Eldar Guardians

Hi, I have tryed to kick everything off with my (supposedly) contraversial ideas on Eldar Guardian Units.

I start by dividing them back in to 2 seperate units. Defenders and Storm. Everything is prety much the same as is now with the exception that the Guardian Defenders start with Lasblasters. I have then added the Shuriken catapult as an option. Weapons Platform is still a must. Warlock options are built in to the unit as they should be and hence no Jetbike which makes sense or course.

Then I moved on to Guardian Storm. To add a bit of punch to the unit I have given them a Special weapon for every 5 guardians. I also have given them the option of replacing Pistol with Catapult, therefor allowing catapult units without Weapons Platforms. I toyed with the idea of making them a new 3rd unit and couldnt think of an name so I discided this was better.

Lastly I added a new special weapon to the Guardian Storm unit. This is intentionaly added for us to work on as a comunity amd shap and mold in to what we feel is right. I will start with my idea for it.

Star Gun: rng 12" s6 ap2 assult 2

It is effectiavly a hand held start cannon. It probably could use a better name.

So go nuts and rip me apart

My biggest and first question is how radical you want to get with this codex.

Which of the following do you want to do?

1. Balance out existing codex options
2. Give existing units new scope
3. Rework codex from the ground up
4. Take Eldar in a totally new direction

I think one of the biggest draws to actually playing Eldar armies is synergy, or put another way, how the units work well with each other. Individually, most units would be too specialized to have a place in the army, but together the units should be a scary machine. By comparison, Space Marines are the jack-of-all-trades kings. Their units should be kitted out to handle all but the most extreme threats. The Eldar units do one thing and do it very well.

My point here being that you can't really change one unit without affecting the Eldar as a whole. So the scale of your changes to Guardians will be roughly the scale to which you change a lot of units. Adding this Star Gun, especially for every five models in the unit, allows serious anti-MEQ punch, which would have been reserved for Reapers or Banshees. Giving them lasblasters can potentially make them cheap Hawks without wings.

Ideally, what I would like to see Guardians become is a unit that does not rely on the Farseer to become effective and that embraces its Troops slot wholesale. I would like to see a unit that, through volume of fire and mobility, presents a serious threat to any other troop unit in the game.

For Defenders, I think Catapults should be standard and Lasblasters the option. As interesting your idea may be, it seems to be the minority. I think weapons platforms should be a one-model upgrade, replacing the standard rifle, and that the heavy weapons some changes.

For Storm, I think the special weapons should be good (ala, make a Fusion Gun that has melta and plasma options) and give them a heavy flamer, but have one allowed for every ten models.

Food for thought.

Hmmm..... Interesting food.

I see what you are saying here reguarding the precice roll. I do feel that is part of thr roll of the Aspects of War. Guardians should be weaker, than aspect, but have a slight bit more flexability. They should atleast be about on par with an Imperial Guardsman reguarding flexability. My reasoning for the one in five for the special weapons is that you can curently take 2 in a 10 man unit. Wanted to keep it kind of consistant. I also was thinking of addind the option for 2 weapons platforms in a 20 man Defender unit.

Now to the hard bit. Balance. I feel that a full Defender unit should be slightly better at shooting while worst in combat than Dire Avengers. Storm should be the opposite. While Dire Avengers should be a bit of both with better protsction. Making all 3 units perfictly viable options and hopfuly all nesecery so you have hard choices. I like hard choices.

With reguards to Lasblaster being the base. I have always wrote it as Catapult with Lasblaster swap out. I wrote it this way this time for 2 reasons. Firstly is to tie in with the same choice with the Storm as this is the first time I have thought of it. Secondly I thought it emphisises the fact that they exist. I do not mind that they become mini Hawks. Apparently no one uses them. I do all the time to great success. I just have always been missing the lasgun options that use to be standard for guardiand back in the day. I still have 60 of them sitting in a box. I currently do not use guardians as Dire Avengers are way better with their range and amount of shots. I agree that Shuriken Catapults make an awsome support weapon to assulting units and is why I will always keep them around everyware.

