Eldar - ReDesign / Rules Development

[lastspartacus]

Dont take away a TH, give one to the battlebarge


Now someone comment on my holofield ideas.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

Nope. 3 TH for BB is enough. 1 TH for SC should be enough. It's a light fer Emperor's sake.

As for your HF idea, still too complicated fer me.

[lastspartacus]

How complicated?  Nothing could possibly simpler than: Measure range.  Set effect. 

I definitly wouldn't have a problem with it. 
Now if its a matter of taste, thats a different story.  Like my thoughts on the LD based idea, simply how it feels over if its a good option, for me.
But I think it gives them a characterful and defensible option.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

You're variable to hits are for WBs I gather upon rereading your last post. The current WB rules are fine as they are even with the 5+/4+ armor upgrade proposal. Actually the idea is to limit the effectiveness of lances. Because they always hit on a 4+. If you allow the lances to hit without penalty, lotsa Eldar ships are going to die even with those saves. It's those "if within x" conditions that I am leery about.

My proposal is simpler. Lances hit on a 5+ against ships with holofields with any hits being re-rolled. No checking to see if Eldar within a certain range.

Going back on topic, how do ordnance work vs the proposed Eldar change? Personally at so close a range, I don't see how the Eldar can be spoofing the bombers or torps into missing. I can understand with torps, you roll D6 and the number rolled = number of torps that lose the target (I mean even dumbfire torps have to have some targetting system in place). But bombers and ABs shouldn't be affected as such.

[horizon]

See turret entry.

[lastspartacus]

You're variable to hits are for WBs I gather upon rereading your last post. The current WB rules are fine as they are even with the 5+/4+ armor upgrade proposal. Actually the idea is to limit the effectiveness of lances. Because they always hit on a 4+. If you allow the lances to hit without penalty, lotsa Eldar ships are going to die even with those saves. It's those "if within x" conditions that I am leery about.

My proposal is simpler. Lances hit on a 5+ against ships with holofields with any hits being re-rolled. No checking to see if Eldar within a certain range.

Maybe I didn't word it properly.  Lances take the same modifiers to hit that batts do.
There is no 'having to measure'.  You measure when you attack the eldar ship.  The distance is right there, no steps required, to know what you
need to roll to hit it.  What issue would come up that would cause you to be leery?

Going back on topic, how do ordnance work vs the proposed Eldar change? Personally at so close a range, I don't see how the Eldar can be spoofing the bombers or torps into missing. I can understand with torps, you roll D6 and the number rolled = number of torps that lose the target (I mean even dumbfire torps have to have some targetting system in place). But bombers and ABs shouldn't be affected as such.

I think everyone agrees that the closer you get to the eldar ship, the less dramatic the HF effects are.  Still, I can see some kind of effect on the electronics of torps and bombers.  Even so, I feel the effect should not be dramatic.
I would rather see Eldar deal with ordnance through super accurate turrets or countering with their own advanced fighters.

[horizon]

Hi,

on the re-roll hits option:

vs lances:
all ranges   
1 lance   0,25
2 lances   0,50
3 lances   0,75
4 lances   1,00
5 lances   1,25
   
re-roll after lock on   
1 lance   0,50
2 lances   1,00
3 lances   1,50
4 lances   2,00
5 lances   2,50


vs batteries:
under 15cm      
1wb = 1   0,17   0,25
3wb = 3   0,50   0,75
6wb = 5   0,83   1,25
9wb = 8   1,32   2,00
12wb = 11   1,82   2,75
      
15-30cm      
1wb = 1   0,17   0,25
3wb = 2   0,33   0,50
6wb = 4   0,66   1,00
9wb = 6   0,99   1,50
12wb = 8   1,32   2,00
      
above 30cm      
1wb = 1   0,17   0,25
3wb = 2   0,33   0,50
6wb = 3   0,50   0,75
9wb = 5   0,83   1,25
12wb = 6   0,99   1,50


When on Lock-on (per Ray) the lock on dice are rolled and then succesfull hits are re-rolled.


