered a broken army, they play very differently from other armies too but no one is trying to re write them into a space marine type list because that is what people are used too....

most of the armies/fleets in either game are tough to beat in the hands of an ace player, believe  

So what is it? C'mon. Just state your win loss ratio. And while 40k Eldar may not be broken, maybe with the latest codex, the previous incarnations they were.

A few posts ago you were expounding the power of escort only lists, we all know they are much worse than a stalker list in the right hands, so don't change your tune now just because it suits your stance.....

Of course I was. That doesn't mean that adding the battleship won't bring it's own benefits. I am neither changing my tune as I even pointed out that a VS with escorts can be as bad as all escorts. Re-read my posts a few pages back.

The reason I made it ignore shields was not  to cheese it up, but in fact because that is how D-weps work, there is a precident within existing published games workshop rules for D weps functioning in this manner.

1 crit is no big deal, try having everything being crit on a 4+ all the time

The reason why shields affect NC is because if it didn't it would be broken. Auto crit on top of the other damage you cause? if you rolled a 6 for damage that would come up to around 2 crits. If you're lucky 3. Whish gives you good odds at rolling the 10-12 range. Even if you roll average of 3-4, you can still get 2 crits. Don't knock the crits.

No problems as I said I have already made some effort towards supporting my claims and will report back at some point. I think you are just afraid to be proved wrong  :P

There are plenty of limitations , you just cannot see them .I'm waiting for objective opinions from other people before i play with or against it, im hardly going to be the most un biased judge now am I ??

Sure go ahead. Will wait until then. Remember play with it and against it. And play with good and bad players.


Thats flat out fiction , I have lost games when I have played near perfectly,some people are very good/lucky with their fleets you are also forgetting that the dice can also wreck the best laid plans.

Really? BFG Eldar? You've lost when you played near perfect? Against IN or SM? Tau or Nid? I can understand Necron, I can understand Chaos and Eldar even.

I said 'nearly' , 70  is the best part of 100 so 'nearly'?

The battleship comes out cheaper than the two dragonships. From your post, you made it seem like the reverse. Here si what you said: "2 dragonships can have six pulsars six torps and 4 AC's at present and are faster and have more hits , they will achieve the same result in the scenario you put forth but for nealy 100 less points, they will get away further too."

Yes well it would be a pretty poor BB if it was not ....

Which means your argument for the two Dragonships being better than the Phoenix is wrong.

By you, what gives you the right to put words in the mouth of every single person that plays BFG, most of the people I have shown it so far thinks it is pretty cool, some even said they would enjoy the challange, some people said it would need limiting ie one per fleet and only at 1500 plus. Everyone has at very least been constructive.

By anyone who is concerned with balance. Obviously it's a new thing and people might find it enjoyable at first. Not when they keep on getting blasted while on the receiving end.

Not being funny but I don not loose much , at any of the wargames I play , I have a regular pool of at least 30 opponents and do wargames at least three times a week . I also run the local games club, my win-loss ratio has nothing to do with the fleet I use.

A bad workman ......


yes but what is your particular win/loss ratio using the Eldar fleet compared to the other fleets?

Yes so if a lance = a ship sized lascannon.... what would a ship sized D-cannon do !? pulsars in 40k function almost the same as in gothic , why would a d cannon not ?

Because Gothic is a much more balanced game than 40k. If we could translate every weapon in 40k into BFG without upsetting the balance then that would be great. But I don't want to have to put up with the 40k craziness in BFG. Nova Cannons do not exist in 40k's IG do they? Earthshaker is the closest maybe but the Earthshaker does not have limitation as much as the Nova Cannon. when an Earthshaker hits, only question is the saving throw unlike the NC which has to get through shields first. So just because there is a weapon system in either system does not automatically mean there should be the same weapon in the other. 40k also does not have much in the way of shields unlike in Gothic where shields are first penetrated then armor value next.

Eldar in 40k are also not as bad games-wise compared to Eldar in BFG. I've already gone up against 40k Eldar army with MSM and it was not an enjoyable fight when I couldn't shoot back effectively or get into melee even while the Eldar was slaughtering my army. Luckily, they took this away from the latest Eldar 40k rules if I am not mistaken and which is why my friend who tooled his Eldar to use that particular rule is now just letting his army gather dust.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 26, 2010, 03:31:32 PM
That chip only comes out when people want an already broken race to be given more weapons to add to it's already broken arsenal.

lol, the arsenal is far from broken, I do not think i have ever come across someone who seems so angry with a particular fleet/army. I dislike Necrons in both systems but for me its just funny or entertaining.

