Post 1;
In thinking of what I've just said on the vypers discussion page.. we really need to talk about the heavy weapons choices for Eldar. Do we need to add any? Can we replace one? Do we make them rending or give them a lower AP? Add more blast templates? More flamers?
Unfortunately lazy me cannot just grab a synopsis of the units from MWG.com but since we have so few heavy weapons anyway I hardly think it matters.
So, me first.
We definitely need a largeblast heavy weapon. It can be low strength for all I care (though if it is <5 I demand rending). Let's say... hmm..
Sunburst; S4, AP4, 48", Heavy 1, Largeblast, Rending, Blinding*.
"The sunburst is a new weapon seen employed by eldar forces. It fires a nimbus of energy at the target, which explodes in an intense flash of heat and light. Eyes are burnt out, optics damaged and tyres singe and burn under the projectiles energy release."
*Targets of the sunburst roll for a 3+ coversave. If they fail, they are considered blinded and move as if under the USR slow and purposeful and they fire with a -2 BS modifier for their next turn.
Eldritch zephyr; S7, AP5, template*, Heavy 2, pinning.
"In recent years, the increased militarisation of the Craftworlds has borne new weapons to their arsenal. In addition to new aspect warriors emerging or re-emerging after prolonged absence, bizarre and frightening equipment has surfaced on the ancients' vehicles and wraithconstructs. Of these, the bizarre psychic 'flamer' has also been recorded. Soldiers who have come under this weapons furious grip sometimes emerge alive, though very rarely. Video records show soldiers burnt to cinders or falling down, spasming and frothing from the nose and mouth, lightning dancing over them as they thrash and wretch. Others still are seen stiffening in place, typically from the arcing energy off an already dead comrade."
*The eldritch zephyr fires out from the firing model with a range of up to 6", place the template so that the narrow end is within 6” of the weapon and the large end is no closer to the weapon than the narrow end.
--- ahem----
So that's two new weapons. I'll let others talk about the infinitely more graspable weapons we already possess.
Post 2;
At the risk of combining better weapons with better BS..
The IG codex has demonstrated that a large variety of heavy weapons is achievable (though not always fair or economic).
Post 3;
We have approximately two cover-ignoring heavy weapons, both of those are mounted on Forgeworld tanks. One is a d-flamer and the other is the doomweaver (Nightspinner might be codex approved but it is still a forgeworld creation so dig it). I'm totally confident to say that if we left the Eldar purely in the hands of GW and its staff, then all you'd see is a reshuffling of points and strengths on our current weapons totally ignoring that yes, we still don't have a decent multiple-barrage weapon or a tank-mounted flamer of any kind.
Post 4;
Let's not lie to ourselves. A wraithlord is a 3-wound AV12 dreadnought and DarkReapers are gimped Devestators. So the exarch gets a multiple-barrage weapon? Only available thanks to an FAQ ruling. That hardly counts. It's S4 ffs. We need something s8-s10 that's ordnance and a decent tank-mounted flamer.
Post 5;
Actually now I'm really liking that mirv idea. Would be better than a tankmounted flamer anyway.
Post 6;
If that's the case then our heavy weapons platforms need to be more accurate no? These guns aren't literally being held by infantry, where their heartrate or jostling from running or whatever is having an impact - these are guns mounted on tanks mounted on anti-gravatics. If we are going to depend on singleshot, non template weaponry, then our tanks should be BS4 base, with wraithlords and prisms being BS5.
If we are not going to significantly change our modus operandi for the weapons themselves, then we need to adjust the platforms they are mounted on. Ok so we pay 40pts for a brightlance on a wraithlord, make it AP1 and consider it's now on a BS5 AV12 dreadnought with 3 wounds. Is that worth it yet? What if brightlances were S9?
Post 7;
Well it's more than just for fluff reasons. I put down the changes I do because we must break our dependancy on farseers. Our playstyle has stagnated as a race because instead of a farseer being an optional extra that can twist the game in new ways, they're a mandatory choice. It's said best in one of my links, ie that our units have cost of a farseers' guide/doom built into their mostly mediocre stats but then you need the farseer anyway AND the power you're going to cast.Post 8;
So these series of threads have been a massive experiment for me to determine in what ways we can change the meta for eldar by making the units themselves act in a way that accomplishes their design goals without requiring a farseer to be dependable. So that when we come to look at the farseer we don't have to have doom or guide or whatever as mandatory powers for a farseer, they're optional extras used to boost guardians up to par, that the powers a farseer will possess will be more applicable to *an army* and that the farseer will himself be a just an alternative to other HQs wherein all HQs provide army-wide benefits and that no HQ on its own will be so gamechanging as to be a surefire winner for affection.
Let's face it, if farseers didn't have guide or doom or fortune would you ever take them? I wouldn't.
Yes. Heavy 3 starcannon seems fair. The gamebreaker of 3rd edition was the crystal targetting matrix, it was never actually the starcannon that was the problem. As for the brightlance I have trouble finding a way to improve it. Maybe just remove it altogether and make the pulsar have lance as a rule? Pulsar for 40pts (50 for wraithlord) doesn't sound too terrible if it has lance. 48" S8 AP2 lance heavy 2.Post 9;
Not bad. Let's go one step further:Post 10;
48" S8 AP2 Heavy2
48" S8 AP1 Heavy1, Lance
NOW it's worth the points.
Example: a 15point brightlance is still just brightlance. It's a singleshot s8 weapon which gains bonuses over less than 50% of ingame vehicles. Contrast with eml which is 20pts and can change to a template with pinning for those times you want to gib some troops. Even if brightlances were 15 pts I probably wouldn't take more than 1 per army. Much more effective to spam EML at a tank and then blast the contents the next turn.
No comments:
Post a Comment