not at all usless they just a surge in armor tech that bypassed there weapon tech for a brief period but then since compared to a carnifex (in tabale top never compared them in ff game) all vehicles are squissy (1 hit or 6 come on wich one is tougher) granted weaker weapons can hurt a carni but still

Voronesh said:

As I said in the post, I don't really consider it to be a problem. It was just an observation.

Voronesh said:

How again does armor negate electronic warfare? And ceramite and adamantium are just grimdark words for advanced ceramics and advanced metal alloys. Effective, but still ignored by a lance. And the Eldar do love their pulsars.

And you are right, warfare has shifted in the direction of 'Eldar-like' combat since WW2, favoring mobility and firepower over armor. I have a feeling armor in the future will be strong enough to keep personal weapon fire out and active defenses (anti-missile, electronic warfare, etc.) will be needed to combat anything more serious. But this is 40k, not real life, so we suspend our disbelief a bit and argue about the effectiveness of made up technology against other made up technology. Wouldn't have it any other way.

I should point out that I've only played Eldar since 4th, so my opinion is somewhat based on this (played IG in 3rd but rarely played against Eldar). I've heard GW had some pretty severe balance issues back in the day. Oh who am I kidding, they still do, the issues just change (and the story gets worse) with every new codex Matt Ward releases.

I take a different outlook on things, I suppose. If the Eldar are completely unhittable if they want to be (and aren't killing you in the process), this is actually quite in line with the narrative. On the other hand, if they can remain completely unhittable to a decent crew and kill you in the process, some rules tweaks are likely needed. Instead of making the Nova Cannon more effective than it should be, basically forcing you to have one to deal with broken rules (Eldar cheese), fix the broken rules.

I seem to recall something like 'Fighting Eldar is like fighting ghosts.' They are the most advanced sentient race in the Galaxy. They are small in number and very powerful on the attack. They should be difficult to fight, not impossible. I shouldn't need a nova cannon to kill a frigate. Having said that, if an Eldar frigate were not just plain better than an Imperial frigate at some things, then the narrative is meaningless and the game switches from being a game about the 41st millenium and the struggle of mankind to a game about how awesome the imperium is and how fun it is to squish aliens, especially silly space elves.

So why do Macrobatteries get a reduced penalty against Holofields? I understood it was to do with their greater blast radius compared with the precise Lances. If this is the case, shouldn't the blast of a Nova Cannon pretty much automatically catch the Eldar ship?

guest469 said:

My best guess? Firing batteries isn't a single shot. It is a series of shots and volleys fired over a period of time. As such, when your first bunch of attacks starts to miss, you attempt to pierce the subterfuge and fire again, getting more accurate and better data with each new volley.

The general idea is to replicate the holo-field rules from BFG in this newer system. The holofield had a 2+ save against all forms of direct attack (lances, torpedoes, etc) and nova cannons (probably because the nova cannon was a single shot). That means, to me, that the holo-field was perfectly capable of giving you completely incorrect data 5/6 times, and if you based a single shot or volley on that it just wasn't going to hit. 1/6 times the standard sensor suites could see through the illusion. As far as batteries go, they reduced the firepower of the battery by a column (gunnery shift to the right), decreasing their effectiveness (i.e., the first sets of shots are wasted as you track down the target) but not negating them.

I don't think they actually ever came out and said why the holo-field worked how it did (to quote my friend who I always played against 'friggin space elves with their goddamn pixie dust shields'), but this is just what I always figured it did.

from france

As both a player of rt and bfg i know how painful it is to fight the eldar they will always fight in your back and their lance became like a pain in the a...

I know a few trick to kill a eldar ship:

- Nova canon you do not aim at a ship but at the zone it is ( so no -40) . you don't count to hit it but instated on the radiation to shoot down the holofiled

- Mines a large zone and hop that it will run in it and get damage. than you use batteries, lance torpedoes and whatever you have.

- Use fighter and bomber to bring down this holofield. but this work only agaisnt ledar ship who are niot also carier unless you have twice the number and the luxury to lost it

- Use zone weapon as it was said eldar titan have the same strength and weakness and zone weapons don't strike a target so.......

- Prepare for loss in bfg the few time i win against them was at a great cost in term of escort, attack craft light cruiser frigate and even capital ship. a kind of pyrhus victory. you have to sacrifice a ship to allow another to srike at it.

- But there is a trick remenber eldar use the gateway not the warp. if you have to fight in bad condition anything than 3 to one (eldar shipcost a lot and they can 't afford to looseto many) try emergency warp jump. it is dangerous but you have more chance to survive.

also use nasty trick: my ship a transport have a hinding hold landing bay (wolf in sheep clothing) if i met eldar i pretend to be out of energ y and imobile and then launch my bomber. you see the eldar and dark eldar more have one flaw "arrogance" they probably won't resist attcking a hopless prey......

Dorsal and keel weapons are better against them that prow port or starboard because if you can 't turn you ship fast enought this weapons (especialy keel) can in fact Jonquin Saul fleet ox exchequer class has more chance of surving a eldar attack than bigger ship without keel weapon.