Aeldari in Tenth?

[Paladin777]

while losing both guide and doom is a little unfortunate, the automatic reroll to hit and wound army wide does seem to have made up for it in a big way!
 

I've been working on my Biel Tan pretty steadily with one completed project every other month since last august or so. I'm currently working on a squad of striking scorpions. Hopefully they stay relevant in 10th! I did magnetize the exarch's weapons though!

 

I think autarchs might actually see some play now too, which I am very happy about because I really like them!

Edited May 16, 2023 by Paladin777

[Kallas]

2 hours ago, Paladin777 said:

while losing both guide and doom

Actually, it's possible that they still exist in some form.

 

I'll try to find it, but I'm pretty sure when we saw the Terminator Librarian and Weirdboy we heard something about Psykers having different powers on different datasheets. So Farseers and Farseer Skyrunners may very well have a different power from one another - that keeps them from being straight upgrades from one another; same thing for Warlocks/Skyrunners, Spiritseers and (possibly) Bonesigners, if they want to bring them back.

 

It's some conjecture, but it's definitely a solid possibility and would give some diversity. Maybe Farseer SRs have a movement power instead of a defensive power; Warlocks might have an offensive buff; and Warlock SRs might have an enemy debuff. All completely baseless ideas, but if they're differentiating datasheets, that's a good way to do it for the psychic datasheets.

 

Edit: Found it

Edited May 16, 2023 by Kallas
Psyker article

[Paladin777]

That's fair, but I still think the rerolls are intended to replace Guide and Doom. 

[Karhedron]

In Age of Sigmar, full spell lists are normally included in the Battletomes to replace the default ones on the datasheets. My guess is that when the full-fat Craftworlds Codex drops, we will see a lot of the classic psychic powers restored.

[Paladin777]

That's possible, but I'm not holding my breath, just in case. 
 

Especially on guide and doom

Edited May 16, 2023 by Paladin777

[Zoatibix]

I think the re-roll a hit and wound is a decent trade- off for Guide and Doom. 
 

It works every time our units shoot or fight. We don’t have to pick a single unit to Guide or Doom. There’s no need to be in range, and it can’t be denied (I suspect we will see anti-psyker units). It will work on Overwatch. 
 

It isn’t as good on a group of models but stuff like a Wraithlord with BL of a Fire Prism with low volume, high output attacks just straight up get to reroll a fluffed hit AND wound roll.

 

I agree that Doom and Guide may make a return.

 

 

[Paladin777]

Well, this is a lot of reveals!

 

most everything seems in line with GW's philosophy of 'less lethal,' but I think we'll be just fine. 

 

It's nice to see that Phoenix Lords actually buff their aspect when leading a squad again! Their nerf to t3 is annoying though. 
 

 

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Paladin777 said:

It's nice to see that Phoenix Lords actually buff their aspect when leading a squad again! Their nerf to t3 is annoying though. 

 

Agreed on both counts. The fact that Leaders are now embedded in their squads will provide a good measure of protection I think.

 

But I feel they will be hugely vulnerable to the Epic Challenge stratagem. 

[Paladin777]

That's when we make sure to have an extra CP available for phantasm

[Sawtooth]

With the changes to the force organization how are people feeling about a mostly Aspect Warrior army with no Guardians? Do we know enough yet to speculate on its effectiveness?

[Kallas]

It's definitely possible.

• Dire Avengers have a solid use for controlling objectives with their overwatch buff, though OC1 is a risk. But their shooting is solid with Lethal Hits, AP-1 and good volume, they can definitely do good work into any infantry up to maybe a little above MEQ weight-class. Depending on their cost, I think one or two units of 10 would be a solid investment, especially if you want to bring Asurmen and get a double overwatch.
• Scorpions (the only other Aspect we've seen) are good for ripping up medium/light infantry (MEQs and below, basically) and can Infiltrate still, so immediate forward pressure. Will need to see how prevalent infantry is in 10e, as they will pretty much be worthless vs vehicles and monsters; and Karandras doesn't add nearly as much value to them as Asurmen does to DAs.
• Warp Spiders seem very useful. Death Spinners are lower S, but Devastating Wounds and Torrent are nice - Torrent is especially nice for a cheeky overwatch: vs GEQs, 5 of them should do about 6 wounds after saves, plus 3 Mortal Wounds, so pretty nasty. Given that they can just Flickerjump 24" instead of Advancing/Charging, they can pop up in a lot of places - and as far as I'm aware it's not even once per game, it can be done every turn (provided they're not Falling Back), so they look to be a super mobile anti-infantry unit.

Big problem so far is we haven't seen any of the really hard hitters: Shining Spears will likely have the Lance rule (+1 to wound on the charge), but not sure about much else beyond losing some of the volume of fire (Twin Shuriken Catapults going to Twin-linked); Banshees will probably lose some AP, but the rest is up in the air; Dragons I'm worried about, as Melta in general has been reduced in lethality heavily by the bump in Toughness (needed for vehicles, but Dragons should be a strong AT unit so...); Hawks are likely pretty similar in damage output, they've always been anti-infantry, but as for their mobility it could be a bunch of different possibilities; and Reapers will hopefully be decent into heavy infantry, but they often come out either super OP or trash, so flip a coin!

