Are the Eldar movement rules broken? Whats the alternative?

[horizon]

What's to fix with the MMS rules?
We use and play them regular. Yes, it is always developing (like a living rulebook ). Last update while ago but expect something later this year. Others play it as well.

I think it is balanced and nothing major broken (unlike msm....)....

I mean I am the "caretaker" of MMS. And they have come along way since the WR11 edition...

If you don't want to talk about it in public shoot me an email (you have the adress).

[lastspartacus]

The MMS Eldar are about 85% done, in my own opinion.  Really great fleet.  I'm not too fond of completely ignoring minimum movement though.  Even a 5cm requirement would make me happy.  I've just seen too many 'become a starbase behind asteroids' variants of Eldar ordnance fleets.

[Dark Depths]

@horizon.  Its been about 9 months ish since i've had a look at them, I didn't go back due to ongoing projects with my IN fleet, but as the general consensus is that mms is ok then i'll give it another go.  I don't know where i'd find the mms rules anymore though (poor memory, sorry)  so if you want to give me a link to the mms rules, i'll have a look at them and give them a whirl for a few games and see how they go.

[horizon]

General Consensus online: MMS is ok.


http://www.tacticalwargames.net/archive/rules/gothic/geldarmms01.html

[Dark Depths]

Thanks very much.  Once i've played them out again (hopefully next week) then i'll let you know if i've been converted.

[lastspartacus]

Out of curiosity, do you think they are broken as in too powerful or too weak.

[Dark Depths]

Out of curiosity, do you think they are broken as in too powerful or too weak.

Is this directed at me?  If so, which set of rules are we referring, mms or msm?

[fracas]

IMO MSM is characterful and is not broken.

[lastspartacus]

yes DD, and I meant MMS, which I assume you are talking about.

[horizon]

IMO MSM is characterful and is not broken.

Then why did you suggest a holofield change?


(kiddin, I know you mean the move system itself).

[Sigoroth]

IMO MSM is characterful and is not broken.

No, it's not characterful. There's nothing to suggest that Eldar should be so fragile. They have Wraithbone, which is far tougher than anything the Imperium have, and the ship is grown, meaning no weak welds or rivets. Also, the total lack of shielding is absurd. The Eldar are going to "trick" those meteors into not hitting them huh? They're going to look down on the most effective shielding in the game as "crude" and instead of doing better they're going to not put anything on ... right.

As for not being broken, you're wrong there too. If you cannot shoot at them, ie, they have enough terrain to effectively hide in, then you cannot win. You can try to out-ordnance them, but the only time I've lost to that method (only time I've lost with them) was with the old ordnance rules, against a carrier fleet, where 2/3 of my carrier capacity had run out and my opponent got consistently insane luck (and I mean on a grand scale, like 70% above average with around 100 rolls). Even then it was a close game.

If you use the attack rating method of battlezone selection then Eldar will usually have 4-5 asteroid fields on the table, and possibly a planet too. This is sufficient terrain to hose the enemy.

So how do they fare if you can shoot at them? Crapola. Holofields are a joke protection really. Sure, your lances don't do much (1/2, then 1/6 + 5/6 x 1/6), but any moderately balanced list will have enough WBs to more than make up for this given the 4+ armour, reduced hits and 4+ crits. With that the Eldar carriers will simply evaporate if they can be shot at. This means that the Nightshades lose a lot of effectiveness, as the enemy will have clear AC dominance to put out a tonne of CAP. If using Hemlocks instead then that leaves them free to send out bombers.

Eldar are doubly broken. They're too powerful with terrain and too weak without it. Terrain should be helpful, not broken.

It doesn't even make sense:

Tactical Officer: Captain! Enemy contacts ahead, coming out of an asteroid field!
Captain: Acknowledged.
Tactical Officer: They're closing fast sir. Orders?
Captain: Hold steady.
Tactical Officer: They're targeting the Agamemnon!
Captain: Hold.
Tactical Officer: The Agamemnon is hit, she's venting atmosphere from several hull ruptures ... power signs are erratic ... Orders?
Captain: Hold
Tactical Officer: The enemy are retreating sir, they're heading back to the asteroid field. If they make it we'll lose them ...
Captain: Steady.
Tactical Officer: They're nearly there sir!
Captain: Acquire a targeting solution! Lock onto the biggest vessel. Prepare to fire!
Tactical Officer: Yessir! Acquiring target, locking .... they've disappeared from our screens sir.
Captain: Damn! They were just to fast!

Wut?

[fracas]

The eldar is not fragile. It only appear so if you do not consider the holofield. Even batteries aren't that good. In a game of movements and position MSM is characterful.

Problem with eldar is that they have too many schticks in addition to MSM
Holofield
Super lances
Super ordnances
Compared to weakness

Of the 4 listed I would change holofield saves ( just like I would change necron reactive hull save)
No bonus against batteries and MSM only for corsairs not craftworld
(necron would not get hull saves against torpedoes)

[Dark Depths]

yes DD, and I meant MMS, which I assume you are talking about.

Ok, well, as it was several months ago I forget specifics but I think we (my group) felt that the mms rules made the Eldar very vulnerable.  We played a game and I seem to recall the Eldar lost badly.  But, having re-read the rules as they now stand, I think we were trying to play them as the old style msm Eldar, rather than like a regular bfg fleet.  (If that makes sense).  Having played a 500pts game yesterday I think the mms rules are better and more in character and in tune with the rest of the bfg system than the msm rules.  Its now possible to win, but the Eldar are still very powerful, as reflects their superiority.  I especially like the rule saying that when they reach 2hp they have to disengage, its a very nifty way of stopping suicidal Eldar.

[fracas]

I think for all fleets ships should disengage if crippled unless passing leadership. Suicide ships are silly.

[horizon]

Ok, well, as it was several months ago I forget specifics but I think we (my group) felt that the mms rules made the Eldar very vulnerable.  We played a game and I seem to recall the Eldar lost badly.  But, having re-read the rules as they now stand, I think we were trying to play them as the old style msm Eldar, rather than like a regular bfg fleet.  (If that makes sense).  Having played a 500pts game yesterday I think the mms rules are better and more in character and in tune with the rest of the bfg system than the msm rules.  Its now possible to win, but the Eldar are still very powerful, as reflects their superiority. 

Great!

I especially like the rule saying that when they reach 2hp they have to disengage, its a very nifty way of stopping suicidal Eldar.

Sigoroth will be very pleased to read this.