With this system, I fear that Eldar are very weak to fleets with long range lance fire. These can go on Lock On easily and pound the Eldar ships with ease.
In a battle without or little celestial phenomena it'll be a gallery shooting game I fear.

hmmm

[lastspartacus]

Not with my suggestion!  Look at me!



Also, on a completely different note, the new Dark Eldar models made me realize, Horizon, that you made a DE version of the MMS too, it seems.
How current is that to 1.9, and do you consider them to be complete?  They sure do have limited model choices, but seem interesting.

[horizon]

Heya,

in above the two values for batteries are vs 5+ armour followed vs 4+ armour

slight adjustment for lances, per admiral on a 5+:

 
all ranges            
1 lance      0,17      
2 lances      0,33      
3 lances      0,50      
4 lances      0,66      
5 lances      0,83      
            
re-roll after lock on            
1 lance      0,50      
2 lances      0,66      
3 lances      0,99      
4 lances      1,32      
5 lances      1,65   


Seems good to me.

On the DE:
The ruleset you find on the MMS download page is only given form by me I did not write a single rule in it. Old, not updated and only cool for the pictures

As for fleet models I say:
cruiser
light cruiser
escort
and the admiral's long lasting in the build DE battleship

[lastspartacus]

If he came up  with a DE battleship, I'd sure like to hear it.  

If you are in a number's crunching mood, I'd be interested in seeing the exact maths on the survivability of my own suggestion, with WB and lances hitting on 6s beyond 30, 5s beyond 15, and 4s within 15, with holofields causing a right shift to batts and denying close range left shifting.

[horizon]

Attempt at wording the Holofield rule:

Holofields
The Eldar are not protected by shields like other races but by advanced holofield technology. This sophisticated ECM produces multiple local engine signatures whilst actively masking the parent ship’s engine signature. The effect of this is a general interference that makes accurate targeting extremely difficult.

*    Against attacks which make use of the gunnery chart the Holofields force one extra right shift on the gunnery table, this in addition to any other shift on the gunnery table. Any succesfull hit    must be re-rolled.
*    Against attacks which make no use of the gunnery table and target the ship directly the holofield makes targetting of the Eldar vessel difficult, to represent this a 5+ is needed to hit the Eldar    ship (instead of the regular 4+ for lances). Any succesfull hit must be re-rolled.

When the enemy vessel is on Lock-On Special Orders the holofield forces the re-rolls after the re-rolls for Lock On have applied.
When the Nova Cannon rolls a direct HIT on the scatter dice when targetting an Eldar ship this result is re-rolled.

Note: in no case a blastmarker is placed when shooting at an Eldar ship. If an Eldar ship travels through a blastmarker is takes a hit on D6 roll of 5+.

What about Armageddon guns & Starfield Pulses?
Celestial Phenomena?


ps I'll have some math for yours later...

[lastspartacus]

I do think after looking over the current rules again that some kind of save is needed against ordnance, but I think a set variable is always preferred to dice rolling.  say, +1 or +2 to hit for bombers and torps, or eldar turrets counting as double for suppression and torps rerolling hits, or something.  Just throwing out thoughts late at night

[horizon]

Second time: Turrets


With the holofield not offering protection against orndnace the ships need turrets. I'd say turrets hit on a 4+, they may re-roll missed dice (like Tau tracking system).

That's enough protection. Same system as any other race, slightly better. No holo save vs ordnance I'd say.


Your holo systems comes out weaker then the admiral's system. Weaker as in : Eldar suffer hits more easily.

[Admiral_d_Artagnan]

I did mention no lock on against Eldar holofields, right?

That plus gorced re-roll on successful hits should aid greatly in Eldar survival even at long ranges.

Also means I have to revise my experimental NC rules if No Lock On rule is enforced.

[horizon]

Guessed I missed the lock-on memo. lol.


Well, if people would go by that. (I'd even allow Lock On tbh for playtesting).