Topic: Harequins-worth it?

[The Black Dahlia Murder]

Simple question:

Are Harequins worth the points and money? I got three (Shadowseer and two with Harequins kisses) when my buddy gave me his army and I don't know if they are worth buying some more.

[Irisado]

There are so many factors which revolve around whether or not Harlequins are worthwhile, ranging from how much you want to adhere to background when putting your army together, to the type of army, strategy, and tactics you wish to employ, so it's pretty difficult to give you advice without knowing your intentions regarding these points.

In general, Harlequins are a difficult unit to get the best out of, due to their vulnerability to reprisals and the defenders react rule, and they are rather expensive.  Also, Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions can get the job done against most units, meaning that Harlequins only really offer a discernible advantage against high toughness opposition, such as monstrous creatures, and certain tough infantry units.  Against certain armies, therefore, such as Nurgle Chaos armies, they can be handy, but against more common MEQ and GEQ armies, their effectiveness is more limited in my view.

In an all comers list, my view is that they are not the best choice, for the reasons I have given above.  They are, however, useful if you play against a restricted range of opponents whose armies are vulnerable to Harlequins, or if you like to tailor your lists.

[Blazinghand]

Irisado's analysis is correct. Also, it really depends on what list you're running.

Here's some general advice:

Compared with our other Elite CC choices of Scorpions and Banshees, Harlequins have a narrower role. Scorpions are good against hordes and can operate without a transport or as a counter-assault unit fairly easily due to their good armor. Banshees need a transport and are best against opponents with good armor saves, but usually need backup due to their fragility.

Harlequins have a worse save than Banshees do but always get it. They can't take a dedicated transport. They're probably not as cost-effective against MEQs as Banshees but against high-T opponents with good saves such as SM Bikers, Monstrous Creatures, etc they shine.

Their biggest strength is on foot. They're good at footslogging thanks to Veil of Tears and Flip Belts. You see them sometimes as Counter-Assault units in Wraith-heavy armies due to the Shadowseer ameliorating the effects of Wraithsight.

The other issue with fielding Harlequins is fluff. They don't intervene in combat except in turning points of fate or to fight against Chaos. Also, people tend to shoehorn them into borrowed transports from other units even though Harlequins wouldn't use a Wave Serpent from Craftworld Eldar. The usual tactic is to take a 6-man Fire Dragon Squad and put it in a Falcon, and also buy a Wave Serpent for it and have the Harlequins hop in on turn 1.


EDIT: Lastly, like basically all Eldar assault units, you want to field as large a squad as possible. 3 isn't going to cut it. I'd run a max squad of 10 if I used them.

[ReX]

Compared with our other Elite CC choices of Scorpions and Banshees, Harlequins have a narrower role.

I do agree with most of the things you said in your post Blazinghand, however, I think the statement above is wrong.

And since Irisado also said something along the same lines:

Against certain armies, therefore, such as Nurgle Chaos armies, they can be handy, but against more common MEQ and GEQ armies, their effectiveness is more limited in my view.

First of, let me just say that I, unlike Irisado for instance, don’t really care about fluff when I’m building my Eldar army. I have a more "competitive mindset" and if a unit gives me what I’m looking for I won’t hesitate to field it even though it might not be right from a fluff point of view.

Now when that is said, I have more or less only been playing a foot-based list during the last 1.5 year, and based on my experience Harlequins are just amazing. However, as my experience is based on foot-lists, I will not make any claims that Harlequins are still amazing if you field them in a mechanized or hybrid-army. In my experience they do need support from other elements of your army to stay alive.

I do agree, that scorpions and banshees might be more cost-efficient against certain enemy units, however, harlequins gets the job done better overall. And as mentioned they also don't require a transport.

I took the time to do some math-hammer to try and give some numbers to back up my point of view:

In the table below I have compared Harlequins, Banshees and Scorpions against a variety of opponents.
And in all the following scenarios doom is applied to the target, and it is being assaulted by the Eldar unit.

