Wh40k 10th Edition Aeldari Index

[sandrorect]

31 minutes ago, Kallas said:

It is a problem if you want 4 Vypers. 

 

And that is not a problem because spaming units is THE problem. 

 

Maybe 4 Vipers is not so much because they are not and overpower unit, but because GW don´t limit units one by one (Support weapons only 3, Vipers 4, specialits warrior only 1 each unit, Wraithlord only 2, etc.) and put the limit at 3 for all units you can´t be more precise and maybe 9 vipers is a problem so i am thankful that they limit the units composition.

 

And if i want to use more than 3 warwalker (i don´t have so many vipers) it easy: I play a edition that allowed me to do that.

Edited June 15, 2023 by sandrorect

[Kallas]

15 minutes ago, sandrorect said:

And that is not a problem because spaming units is THE problem. 

It is a problem when people have more models that were not "THE problem", and now can't field them because...apparently more than 3 Vypers is a problem? 3x3 War Walkers weren't a problem in 8e. They were ok in 9e, but now in 10e they are. The problem is not spam: the problem is making problematic rules/costs.

 

17 minutes ago, sandrorect said:

And if i want to use more than 3 warwalker (i don´t have so many vipers) it easy: I play a edition that allowed me to do that.

Ah yes, the good old "just play something that your play group is probably not going to do!" defence 

Most people play the latest edition, and a large part of that is because it is known to be the supported edition: sure, you could play 5th Edition 40k in 2023 - good luck finding many folks who are actually up for it, and then enjoy playing that one other person over and over and over again...

[Commissar Yossarian]

4 hours ago, Kallas said:

Because the Spiritseer is a Character, so can't have wounds allocated to them unless they're Precision.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player controlling the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit, as follows. If a model in the target unit has already lost one or more wounds, or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, that attack must be allocated to that model. Otherwise, that attack can be allocated to any model in the target unit. Note that it does not matter if that model is visible to or within range/Engagement Range of the attacking model. ■ If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or had other attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

 

From the rule book. You can choose to allocate against your character, but they keep taking it if already allocated in the phase or have lost any wounds already until dead.

 

@Zoatibix @Slips

The reason people are generally apprehensive is precisely because GW has a history of writing Eldar to be broken, and are generally bad at understanding how systems will actually be manipulated.

 

The DW example is actually a good one. Anything that can reliably pump out high quantities of MW's is intrinsically bad for the game, especially as written for the start of 10th. 

 

Furthermore the Fate Dice mechanic is appalling when coupled to broadly applicable Invul Saves and lots of MW output. On top of that for an edition that is suppose to reduce re-rolls the faction gets a baked in re-roll to hit and re-roll to wound ever attack. This literally doubles down into their skew.

 

Is it really going to be fun for an opponent watching an Avatar solo their army? It is a T12 16W model that reduces incoming damage by half and can choose to ignore any non-mortal wound attack on a 4+ from the fate dice pool.

 

Or a wraithknight that also gets a 4++ and can proc 2d6 mortal wounds into an enemy unit at will?

 

How about wave serpent surprise. Do you want double shooting MW spewing Wraithguard or play 'will it blend?' from the 4++ clown car that you cannot hurt should the other player choose.

 

Maybe the Wraithknight and Spirt Seer combination mentioned above. 

 

Pile on top of this your support characters can generate more fate dice, make a single saving throw a 6 a turn (further invalidating attacks), stand up after finally being killed, and upgrade other fate dice.

 

Sure the Fate dice are a limited resource, but that really doesn't matter. Starting with 15 and generating 2-3 a turn with no limit on how many can be used in a turn/phase etc means for T1 and T2 the Eldar player is not playing the same game.  By turn 3 remaining fate dice will be irrelevant.

 

This is not a single broken squad/strategy combo. This is the whole army.

 

That said, I do sympathize that its not unique to Eldar, just very very common, so they get more flak. But this crap is bad for the game, bad for the hobby and at this stage really should not be happening. I like that the faction is fast, and can throw a good punch before fading away. But that dance should take 2-3 turns to see results, not remove 20% of your enemies army turn 1 for no losses back, then another 20% on turn 2 such that you're basically playing with a 40% points advantage.

