Eldar MMS v2.0

[Sigoroth]

That is also an option.

Sig, iirc you where allright with 5+ prow armour / 4+ rest for all vessels?

In exchange for what? I wouldn't be in favour of further nerfs. They're already extremely fragile. Given that they've got ships made out of Wraithbone(!) and the look of the actual models and how they play I could actually see a 6+/4+/5+ armour, particularly for CWE. As was pointed out to me by Barras, the Eldar look very well armoured from the front, moderately so from the rear, and due to the sails look the weakest from the side.

It actually makes sense given the way Eldar attack. Head on alpha strike exposing your prow, brace return fire, blow past the enemy battle line, showing your aft. Least often exposed is abeam. This armour layout I would see as a combination of configuring their ships to the their tactics and their tactics to their ships. I see the sails as being weak points, so low armour. Therefore the Eldar alter their tactics to expose them as little as possible, making for head on attacks. Therefore they have the prow weaponry and the speed to get out to avoid broadside duels. Then, given this established doctrine they armour up their prows. Makes sense.

[Dark Depths]

Ramming: allowed on a Ld test of 5 D6....

Is this really a high leadership roll though?  Average D6 roll of 3-4, versus average eldar leadership of 8-9...

Anyway, I sort of like Sig's idea of 6+/4+/5+ armour, it does make sense given that criticals do not correspond to the arc of fire that the shots that caused the critical came from.

[lastspartacus]

Eldar MSM was too one trick pony.  If you are suggesting fixing eldar with shields, full hull points, and armored prows, well, I've lost the will to debate :p

[Sigoroth]

Eldar MSM was too one trick pony.  If you are suggesting fixing eldar with shields, full hull points, and armored prows, well, I've lost the will to debate :p

Why not? Eldar have better materials and methods for constructing ships (Wraithbone), better shield tech and the ships themselves suggest the 6+/4+/5+ profile. Also, while Eldar may not like to fight battles of attrition I see no reason why they shouldn't have the same crippled threshhold as IN and the same boarding and repair capabilities too.

The fact is that the people at GW wrote the background and character of the Eldar differently to how they've been represented in both 40k and BFG. Eldar should have reasonable armour. 5+ is reasonable, 4+ is suicidal. Eldar are not suicidal. In 40k the basic trooper should have 4+ armour. The aspect warriors should have 3+. The advanced tech allowing them to run while in such "heavy" armour.

Also, Eldar condemn the Imperiums doctrine of just throwing more armour on at the expense of mobility. They don't disdain the protection that armour provides (else their skimmers would be armour 10, not 12), merely that the IGs tanks are slowed to a crawl because of their armour. Also, they have weapons that ignore that bonus armour.

How holofields have been used as the Eldars mainline defence in BFG is ridiculous. They have superior shield tech to the Imperium. Shields are the best defence in space battles AND extremely necessary if you spend any amount of time in asteroid fields, which is where the Eldar tend to hang out. Since Holofields provide little (comparitive) protection against WBs and WBs are armour based and the prow facing is the most susceptible to WB fire and the extra armour would do little to slow the Eldar ships then the Eldar would of course up armour the prow. To suggest that they wouldn't do that because of their philosophy would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face. To suggest that they couldn't do that is ludicrous.

Mind you, the CE don't look as armoured in the prow as the CWE. Maybe they suck at building warships.

The designers went for a "feel" rather than basing the fleet on what the Eldar, as described in the 40k universe, would do. However, even with shields and full hits (albeit forced to bug out when reduced to 2) the Eldar still feel a fragile compared to Chaos and still feel "Eldary". With the suggested profile (6+/4+/5+) when combined with HFs fleets with long ranged focused fire like Chaos will have a hard time against Eldar. On the other hand, the IN would do well in passing at close range being able to fire both broadsides at close range into 4+ armour. Even a braced Lunar would get 3 dice hitting on 4+, critting on 5+.

[Plaxor]

Horizon/Sigoroth;

I don't suppose there is any chance that I could get a hold of older versions of MMS, I'm actually quite curious about the history of your changes.

[horizon]

Sig,

for the armour: well it is an increase for the destroyers. 5+ prow/4+ I mean.

4+ rear would be illogical as it is pretty small areas to hit. The sails from the sides are most vulnerable. Also: the sails aren't hull thick wraithbone. Plus they make up the largest area.