The three squads are:

Squad H:
9 Harlequins w. 9 kisses
1 Troupe Master w. Power Weapon

Squad B:
9 Howling Banshees
1 Exarch w. Executioner

Squad S:
9 Striking Scorpions
1 Exarch w. Claw




To give a short explanation: In the table above green is the best performing squad, yellow is second place and red is the worst performing squad. And of course I'm open to that I might have made some mistakes in the above comparison, but I'm fairly certain that it's correct..

In terms of killing power, Harlequins surpass scorpions and banshees in all the given scenarios. In some they even kill more than the scorpions and banshees combined. Against enemies which ignores armor saves the casualties they might take may be reduced with fortune, which is not the case for scorpions or banshees.

Based on the examples given above (which does not include MCs and vehicles, where I think Squad H would do better than the others aswell) saying that Harlequins have a narrower window than Banshees and Scorpions is wrong in my view. They might need a bit more of pratice, as they are quite unforgiving, however if they get some support from the rest of your army they can often decimate a unit and still be out of harms way due to nearby units beeing tied up in combat or out of VoT range. Still if they are in harms way, you might have made a mistake..  but fortune and cover can make them quite resillient if somthing manages to spot them.

I won't go futher into detail, but to the OP: If you like "Eldarish units" (squishy, sneaky and might require some practice) which can, with some help from a farseer, kill almost anything in the game on the charge I would invest in some more Harlequins.

[Blazinghand]

You argue that Harlequins are more effective, and that's probably true. You also concede that they may not be more cost-effective, and I think that this is both true and relevant. You must factor in points cost when evaluating a unit's effectiveness through mathhammer. I mean, I could just go in and say "why would you ever field 10 Storm Guardians with 2 Fusion Guns on foot when you could field 10 Wraithguard on foot, look how much better the Wraithguard are at such and such jobs" but that's not a good argument if they aren't proportionally better for their points. Obviously, the points difference is smaller here, but it's still there:

9 Harlequins with Kisses + a Troupe Master with a PW is 236 Points
9 Howling Banshees + Exarch with Executioner is 182 Points
9 Striking Scorpions + Exarch with Claw is 187 Points.

Which is to say, the Harlequin squad you have detailed cost 30% more than the Banshees or the Scorps do. In light of that, the fact that they kill 12.5 MEQs of 10-man MEQ squad compared to the Banshees' 9.5 seems like it's not such a great deal. Killing 19 GEQs instead of the Scorpion's 17 also seems not worth the cost increase.

It's probably worth it to field them against Plague Marines etc though.

Another thing to note: All of these units actually cost more than this because Eldar forces don't act alone. Banshees usually don't cost 182 points since you almost always want them in a Wave Serpent. Harlequins are usually more expensive as well since you need to stick them in a borrowed Serpent or get a Shadowseer with Veil of Tears. Scorpions can get away with chilling on foot thanks to their saves, but usually you want to spring for the Exarch abilities or a transport for them anyways.

[Irisado]

I have to say that I find your table very confusing.  Where you say x number of units killed, do you mean models in the unit, or do you actually mean units?  Why have reprisals only been calculated for two units?

The point which I feel that you are overlooking is that while Harlequins are superior in terms of pure mathematics, the advantage which they have in terms of killing power compared to Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions is not significant enough to warrant the points paid to take them.  For example, the Harlequin squad you cite below, which would also need a Shadowseer, is significantly more expensive than the Striking Scorpions or Howling Banshees.  Blazinghand's post illustrates this issue in more detail, so I won't go into further detail.

Is it really, therefore, worth paying the points for the amount of additional damage inflicted against regular MEQs and GEQs?  My answer to that is most definitely not.  It is for this reason, they can be classified as being a niche unit in my view, since the performance enhancement is just not profound enough against regular units to warrant the additional expenditure of points.

[SeriousCallersOnly]

My brother uses them in a themed Iyanden list to provide some much needed close combat punch. The list is so themed, he doesn't use aspects, so has (self imposed) no access to banshees or scorpions. Harlequins can be fluff-justified though. But no three shells shenanigans with serpents.

Personally, I don't think they need a transport. When I've played against them the spotting-distance-field-thingy seems to protect them pretty much into charge range.