 

[SkimaskMohawk]

8 minutes ago, Commissar Yossarian said:

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player controlling the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit, as follows. If a model in the target unit has already lost one or more wounds, or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, that attack must be allocated to that model. Otherwise, that attack can be allocated to any model in the target unit. Note that it does not matter if that model is visible to or within range/Engagement Range of the attacking model. ■ If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or had other attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

 

From the rule book. You can choose to allocate against your character, but they keep taking it if already allocated in the phase or have lost any wounds already until dead.

 

@Zoatibix @Slips

The reason people are generally apprehensive is precisely because GW has a history of writing Eldar to be broken, and are generally bad at understanding how systems will actually be manipulated.

 

The DW example is actually a good one. Anything that can reliably pump out high quantities of MW's is intrinsically bad for the game, especially as written for the start of 10th. 

 

Furthermore the Fate Dice mechanic is appalling when coupled to broadly applicable Invul Saves and lots of MW output. On top of that for an edition that is suppose to reduce re-rolls the faction gets a baked in re-roll to hit and re-roll to wound ever attack. This literally doubles down into their skew.

 

Is it really going to be fun for an opponent watching an Avatar solo their army? It is a T12 16W model that reduces incoming damage by half and can choose to ignore any non-mortal wound attack on a 4+ from the fate dice pool.

 

Or a wraithknight that also gets a 4++ and can proc 2d6 mortal wounds into an enemy unit at will?

 

How about wave serpent surprise. Do you want double shooting MW spewing Wraithguard or play 'will it blend?' from the 4++ clown car that you cannot hurt should the other player choose.

 

Maybe the Wraithknight and Spirt Seer combination mentioned above. 

 

Pile on top of this your support characters can generate more fate dice, make a single saving throw a 6 a turn (further invalidating attacks), stand up after finally being killed, and upgrade other fate dice.

 

Sure the Fate dice are a limited resource, but that really doesn't matter. Starting with 15 and generating 2-3 a turn with no limit on how many can be used in a turn/phase etc means for T1 and T2 the Eldar player is not playing the same game.  By turn 3 remaining fate dice will be irrelevant.

 

This is not a single broken squad/strategy combo. This is the whole army.

 

That said, I do sympathize that its not unique to Eldar, just very very common, so they get more flak. But this crap is bad for the game, bad for the hobby and at this stage really should not be happening. I like that the faction is fast, and can throw a good punch before fading away. But that dance should take 2-3 turns to see results, not remove 20% of your enemies army turn 1 for no losses back, then another 20% on turn 2 such that you're basically playing with a 40% points advantage.

 

 

"Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase."

 

You need precision to allocate wounds to a leader.

[Kallas]

33 minutes ago, Commissar Yossarian said:

From the rule book. You can choose to allocate against your character, but they keep taking it if already allocated in the phase or have lost any wounds already until dead.

From the rulebook:

Quote

Leaders, page 39:

[...] Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase. As soon as the last Bodyguard model in an Attached unit has been destroyed, any attacks made against that unit that have yet to be allocated can then be allocated to Character models in that unit.

 No, you can't.

[Guest]

WS/BS 4+ Wraithlords are just silly. Obviously they're factoring in the Spiritseer buff, but why would they even let an Infantry-sized Leader attach to a massive freakin' walker? Basically means you have to choose between Wguard/blades and Lord for each SS you have, not to mention it looks ridiculous. It's the "Don't talk to me or my son ever again meme." Back to 3+ and no SS leader option please geedubs, kthx.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Slips said:

Im surprised Eldar are still getting this much flak when Deathwatch had to get FAQ'd PRE-EDITION RELEASE to prevent them from just drowning an opponent in 70-90MWs in one turn.

That got FAQ'd before release because it got hate. The Eldar are still getting hate because their stuff looks broken and it hasn't been FAQ'd yet.

[Slips]

43 minutes ago, Commissar Yossarian said:

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player controlling the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit, as follows. If a model in the target unit has already lost one or more wounds, or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, that attack must be allocated to that model. Otherwise, that attack can be allocated to any model in the target unit. Note that it does not matter if that model is visible to or within range/Engagement Range of the attacking model. ■ If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or had other attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

 

From the rule book. You can choose to allocate against your character, but they keep taking it if already allocated in the phase or have lost any wounds already until dead.

 

@Zoatibix @Slips

The reason people are generally apprehensive is precisely because GW has a history of writing Eldar to be broken, and are generally bad at understanding how systems will actually be manipulated.