And my chip comes out when gw heap all the love on imperial armies and fleets, thats why IN has a gajillion battleships to choose from don't get me started on Marine codex spam.....

Yes it will.

You don't 'know' currently its just an opinion, your comments on the eldar fleet at large carry more weight as you have played them a fair bit by the sound of things, I notice no one else threw a tantrum ?


I miss out on some of the rules but neither have I not read or mis-read your post. Out point of contention stands and there is no misreading there.

As the rules are the 'contention' missing out on them is kinda fundamental to your position.....

Still one to two turns of shooting. Aside from which your escorting ships can focus on the ships which can attack the battleship. Even if you don't fire the second turn, zip to the enemies rear then. Advantage is still yours. 

Yes , because a good IN player is just gonna let us do that., as eldar ships go it is slooow and even slower if it fires its Lazah / D lance
not likely to be doing much zipping,its more likely to just end up in the middle of your fleet a big fat turkey ready to be plucked ...... read the rules !!!


So what is it? C'mon. Just state your win loss ratio. And while 40k Eldar may not be broken, maybe with the latest codex, the previous incarnations they were.

As I stated earlier I skipped 3rd and 4th ed 40k due to them sucking so I have no idea. I'm not sure my win-loss ratio has any bearing in this conversation.

Of course I was. That doesn't mean that adding the battleship won't bring it's own benefits. I am neither changing my tune as I even pointed out that a VS with escorts can be as bad as all escorts. Re-read my posts a few pages back.

Your implication was that access to a stalker makes them a harder fleet , my point was that infact it makes no difference to the corsair fleet , I honestly think the most OP corsair lists will not contain one.

1 crit is no big deal, try having everything being crit on a 4+ all the time[/color][/quote]

The reason why shields affect NC is because if it didn't it would be broken.

because you can buy multiples....

Auto crit on top of the other damage you cause? Its(probably my fault as the rules are not clear its d6 hits of which ONE is upgraded to an auto crit. so no potential 7 hits , you are very unlikely to get more than 1-2 crits most of the time



Really? BFG Eldar? You've lost when you played near perfect? Against IN or SM? Tau or Nid? I can understand Necron, I can understand Chaos and Eldar even.

yup

I said 'nearly' , 70  is the best part of 100 so 'nearly'?

The battleship comes out cheaper than the two dragonships. From your post, you made it seem like the reverse. Here si what you said: "2 dragonships can have six pulsars six torps and 4 AC's at present and are faster and have more hits , they will achieve the same result in the scenario you put forth but for nealy 100 less points, they will get away further too."

Phoenix ship with special wep upgrade and Raiders is 470 , 2 dragon ships with Raiders is 540 , so yes the dragons cost more , I had the prices the wrong way round in my head apologies .

Yes well it would be a pretty poor BB if it was not  ....

Which means your argument for the two Dragonships being better than the Phoenix is wrong.

As in two 'together' as a pair for roughly the same outlay in points is likely better/more points efficient/flexible

By anyone who is concerned with balance. Obviously it's a new thing and people might find it enjoyable at first. Not when they keep on getting blasted while on the receiving end.

Well if you are to be believed if they are playing against eldar they will be blasted anyway regardless of player skill,luck or any other factors....[/quote]

yes but what is your particular win/loss ratio using the Eldar fleet compared to the other fleets?

I have one 40k army , Eldar I have one BFG fleet now, Eldar. I used to run an IN fleet which I enjoyed and had plenty of success with , thing is I am much better at wargames in general now so it is difficult to compare. I imagine if I had any interest in playing an IN fleet I would be somewhat improved now.


Because Gothic is a much more balanced game than 40k. If we could translate every weapon in 40k into BFG without upsetting the balance then that would be great. But I don't want to have to put up with the 40k craziness in BFG. Nova Cannons do not exist in 40k's IG do they? Earthshaker is the closest maybe but the Earthshaker does not have limitation as much as the Nova Cannon. when an Earthshaker hits, only question is the saving throw unlike the NC which has to get through shields first. So just because there is a weapon system in either system does not automatically mean there should be the same weapon in the other. 40k also does not have much in the way of shields unlike in Gothic where shields are first penetrated then armor value next.