[Skyleap]

I think Blazinghand has a point re: comparing the unit costs according to how they are most often used. When this is taken into consideration, the costs of each unit even out significantly and, in truth, become negligible when dealing with each example as a max squad. But the numbers become skewed as a result of what the Wave Serpents can do during the course of a game in addition to what the cargo's capabilities are.

I think the greatest knock against Harlequins is their inability to bring a vehicle into the fray. There's definitely something to be said about Banshees and Scorpions for this reason alone: the ability to divide and conquer/harrass the opponent on multiple fronts. Harlequins have only one point on their spear. Granted, it's a very sharp one, but it's one nonetheless.

[ReX]

9 Harlequins with Kisses + a Troupe Master with a PW is 236 Points
9 Howling Banshees + Exarch with Executioner is 182 Points
9 Striking Scorpions + Exarch with Claw is 187 Points.

Which is to say, the Harlequin squad you have detailed cost 30% more than the Banshees or the Scorps do. In light of that, the fact that they kill 12.5 MEQs of 10-man MEQ squad compared to the Banshees' 9.5 seems like it's not such a great deal. Killing 19 GEQs instead of the Scorpion's 17 also seems not worth the cost increase.

It's probably worth it to field them against Plague Marines etc though.

The reason why I commented in the first place was not because I think Harlequins are more cost-efficient than Banshees at killing MEQ or more cost-efficient than scorpions at killing GEQ. However, when it was said that Harlequins have a narrower role than scorpions and banshees, I felt like saying something, because as you can see from the table I believe that it is scorpions and banshees that have the narrow role here.

Let me try one more time.
Harlequins outperform banshees in killing MEQ units AND outperform scorpions in killing GEQ units, in addition to being better than both of them against almost every other opponent.
So if you where to take ONE unit which you would use as a counter-assault unit for instance, or to kill the enemy’s super unit, would you take banshees, scorpions or harlequins in your take-all comer list? Of course what unit one prefers is up to play style and what kind of army one fields. However, if you take banshees I feel that there are a number of units out there that does not fear you, if you take scorpions the same can be said, however, the number of units that do not fear you is smaller when you take harlequins. As the units that don’t like a banshee charge also do not like a harlequin charge and the same situation exist for scorpions compared to harlequins. Apart from having more killing potential, I also feel that Harlequins bring so much more to the table with their special rules and the shadowseer.

Although your point of cost is valid, the way I see it is that by paying a bit extra for harlequins I get a unit that can probably function against every enemy unit I end up facing. I would not feel the same way if I had fielded scorpions or banshees.

I will not go into the debate about point cost etc. as I think that is a quite complex subject. For instance for banshees to be viable they need a transport, which brings their points above a maxed harlequin squad with shadowseer. Of course the transport in itself has some uses apart from carrying the banshees, however, it will not make your banshees kill more in an assault. And in certain lists, as in a footslogging list, this one wave serpent will never live long enough to deliver the banshees where they are needed.

I have to say that I find your table very confusing.  Where you say x number of units killed, do you mean models in the unit, or do you actually mean units?  Why have reprisals only been calculated for two units?

I do mean, of course, x number of models killed in the enemy unit. Thank you for pointing that out and I have now fixed it in my original post. And as for why I have reprisals only calculated for two units:

1: I didn’t have the time to do it.
2: To be realistic the 10 MEQ, 20 boys and 10 Plague Marines should all have a power k/claw in the unit, which means that it takes a tad bit more time to calculate the casualties from reprisals.

The point which I feel that you are overlooking is that while Harlequins are superior in terms of pure mathematics, the advantage which they have in terms of killing power compared to Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions is not significant enough to warrant the points paid to take them.  For example, the Harlequin squad you cite below, which would also need a Shadowseer, is significantly more expensive than the Striking Scorpions or Howling Banshees.  Blazinghand's post illustrates this issue in more detail, so I won't go into further detail.

What if I say that these howling banshees you mention also need to take a transport to function on the battlefield? Then these banshees are more expensive than the harlequins, and you end up spending over 1/3 of the total cost of the squad on a transport, which doesn't make your unit more "killy", it only ensures they get into combat where they are needed.
However, as I said earlier, this is a much more complex subject and I do neither wish nor have time to go into this now.

