crono

@LH: While I know it gets ride of the war walkers, but it was more of possible update for you to consider.  Reactions?

I dont think that list is legal.  The Allied Detachment cant be from the same Faction.  You'd need to change it to a Combined Arms detachment.

You're right... totally forgot, and I'm making the modifications.

*edited for readability*

Having looked over the list, I think it could really use the new codex update...  Also, the considerations below are from some ideas that I am tinkering with for an air force list I would like to build (adding the crimson hunters formation.)  But in this case I tried to keep many of the themes that you have in your list, but sacrificed the war walkers.  My version though definitely will not make any friends...

1995pts - 1 CAD, and Warhost detachment -

CAD:

HQ

Fast Attack

-185pts  Hemlock Wraithfighter

Heavy Support

-165pts  3 D-Cannons

Windrider Warhost Detachment:

-115 pts  Farseer Skyrunner

-350 pts  7 Warlock Skyrunners

Having taken some time to think about this...

Try the scatter lasers on the defender guardians (not sure about the count).  You've got a lot of actual high str AP 2, and potential AP 2 wounds via blade storm, but outside of the vipers, the list is lacking high volume mid strength shooting...

Also, I think with the vipers... drop one and let try and make the 50 pts do something more.

Assuming they are alive and able to do the move, they should be effective at it.  Each model gets an attack hitting on a 4+ with haywire.  That's GREAT for dealing with flying vehicles.  However, FMCs are a whole 'nother ballgame and you really need AP3 to have a decent chance against them. 

I would hold off on the "GREAT", part for now.  I think you can make them GREAT at vehicle flyers, but you've got to be able to reach the flyers and pass them on your turn to utilize this great tool.  While moving 18" really does help that cause... but SAF at that unit will help to really reduce the threat the unit posses.  Translation, in many games against vehicle flyers, they will probably be very dependent on cover/LOS blockage with respect to this particular task.

As much as this thread had certain amusement for me...  at some point all good things SHOULD come to an end... :D

Pax, in the difficult terrain runs, it's really clear:  "Unless otherwise specifically noted otherwise, a model in cover behind difficult terrain has a 5+ cover save.

At this point, the question is to determine how if a model can obtain this cover save, which takes us to the section:  "Cover Saves"!

"Often, you'll find enemy models are partially hidden or obscured by terrain, which is also known as being in cover."

If anything, based on what you have described... it would appear you are the one that is manipulating the terrain rules.  I can't say if it is even in your favor though... lol :)

No, you're not Jump Infantry... you become a Jump Monstrous Creature.

Lol, who is this comment directed towards?

So, in case it was already made clear by the later responses:

Pax, yes the DK gains bulky and now I want to model a variation of the flux capacitor as a counts as personal teleporter to represent how the DK becomes "bulky" 

Welcome back!

Anyone able to parse this out? Seems like there are three shoulder options, the Icarus and two others.

It would seem to be the two missile pod options or the stormspear or the ironstorm

First, windriders lack skilled rider, as far as I know, so if they resort to cover, they are looking dangerous terrain tests. Not a huge issue, but a legit concern with small units and low base leadership (unless they have higher in the new codex).

 

Then, if the point is them being objective secured, they need to stay within 3" of the objective at the end of their turn. So the jump shoot jump is limited by objective placement.

 

As for spamming AV 13/14, that would be every army. Every army can take lots of buildings. Buildings are typically AV14.

Pax, you crack me up.  I like the idea of not taking the "chicken little" approach to the new dex.  But this point to counter-point approach really doesn't hold much water. 

The first thing, about the dangerous terrain tests: It's not a legit concern.  The percentage chance of failing the inital test is 1/6, then 1/3 for the armor save, then failing (even leadership eight) around 7/25... That is a tall order of consecutive failures.  Statistically the actual likelihood of occurrence is so low, it shouldn't effect the decision making process for any player.