Eldar in 40k are also not as bad games-wise compared to Eldar in BFG. I've already gone up against 40k Eldar army with MSM and it was not an enjoyable fight when I couldn't shoot back effectively or get into melee even while the Eldar was slaughtering my army. Luckily, they took this away from the latest Eldar 40k rules if I am not mistaken and which is why my friend who tooled his Eldar to use that particular rule is now just letting his army gather dust.

[/quote]

There is plenty of background fluff to indicate that the Eldar still occasionally bring out the pre fall Mega weapons, not sure where else you would be able to use them other than on a big ship .......

Actually the earthshaker is much the same if you shoot it at anything without sheilds BOOM! as soon as you shoot it at say a titan or superheavy with shields it becomes a bit meh , the main point being that the all of the gothic weps are in some way based or related to existing tech available to the races in 40k.

Mech eldar do not need MSM in 40k a good player can still run rings around most opponents. I expect the crystal targeting matrix will be back in some form. Eldar can still move twice due to Star engines.

Sounds like you dislike or have trouble playing against ultra mobile lists/armies, you must hate dark eldar !!
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 26, 2010, 07:03:52 PM
In BFG we do not hate Dark Eldar. ;)

Well, is the Eldar arsenal broken? I suggest a talking to Xavi at Port Maw haha. (Go to the thread Eldar to the core wraithbones thread, like even more heresy then MMS, or not...).

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 26, 2010, 08:31:42 PM
Err, perhaps that was not very clear , I was referring to DA in 40k not BFG , just to clarify .

Horizon , you asked about points etc on the Voidstalker CWE , I have answered your questions , I was just wondering what you thought ?
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on May 26, 2010, 09:57:41 PM
Heya,

I would have it at armour 5+ and drop the variable fire arcs. At no cost change.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on May 27, 2010, 01:59:08 AM
Yeah that works too and further serves to give it some characteristic differences from the CE stalker.

I take it everyone is cool with the torp /bay swap ?

M.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 31, 2010, 08:44:21 AM
lol, the arsenal is far from broken, I do not think i have ever come across someone who seems so angry with a particular fleet/army. I dislike Necrons in both systems but for me its just funny or entertaining.

And my chip comes out when gw heap all the love on imperial armies and fleets, thats why IN has a gajillion battleships to choose from don't get me started on Marine codex spam.....

My chip comes from wanting to add more to something which already has a huge advantage already. You dislike Necrons? And what if Necrons got some stuff which are more anti-Eldar? Also, what codex spam?

As for adding more battleships, while it may seem that IN has a gajillion battleships, the Eldar VS can result in almost as much variety as the IN battleships. You just don't have them with distinct name classes. Heck, in the end, all the IN battleships can be reduced to one chassis, name it Terra, and then just modify the weapons, armor, turrets and speed values. The latter 3 are the only difference among the battleships and the one the Eldar battleships do not have. But again, I don't mind if Eldar do get 5+ armor for their battleship for CWE or even CE.

You don't 'know' currently its just an opinion, your comments on the eldar fleet at large carry more weight as you have played them a fair bit by the sound of things, I notice no one else threw a tantrum ?

Just coz no one's throwing a tantrum doesn't mean it's not true. Not everyone reads these boards and if mine is just opinion then so is yours. Let's leave it at that until we get the games in then.

As the rules are the 'contention' missing out on them is kinda fundamental to your position.....

You've missed out and misread some of my rules yourself. So let's leave this issue here then.

Yes , because a good IN player is just gonna let us do that., as eldar ships go it is slooow and even slower if it fires its Lazah / D lance
not likely to be doing much zipping,its more likely to just end up in the middle of your fleet a big fat turkey ready to be plucked ...... read the rules !!!

Oh, yes, IN is slow and a good Eldar player will allow you to do just that. Why would I shoot when I know the ship will be sitting in the middle of the IN fleet? Common sense dictates I do something to avoid that situation. Again, zip past and the IN player won't be able to do much about it. Aside from which, you do have other ships to harass the IN ships.

As I stated earlier I skipped 3rd and 4th ed 40k due to them sucking so I have no idea. I'm not sure my win-loss ratio has any bearing in this conversation.