Is it really, therefore, worth paying the points for the amount of additional damage inflicted against regular MEQs and GEQs?  My answer to that is most definitely not.  It is for this reason, they can be classified as being a niche unit in my view, since the performance enhancement is just not profound enough against regular units to warrant the additional expenditure of points.

I almost get the feeling that you are comparing the harlequins ability to fight MEQ with banshees, and their ability to fight against GEQ with scorpions. I might be mistaken, but if so that’s not fair, is it? My point is that given almost any enemy unit the harlequins will be able to deal with it, the same cannot be said for the banshees and scorpions. Therefore, I think that it is the scorpions and banshees that are the more "niche unit", while harlequins are the take-all comers. However, this is only my impression and I just wanted to state that I do not feel that harlequins have a narrower field than scorpions and banshees. If you disagree, then fine. However, I do not have time to continuing this discussion any time soon.

I think the greatest knock against Harlequins is their inability to bring a vehicle into the fray. There's definitely something to be said about Banshees and Scorpions for this reason alone: the ability to divide and conquer/harrass the opponent on multiple fronts. Harlequins have only one point on their spear. Granted, it's a very sharp one, but it's one nonetheless.

It depends on the army you field. I can argue that it is a big bonus for me that the harlequins do not need any transport.
When it comes to them having only one very sharp spear, their speed can be quite astounding for a foot-based unit. With hit and run in the enemy's turn including move + fleet + assault in your turn they can cover quite the distance (26" on average).

[Blazinghand]

However, when it was said that Harlequins have a narrower role than scorpions and banshees, I felt like saying something, because as you can see from the table I believe that it is scorpions and banshees that have the narrow role here.

Let me try one more time.
Harlequins outperform banshees in killing MEQ units AND outperform scorpions in killing GEQ units, in addition to being better than both of them against almost every other opponent.
...
Although your point of cost is valid, the way I see it is that by paying a bit extra for harlequins I get a unit that can probably function against every enemy unit I end up facing. I would not feel the same way if I had fielded scorpions or banshees.

I will not go into the debate about point cost etc. as I think that is a quite complex subject. For instance for banshees to be viable they need a transport, which brings their points above a maxed harlequin squad with shadowseer.

If we're going to have to disagree here. Admittedly, 10 Banshees with a Serpent are more expensive than a Harlie squad with VoT... by 4 points.

I deliberately did not factor in extra costs for Shadowseers, Scorpion Inflitration, or Transports. I did not add in a Shadowseer with Veil of Tears in my Harlequin cost calculations, which would have upped the cost of the squad to 266 points. For 270 points you could have a squad of 10 Howling Banshees or Striking Scorpions mounted in a Shuricannon Wave Serpent with Spirit Stones. Eithr of these Aspect Warrior squads would combine mobility with an additional piece of armor / heavy weapon platform and capability against either MEQs or GEQs. The footslogging Harlies would not have the same tactical flexibility.

Are Harlies good at killing lots of stuff? Sure. That doesn't mean they're not a niche unit though. Saying they're tactically inflexible doesn't mean they're bad at killing stuff. It only means they don't have tactical flexibility: They're an infantry assault unit with weak saves and high points cost and no dedicated transport. They have a narrow role: walk up the field and CC whatever comes by, or stand still and CC whatever comes by. They can't inflitrate, or outflank. They don't have a gunboat/transport attached to them. You can't move them flat-out in formation with two other units in Wave Serpents to be the Hammer in your Hammer & Anvil strat. You can't use their dedicated transport to do a Serpent of Fury formation to buy you one extra turn of shooting. They will never Tank Shock onto an objective in turn 6 and cause your opponents unreasonable levels of rage.

But they do put out a lot of damage in assault. Effective? That cannot be denied. Narrow? Definitely. The right choice? That depends on your list. In my list, the slowest unit by far I field is a squad of Warp Spiders. I never even considered Harlequins. In a footdar list or other circumstances, they may be better, but they're too much of a niche unit for me.

What if I say that these howling banshees you mention also need to take a transport to function on the battlefield? Then these banshees are more expensive than the harlequins, and you end up spending over 1/3 of the total cost of the squad on a transport, which doesn't make your unit more "killy", it only ensures they get into combat where they are needed.
However, as I said earlier, this is a much more complex subject and I do neither wish nor have time to go into this now.

