Talk:Warhammer 40,000/7th Edition Tactics/Eldar

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search
Clean-Up.jpgThis page is in need of cleanup. Srsly. It's a fucking mess.


Wraithknight with 7 attacks?[edit]

Could someone please explain how a Wraithknight with Ghosglaive gets 3 bonus attacks? I can't find any rule in the BRB or new codex that states this.

Do not use strikethroughs![edit]

OK, whoever does it, just stop. This is a bad way to edit page.

The New Units[edit]

Someone who's got the new Eldar Codex should REALLY just add details for the new units already. Even if the whole article gets a once-over, the headers should at least BE there.


Added and edited some parts of it, so that the page would be a bit more up to date. Will continue tomorrow, If I have the time and humour for that. --Warpman (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Crunch[edit]

Looking at the new stuff written about guns, the crunch should be more explicit (ie. what the Shuriken rule is- its referenced but not stated) I would put it myself but I don't play craftworld eldar

New Codex rewrite[edit]

With the new codex looming on the horizon and the mess that this page is, I say that when the new book comes out this gets rewritten from the ground up. - Biggus Berrus (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, given the piss-poor state it's in, that sounds like a good idea. Dok (talk)

Fluff Stuff[edit]

I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings, but I keep fighting the urge to delete all the fluffy stuff from this article. Some of it is funny but it does kinda say TACTICS at the top. I will be reasonable and just keep one paragraph of fluff around in most cases :(

Can't help but notice there's a shit-ton of run on sentences in this new page, too. If the two parts of the sentences aren't related then don't comma them together. I mean, come on.

Brian Moseley[edit]

Spot on with this write-up, I really think this website wants far more consideration. I'll probably be again to learn way more, thanks for that info.

This page is in much better shape, I love you nerds so much.

Hey, I don't think that a Falcon tank becomes scoring just because you put a squad of Troops in it. I think that only works if the vehicle is a designated transport purchased with the squad. If I am correct, we should change the part in Blue Chip Units where it says the DAVU falcon is scoring.-the DA's don't stop scoring just because they are in a transport,you measure from the hull to the point for them.The Falcon doesn't score on it's own,just when they are camping in it.-

Trap Jokes[edit]

Avoid them, your average Trans woman faces a 1/12 chance of getting murdered. for more lulzy fails in this regard, and to give you an idea of how bad it is see here. http://transphobiaarchive.tumblr.com/

RegardsVoidsman 04:32, 5 July 2012 (BST)

Remember back when /TG/ cared about such things as not to offend someone (mind you for good jokes, and not to spam "lolnigga" everywhere)? Yeah, me neither. --Gufu 07:55, 5 July 2012 (BST)

That's the point. Anything funny about that joke died with Myra Beckenridge.Voidsman 19:14, 5 July 2012 (BST)

yes let's get rid of that, and the Black Irish Leper thing from C.S. Goto's article as well. LOLJK.--82.70.18.41 15:34, 5 July 2012 (BST)

Hi new here[edit]

Hi everyone glad to be at this forum.

Um. Okay. Welcome. -dokfm

Tonns of flyers[edit]

There are a lot of eldar flyers and SH flyers in imperial armor books. Can anyone wrote something about eldar aircraft, cause in 6-th ed its quite vital?

Shane K Richardson[edit]

Can I just say what a relief to find someone who actually knows what theyre talking about on the internet. You definitely know how to bring an issue to light and make it important. More people need to read this and understand this side of the story. I cant believe youre not more popular because you definitely have the gift.

6th Edition Notes[edit]

Jemas42 here. I'd like to move this, and other tactical articles away from 'Old Tactics+6th edition notes' style and into a more unified 6th edition thing. I've already started, and I was hoping I could get some assistance. Thanks etc.

Done and done :)

This page now reads like ass[edit]

Somebody edited this page by stuffing sentences inside of sentences and adding "dependent, clauses to, every sentence." It now reads the way a 13 year old boy speaks. It reads like ass and is now going to be harder to edit. I hate it. Also, somebody is pretty obviously pushing an agenda. Every time it says "X is better than Y" there should be words that explain the tension between the two choices rather than "flat-out, declarative statements that, sound like somebody, arguing with a chump kid."