With respect to objective secured - it will only matter if the objective is even available to achieve if in a maelstrom game, or in a standard objective game this typically is only a concern towards the end of the game when it becomes about scoring those objectives.  Early on, the jet bikes will make appropriate use of cover in general.  And unless the opponent is also using aggressive deep striking or similarly fast units to claim distant maelstrom objectives early on, the intelligent Eldar player will use non-jetbike units AKA warp spiders, scorptions, wraithguard, and wraithlord, hell in my case harlequins to claim early maelstrom objectives near my deployment zone.

About the buildings: Yes, everyone can take a fair number of buildings... this is true, but comes at a cost that most list (as I visualize it) would be much less effective.  Even then, if the eldar player decides on playing a hemlock, wraithguard, or even old school fire dragons in deepstriking falcons... The buildings are not very likely to have the protection that you are looking for.  Meanwhile... 4 minimum units of jetbikes are still going to 64 shots at up to 4 different targets.

Also, about the list build, I think fluger is correct.  4~5 jetbikes will be the sweet spot.  I will start experimenting with MSU eldar, with harlequins detachment in the next few weeks.

I'm being compelled to the FNP camp, but the funny thing is that I always thought of terminator armor as what elite shock troops would use, requires greater training and skill.  Which for me was, translates to being stronger and tougher:  so toughness 5 and FC.

Out of curiosity, did we ever get a confirmation of he prism cannons profile?  Then the follow up question would be, if the other two have to sacrifice their shot to bolster another?

Cause, thinking alone the base profiles from the past... 3  str-7 ap 2 large blasts for 345 points from is an interesting thought.

Netflix doesn't work here.

Netflix for copyright reasons, is location sensitive. Just VPN to your work domain state-side, and you'll be fine.

The Eldar CODEX is certainly better than the DA one, but you asked for the marine equivalent. And that unit is certainly OP if looked at in isolation (DA codex is certainly lacking, but that unit is a diamond in the rough).

 

Let's see, stock unit has Scout, hit and run, skilled rider, better weapons: plasma talons (which 1 in 3 can swap for the RW grenade launcher for free), S5 paired melee weapons with rending, ATSKNF, stubborn, higher toughness, higher strength, frag and krak grenades, higher leadership.

 

Then, if using RW command squads, they've got the banner access and the FNP access.

 

As for objective secured, again, that is not a special rule of the bikers. They are troops, yes, but they require additional rules to be objective secured. Also, the 27pt unit, while nifty in shooting, is not durable enough to HOLD objectives, especially if assaults can be made. You'll likely be looking at another 100pts (or more) in ICs to make them viable as objective secured units for games where you can't just steal the objective last minute.

 

My argument is that, in isolation, RW Knights/command squads are the marine equivalent of your 27pt bikers.

Main thing Pax... this isn't the equivalent.

You are asking the audience to accept they are an equivalent without a reasonable case.  The unit you describes is a good unit, but not a 27 point unit.  It simply doesn't have the range fire power.  The better weapons comment really only applies to the ability to select CC weapons.  The unit also has a size cap limitation, and is slower in terms of overall movement potential.

Also, how is the model an all around weaker model, if it is significantly more likely to kill the RW unit (or most other treats that would even target them) before the enemy has a chance to respond?

Why is it that Eldar always have a few units/weapons which are dubbed really broken, but space marines don't run really run into the same opposition, even if they have an equally viable unit?

Pax, while I would like to breakdown more then one unit.

For example please tell me a if a unit in the SM dex that has all of the following for 27 points a model:

Moves 12"

turbo-boost 36"

Have built in Relentless, and HoW

Can be from unit size 3-10.

Depending on the detachment selection - objective secured

Depending on the special rules selection - for 1 turn the model can get shred

What you'll find is that there is no space marine equivalent for 27 point.  Sure you can get kinda close, but in this case, there is no tax, weird formation, or really any deficiency that is required.  Even I have to admit this unit, is a bit outlandish, but still not as bad an "easy-button" that the previous codex serpent spam was/is.  Having said that, I can totally understand a marine player asking the question:  Why can't I have a cool toy like that to add to my collection, and wreck face?