Of course there is. If you have an excellent win/loss ratio using Eldar compared to other races, that definitely has a bearing.

Your implication was that access to a stalker makes them a harder fleet , my point was that infact it makes no difference to the corsair fleet , I honestly think the most OP corsair lists will not contain one.

That will depend on the playstyle. Some people will be able to use a VS in an escort heavy fleet to good effect, even better than an all escort fleet. Others will prefer all escorts.

because you can buy multiples....

No, even if I took only one, an average roll for a direct hit means a cruiser is crippled. A battleship has 1/3rd of its HP gone. That is why an NC ignoring shields would be broken.

Auto crit on top of the other damage you cause? Its(probably my fault as the rules are not clear its d6 hits of which ONE is upgraded to an auto crit. so no potential 7 hits , you are very unlikely to get more than 1-2 crits most of the time

Unlikely, maybe. Dice are fickle though. Just because it is unlikely, doesn't mean it can't happen. You could get 3 or more on some days and others not. You roll the right crit and yes you can get 7 or more hits in. I've had it happen and so effectively lost my battleship.

Phoenix ship with special wep upgrade and Raiders is 470 , 2 dragon ships with Raiders is 540 , so yes the dragons cost more , I had the prices the wrong way round in my head apologies .

Ok.

As in two 'together' as a pair for roughly the same outlay in points is likely better/more points efficient/flexible

True but then again, you can have the Phoenix and a Dragonship and you would come out better than 2 Dragonships for slightly more cost, wouldn't you?

There is plenty of background fluff to indicate that the Eldar still occasionally bring out the pre fall Mega weapons, not sure where else you would be able to use them other than on a big ship .......

Craftworld most likely.

Actually the earthshaker is much the same if you shoot it at anything without sheilds BOOM! as soon as you shoot it at say a titan or superheavy with shields it becomes a bit meh , the main point being that the all of the gothic weps are in some way based or related to existing tech available to the races in 40k.[/color]

Yes but not all have to be brought to the other game. In a game where Eldar is clearly dominant already, I don't want to see them adding to their arsenal.

Mech eldar do not need MSM in 40k a good player can still run rings around most opponents. I expect the crystal targeting matrix will be back in some form. Eldar can still move twice due to Star engines.

Sounds like you dislike or have trouble playing against ultra mobile lists/armies, you must hate dark eldar !![/color]

Not in BFG. In 40k without the MSM, used by an average player, you can still catch up to the Eldar. Yes, ultra mobile armies which can shoot you and then move out of harms way does leave a bad taste in the mouth. However, with BFG Eldar, I don't see any way of removing MSM to provide the survivability to Eldar. Give them 5+ would make them similar to DE. While that would make sense, it would dilute their flavor. So I don't mind MSM in BFG for now unless they come up with a suitable replacement. I'm still dubious about the previous MMS iterations though Horizon is still in the process of improving on it. Maybe in the future they can come up with one which will feel fair to most parties. Then I might be amenable to adding more weapons like the the ones in the Phoenix to Eldar.      
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Admiral_d_Artagnan on May 31, 2010, 08:46:26 AM
Yeah that works too and further serves to give it some characteristic differences from the CE stalker.

I take it everyone is cool with the torp /bay swap ?

M.

Yup, that's ok.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on June 25, 2010, 05:02:05 AM
So Ray

Is It likely that the discussed CWE Stalker could be made available via the Faq ?

It's bloody awful not having it in the CWE fleet.

I also dislike being forced to pay 150 points for an admiral with over priced re rolls to get the Flame (which is yet ANOTHER cruiser)

the extra points and re roll premium seems to be offered as some sort of balance to being able to take reserves , except the current reserves rules make  it impossible to get any benefit at all or to take the stalker for CWE ?!

As a corsair player being able to take some CWE cruisers would be cool , however I would have to spend minimum 600 more like 700 points on corsair cruisers to get ONE CWE ship , what is the point  ? you would struggle to get more than one in a 1500 point fleet ,so utterly useless and certainly not worth a 150 point Admiral, not to mention the crazy re-roll prices.

On the other hand , as a CWE player a few corsair escorts would be cool , however to get a squadron of three , I would have to buy 9 of the rubbish CWE escorts @ 360 points

It's a complete joke and a waste of time, is this likely to get rectified ?