 

Basically...we're waiting for info, but of the Aspects we've seen I'm personally quietly optimistic - Eldar have had some great units previewed/leaked (Support Weapons are crazy; the Grav-tanks we've seen are decent enough, just outshone by the D-Cannons ; Avatar is great; Farseers looks good; Guardians are all useful in their utility, albeit still flimsy, and so on). Eldar do typically come out pretty strong, so it's probably a safe bet that the remaining Aspects will be at least decent.

[Doctor Perils]

On 6/5/2023 at 8:19 PM, Sawtooth said:

With the changes to the force organization how are people feeling about a mostly Aspect Warrior army with no Guardians? Do we know enough yet to speculate on its effectiveness?

Even if it isn't particularly good in the Index, I'd be absolutely _shocked_ if there isn't an aspect host/bladestorm detachment in the codex

[TrawlingCleaner]

So the GW website seems to confirm that Rangers are no longer Battleline as I'd spotted on the Datasheet:

 

This isn't the end of the world as I think both sets of Guardians have some very handy rules that we can make use of. Storm Guardians' sticky objectives are particularly useful for hyper-aggressive/mobile Eldar armies. I'm very interested to see what Corsairs do in the new edition, looking at what other faction's Battleline choices have gotten so far, perhaps rerolls when on an objective?

[Karhedron]

I think the main reason Rangers were popular in 9th was that Eldar Troops have generally been pretty poor and they were simply the cheapest way of paying the Troop tax. So I doubt many people had more than 3 units of Rangers anyway. Although the fact that their sniper rifles can actually do more than just tickle their targets will be welcome in 10th.

 

With the FOC gone, it does not matter whether they are Troops or not for most players. I guess there will be some Alatitoc players with lots of Rangers for whom this might be awkward. The best advice I can give is run them as 10-man squads for the time being and hope the Codex includes a Pathfinder Host when it arrives.

[Emperor Ming]

Not the end of the world at all, 3 units of rangers is fine

 

I cant see Battleline actually being that important, maybe just for guard/Gcults

 

Even when I used orks, I didn't use anymore than 3 of any unit so it wouldn't of mattered

[Paladin777]

Battleline is baked into the datasheets, so It probably wouldn't matter what detachment you use. 3 units of rangers max. There's also shroudrunners if you want more Ranger flavored units, so I don't see Alaitoc players being that put out. 

[Karhedron]

Thanks for the info, I didn't twig about battleline being a fixed ability.

[Kallas]

It is still possible for units to gain (and maybe even lose) Battelline via Detachments. GW definitely seem to be pushing the AoS design for the Detachments () and general army design () (eg, units having sidegrade weapons; even looking like will probably be flat costs for most - just an assumption though). So it is possible that Rangers could get Batteline in a Ranger-style Detachment. I guess we'll see how far GW wants to push the Detachment system.

[Paladin777]

Possibly, but I'm going to guess that certain weapon options are still going to cost points. There's no way I'm taking a heavy bolter over a multi-melta on a unit that can take either, like the brutalis Dreadnaught for example. 
 

With the way GW has been trying to drive home the datasheets being static, I'm going to say it's possible that a detachment can giveth or taketh away Battleline, but I doubt they will.

[Urkh]

13 hours ago, TrawlingCleaner said:

 

This isn't the end of the world as I think both sets of Guardians have some very handy rules that we can make use of. Storm Guardians' sticky objectives are particularly useful for hyper-aggressive/mobile Eldar armies.

I'm personally still not sold on storm Guardians over defenders atm. I feel getting an extra fate dice for each objective I have defenders on is more powerful than being able to leave an objective behind, especially when said leaving unit hits like a wet noodle. Sticky objectives still leave the objective easily capturable by the opponent, unless I screen it it out. But at that point, why not just leave a unit such a guardian defenders there to defend it and generate more fate dice for myself? I can use the rest of my glass cannon army for being hyper aggressive. 

 

I just don't think Storm Guardians cut the cheese compared to Guardian Defenders. It is a shame, as I am painting a unit of storms right now.

[Emperor Ming]

36 minutes ago, Urkh said:

I just don't think Storm Guardians cut the cheese compared to Guardian Defenders. It is a shame, as I am painting a unit of storms right now.

Some units are just destined to be crud forever

[Paladin777]

Unless they're really cheap and have cheap special weapons...

[The Yncarne]

1 hour ago, Paladin777 said:

Unless they're really cheap and have cheap special weapons...

The "Gav cav" assaulting fortified gun emplacements? 

[Zoatibix]

I see Storm Guardians as closer to modern day ‘assault’ troops than the melee wielding loons we know and love in the rest of 40K.

 

They rely more on softening up the enemy with flamers, fusion and the odd grenade. Then trying to stab them with their bayonets (in this case, poke with a couple of melee weapons)

 

They never seemed great at that and people would normally just take Aspect Warriors. They now have to compete against Corsairs, too.

 

It the downside of adding in more options for a given role.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Zoatibix

[Karhedron]

I can see some mileage in Storm Guardians' sticky Objective ability. It looks like Battleshock is going to be a significant factor in 10th and can be caused by more than just casualties. I unit unexpectedly failing a Battleshock test could easily cost you 5 VPs. But if Storm Guardians have stickied something, you will continue to score for it, even if the unit that is holding it fails a Battleshock test at an inconvenient moment.