As for direction of codex, well that is the purpose of this site. Let the people discide whats best for theem to play with/against. Take it where you feel. I realy hate the idea of increasing ranges. Firstly everyone wants 18" on dire avengers. Then even befor that happened it moved to everyone wanting 18" on all catapults. Now pwople are asking for 24" on dire avengers and vehicles and 18 on guardians. Escelation is terrable. I say if you want 24" range them pay the price in strengh. Yet people arn not happy with that.

Sorry for mini rant there.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

I see what you are saying here reguarding the precice roll. I do feel that is part of thr roll of the Aspects of War. Guardians should be weaker, than aspect, but have a slight bit more flexability. They should atleast be about on par with an Imperial Guardsman reguarding flexability. My reasoning for the one in five for the special weapons is that you can curently take 2 in a 10 man unit. Wanted to keep it kind of consistant. I also was thinking of addind the option for 2 weapons platforms in a 20 man Defender unit.

I'd advise being careful with "precedent" and "consistency". There are things that have been introduced to the game that have imbalanced it, and rather than remove the imbalancing factor, GW decided to use counterweight options in other Codices. As you refer to it above, it's a rampant escalation of an arms race. I'd prefer to look at the initial issue and remove it if that is possible. Using your example, if we limit the Guard to one special weapon for a unit and one heavy weapon for a unit, we can keep the Eldar on the same keel.

I'm also of the opinion that slot choices GENERALLY should be able to compete with those units that fill similar slot choices in other codices. A 160 point unit of Guardian Defenders should be a statistical match (or around it) to a 160 point Space Marine Tactical Squad, for example.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

Now to the hard bit. Balance. I feel that a full Defender unit should be slightly better at shooting while worst in combat than Dire Avengers. Storm should be the opposite. While Dire Avengers should be a bit of both with better protsction. Making all 3 units perfictly viable options and hopfuly all nesecery so you have hard choices. I like hard choices.

I disagree here. I think Dire Avengers should be superior and more expensive Guardians. Guardians should only be better at shooting through numbers and the addition of a special or heavy weapon. Basic gun to basic gun, I think the Avengers should be superior. Better BS (4), better range, and perhaps gun improvements like an additional point of Strength and/or AP. The Avengers are an elite unit of soldiers, every bit an improvement over a Guardian that a Space Marine is over an experienced Guardsman. The counterbalance to this is that they will be pricey and still comparatively fragile.

I think of it this way. Guardian Defenders, with their talents for mid-range combat, would be more inclined to join an aspect like the Avengers. Storm Guardians would be more inclined to join Banshees or Scorpions.

You're right though, the choices should be difficult.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

With reguards to Lasblaster being the base. I have always wrote it as Catapult with Lasblaster swap out. I wrote it this way this time for 2 reasons. Firstly is to tie in with the same choice with the Storm as this is the first time I have thought of it. Secondly I thought it emphisises the fact that they exist. I do not mind that they become mini Hawks. Apparently no one uses them. I do all the time to great success. I just have always been missing the lasgun options that use to be standard for guardiand back in the day. I still have 60 of them sitting in a box. I currently do not use guardians as Dire Avengers are way better with their range and amount of shots. I agree that Shuriken Catapults make an awsome support weapon to assulting units and is why I will always keep them around everyware.

Makes sense. My point was only that more people use the Catapults, so I thought they should be standard. Your preference for the Lasblasters is cool, though.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

As for direction of codex, well that is the purpose of this site. Let the people discide whats best for theem to play with/against. Take it where you feel. I realy hate the idea of increasing ranges. Firstly everyone wants 18" on dire avengers. Then even befor that happened it moved to everyone wanting 18" on all catapults. Now pwople are asking for 24" on dire avengers and vehicles and 18 on guardians. Escelation is terrable. I say if you want 24" range them pay the price in strengh. Yet people arn not happy with that.

True enough, escalation is an issue.

Here's my weapon breakdown, presented as more food for thought.

Shuriken Catapult: Rng-24", Str-3, AP-5, Rapid Fire
Avenger Catapult: Rng-30", Str-3, AP-4, Rapid Fire
Lasblaster: Rng-18", Str-4, AP-4, Rapid Fire

Dwane Diblie wrote:

Sorry for mini rant there.

Ha! I study philosophy, political science, religion, economics, and medicine. I am very used to ranting and you didn't even come close. Keep those opinions coming.

Herald of the Lost wrote:

Here's my weapon breakdown, presented as more food for thought.