As per discussion with Horizon and Admiral re the Stalker, the current agreed suggestion is this:

Make available to CWE only at 1000 +    drop variable fire arcs increase armour to 5+ and give the option for a direct swap of 4 bays for 8 torps.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on June 25, 2010, 10:53:09 PM
Kraken,

The Hero is dropping in price due to the FAQ.

The Voidstalker won't be added to the CWE in the FAQ most likely. If it were to be added it would be as it is in Armada, with a possible Lb/torp swap.

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on June 26, 2010, 02:38:11 AM
Cheers Ray

Dropping the price of the Hero does little to make him particularly attractive as I think as stands you would end up with a crapper fleet using reserves at all , I suppose you just choose one list or the other and take the flame as your flagship .......

I was under the impression Yriels fleet started life as a CWE fleet and picked up a load of corsairs as his fame grew , that kind of fleet is impossible to field .....

Would be disgustingly grateful if even the plain stalker could get a torp swap option and make it in to CWE list.

Thanks
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on June 26, 2010, 07:07:22 PM
I dunno, perhaps it is the story, the background, but even with the overpriced 150pts Hero with maxed out re-rolls on the Flame in a 1500pts fleet has never failed me. At 100pts I am just very happy. Since the Hero is the only way to get the Flame and the Flame is mega awesome (with added raiders soon,kewl).

Also, you could consider taking the Corsairs as parent fleet for the Hero:

Hero
Flame
Void Stalker
2 other (light) cruisers (Aurora I say)
*** now you have 3 cruisers to add a CWE cruiser.
Add Corsair mega escorts (Nightshade/Hemlock).
And for fun some Shadowhunters
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on June 27, 2010, 12:57:16 PM
I think it would be less crap if it was 2:1 with a pirate princ , the difficulties of coordinating 2 different fleets are well represented by the overcosted re-rolls and with 2:1 it's still very difficult to get many ships , but you might manage more than ONE , I feel it would allow for a much truer pirate prince lead mixed fleet than the current rules allow.

I'm just a bit peeved as I had an idea in my head for a really eclectic and fluffy mixed fleet lead by an eldar hero and it is just impossible , the rules that you would think should allow it / make it work do not work.

 
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on June 28, 2010, 01:39:55 PM
Roy,

Keep in mind that you have no wraithships to allow a dragon ship in the CE list and if you bring them in as reserves you'll have reached your cruiser limit! However you could use a wraithship to shield auroras with its greater hits and armour.


Kraken,

The reserves are only token for these fleets, so adding a wraithship here or hemlock there is all you'll get.

However if CWE and CE could have reserves normally a Hero could reduce the ratio from 3:1 to 2:1. (this is being considered, but no promises).

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on June 28, 2010, 01:48:30 PM
Yeah, so the reserve rules are utterly fail, I honestly doubt anyone uses them , Horizon seems to be happy just paying a gijillion points to get a slightly better cruiser for his CWE fleet , which is honestly the way I am Headed with mine.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on June 29, 2010, 04:17:57 AM
Hi Ray,

then reword the Dragonship limitation: not one per two Wraithships, but one per two cruisers.

I use the Hero to get the Flame.

Reserves only if the games get above 1500/1750 to get more ships.
Reserve rules are pretty common in the IN fleets.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on June 29, 2010, 01:16:36 PM
Roy,

The rewording is possible but CE are already super powerful, giving them this bonus but nothing to CWE will mean CE will win out with kick ass cruisers and escorts. CWE are also super powerful, neither need a bonus.

Cheers,

RayB HA

 
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on June 29, 2010, 07:13:19 PM
Gamewise/playwise I entirely agree on this reserve subject for Eldar.

Fluffwise, especially when using 'Yriel', the rule makes no sense at all. Here gameplay contradicts fluff. Perhaps someone should design a special Yriel's raiders fleet list with a mix of both?
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on June 30, 2010, 11:17:45 AM
Well, at what point would you make his fleet list? When he's a CWE Admiral (so just CWE), a CE Pirate with reserve numbered CWE ships (as it is now really) or when he pops back in defence of his CW where it's his CE fleet with CWE reserves and a normal fleet of CWE (which is a ratio of 1:1, but broken ;)).