 

The DW example is actually a good one. Anything that can reliably pump out high quantities of MW's is intrinsically bad for the game, especially as written for the start of 10th. 

 

Furthermore the Fate Dice mechanic is appalling when coupled to broadly applicable Invul Saves and lots of MW output. On top of that for an edition that is suppose to reduce re-rolls the faction gets a baked in re-roll to hit and re-roll to wound ever attack. This literally doubles down into their skew.

 

Is it really going to be fun for an opponent watching an Avatar solo their army? It is a T12 16W model that reduces incoming damage by half and can choose to ignore any non-mortal wound attack on a 4+ from the fate dice pool.

 

Or a wraithknight that also gets a 4++ and can proc 2d6 mortal wounds into an enemy unit at will?

 

How about wave serpent surprise. Do you want double shooting MW spewing Wraithguard or play 'will it blend?' from the 4++ clown car that you cannot hurt should the other player choose.

 

Maybe the Wraithknight and Spirt Seer combination mentioned above. 

 

Pile on top of this your support characters can generate more fate dice, make a single saving throw a 6 a turn (further invalidating attacks), stand up after finally being killed, and upgrade other fate dice.

 

Sure the Fate dice are a limited resource, but that really doesn't matter. Starting with 15 and generating 2-3 a turn with no limit on how many can be used in a turn/phase etc means for T1 and T2 the Eldar player is not playing the same game.  By turn 3 remaining fate dice will be irrelevant.

 

This is not a single broken squad/strategy combo. This is the whole army.

 

That said, I do sympathize that its not unique to Eldar, just very very common, so they get more flak. But this crap is bad for the game, bad for the hobby and at this stage really should not be happening. I like that the faction is fast, and can throw a good punch before fading away. But that dance should take 2-3 turns to see results, not remove 20% of your enemies army turn 1 for no losses back, then another 20% on turn 2 such that you're basically playing with a 40% points advantage.

 

Specifically re: reduce the rerolls this edition: if you have a problem with Eldars' like, 9 units who have an innate reroll ability then IDK why you dont have a problem with marines having 12 (not including chapter specific characters and units) AND Oath of the Moment (which allows your entire army to reroll hits and wounds vs a specific target once per turn; arguably more powerful than just going "I would like this one roll to be a 6 :)" ).

 

I just feel like people are hyper focussing on Eldar and blind spotting / memory holing themselves with regards to other armies who have it just as good if not better but dont have Fate Dice.

1 minute ago, Lucius_The_Temporary said:

That got FAQ'd before release because it got hate. The Eldar are still getting hate because their stuff looks broken and it hasn't been FAQ'd yet.

if they are quick to fix actual problems that are being called out then, dont you think its a bit odd that, after all this time and the comments Eldar have been getting that it isnt getting pre-release FAQ and, as such, might not be as big of a deal as the internet is making it out to be? I dunno, could just be me.

[Dr. Clock]

What's the hotfix?

 

Feels like 'Fate Dice can never be used as Critical Hits or Critical Wounds' is the least impactful solution. Like they'll still be successes, but not proc special rules. Will equate to more defensive usage, which is not a bad thing for T31W specialists.

 

Game-wide, disallowing Devastating Wounds from spilling across models seems like the best fix - makes them still fit for purpose as anti-armour, but stops them randomly becoming anti-everything on the 6. Low Dmg Devastating still works pretty well, as it should. There's a good/cool mechanic in there, it just needs tightening imho.

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor. 

[01RTB01]

4 hours ago, Kallas said:

It is a problem when people have more models that were not "THE problem", and now can't field them because...apparently more than 3 Vypers is a problem? 3x3 War Walkers weren't a problem in 8e. They were ok in 9e, but now in 10e they are. The problem is not spam: the problem is making problematic rules/costs.

 

Ah yes, the good old "just play something that your play group is probably not going to do!" defence 

Most people play the latest edition, and a large part of that is because it is known to be the supported edition: sure, you could play 5th Edition 40k in 2023 - good luck finding many folks who are actually up for it, and then enjoy playing that one other person over and over and over again...

2nd Ed is actually still very popular despite your facetiousness.

[Commissar Yossarian]

3 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

"Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase."

 

You need precision to allocate wounds to a leader.

Servers me right for not double checking the character section.

 

I guess then the Wraithlord is potentially vulnerable to AP-4/-5 weapons then. So the Enhancement for auto 6 save once a turn is probably the best, since the 6's on fate dice likely have more utility elsewhere.