The transport is an asset, not a liability. My opponents curse tank shock and everything what's left of my Wave Serpents stand for on turns 5-7, etc. See my comments on tactical flexibility earlier in this post.

However, this is only my impression and I just wanted to state that I do not feel that harlequins have a narrower field than scorpions and banshees. If you disagree, then fine. However, I do not have time to continuing this discussion any time soon.

I understand if you want to discontinue this discussion. Although my tone may be strident at times, I mean nothing but the best. I feel that it's good to have disagreements on the forums so that we can flesh out the pros and cons of various units. For those seeking information, this is doubtlessly a fascinating exchange through which they're learning a lot about the ups and downs of various Eldar Elite CC units. This discussion of Harlies vs Scorps vs Banshees is probably better rounded than something I could have written myself and is an asset to our collective knowledge. Although it's fairly unlikely either of us will run to the store and start buying box sets of the other guy's CC unit after letting this debate wind out to the end, it's a good intellectual exercise. I hope you respond to my comments when you have the chance.

[Capamaru]

It all comes down to your style of play. I for example never leave home without a squad of banshees in their serpant. I know that I could probably make good use of the punching power harlies have but with the way I play, using a lot of mechanized units I feel this unit would be totally exposed to enemy fire (although it isn't).

[Irisado]

Harlequins outperform banshees in killing MEQ units AND outperform scorpions in killing GEQ units, in addition to being better than both of them against almost every other opponent.

The margin is insignificant though in the majority of cases, that's the key issue, and that's why it can be argued that they have a narrower focus, because they are only significantly more effective than the Aspects against a small range of opposing units.

Of course the transport in itself has some uses apart from carrying the banshees, however, it will not make your banshees kill more in an assault.

As you said though, there is more to this discussion that killing power alone, as you were keen to emphasise when you pointed out the benefits of the Shadowseer and Harlequin movement rules, so to be fair, the fact that the Wave Serpent can be used to transport any unit, is also a benefit which should not be overlooked  .

And in certain lists, as in a footslogging list, this one wave serpent will never live long enough to deliver the banshees where they are needed.

You wouldn't field one Wave Serpent in an infantry list, so that's not a worthwhile comparison in my view.

What if I say that these howling banshees you mention also need to take a transport to function on the battlefield? Then these banshees are more expensive than the harlequins, and you end up spending over 1/3 of the total cost of the squad on a transport, which doesn't make your unit more "killy", it only ensures they get into combat where they are needed.
However, as I said earlier, this is a much more complex subject and I do neither wish nor have time to go into this now.

Okay, but as I said above, you were keen to mention the 'non killy' benefits of the Harlequins, and as Blazinghand said, the points difference is not that significant.

I almost get the feeling that you are comparing the harlequins ability to fight MEQ with banshees, and their ability to fight against GEQ with scorpions. I might be mistaken, but if so that’s not fair, is it? My point is that given almost any enemy unit the harlequins will be able to deal with it, the same cannot be said for the banshees and scorpions.

It's a perfectly fair comparison, because most armies comprise GEQs or MEQs, with only a few specialist units, unless you are playing a specialist army, such as an all Nurgle Chaos force, against which the Harlequins do have a clear advantage.  Also, it has to be pointed out that Striking Scorpions are handy against regular MEQs, in my experience, providing their Exarch is armed with the Scorpion's Claw, and Howling Banshees can still deal with low toughness GEQs without many problems, so they are more flexible than I feel you give them credit for.

As Blazinghand rightly remarked though, we're only scratching the surface of the debate here, since the type of army you field, the forces you are facing, and your strategy and tactics, (as well as background for some players), are also significant factors to take into account when deciding which assault unit to include in your list.

[Brutoni]

Harlequins outperform banshees in killing MEQ units AND outperform scorpions in killing GEQ units, in addition to being better than both of them against almost every other opponent.

The margin is insignificant though in the majority of cases, that's the key issue, and that's why it can be argued that they have a narrower focus, because they are only significantly more effective than the Aspects against a small range of opposing units.