No need to be troll-y. It is the internet, and so it is going to have a heavy dose of "chicken little" syndrome. That is fine, just remember that we need to accept change with grace and a grain of salt.

More like "that moment when everyone realized that chicken little suddenly turned into a velociraptor..."

They have the small bases now.

Maybe, the logic is if we give them small bases, they won't notice the scatter lasers...  Or maybe, if we sell them with small bases, they can fit more on the board, and make them more susceptible to blast markers all at the same time! 

Well, at least for the picture, they only had 1 scatter laser... Ahaha ????

Wait. Of all the broad, sweeping comments in this thread, you go after my throwaway one? lols

Lol, I got lazy and didn't want to read through the whole thread for some even juicer. :)

Wait, so we're talking about a battlepoint tournament, which was formatted so terribly that he was far enough ahead going into the final game that it didn't matter. Also, Nanavati was only running Fateweaver for FMCs. 

 

Nova last year, Eldar went 1st, 2nd, 6th, 7th, and 9th. Only Daemons in the top 10 was 3rd, with zero FMCs.

 

LVO had 2 Chaos players in the top 8, but one had zero FMCs, and Nick only ran Fateweaver. Admittedly there was only 1 Eldar player, but he was at least running 4 serpents. With nearly zero daemon FMCs in the discussion.

 

 

I mean, really, I don't know what tournament coverage you've read that's telling you Daemon FMCs are tearing up the meta, but I can't find it going back through all of 2014. Being someone who has all of nothing to do most days, I've done more than my share of reading forums and FLG, 3++, etc. and it's pretty clear that the vast majority of the overall community feels that Serpents with scatter lasers are too good. /shrug

So... a few things.  First and foremost, I was poking a bit of fun at pretre for his comments.  Counter pointing his quite broad-sweeping comments, with a single set of results.  Second, I never made any claims about the meta or other past tournament results and as an eldar player I do find the serpents to be an easy button for lesser players.  Please refer to my comments in the recent thread about serpents.  Finally, I fully expect some type of response from either pretre or Westrider that may or may not even address my points given how one sided and almost "jaded" my response was.  I'll need to find an appropriate thread degenerating meme if that should be the case.

@AP:  Yeah, as I think about his list, you are correct in that generally most people wouldn't consider it a FC.  I did, simply because it fit my point with Pretre, but even then... I thought he did max his FMC's after the tzeench heralds.  Oh well, the price of aging I suppose.

How did the next best Daemon Flying Circus place, tho? How well does it do when not helmed by Nick Nanavati?

2nd, CD/CMS (in this case but heavy flyers as I recall), 18th, and 31st.

With pure Nids coming in at 6th and 27.

Eldar at 5th (ELD\ELD\DE), then pure Eldar placing at 20, 22, and 28th.

If spamming serpents was really that great, it simply would have done better.  But the results are pretty clear, Daemons did quite well.  Also, no need to bother with the name drop, cause he really isn't that great a tactician.  Don't get me wrong, very strong player, but there were better tacticians, but the list is very efficient.  Leaving little to chance, and so minor mistakes on his part don't effect the game nearly as much.

Except wave spam is objectively better than FMC and pretty much anything else.

Nope, not in the case deamon flying circus... of course I am assuming the daemon player is solid.  In that case I would say, eldar probably have the best fighting chance against the list.  After that Nids, if there are no detachment limits...  Daemons flying circus, minus some bad luck can deny most elements of the game, except against lists that are equally as fast.  There was a reason why, at Adepticon, the final round of the individual was basically predetermined with the daemon player winning for the third straight time in a row, with the same basic principal for all 3 years.

Stuff

I don't know...  As someone who has had almost every list I've ever submitted rejected at least once.  I think your point of perception is the most relevant point.  Most people will simply perceive this list a better than what it is.  But that doesn't preclude this list going berserk in a few games in a row jading even more peoples options. :D