Shuriken Catapult: Rng-24", Str-3, AP-5, Rapid Fire
Avenger Catapult: Rng-30", Str-3, AP-4, Rapid Fire
Lasblaster: Rng-18", Str-4, AP-4, Rapid Fire

Wow. That to me is slightly over powered

The Shuriken Catapult above is the same as the lasblaster is now. I do not understant your reasioning for the lasblaster above having that stat line. I do agree that Swooping Hawks need a better version though. Call it a hawk blaster, whatever, not this topic. Avenger Catapult being 30" though? Wow. I disagree as I still feel that eldar weapons, especialy shuriken weapons, should be shorter than other race equivalents. Have you ever managed to flick a card as far as you can flick a marble?

With my comparason between Dire Avengeds and Guardians, I was thinking on a point to point basis. But you bring up a good point in the comparison of troops to troops of other Codices. So a little Math hammer and lets see where it currently stands in reguards to 10 man tac squad. 160pts = 20 guardians with no upgrades. As we must take a weapon we have to drop 1 guardian just to take a Shuriken cannon. If we want grenades then we are down to 17 guardians. Lets work with that against MEQ.

Lasblaster: 16 x 2 shots = 16 hits = ~5 wounds = ~2 dead MEQs (1/5th of squad)
Shuriken Catapult: 16 x 2 shots = 16 hits = 8 wounds = ~3 dead MEQs (3/10ths of squad)
+ Shuriken Cannon: 3 shots = ~2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~1 dead MEQ (1/10th of squad)

In return

24" Bolter: 9 shot = 6 hits = 4 wounds = 4 dead Guardians (4/17th of squad)
12" Bolter: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 8 wounds = 8 dead Guardians (8/17ths of squad)
+Heavy Bolter: 3 shots = 2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~2 dead Guardians (2/17th of squad)

Marines also have the ability to shoot and assult like guardians do. But can not move and fire their Heavy Weapon. Also all the marines are going to be better in combat than the guardians and the unit comes with sargent in cost. All in all marines are still better by a fair bit in my opinion.

Now just in case you want to see the dire avenger equivelent. 10 man with exarch ( Catapults and Blade Storm)

Avenger Catapult: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 6 wounds = 2 dead MEQs (1/5th squad)
w/ Bladestorm: 9 x 3 shots = 18 hits = 9 wounds = 3 dead MEQs (3/10ths squad)
+ Exarch: 4 shots = ~4 hits = ~2 wounds = ~1 dead MEQ (1/10th squad)
+ w/ Bladestorm: 5 shots = ~5 hits = ~3 wounds = ~ 1 dead MEQ (1/10 squad)

In return

24" Bolter: 9 shot = 6 hits = 4 wounds = 2 dead Avengers (1/5th of squad)
12" Bolter: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 8 wounds = 4 dead Avengers (2/5ths of squad)
+Heavy Bolter: 3 shots = 2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~2 dead Avengers (2/5th of squad)

So in conclusion I would postulate that Defenders with lasblasters dose better than Dire Avengers because of range only. While Defenders with Catapults do better unless Dire Avengers use Bladestorm. But with return fire Marines are still slightly superior. And Marines win Combat hand down. So Guardian Storm are there for needed to help there. Extra weapons or not.

Herald of the Lost wrote:

... I think Dire Avengers should be superior and more expensive Guardians. Guardians should only be better at shooting through numbers and the addition of a special or heavy weapon. Basic gun to basic gun, I think the Avengers should be superior. Better BS (4), better range, and perhaps gun improvements like an additional point of Strength and/or AP. The Avengers are an elite unit of soldiers, every bit an improvement over a Guardian that a Space Marine is over an experienced Guardsman. The counterbalance to this is that they will be pricey and still comparatively fragile.

And again I agree. And, I feel I have explained it above. On a model to model basis Dire Avenger needs to be way superior. But on a point to point Dire Avengers need to kind of fill both rolls of range and combat with out the extras that the guardian unit set. Making Dire Avengers no have to rely on Guardians, and Guardians not have to rely on Dire Avengers but still need to rely on other Guardians. I hope that makes sence. I want all 3 units to be good enough that there is no clear choice as to what to take. All 3 need to be staples.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

The Shuriken Catapult above is the same as the lasblaster is now. I do not understant your reasioning for the lasblaster above having that stat line. I do agree that Swooping Hawks need a better version though. Call it a hawk blaster, whatever, not this topic. Avenger Catapult being 30" though? Wow. I disagree as I still feel that eldar weapons, especialy shuriken weapons, should be shorter than other race equivalents. Have you ever managed to flick a card as far as you can flick a marble?