I'm afraid I don't understand the logic of that argument. I believe you are saying that Banshee's or Scorpions have a wider focus than Harlequins?

If that's the case then we have to consider that both have various out of combat benefits and advantages that would require considerable consideration to draw an opinion on who, if any, has a narrower focus. (Note I did this consideration but then hit the back space to clear a spelling mistake and instead went to my previous page... frustrated doesn't even cover the state I am now in!)

If we are considering the focus of the unit in close combat alone then I simply cannot agree with your statement. Additionally, and I do not mean to be rude, I do not understand how you can even make such a statement.

A unit that is as capable in close combat against a specialists chosen target but more capable in close combat against other targets cannot have a narrower focus?

Consider... 10 Harlequin's kitted out munch through marines as easily as 10 kitted out banshees and statistically they do it a little better. However they are also far more effective against hoard units or high toughness units or other specialist close combat units (Assault termies, Lash and Sword Warriors etc). How does that unit have a narrower focus in close combat?

So considering the marginal difference in costs between the three, and that most opponents are MEQ or GEQ surely 1 or 2 squads of Harlequins are going to suit a "all takers" list far more than 1 squad of scorpions and 1 squad of Banshees, or just 1 of the specialists. The harlequins can do both jobs as well as the specialists with the addition of handling more "tailored" lists with a greater proficiency.


In the end your theme, style and army list will have the main say in what unit you feel however besides the lack of a "dedicated" transport for harlequins I think they are without a doubt the more rounded and capable CC choice and hence the extra points.

[Irisado]

Perhaps I haven't gone into enough detail, so I will answer some of your points below:

I'm afraid I don't understand the logic of that argument. I believe you are saying that Banshee's or Scorpions have a wider focus than Harlequins?

To a certain extent they do, because they are sufficiently effective against a wide range of units relative to the Harlequins in terms of cost for them to be a better choice in my opinion.

If we are considering the focus of the unit in close combat alone then I simply cannot agree with your statement. Additionally, and I do not mean to be rude, I do not understand how you can even make such a statement.

A unit that is as capable in close combat against a specialists chosen target but more capable in close combat against other targets cannot have a narrower focus?

When the statistics show that their effectiveness against most units is not a significant improvement compared to the Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees, and then you factor in the points cost of the three units, I think that you can make a good case for Harlequins having a narrower focus, since they are only an optimal choice against high toughness targets, such as monstrous creatures.

Consider... 10 Harlequin's kitted out munch through marines as easily as 10 kitted out banshees and statistically they do it a little better. However they are also far more effective against hoard units or high toughness units or other specialist close combat units (Assault termies, Lash and Sword Warriors etc). How does that unit have a narrower focus in close combat?

Striking Scorpions are more effective against hordes once you factor in durability and points costs, and against assault Teminators (which should be shot to pieces incidentally, so I don't think that this unit is one which should be taken into account) their performance advantage compared to Howling Banshees is insignificant once you account for the same factors.

If you want to crush Nurgle Chaos armies, or dispose of monstrous creatures, Harlequins have a clear advantage, especially against monstrous creatures, which tend to ignore armour saves, but otherwise, I don't think that their performance, once other factors are taken into account, is sufficiently superior compared to the Aspects to argue that they have a wider range of application.

[Brutoni]

Perhaps I haven't gone into enough detail, so I will answer some of your points below:

I'm afraid I don't understand the logic of that argument. I believe you are saying that Banshee's or Scorpions have a wider focus than Harlequins?

To a certain extent they do, because they are sufficiently effective against a wide range of units relative to the Harlequins in terms of cost for them to be a better choice in my opinion.

I sort of understand what you are getting at, however I disagree. While Harlequins are more expensive (30% more if I remember correctly from the squads above) they are almost 30% effective at killing the aspects specialty AND more effective against the aspects weak spots. Harlequins are therefore, IMHO, the wider focused, and more capable, close combat unit

If we are considering the focus of the unit in close combat alone then I simply cannot agree with your statement. Additionally, and I do not mean to be rude, I do not understand how you can even make such a statement.