Here's an example from the top of the page: """On top of the whole pile are the Fire Dragons, Melta is king and they just love to ride in Falcons or Serpents, next up Swooping Hawks spamming haywire grenades. Wraithguard come in a close 3rd but the price you pay is a real burden. The highest strength gun in your codex is the Fire Prism; firing its small blast at S9, with a rare BS 4, however it is more useful for wound allocation abusers (but can't smash Biker Nobs any more).""""

The whole rest of this section is in order of weapon strength. I'd fix it, but it's more important that whoever wrote it understands why it's terrible rather than me fixing it and then you fucking it up again. I also fail to understand why this was moved to the top of the article. Why would you put weapon upgrades at the top of this article?

For the newer 6th edition books, I've been putting upgrades and army special rules at the top of page. I've also been trying to do that for some of these older ones too, but it didn't work out all that well. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to go back and move the weapon upgrades back down. I was also trying to fix the horrible, horrible, horrible editing and remove points costs, but there's... just... too... much... --Dok

Recent FAQ Changes[edit]

Just so people know, Mind War can now be Look Out Sir'd. I don't want to edit the article (as I'm rather new at this stuff and I don't want to mess something up.

Thanks for telling, but... how does that even work? Jump in front of the MIND BULLETS? I always thought that was a direct attack on an individual. Biggus Berrus (talk) 09:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Clearly, you think about jumping in front of thought bullets.--Boss Ballkrusha (talk) 09:35, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Codex Iyanden[edit]

will we have to add to this page about the new sub dex or do we make a whole new tactical page? User:Dragonkingofthestars (talk) 07:12, 5 june 2013 (UTC)

I assume we'll just include it alongside the stuff we have. For instance, where we have the Warlord Traits, we'll have a section for the Codex traits and a section for the Iyanden traits. Similarly, where we have Remnants of Glory, we'll have a section for "Iyanden artifacts" (whatever they end up being called). For units that change (for instance, the ability to take up to 5 Spiritseers as one HQ choice), just add a bullet point about how they can do that. I don't think we need a whole new page for it, given it's not as extensive as, say, a full Imperial Armour army list. Dok (talk)
Never mind what I said. I'm adding a "supplements" section for each sixth edition Codex. Each one will have a subsection for each Supplement that comes out, listing the rules (and our commentary), as well as a subsubsection for Warlord Traits, new "relic" items, and other rules that are too complex to explain and commentate on in a few sentences. I'm just worried we'll get in trouble for having too much detail in our rules, but most of them can't really be commentated on unless we have the rule itself. Dok (talk)

Scorpion Claw plus Crushing Blow[edit]

I read this combo as coming out to S7 as I view Crushing Blow as modifying the base Strength rather than replacing it. As evidence, Fuegan is listed as S4 like all the Phoenix Lords but has crushing blow. If it modified the base Stat, he would be listed as S5.

It says that the model has +1 strength, not that his attacks have +1 S, therefore a scorpion exarch actually has S4, and S8 with a claw. I asked my local GW shop manager and he confirmed this. -Silver (talk) 13:30, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't say the model has his base strength characteristic increased by 1 either. Fuegan is a good example of how it should be applied. He has the standard Phoenix Lord strength of 4. And one of his exarch powers is crushing blow, so if it was actually increasing his base stat, it would be at 5 in his profile. Instead, a model with Crushing Blow gets a +1 modifier to strength. And that results in the claw being S7.
This because you have to add the bonus to his strength, it's not already included in the profile (also note that the PLs use the same profile in the tables, GW probably copy-pasted all in each lord's page). Anyway, I asked again to a different shop manager and he confirmed the S8 thing. At least until a FAQ comes out, then we'll see. -Silver (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I agree with the S8 thing. Crushing Blow modifies the base strength to 4, whereas the Scorpion Claw doubles the model's strength. The difference in wording is that one is about the strength of the model, the other is the strength of the model's attacks. - Biggus Berrus (talk) 14:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Wraithseer, Iyanden Codex and Forgeworld Eldar update[edit]

  • Wrote them a letter. part of it. Apparently, Imperial Armour 11 on page 185 states that "An Eldar Wraithseer is a HQ choice for a Codex Eldar army." A question arises from direct wording.Codex:Eldar can include Wraithseer, but it's not easily understood whether Codex:Yanden can take this HQ choice.
  • Answer: Hi there. We will be reviewing the rules for our Eldar models over the next few months to bring them in line with the 6th ed 40k and the new Codex. However, work schedule for our book team is currently very busy so regrettably we are not able to give a more specific time frame than this, sorry.