Cheers,

RayB HA   
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on June 30, 2010, 11:32:56 AM
This one:
Quote
Prince Yriel
 
Prince YrielPrince Yriel, Autarch of Iyanden, was a brilliant if reckless commander in Iyanden's fleet. He is not of pure Iyanden blood but is honored as one of the greatest defenders of Iyanden. He was originally exiled when he led a successful and pre-emptive attack on a Chaos fleet that left the Craftworld open to attack. He and his crew formed a corsair fleet, the Eldritch Raiders, and had become infamous throughout the galaxy in only a few decades, a testament to Yriel's skill[5].

He and his fleet saved Iyanden at its time of greatest need, at the height of the Tyranid invasion by the Hive Fleet Kraken. As the Craftworld was about to fall, Yriel and his Eldritch Raiders blew a sizeable hole in the Tyranid's fleet and reinforced Iyanden's forces. Yriel himself slew the leader of the hordes, a supposedly invincible creature, with the Spear of Twilight, a cursed artifact that contains the power of a Supernova. Yriel was then instated as an Autarch of Iyanden, and is currently searching for a way to rid himself of the Spear, which is slowly killing him.

Yriel first appeared in early first edition as the "self-styled 'Lord Prince Yriel,'" where it is mentioned that Imperium fostered rivalries between Yriel and other pirate companies resulted in factional fighting; his conquest and absorption of two of these rival groups (Xian's Black Raiders and the Scarlet Command) making him the single most powerful Eldar pirate operating in the galaxy.

Thus Eldritch Raiders. The point is: have other ships/captains departed from Iyanden when Yriel left. That is a vague part.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on June 30, 2010, 06:53:38 PM
yup I think most of yriels initial fleet left with him as it states "he lead his followers into exile as a corsair prince"

 Being forced to take a mix would be cool,I do not see how even 1:1 is broken. For each good ship you take you will have to take a worse one , so subsequently you will no longer have the all strong cruisers lists of CWE or evil escort spam of CE , but a mixture of CE and CWE cruisers and likewise you will have as many Failhunters as CE escorts , which IMO balances well enough.

just the 'normal' reserves' rules are awful for representing pirate prince lead fleets , it's impossible to capture the correct 'flavour'....

Ideally what I would like to see is something like this : buy prince, choose parent fleet, buy flagship, this can be any ship from either list (which should allow for the stalker in a CWE list)  possibly buy some stupidly overpriced re-rolls (this is a good mechanic to represent the difficulties of trying to co-ordinate a mixed force) pick fleet as normal from parent list upto 2/3rds of points max (usual restrictions apply) , you may then spend upto 1/3rd of your set points limit on the other fleet list (usual restrictions apply) so 2 wraithships for 1 dragonship etc etc
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on July 02, 2010, 12:55:47 AM
Kraken,

Actually you're right 1:1 wouldn't be broken. It deserves further thought.

Cheers,

RayB
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Kraken on July 03, 2010, 01:54:30 AM
Hi Ray

I'm glad you got what I have been trying to say , I was beginning to think I was mad.

As I said the most broken fleet possible would be made of all CWE cruisers and All CE Escorts, however 1:1 makes that impossible and forces you to mix the fleet it would also mean that you would have to play something like 2k to get more than one Dragonship as you would need one CE cruiser to feild it and two wraithships which of course you would need two CE cruisers to have , so you would actually have to buy 5 other ships per dragonship..... its possible to squeeze 2 into 2k (with no escorts) I think.

I would still prefer a percentage 25-33% to spend freely on reserves, the fleet will look better for it and will make picking/working out a fleet fairly straightforward and even at 1:1 I think it is still too much a two edged sword. 
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Sigoroth on October 01, 2010, 01:23:50 PM
Just to clarify, there is no onus on the CE player to bring Wraithships in order to field Dragonships as reserves. The restriction of 1 DS to 2 WS is a CWE fleet restriction, not a special rule of the DS nor a CE fleet restriction. Therefore a Hero, VS, FoA, 2 Aurorae, 1 DS and as many CE escorts as points allow is a perfectly legal CE list.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on November 09, 2010, 12:17:20 AM
The difference here as apposed to normal fleetlists is the wording of 2 wraithships instead of cruisers.

If Wraithships were termed as cruisers for the Dragonships fleet requirements it would be much easier to take them as reserves.

Cheers,

RayB HA       
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Sigoroth on November 10, 2010, 10:35:05 AM
The difference here as apposed to normal fleetlists is the wording of 2 wraithships instead of cruisers.