A unit that is as capable in close combat against a specialists chosen target but more capable in close combat against other targets cannot have a narrower focus?

When the statistics show that their effectiveness against most units is not a significant improvement compared to the Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees, and then you factor in the points cost of the three units, I think that you can make a good case for Harlequins having a narrower focus, since they are only an optimal choice against high toughness targets, such as monstrous creatures.

I disagree with this, as said a full 10 man squad with kisses is roughly 30% more costly than Banshee's or scorpions. However they are between 15% and 30% more effective against those unit's specialties AND they are a whooping 40% more effective against things like Plague Marine equivalents.
How can that unit have a narrower focus when you consider that from a pure statistics role it is a more capable unit across the board in close combat AND in a way that will happily cover a quick point for point glance.

Consider... 10 Harlequin's kitted out munch through marines as easily as 10 kitted out banshees and statistically they do it a little better. However they are also far more effective against hoard units or high toughness units or other specialist close combat units (Assault termies, Lash and Sword Warriors etc). How does that unit have a narrower focus in close combat?

Striking Scorpions are more effective against hordes once you factor in durability and points costs, and against assault Teminators (which should be shot to pieces incidentally, so I don't think that this unit is one which should be taken into account) their performance advantage compared to Howling Banshees is insignificant once you account for the same factors.

If you want to crush Nurgle Chaos armies, or dispose of monstrous creatures, Harlequins have a clear advantage, especially against monstrous creatures, which tend to ignore armour saves, but otherwise, I don't think that their performance, once other factors are taken into account, is sufficiently superior compared to the Aspects to argue that they have a wider range of application.

Once you consider their durability then I think you also have to consider sheer killing potential, with the squads set up as shown, and assuming clean delivery to the target, the harlequins will kill 18-19 Orcs while Scorpions will only kill 13-14. Thats a 4-5 difference and that means there are what 12-15 extra attacks heading the way of the scorpions? I think the maths would show quite clearly that the difference between a 3+ to a 5++ is going to mean little when the scorpions have an extra 12-15 attacks to deal with.
They also can't deal with the Nobs return attacks anywhere near as well!

Banshee's you didn't give a clean example of so I can't consider that.

If you are talking about footslogging durability then the harlequins have the option to be as survivable as the scorpions with veil of tears for advancing in the open.... Or in cover they gain the same benefits as the scorpion but will move through more reliably than the scorpions. Banshee's on foot just die in my gaming experience with them.

So as it is what hurts the harlequins the most is that they have no dedicated transport, are more expensive (so not always an option), will require much more skill and finesse to play because they are more squishy in a straight out battle. That and the fact that they aren't craftworld eldar so why they are in a book about the craftworld eldar is beyond me.......

This however is just my opinion and looking at the units in a vacuum like this is always tricky. You rarely can have a discussion about an entire army without considering individual units, but to best consider a unit you must consider what it will be fighting with, against, in what terrain and with what role in mind?

[Irisado]

I sort of understand what you are getting at, however I disagree. While Harlequins are more expensive (30% more if I remember correctly from the squads above) they are almost 30% effective at killing the aspects specialty AND more effective against the aspects weak spots. Harlequins are therefore, IMHO, the wider focused, and more capable, close combat unit

That's not correct as far as I can see.  For example, against MEQs, using the statistics above, Howling Banshees wipe out ninety-four percent of the squad, compared to the Harlequins on 100 percent, so Harlequins are only thirty percent better than the Striking Scorpions (seventy-one percent).  Against GEQs, Striking Scorpions are only ten percent behind the Harlequins, not thirty, and so the pattern continues.  They are only thirty percent more effective relative to both Aspects against Plague Marines, hence they are only significantly better against high toughness units, as I outlined in my previous post.

How can that unit have a narrower focus when you consider that from a pure statistics role it is a more capable unit across the board in close combat AND in a way that will happily cover a quick point for point glance.

Because, as I have already explained, once you factor in cost and durability, the improvement is not sufficiently significant for them to be a sound option in my opinion, so their optimal window of operation is narrower than that of Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees.