[Commissar Yossarian]

2 hours ago, Slips said:

Specifically re: reduce the rerolls this edition: if you have a problem with Eldars' like, 9 units who have an innate reroll ability then IDK why you dont have a problem with marines having 12 (not including chapter specific characters and units) AND Oath of the Moment (which allows your entire army to reroll hits and wounds vs a specific target once per turn; arguably more powerful than just going "I would like this one roll to be a 6 :)" ).

 

I just feel like people are hyper focussing on Eldar and blind spotting / memory holing themselves with regards to other armies who have it just as good if not better but dont have Fate Dice.

if they are quick to fix actual problems that are being called out then, dont you think its a bit odd that, after all this time and the comments Eldar have been getting that it isnt getting pre-release FAQ and, as such, might not be as big of a deal as the internet is making it out to be? I dunno, could just be me.

It's just you ;)

 

Marines are definitely powerful, and I would contend DA in particular could be very broken, but their raw output is nowhere close to eldar.

Fate dice are much, much better than Oath, and Unparalleled Foresight gives every single unit (not just 9) a re-roll a hit re-roll a wound each attack. 

 

Sure Marines can focus fire down a unit, but it will require multiple units focused on a tough enemy unit (that would get OotM). Eldar can reliably pick up any enemy unit with one of their own. That is wildly different, and the issue is the level of reliability for sustained results.

 

We are going to see lots of terror from poor GW work on the Index's, but multiple badly written things doesn't make one of them better.

 

And you're 'if it was a problem GW would have fixed it' tack is one of the worse strawman arguments I've seen in a while. In case you missed all the other moaning and whingeing there are lots of other glaring problems that GW hasn't fixed in other indexes either, from typos to RAW making units immune to 1D weapons. Hell, the tank shock stratagem has issues since it can apply to walkers, and it caps mortals, but isn't getting fixed. The other lower key problem is likely going to be GSCs bikers if the Goonhammer article is accurate. 

 

I honestly don't think people are making the claim that only Eldar are the problem. It's that this thread is about Eldar, and anyone who can do basic math will readily determine that as written the Index is going to be a problem. Hence people discussing the Eldar Index problems in the Eldar index thread.

 

Finally, I believe that as a business GW wants to sell lots of expensive models, like Wraithknights, and have zero incentive to change it until they've achieved those sales. The DW squad interaction with MW output would not realistically move the needle on sales, but getting Eldar players to go buy a crap tone of Wraith Constructs, Night Spinners, etc probably will help their quarterly results ;)

 

@Dr. Clock

Agreed. The simplest hot fix would be to disallow FD from procing other effects (ie. not count as naturally rolled that number). Then you would get all the consistency, and defensive potency, but at least not be able to force 2d6 mortals at will.

 

I could see this being still very strong, but at least not game breaking.

[Captain Idaho]

This may be hard to believe, but Eldar aren't the only things in 10th I don't like!  I don't like Marines focusing on Devastating Wounds spam either, as that's potentially skewing games as well! I don't like Dark Angels getting a flat -2 damage to their best unit, or any of the damage reduction abilities not having a cap or minimum baked in.

 

Of course, most of all I hate the Tau. Do I think they're OP? Nah I've not read their rules. Just don't like them. 

[sandrorect]

8 hours ago, Kallas said:

It is a problem when people have more models that were not "THE problem", and now can't field them because...apparently more than 3 Vypers is a problem? 3x3 War Walkers weren't a problem in 8e. They were ok in 9e, but now in 10e they are. The problem is not spam: the problem is making problematic rules/costs.

 

Ah yes, the good old "just play something that your play group is probably not going to do!" defence 

Most people play the latest edition, and a large part of that is because it is known to be the supported edition: sure, you could play 5th Edition 40k in 2023 - good luck finding many folks who are actually up for it, and then enjoy playing that one other person over and over and over again...

 

Spam units alwais is a problem because is the form it is the form that a good system craks, so a good developer limits the units.

 

But GW is no a good developer because they want to buy all units for your facction several times, that is the reason because some vehicule can go in scuadrons, when the palyer had a limit of types of units. 

 

And no the defence is not play another edition. The defence is you make your own edition, GW is awful doing rule: every edition and codex have problems but this is more dificult that play a old edition because for the former option you need a big group with very receptive to changes but if you can do it is when the game become a brillant and very enjoable game, because the game become the game you want to play.