If Wraithships were termed as cruisers for the Dragonships fleet requirements it would be much easier to take them as reserves.

Cheers,

RayB HA       

You do not have to obey fleet restrictions of the parent fleet regarding reserves, only fleet restrictions of your current fleet. The CWE fleet restricts Dragonships based on the presence of Wraithships at a specific ratio. The CE fleet list does not. Therefore you do not have to include Wraithships in a CE fleet in order to take Dragonships as reserves. If the restriction were a special rule of the Dragonship then it would have to be observed in any fleet in which it is taken as a reserve.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: RayB HA on November 12, 2010, 02:56:09 PM
Ah yes. You're right! In that case, the normal reserve ratio would be okay, as otherwise you've got a super CE list that has its super escorts and uses its Auroras to unlock Dragonships, (squadroning them so the dragon ship can take the brunt with its better armour, the Auroras would still get hit on 4's though).

Cheers,

RayB HA
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Valhallan on November 15, 2010, 01:24:00 AM
then how about 1:1 for each *type* of cruiser...
ie 1 dragon for 1 shadow/eclipse; 1 wraith for 1 aurora/solaris

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: maaksel on December 16, 2010, 03:54:32 AM
Long time BFG player, very excited about several of the new changes.

Overall I find the shadow hunter to be 'meh' with it's current rendition in the 2010 FAQ.  They are shadow 'hunters' not shadow 'defenders', which makes me believe they go out looking for the attack craft to shoot them down, not 'defend' better against them.

Also, with the drop of the Prince to 100, means that corsair elder can be used correct?  Why would I take a shadow hunter over a hemlock? Especially with the amount of attack craft (and it's resilience) that this craftworld can produce.

Best case would be a Hemlock paired with a Shadow Hunter 3WB.  On brace you lose a grand total of 1 WB.

As for 3 pulsars vs 14 WB's.  3 pulsars AVERAGE 1.5 + .75 + .375 hits, a grand total of 2.63 hits (against any armor).

14 WB's, you'll average between 10 and 7 dice, so we'll say 8.5 for fun.  AV4 ~4.25 hits, AV5~2.42 hits, AV6 1.4.  The lance is superior vs both AV5 and AV6 (assuming no holofields).  Locked on (really? eldar locked on?)  The lance will get even better.

I read through the new warp rift and I really liked the new battleship for them - seems like fun, will have to play test it.

I look forward to being a new active member in the community.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on December 16, 2010, 05:16:49 AM
Hi Maaksel,

1 Eldar Pulsar equals 4 Eldar Weapon Batteries. Therefor the options on the Wraithship are good and in equal strength.

16wb vs 3 Pulsar is 1:5, which is in heavy favour of the batteries. Within MMS the strenghts are 12wb & 3pl which still plays out balanced.

So 14wb vs 3 PL is a good choice.  
Creating 4 PL / 16WB is just off limits.

You compare the possible average damage output by the Pulsar. But the hit potential is somewhat lower.

Also Eldar WB are always closing:
That means 10 dice between 15-30cm
If  a blastmarker is present 7 (but then I'd pick another target).
Under 15cm the dice are 13 (left shift).
And they don't go over 30cm.

So we are looking at an average of 10 dice all the time. Since
i) my Eldar won't be daft to go under 15cm (but if I do I get 13 dice which might a final kill option).
ii) I will look for other targets if blastmarkers are intervening.


Also, your 8,5 dice vs 5+ armour is wrong: should be 2,81


7 dice (15-30cm behind blastmarker)
4+ = 3,50
5+ = 2,31
6+ = 1,12

10 dice (15-30cm or under 15 behind blastmarker)
4+ = 5,00
5+ = 3,30
6+ = 1,60

13 dice (under 15cm)
4+ = 6,50
5+ = 4,29
6+ = 2,08

From this we see that vs 5+ armour the 14 weapon batteries are better then the 3 pulsar unless there is an intervening blastmarker. Versus 4+ armour the weapon batteries are plain better.
Only vs 6+ armour the Pulsar is better on all levels.

So that leads to this: a mixture of both weapons is adviced in the fleet. Both are needed.
:)
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: maaksel on December 17, 2010, 09:08:25 PM
Following link has the break down of 1-20 batteries vs lances at the 1=4WB Mark.