A shuriken round is a thin, razor sharp blade that seems to be fired out of a railgun equivalent, as the catapult is described as having a "gravitic accelerator". I don't see how that drops the range in comparison to something like a boltgun. The catapult was given a short range because GW was trying to encourage eldar players to get close. I don't like thinking that way.

Eldar spent eons fighting Necrons and Orks. After the paths were created, they fought things like Space Marines. They are millions of years old. I don't see why their guns should be so limited in scope. I mean, the Tau have a basic rifle that makes the catapult look like one of those toy disc guns from the supermarket.

I guess the overall point is that those less mobile units, Guardians and Avengers, should be able to reach out and touch someone and not require a mech-transport to be effective. A solid little anti-infantry firebase for your "speartip" units to attack from, in other words. And at Strength 3, you won't be breaking any game with them.

As for the lasblaster, my reasoning there is that I see a weapon far superior to the lasgun, and superior to the Shuriken Catapult. At Strength 4 and AP 4, they are a threat to all infantry, and in numbers, a threat to heavy infantry, with that legendary Eldar resilience as a counterbalance.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

With my comparason between Dire Avengeds and Guardians, I was thinking on a point to point basis. But you bring up a good point in the comparison of troops to troops of other Codices. So a little Math hammer and lets see where it currently stands in reguards to 10 man tac squad. 160pts = 20 guardians with no upgrades. As we must take a weapon we have to drop 1 guardian just to take a Shuriken cannon. If we want grenades then we are down to 17 guardians. Lets work with that against MEQ.

Lasblaster: 16 x 2 shots = 16 hits = ~5 wounds = ~2 dead MEQs (1/5th of squad)
Shuriken Catapult: 16 x 2 shots = 16 hits = 8 wounds = ~3 dead MEQs (3/10ths of squad)
+ Shuriken Cannon: 3 shots = ~2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~1 dead MEQ (1/10th of squad)

In return

24" Bolter: 9 shot = 6 hits = 4 wounds = 4 dead Guardians (4/17th of squad)
12" Bolter: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 8 wounds = 8 dead Guardians (8/17ths of squad)
+Heavy Bolter: 3 shots = 2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~2 dead Guardians (2/17th of squad)

Marines also have the ability to shoot and assult like guardians do. But can not move and fire their Heavy Weapon. Also all the marines are going to be better in combat than the guardians and the unit comes with sargent in cost. All in all marines are still better by a fair bit in my opinion.

Now just in case you want to see the dire avenger equivelent. 10 man with exarch ( Catapults and Blade Storm)

Avenger Catapult: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 6 wounds = 2 dead MEQs (1/5th squad)
w/ Bladestorm: 9 x 3 shots = 18 hits = 9 wounds = 3 dead MEQs (3/10ths squad)
+ Exarch: 4 shots = ~4 hits = ~2 wounds = ~1 dead MEQ (1/10th squad)
+ w/ Bladestorm: 5 shots = ~5 hits = ~3 wounds = ~ 1 dead MEQ (1/10 squad)

In return

24" Bolter: 9 shot = 6 hits = 4 wounds = 2 dead Avengers (1/5th of squad)
12" Bolter: 9 x 2 shots = 12 hits = 8 wounds = 4 dead Avengers (2/5ths of squad)
+Heavy Bolter: 3 shots = 2 hits = ~2 wounds = ~2 dead Avengers (2/5th of squad)

So in conclusion I would postulate that Defenders with lasblasters dose better than Dire Avengers because of range only. While Defenders with Catapults do better unless Dire Avengers use Bladestorm. But with return fire Marines are still slightly superior. And Marines win Combat hand down. So Guardian Storm are there for needed to help there. Extra weapons or not.

Your mathhammer seems to be spot on, but I think you're not accommodating for range properly. At 12", the Guardians require a transport to get in and do damage. Otherwise, the Space Marines can pepper them from double that distance and then hose them when they get close. With a range of 24" and mobility, the Guardians can encourage the Tactical Squad to come off their position. These points apply with lasblasters and catapults.