[Xenith]

6 hours ago, Lucius_The_Temporary said:

That got FAQ'd before release because it got hate. The Eldar are still getting hate because their stuff looks broken and it hasn't been FAQ'd yet.

 

The problem is that people hate the idea of 6MW/turn from Eldar (using a limited resource) more than 60MW/turn from Deathwatch. There's definitely been a lot more outcry about it, and absolutely zero outcry about the 5MW/charge phase that assault marines get for free on top of their attacks! 

 

Looking through the Index, absolutely everything the Eldar have seems to have gotten weaker. There's some nice combos, but a lot of them rely on being within 12" of an enemy or the target, definitely not somewhere they want to be. Similarly, key characters can only go in bad units - so my melee autarch has to ride with...guardians? And cannot go with one of the aspects they have trained with. 

 

Unless Wraithguard drop down to 25-30ppm, or a spiritseer is 35pts, they're DOA with WS/BS4+, otherwise they either kill 2 marines/turn or suck up all the fate dice.

 

Fire dragons look ok, however they're still squishy and lost 2" of melta range, and not great if they're over 22ppm. Fire prisms and Eldrad look to be the only great choices in the Index, so expect to see them every game! 

[Captain Idaho]

No one thinks Assault Marines are overpowered because they're 3+ save, T4 and 2 wound models that die fairly easily.

 

The issue isn't they generate Mortal Wounds. It's the total lack of a credible counter and the "feels badsies". 10 Assault Marines placed on the table won't make anyone feel bad, because they can oppose them fairly easily.

 

The issues with Deathwatch and Eldar was there is literally nothing you can do about their shenanigans.

 

It's not even the Mortal Wounds from Eldar that are the biggeat problem, it's the fate dice mechanic. In a dice game of chance just declaring what you score on a dice roll is always going to cause problems.

[Xenith]

Again, double standards saying assault marines are not broken because they can be shot, but support weapons are broken because...they can't be?

 

Any justification that ASM are ok can be used for the heavy weapon platform. Both can be effectively and easily countered.

 

6 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

No one thinks Assault Marines are overpowered because they're 3+ save, T4 and 2 wound models that die fairly easily.

 

ASM have 20W with a 3+ save. The Support platform has 5 wounds with a 4+ save.  To claim that the assault marines are more vulnerable than the support weapon platform is... like, there's no point discussing 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Xenith

[Captain Idaho]

I didn't say anything about shooting the support platform (which has indirect fire by the way).

 

I'll just quote myself again:

 

9 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

 

The issues with Deathwatch and Eldar was there is literally nothing you can do about their shenanigans.

 

It's not even the Mortal Wounds from Eldar that are the biggeat problem, it's the fate dice mechanic. In a dice game of chance just declaring what you score on a dice roll is always going to cause problems.

 

[TrawlingCleaner]

Words to live by from the Goonhammer reviews:

 

Quote

I’m going to close this review by just speaking straight to the Eldar players.

Are Eldar a bit too strong at release? In my opinion the answer is yes. There’s frankly going to be a lot of incredibly cool individuals who will try and take some moral high ground position or try to make you feel bad for playing this faction at the outset of 10th edition. Ignore these people, they do not matter. It’s not your fault that these rules are the way they are. Instead, I want you to get out there and live your best life because I promise you it won’t last long. None of those people would ever bat an eye if the situation were reversed and it were their faction. So when they start their tired refrain, I want you to smile, tune them out, select a Support Weapon to shoot then reach over to your Fate pool and whisper to yourself, “Here comes the D.”

 

Most of our power relies on Farseers and Guardians flipping Fate Dice into 6s for the better stuff. So our army is lynchpinned on 14 T3 wounds with a 4+ save? Or several of those? We can hide them in buildings but Indirect is literally eveywhere, we can use Fate Dice to try keeping them alive but it's a finite resource, especially any rolls that are menaingful

Our characters on the whole are weaker than they've been (that I can remember), and can only attach to some of the weakest infantry in the game. In practice, how sustainable is going to be?

There's no denying that Fate Dice are good but if we relying on being able to leverage them and produce more from characters and Guardians, I think we're going to have a bad time

 

The Index looks good fun, I'm not wholly sure the Support Platforms are as hideous as claimed or if they're a meme unit you take to skew lists. Points and time playing games will tell.