From that pov it would be 5+/4+/5+.

6+ is something no one would buy. People in general would just call us : losers.

[lastspartacus]

Bone does not equal adamantine

[Plaxor]

Adamantine does not equal bone?

They are right LS, wraithbone in the fluff is stronger than ceramite and plasteel. So they are justified in saying that their armor should be at least 5+.

However my take on why the escorts had lower armor was not for the fact that their armor was less, but that they had less crew (and were smaller) so that it would take relatively less firepower to destroy them.

However I could see 5+ prow/4+ sides and rear.

[Sigoroth]

Adamantine does not equal bone?

They are right LS, wraithbone in the fluff is stronger than ceramite and plasteel. So they are justified in saying that their armor should be at least 5+.

However my take on why the escorts had lower armor was not for the fact that their armor was less, but that they had less crew (and were smaller) so that it would take relatively less firepower to destroy them.

However I could see 5+ prow/4+ sides and rear.

Indeed. And if you look at the models in the CWE fleet, which is a warfleet, the prow of those ships looks far more armoured than those of the Imperium. Armoured with stronger stuff than what the Imperium could possibly make. On the most vulnerable facing of the Eldar ships. In a system where armour matters. Where it wouldn't slow them down. Aaaand they're not going to do it because ... they don't like the idea of surviving?

As for the escorts and size and whatnot, well, seen the new Tau escorts? Warden is tiny tiny tiny. The ship is about as thick as an Eldar solar sail. That ship has 5+ armour. The Castellan really isn't that much bigger. It's still flimsy.

[Plaxor]

Which is why I agree with the idea that the castellan should be dropped in cost to 20-25 and have 4+ armor.

In escorts you can't really represent their size in hits, so usually I think it's better to do this with changing their armor value.

Like the Cobra, I don't think the IN would make it out of different stuff than swords and falchions but it has lower armor. It makes sense that this is just because it is smaller and therefore easier to kill.

[lastspartacus]

Bah, racial propoganda.  My ass their pretty little bone structures are harder than the hardest known metal in the galaxy.  I rebuke it

[horizon]

Your problem, not mine.

[barras1511]

I have a very strong opinion when it comes to the eldar. They are not represented as a superior race and they should be. They are a dying race. They save themselves in soul stones when in battle. What happens to the souls that are blown to smithereens by being on a lightly armoured ship? To me it just not make sense. Light armour on a pirate fleet I can understand. Speed and armament must come first. On a battle fleet however, armour should be available.  Should they be as heavily armed or as fast as a pirate fleet? Hell no. This is not their raiding fleet but their defense fleet for their craftworlds.

Besides "These are Eldar", give me another reason for them not to have better defenses than any imperial vessel IF they are so technologically advanced. I recognise the need for game balance, but this is where points come in and limit the eldar from fielding a large sized navy.

In short Eldar should be limited in number, but almost unlimited in every other regard. This is what technology gives your forces.

The armour 6+ on the front is demanded by the range of their guns and turns. They must face the front. Have a good look at the model and tell me if it looks like it couldn't take more damage than a SM strike cruiser. I'm not asking for them to be impossible to kill, but they should be harder to kill than they currently are but that being said, they should also pay for it in points. The 6/4/5 would suit their playing style.

I'm not asking you to agree to this proposal but to think about the changes to the Eldar from MSM. The MMS Eldar are no longer the terrain huggers their forebearers were. They need new thoughts and insights to allow them to evolve into an enjoyable and challenging fleet for both player and opponent.

[horizon]

So, you say the CWE should turn into a highly elite fleet?

By all this: what keeps this mind set from giving longer ranged weapons to Eldar?
Because: the farther away you are from the enemy the better for a Dying Race.
Right?

[lastspartacus]

I always thought of the Eldar as advanced, I mean their fluff clearly states that they put their technology into evasion and generally see heavy armor as crude and unsophisticated.  But they are the way they are, I assume for some reason they don't have long range weapons, perhaps because they put all their power systems towards other things, and favor 'dense' fields of combat.

It is interesting that the Eldar, and the even more advanced Necrons utilize neither long range or shield tech.  One would think that either could manage firing at 90cm with loads of shields.  I can only assume that millenia of combat has caused them to see some unknown benefit to putting power towards the  things they do excel in.