Moreover, I believe another change should be added into the mix, and this often gets more vitriol than my weapon suggestions.

Wait for it....

...Guardian Armor: 4+ armor save.

Why? Because again, the Eldar are an ancient society who conquered the damn galaxy. They should know how to make a suit of armor that functions better than my cousin's motorcycle jacket. This lends them a bonus in survivability that doesn't take away from the fact that they are still fragile (Toughness 3, after all), but also reflects that perhaps the "dying race" has figured out how not to die in droves.

What I'm hoping for, eventually, is to make Guardians into something between a Guardsman and a Storm Trooper. Disciplined, decent save, low toughness, with a medium capable weapon. Around 10 points, with grenades. A unit that can pepper a Tactical Squad as you set up your Banshees to wipe them out and a unit that can draw the attention of a horde of gaunts and slice them to ribbons before they get there.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

And again I agree. And, I feel I have explained it above. On a model to model basis Dire Avenger needs to be way superior. But on a point to point Dire Avengers need to kind of fill both rolls of range and combat with out the extras that the guardian unit set. Making Dire Avengers no have to rely on Guardians, and Guardians not have to rely on Dire Avengers but still need to rely on other Guardians. I hope that makes sence. I want all 3 units to be good enough that there is no clear choice as to what to take. All 3 need to be staples.

I hear you. My only dissenting opinion is that I do not believe Avengers should be designed to fulfill a hand to hand roll, or a balanced between ranged and hand to hand, which is another reason why I go with Rapid Fire over Assault on the catapults. I don't believe these are the types of units that spray and dive in. They spray, spray again, back off, and spray some more. By that reasoning, they should require a support assault unit or a support anti-tank unit, be it Banshees or Dragons.

I would use them almost deceptively. By having no anti-tank, they'll probably be a low priority target. But then they open up and start mauling support units and halving horde units by the time said units get into range to assault them back.

But anyway, I think I've lost coherency at this point.

I will start by saying I totaly missed the Rapid fire on all 3 weapons above.

That dose change how they work quite alot. But that being said I feel that is it not right. But if they had to be, then I would be looking at returning the Avenger Catapult back in to a standard catapult and giving the Exarch a new power to Extend the range of the unit by 6" including for Rapid Fire. This of course would not be used in conjunction with Bladestorm.

But I still feel it is wrong. I was never comfortable with Warpsriders haveing Rapifire on their Death Spinners last edition. There is something that feels not right about Rapid Fire on eldar. Eldar weapons are supose to be superior equivelents of imperium weapons with massive amounts of OH&S built in. Hence the Assult ability. So in my mind it stays. There is one exception on my view of Rapid Fire in Eldar and I very mixed responces to this. Ranger Long Rifle should be Rapid Fire instead of Heavy 1. They are supose to be insainly good with their weapon and I do not se a porblem with them double tapping at close range. Long range is still as effective as now. I think I am going to breake that up in to other Topics.

Armour. I do agree to an extent that they need better armour but 4+ feels too much to me. I am thinking Armour with special rules might be better. So lets start talking armour ideas

Guardian Mesh Armour:
A Model wearing Mesh Armour recieves an Armour Save of 5+. In addition the modle can take its save if the AP of a wounding hit is equal to or greater than its armour. IE: a shot would need AP 4 to ignore the armour compleatly.

I do feel this can be applyed to all armour in the codex. But I start to worry when I think about 3+ armour units needing AP2 to be beaten. Dose this feel too powerful. For the 5+ it is not so powerful, but it dose stop all your presiors Aspects form dying in droves to Heavy Bolters. (which I know is desirable, but many be too much?) Talk that over. Oh and there was talk of that being the rule for Storm Troopers in the first IG codex back in 3rd ed as they didnt want it to be as powerful as Scout armour. In the end they droped the idea. I guess it may have been too much of a hassel. But if it was an army wide rule maybe not so much. Also I am not sure weather to apply it to jetbikes.