Once you consider their durability then I think you also have to consider sheer killing potential, with the squads set up as shown, and assuming clean delivery to the target, the harlequins will kill 18-19 Orcs while Scorpions will only kill 13-14. Thats a 4-5 difference and that means there are what 12-15 extra attacks heading the way of the scorpions? I think the maths would show quite clearly that the difference between a 3+ to a 5++ is going to mean little when the scorpions have an extra 12-15 attacks to deal with.
They also can't deal with the Nobs return attacks anywhere near as well!

Correct, but the higher saving roll is going to help here, so the only way that you're going to resolve this debate is to factor in reprisals for each unit in the table.  That said, in game, you are likely to soften up units like this before assaulting them, so the maths is always going to give something of a false impression, which is why I'm not a fan of pure statistical analysis.

If you are talking about footslogging durability then the harlequins have the option to be as survivable as the scorpions with veil of tears for advancing in the open

Not once they get to within mid to short range, and reprisals after they have won a combat can hurt them very badly, so they are, in my view, the ultimate glass cannon.

This however is just my opinion and looking at the units in a vacuum like this is always tricky. You rarely can have a discussion about an entire army without considering individual units, but to best consider a unit you must consider what it will be fighting with, against, in what terrain and with what role in mind

I completely agree with all of that, and that's why pure maths will only get you so far  .

[Fenris]

Sorry for jumping in late, IMHO there are 3 factors that need to be considered when deciding witch unit is the most narrow of the 3 being discussed.

- Logistics
- Durability
- Killyness

Logistics:
Banshees generally need a transport to do their job, hence they have 1 logistic choice.
Harlequins need VoT to do their job, and may not take a dedicated transport, 1 logistic option.
Scorpions has 2 options, shadowstrike or a transport, or even both but that seems a bit excessive IMHO.

Durability:
Scorpions clearly win here due to their better save, although 5++ or 4+ save I am not sure which is best, but the 4+ probably is.

Killyness:
Harlequins win clearly, while banshees and scorpions have their different preferred targets.

So the most narrow unit must be the banshees, but with so many MEQ's around (their preferred target) they are still quite ok.

[Brutoni]

Sorry for jumping in late, IMHO there are 3 factors that need to be considered when deciding witch unit is the most narrow of the 3 being discussed.

- Logistics
- Durability
- Killyness

Logistics:
Banshees generally need a transport to do their job, hence they have 1 logistic choice.
Harlequins need VoT to do their job, and may not take a dedicated transport, 1 logistic option.
Scorpions has 2 options, shadowstrike or a transport, or even both but that seems a bit excessive IMHO.

Durability:
Scorpions clearly win here due to their better save, although 5++ or 4+ save I am not sure which is best, but the 4+ probably is.

Killyness:
Harlequins win clearly, while banshees and scorpions have their different preferred targets.

So the most narrow unit must be the banshees, but with so many MEQ's around (their preferred target) they are still quite ok.

An excellent summary and simple view point. However I do think some additional points must be taken into consideration.

If the Banshee's MUST take a transport, and I think we can all agree than 9/10 times the have to do that. Then they are going to suddenly have an increased durability for while they only have a 4+ save suddenly you have to destroy a transport that is reasonably resilient and exceptionally quick moving.

Harlequins for instance stand a lot to be gained by the simple fortune power because a fortuned 5++ becomes a very reasonable all round save which can protect the squad from a lot of fire power.

It is an interesting topic and I think worth writing an article about.... though at the moment I don't have a regular opponent to do test games with for a proper article? Has anyone written a comprehensive article on the subject?

[Irisado]

It is an interesting topic and I think worth writing an article about.... though at the moment I don't have a regular opponent to do test games with for a proper article? Has anyone written a comprehensive article on the subject?

Do you mean an article comparing Harlequins to Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions?  If I remember correctly, there are old articles in the database on this subject, but there is certainly nothing for fifth edition, so if anybody wants to write one, please feel free to do so in the Eldar Project board, and I will edit it for publication on the front page.

[Ldarish]

I see a few comments about Banshees having to take a transport.

Of course another factor is the type of battle.
Howling Banshees would not need a transport for Cities of Death.

So any comparison, and especially any article, comparing the 3 afore mentioned CC units
should include their relative benefits in various scenarios.