In other words: FW doesn't yet give a damn. And we're not getting an Update before the Autumn begins.

  • Logical Answer: There is no Codex: Iyanden. There is a Codex supplement called Iyanden, which builds upon Codex: Eldar. A Wraithseer can be taken for Codex: Eldar, which can in turn be supplemented by Iyanden: A Codex: Eldar Supplement. There is no argument here. Dok (talk)
    • PS: It's Iyanden, not Yanden.

Witchblade[edit]

"Witchblade a heavily nerfed weapon that sports Fleshbane and Armourbane but with shitty AP-, a bad weapon that will always disappoint. " Armourbane gives it AP 2d6, why does the AP - entry matter at all?

Armorbane gives it a +2d6 on its vehicle penetration roll, it doesn't affect AP. This means that just about any character with a hint of challenge capacity will stomp a witchblade user into the ground. 2+ wounds don't mean shit when you can't get through the other guy's armor.
Well, unless other guy have a 2+ it's kinda even, as he couldn't get through Witchblade user's 4++ either (unless he is Lufgt Huron or the Swarmlord).
A lot of challenge-built characters are going to be putting out enough attacks that a few will get through, and given the love of powerfists several armies have, they'll be inflicting instant death with a single wound. Not the best situation to be in.--Boss Ballkrusha (talk) 06:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Why the are are you using a 'seer for close combat? There job is to buff the army with there powers.

This page still reads like ass[edit]

For christ's sake, if you don't know how to use a comma, don't edit wiki pages. It's so terrible. Look at it. I quit. Fuck.

I'll try rewriting most of it, wish me luck; also the original writer is too fond of specific words 'boast' 'basically', wanna bet he wrote fanfics too? --Xenrolf (talk) 07:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

6th Edition Wasp section[edit]

Has the Forgeworld Wasp been updated yet for 6th?

Warlock powers rolled AFTER splitting into other units[edit]

Sadly the Warlock rules explicitly state:

"Before the battle, immediately after determining Warlord traits, any Warlock in the Council may be split off from this unit and assigned to lead a different unit from the following list, which they cannot leave:"

This means that the order of play is as follows:

1. Set up Fortifications,
2. Set up Terrain,
3. Set up Objectives,
4. Roll for Warlord Traits,
5. Split Warlocks Off to Lead Other Units,
6. Roll for Psychic Powers,
7. Deploy Forces.

Still nice to have anything to boost the troops, but it would be more realistic to have the powers determined first. After all, an Eldar Autarch would know which powers their warlocks have before deploying for battle, and would assign them appropriately!

      • Wrong. Psychic Powers are generated before the game begins, whereas Warlord traits are determined directly before you deploy your first unit. Therefore determining what psychic powers you get comes before determining warlord traits.

7e Updates[edit]

Please stop using strike-throughs and whining about D weapons. Yes, they are strong, but this is a tactica article not an "omg Eldarz r so OP" bitch-fest. I'm trying to keep this article up to date with 7e stuff, and the borderline spam is obnoxious. CrazyThang (talk) 19:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)


- It should be mentioned how sweet it is for allied detachments that the Warlock conclave offers a psycher hq slot for 35 pts. It's not an IC but it's a warp charge and fucking awesome if you just want to add some d weapons to a guard or marine list.

Craftworld Ulthwé?[edit]

Just looking over the different Craftworlds and their army composition and I noticed there's no Ulthwé. Seems relatively simple: Guardian Stormhost. Jetseer. Three squads of Storm Guardians, power weapons, special weapons, and a warlock (each with Wave Serpent). Warlock Conclave with five Warlocks. Two Vypers, two Walkers, and two Vaul's Wrath batteries with a Warlock. Should leave plenty of room for auxiliaries and upgrades. Gives you your Black Guardians, accounts for your crazy amounts of psykers, and no aspect warriors. Not sure about using peasants as the body of your forces? Too bad, it's the price you pay for living so close to the Eye of Terror. At least you'll be able to cast shrouding on something.

Gathering storm[edit]

Shouldn't this article talk about how you can take a Eldar/Deldar force for minute drawbacks and awesome buffs?

No, because this article is for the "Eldar" faction. You want to look at "Ynnari" for discussions about Eldar/Deldar/Harlie combos. see here -Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2017 (UTC)