On to Dire Avengers. Dire Avengers are the first and oldest aspect of war and is a representation of the soldier of war. All other Asspects split form this to be a more specialised version of that type of fighting. They are the all round aspect. I see no trouble with them forfilling a roll of Shooting and then assulting. I do not mind so much if Guardians are resticted to shoot or assult. But Dire avengers must stay with the ability. I woulld even go as far as to say that it is ok for them to be armed with a Pistol and CCW in addition to the Catapult. But I also feel that it will detract form other aspects if done. I am also a firm beleaver that each and every aspect should have its own unique stat line for various reasons. Primarialy as a representation of focus of combat style, and as such Dire Avengers would have teh ost rounded Stat line of all aspects covering a bit of power in all fields of battle compaired to a guardian but superior to none compaired to an Aspect of that field. Dire Avenger vs Scorpion. Avenger can and will fight in Assult better than a Guardian but worst than A Scorpion. But a Scorpion can not perfor as well at shooting as a Dire Avenger and will be on par with a Guardian. I also have soem very extream ideas for a couple of aspects.

Dwane Diblie wrote:

Armour. I do agree to an extent that they need better armour but 4+ feels too much to me. I am thinking Armour with special rules might be better. So lets start talking armour ideas

Guardian Mesh Armour:
A Model wearing Mesh Armour recieves an Armour Save of 5+. In addition the modle can take its save if the AP of a wounding hit is equal to or greater than its armour. IE: a shot would need AP 4 to ignore the armour compleatly.

I do feel this can be applyed to all armour in the codex. But I start to worry when I think about 3+ armour units needing AP2 to be beaten. Dose this feel too powerful. For the 5+ it is not so powerful, but it dose stop all your presiors Aspects form dying in droves to Heavy Bolters. (which I know is desirable, but many be too much?) Talk that over. Oh and there was talk of that being the rule for Storm Troopers in the first IG codex back in 3rd ed as they didnt want it to be as powerful as Scout armour. In the end they droped the idea. I guess it may have been too much of a hassel. But if it was an army wide rule maybe not so much. Also I am not sure weather to apply it to jetbikes.

I can't say that I'm a fan of the idea for Guardians, though you may have stumbled upon a possible solution for the problem I've been having with Terminator Armor and trying to make it the expensive, super resilient thing it is in the background.

If one were to go through with this idea, I think it would be less complicated to say "the armor adds 1 to the AP value of all hits against it."

Dwane Diblie wrote:

On to Dire Avengers. Dire Avengers are the first and oldest aspect of war and is a representation of the soldier of war. All other Asspects split form this to be a more specialised version of that type of fighting. They are the all round aspect. I see no trouble with them forfilling a roll of Shooting and then assulting. I do not mind so much if Guardians are resticted to shoot or assult. But Dire avengers must stay with the ability. I woulld even go as far as to say that it is ok for them to be armed with a Pistol and CCW in addition to the Catapult. But I also feel that it will detract form other aspects if done. I am also a firm beleaver that each and every aspect should have its own unique stat line for various reasons. Primarialy as a representation of focus of combat style, and as such Dire Avengers would have teh ost rounded Stat line of all aspects covering a bit of power in all fields of battle compaired to a guardian but superior to none compaired to an Aspect of that field. Dire Avenger vs Scorpion. Avenger can and will fight in Assult better than a Guardian but worst than A Scorpion. But a Scorpion can not perfor as well at shooting as a Dire Avenger and will be on par with a Guardian. I also have soem very extream ideas for a couple of aspects.

Not a terrible argument, I must say. I like your idea of Avenger Catapults with pistols and cc weapons. And I don't think it will be stepping on any toes either. The Scorpions and Banshees will still dominate the Assault phase, but the extra weapons for the Avengers will make them a little more solid in a fight.

To be honest, Dwane, I don't see the point of giving Guardians a 'special' 4+ armour save. When is it going to make a difference?

I like the idea of having Guardians as a cross between average Guardsman and Storm Trooper.

• 
  4+ Armour save.
  Shuripults: 24", S3, AP5, Assault 3 (Avengerpults have AP4)
  Storm Guardians as a seperate unit to Defenders
  9pts/model for Defenders
  Allow 1 Support Weapon (from the Heavy Support section) per Defender squad that does not take up ANY slots.
  

Ah but it is not a 4+ save. It is still a 5+ save. It will make quite a big diffarence as they will start to get saves in the open to most base weapons. Yeah sure it is still a 5+ save. But better than nothing and not as good as a 4+ save which should still be reserved for Aspects.

