RE: [Epic] Tactic Critique

From: Miller, Chris <CMiller_at_...>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 10:32:52 -0500

>
>----> The Eldar have gained in firepower, if anything. Guardians at 2fp?
>The Aspects seem to be damn nasty, and with an Exarch...
>Miss the old serpent shields but the new one is a useful vehicle,
>especially when teamed with the Doomweaver (whatever they call it now).
>
>Actually, the Eldar have LOST a lot of firepower, at least a lot per point.
>One of these days I'll do one of them analysis things. But anyway. Most of
>the firepower they have now is alot point for point compared to the
>equivilent. Guardians have good Fp, but are mostly usefull for just winning
>firefights. It's hard to actually shoot with them, because of the range. I've
>always wanted to try unloading a bunch of guardians in front of the enemy and
>shooting them, but I doute it would work to well. The reverse of this is that
>eldar seem to have gained assault. You can actaully get decent numbers of
>assault stands now, rather than a few small, but good detachments.
>I miss when eldar were a shooting army, rather than a assault army.
>Persoanlly, I think assault is a strange way to go for an army concerned
>about causlties.
>-----------------------------------------------------James
>Nugent----------------------------------------

------> I'm still not so sure. The guardians in SM/TL were pretty weak
in the shooting department. Reapers, Avengers were OK, but most of my
firepower came from vehicles - falcons, dreads, prisms, weavers,walkers,
etc., and they're all still there and most can still do pop-ups. I agree
the Guardian range sucks, but the game tends to close down to close
range at some point anyway, and they don't lack for transports. I often
used jetbike swarms for assault tactics in SM/TL, but now they also tend
to more FP than assault. As for aspects, I usually saw/played more
Harlies, Scorps and banshees in any given battle than dragons, avengers,
and reapers anyway, so while the change to the aspects is annoying on
the stat line, for what people take in the game, I don't think it's a
huge change.
          As for the casualty factor - I agree 100%. The fluff is always
harping on "dwindling race" etc. yet the guardians are treated as
expendible troops quite a bit of the time. Really, in both this and 40K,
you'd think they would worry a little more about armor and using
dreads/wraithguard/some kinda automated units rather than living Eldar,
and that the assault thing would be restricted to specialists who were
very nasty. Seems like they should have more ranged AT shots, or
something, too.

Chris Miller

>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Jul 24 1997 - 15:32:52 UTC