 

I do wonder though, once it blows over and Devastating Wounds+things that interact with it is nerfed, what's left in the codex that works? Wraiths? Windriders?

[sandrorect]

34 minutes ago, Xenith said:

 

The problem is that people hate the idea of 6MW/turn from Eldar (using a limited resource) more than 60MW/turn from Deathwatch. There's definitely been a lot more outcry about it, and absolutely zero outcry about the 5MW/charge phase that assault marines get for free on top of their attacks! 

 

Looking through the Index, absolutely everything the Eldar have seems to have gotten weaker. There's some nice combos, but a lot of them rely on being within 12" of an enemy or the target, definitely not somewhere they want to be. Similarly, key characters can only go in bad units - so my melee autarch has to ride with...guardians? And cannot go with one of the aspects they have trained with. 

 

Unless Wraithguard drop down to 25-30ppm, or a spiritseer is 35pts, they're DOA with WS/BS4+, otherwise they either kill 2 marines/turn or suck up all the fate dice.

 

Fire dragons look ok, however they're still squishy and lost 2" of melta range, and not great if they're over 22ppm. Fire prisms and Eldrad look to be the only great choices in the Index, so expect to see them every game! 

 

Well, all faction have gotten weaker because all combos of 9th edition have gone or have been toned down.

 

And the thing about autarch and specialist, have a simple solution: put them together in a battle. If the combo is broken we will know that GW is rigth to make the restriction, if not GW is wrong and nobody will said that you can´t.

 

 

[Xenith]

10 minutes ago, TrawlingCleaner said:

Most of our power relies on Farseers and Guardians flipping Fate Dice into 6s for the better stuff. So our army is lynchpinned on 14 T3 wounds with a 4+ save?

 

If you can't remove 14 T3 wounds and 5 T6 wounds, then you were never going to win the game anyway.

 

People seem to be forgetting that metas shift. If DCannons are as broken as people think...then the meta will be full of longer range indirect fire that will neuter them immediately.

 

Then fire prisms will wipe out that longer range ID fire, and people willl again complain that Eldar are broken. It is the way. 

 

[Blindhamster]

16 hours ago, Aramis K said:

Corsairs with rifles have no close combat attacks. Seen that before - I assume a mistake, we've seen it a few times now.

its the result of the way they broke the datasheets up so nothing has a basic combat profile to fall back on, and is pretty clear they never considered the ramifications (suggests the datacard layout and approach they went with for melee weapons was a late in the day decision).

[Captain Idaho]

Proof readers! GW appear to have none! 

 

 

[Bouargh]

1 hour ago, Captain Idaho said:

Proof readers! GW appear to have none! 

 

I should have missed something...

I though it was the purpose of the Forums such as B&C: getting a collaborative platform of free of charge proof readers... (in case of doubt this is supposed to be humoristic...)

 

Anyway, it is not only proof reading - shall, as apparently said/rumoured, be the system of points updates 4 per year and balance dataslate twice a year be maintained it, means that not only proof reading reading is missing but also the previous integral game design. Which is more or less business as usual if we look in the back years. 

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Bouargh

[TrawlingCleaner]

Ynnari and Corsairs/Quins seem to work much better now but still have some weird sticking points/interactions.

 

So if your Warlord is Yvraine you can take up to 1k of DE in a 2k game. The interesting part here is that all Drukhari units have the Aeldari keyword so all buffs from the Craftworld side target them, which is pretty great! The weird part here is that you can't take any Corsair units but it's two of the units Yvraine and Visarch can attach to if she's not the Warlord. Odd

 

Quins and Corsairs work pretty well in DE armies as Power from PAin doesn't target a keyword, it just targets a unit in your army. Quins take their boats over with them as they have the Harlequin keyword but Corsairs are stuck without a ride as there's no Corsair transport and DE vehicles can only transport things with the Drukhari keyword which is a shame. I think there could be a case to be made for either Voidreavers or Voidscarred in a DE army? Once you've taken a Wych squad with Lelith, you could take a Voidreavers squad all with Power swords for a very similar role (same stats -1A) or Voidscarred with Executioner for some character hunting?

 

Voidreavers in general are very interesting in an Aeldari army, I think. They'd work well as a Storm Guardian replacement or as a Defender replacement if you were after some more reliable firepower. Being able to Advance and still shoot the Rifles is pretty great! Sprinkle some special weapons in and you're laughing