Now I do admit that the amount of cover around dose make alot of armour redundent for alot of armies these day.

As to the Catapult stat line I feel it is alittle too much. Especialy if combined with Guide. I feel the 2 weapons, Catapult and Lasblaster are both perfictly fine as they are. Want to give Guardians better range then give them back their lasblasters. It is a weapon they use to have as base that was upgraded to the more porweful Catapult. Catapult not so powerful as it was back then though. But, I still beleave it is a good weapon if used right. And that normaly involves working with a storm unit instead of siting back doing nothing.

Now the artilery idea has interested me eversince I first heard it mentioned a while back now. It is a brilliant idea and I would like to find a proper way to implement it. Is it just 1 weapon or 1-3 like in HS? Should the HS version still exist and if so should we ingrease the unit size to max 5 platforms. Do we want to add options for extra crew? I can see a unit of 20 guardians with 5 platforms and a warlock as a HS unit. But again another topic.

I would do the following for Guardians, Storms, and Dire Avengers, its not refined but its my loose idea:

Guardian Defenders

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
3 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 4+

Warden
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
3 4 3 3 1 5 2 8 4+

Unit Size 5-10

Lasblaster R24 S3 Ap5 Assault 2
or Shuriken Catapult R18 S4 Ap5 Assault 2
and a Close Combat Weapon.

May take a Weapon Platform (as codex.)
May take a Warlock.

Special Rules: Fleet, Acute Senses

Guardian Storm

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 3 3 3 1 5 1/2 8 4+

Leader
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 3 3 3 1 5 1/2 8 4+

Unit Size 5-10

Shuriken Pistol R12 S4 Ap5 Pistol
and Close Combat Weapon

May take 0-2 special weapons (as codex.)
May take a Warlock.

Special Rules: Fleet, Acute Senses

Warlock:
WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 3 3 2 5 2/3 9 4+

Shuriken Pistol R12 S4 Ap5 Pistol
and Force Weapon
May replace Force Weapon with a Witchblade for X points or Singing Spear for Y points.

Special Rules: Fleet, Acute Senses, Psyker

Psychic Powers: May take one psychic power.


While the Avengers would be moved to Elite where they belong.

Dire Avenger Exarch

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 6 3 3 2 6 3 10 4+

Weapons:
Avenger Shuriken Catapult R24 S5 Ap5 Assault 2
or Dual Avenger Shuriken Catapults R24 S5 Ap5 Assault 4 for X points.
or Avenger Shuriken Pistol R12 S5 Ap5 Pistol and a Powerweapon for Y points.
or Avenger Shuriken Pistol R12 S5 Ap5 Pistol and a Diresword (as codex) for Z points.

Wargear:
May take a Shimmershield (Provides a 3+ Cover Save to squad) for X points.
May take a Targeting Crystal (Rerolls misses shots) for Y points.
May take a Temple Banner (Unit gains Stubborn) for Z points.

Exarch Powers:
Furious Charge
and Bladestorm (Avenger Shuriken Catapults gain Rending) for X points.
or Defend (Dire Avengers gain a 6+ Invulnerable) for Y points.

May take 0-9 Dire Avengers.

Dire Avenger

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 5 3 3 1 6 2 9 4+

Weapons:
Avenger Shuriken Catapult R24 S5 Ap5 Assault 2

The thing is, Col, is that Dire Avengers are 'jack of all trades' for Eldar - not cheap (Guardians), not too expensive, not too assaulty, not too shooty. And I think that works. Being this jack of all trades lends it perfectly to being Troops. And I think that works too. And you do realise that using your rules you can have the Exarch fighting on its own, rather than with the unit it trains and teaches?

Dire Avengers

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 9 4+

12pts/model. Unit Size 5 - 10.

Dire Avengers carry Avenger Shuriken Catapults: 18", S3, AP4, Assault 2

Special Rules: Fleet of Foot, Acute Senses

One Dire Avenger model per squad may be upgraded to an Exarch for +24pts.

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 5 3 3 2 6 2 9 3+

The Exarch may replace his shuriken catapult for 2 shuriken catapults at +5pts (counting as a single Assault 4 Avenger Shuriken Catapult); with a diresword and Avenger shuriken pistol at +10pts, or with a power weapon and shimmershield at +15pts.