I agree with you that against capital ships, they are pretty similar so long as AV5. AV6, lances are quite superior, and AV4 (which, IMO there is not TOO much of, but it is out there), WB's are much better.

(http://a.yfrog.com/img132/9215/eldarbatteries.jpg)

I'll post more on the community when I get home, I really wish I had access from work (I should be able to fix it tomorrow).

The only problem with saying "I'll just pick another target" is a) you have to pass your LD test (which, although is easier to do with eldar, is not always certain), and b) there sometimes is not another target present to shoot at. If you were to assume blast markers were in base contact 1/3 of the time, and calculate in the average eldar LD is 8.5 (no princes) - We'll take the average of 8 (72.22%) and 9(83.33%) is 77.78%

So, unfortunately we have to assume some blast markers which I gave 33%, plus the 22.2% chance to fail shooting another target... odds are you will shoot through blast markers (although it IS close).

All of that, assuming you're shooting at capital ships only.

I highly agree, I want people to choose their fleets based upon what they like and feel is needed, not one that is highly superior to the other.

Question, if 1 pulsar lance is = 4 eldar WB, why is the shadow hunter 3 WB to 1 'regular' lance? For the same point cost someone can take a hemlock (with the prince being brought down to 100 points).

The problem with all the math above is that it is not taking into account any escorts.  Now that escorts can get a 4+ to be hit vs AB, as well as a brace - I think we'll be seeing more of them.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on December 17, 2010, 09:59:03 PM
Hi,
the Shadowhunter is skewed in that regard since it should have the DE variant or similar and not a regular lance. Since 1 lance is 3 normal batteries, thus the battery shadowhunter is always adviced.
The Wraithship is a perfect example of a good option choices.

With picking other targets: yeah Ld test necessary, but as said lesser of a problem for Eldar.

More escorts in the game is better, I like escors, underrated by many.
But Eldar can deal with that through other means.

But with the Elwb above Pulsar in those (cool!) graphics the fact pulsar edge out vs escorts it makes the mix better & better.
Especially since all 6+ armour fleets are quite rare.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Sigoroth on December 18, 2010, 09:45:19 AM
Just a quick note, it is highly unlikely that Eldar will be in base contact with Blast Markers when they have to take a target priority test. Who would move into contact with one just before they shoot? Typically Eldar try to avoid them due to the damage they could take. Not that it matters anyway, there is no leadership penalty from BMs for target priority tests.

Also note, it is very easy for MMS Eldar to outflank their opponents to get side or rear armour. Also, it is fairly easy for them to get close range. The vast majority of the time they'll be shooting at a closing cap ship with 5+ armour and a close range shift. [Horizon, I can't get the link to work, you've made the EWB auto-closing right instead of left shift yeah? I can't remember if you did. Because a left shift just equated to more firepower?]

Anyway, apart from all that, 1 pulsar is worth slightly more than 4 EWB, it's just an easy break point for comparison, but the pulsars superiority becomes obvious the larger the numbers.
Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: horizon on December 18, 2010, 10:56:56 AM
Hi Sig,
this thread is official CWE... So no MMS here.

The LD test was to test if you could fire at targets further away then the closests (with bm).

Under MMS we had since 1.5 a left shift for gunnery, which in essence is the same as more firepower (apart of a few circumstances). Yes. Dunno, Closing is so farting strong.

Title: Re: Craftworld Eldar and why you hate me
Post by: Sigoroth on December 18, 2010, 11:16:42 AM
Hi Sig,
this thread is official CWE... So no MMS here.

The LD test was to test if you could fire at targets further away then the closests (with bm).

Under MMS we had since 1.5 a left shift for gunnery, which in essence is the same as more firepower (apart of a few circumstances). Yes. Dunno, Closing is so farting strong.

Heh, farting strong. Anywho, in MMS they will far more often than not get the closing cap ship column, moving away at worst, at 5+ armour. In MSM they'll likely be firing at prow armour or, with a little luck, shooting at side armour, closing cap ship column. Makes Eldar WBs good against Chaos, less so against IN, etc.

As for the Ld tests, I know it was a target priority test, that's what I was talking about. To be in base contact with a BM when having to take a target priority test an Eldar player would have to end their movement on a BM, which they wouldn't do. Even if they did there wouldn't be a leadership penalty, because that only applies to command checks.