A Diresword counts as a Power Weapon that causes Instant Death and increases the Exarch's strength by 1.

Avenger Shuriken Pistol: 12", S3, AP4, Pistol

A Shimmershield confers the unit a 4+ invulnerable save.

The Exarch may be given the following Exarch powers:

Defend for +15pts
Bladestorm for +15pts

Note: All Exarch powers may still be used by the unit after the Exarch dies.

Defend: Only models in base contact with the Dire Avengers may attack them
Bladestorm: All the Avenger Shuriken shots in the unit count as Rending

Design Notes:

I wanted to leave the Avengers mostly as they are - note that I changed the Exarch, his wargear and his powers and gave the unit Acute Senses. I like the way Defend works, as it encourages the player to put the unit into chokepoints to keep the number of models attacking down. This helps especially when defending versus hordes of Guants or Orks.

The unit also recieved AP4 avengerpults, as for a jack of all trades unit Avengers could not handle medium infantry (eg Tyranid Warriors) well. The strength has gone down, however, to encourage other units with better guns for taking down heavy infantry (MEQs).

I also haven't put in Transport, as we can do the Wave Serpent later.

SeaSwift wrote:

The thing is, Col, is that Dire Avengers are 'jack of all trades' for Eldar - not cheap (Guardians), not too expensive, not too assaulty, not too shooty. And I think that works. Being this jack of all trades lends it perfectly to being Troops. And I think that works too. And you do realise that using your rules you can have the Exarch fighting on its own, rather than with the unit it trains and teaches?

Not only aware but that's what I was aiming for. This is supposed to be in line with 50 point marines. Guardians end up about as good as dire avengers are now and DAs are going to become killing machines just like all the other aspects.

Dire Avengers

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 9 4+

12pts/model. Unit Size 5 - 10.

Dire Avengers carry Avenger Shuriken Catapults: 18", S3, AP4, Assault 2

Special Rules: Fleet of Foot, Acute Senses

One Dire Avenger model per squad may be upgraded to an Exarch for +24pts.

WS BS S T W I A Ld Sv
5 5 3 3 2 6 2 9 3+

The Exarch may replace his shuriken catapult for 2 shuriken catapults at +5pts (counting as a single Assault 4 Avenger Shuriken Catapult); with a diresword and Avenger shuriken pistol at +10pts, or with a power weapon and shimmershield at +15pts.

A Diresword counts as a Power Weapon that causes Instant Death and increases the Exarch's strength by 1.

Avenger Shuriken Pistol: 12", S3, AP4, Pistol

A Shimmershield confers the unit a 4+ invulnerable save.

The Exarch may be given the following Exarch powers:

Defend for +15pts
Bladestorm for +15pts

Note: All Exarch powers may still be used by the unit after the Exarch dies.

Defend: Only models in base contact with the Dire Avengers may attack them
Bladestorm: All the Avenger Shuriken shots in the unit count as Rending

Design Notes:

I wanted to leave the Avengers mostly as they are - note that I changed the Exarch, his wargear and his powers and gave the unit Acute Senses. I like the way Defend works, as it encourages the player to put the unit into chokepoints to keep the number of models attacking down. This helps especially when defending versus hordes of Guants or Orks.

The unit also recieved AP4 avengerpults, as for a jack of all trades unit Avengers could not handle medium infantry (eg Tyranid Warriors) well. The strength has gone down, however, to encourage other units with better guns for taking down heavy infantry (MEQs).

I also haven't put in Transport, as we can do the Wave Serpent later.

Yours is fine. I just have a different end product in mind.

Col. Tartleton wrote:

Not only aware but that's what I was aiming for. This is supposed to be in line with 50 point marines. Guardians end up about as good as dire avengers are now and DAs are going to become killing machines just like all the other aspects.

Yours is fine. I just have a different end product in mind.

Ahhh... I assumed we were using the base line from this thread: https://thecodexproject.darkbb.com/suggestions-and-requests-f22/regarding-relativity-t12.htm

Of course, some of those units will change (Guardians etc) but I didn't think this was supposed to be a fluff edition, more a patch of some of the units/armies that don't work too well ATM.