News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: "Water Element" Eldar  (Read 2519 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stezerok

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
  • Country: 00
  • For Jason Lezak, and the Missing Photo Op...
"Water Element" Eldar
« on: June 29, 2007, 12:28:46 AM »
Hi all! its been a while since I've stopped by and really posted a lot like I usually do. Lately I've been over at Warseer working on my Pure GK's Daemonhunters list. Now while in discussion a member posted this link:

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/i...owtopic=101214

Now I know that he speaks specifically to GK's, and how he uses them. But what I am more interested in is his way of breaking down armies. He spoke much about two things that called to me. The first was the idea of Beatdown/Control: a way of classifying goals commonly used in Magic the Gathering (a game I happen to love). The second was another way of classifying armies through how they achieve their goals. He did this through the four original elements that Greek philosophers thought all matter was comprised of. Fire, Air, Earth, and Water. Now each of these acts in a different manner obviously, and I think in terms of 40k its easy to see what army terms correspond to which elements.

So my point is I wanted to get some ideas of what you all think for making a "water element" army out of Eldar. He did this effectively well with GK's and part of the reason being that his basic troops can move and fire as they have assault weapons (one of the key things that makes Eldar awesome) So as I continue to do research, and think about designing a list I wanted to get what you all thought of this guys tactica and how we could apply concepts to our Eldar.

Now my biggest complaint (along with many others) is that not all armies can be broken down into a single category and that game flow dictates movements and goals. But I think that once we apply both the MTG terms of Beatdown/Control, with the idea that armies are comprised of these so called elements, we could probably bypass that argument. So again. Read. Enjoy. and lets have some conversations about this.

Offline Sapphon

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1128
  • Country: 00
  • No quantity of firepower matches my arrogance
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2007, 01:49:28 AM »
I've read the Water Warrior stuff, and my impressions are these:

1) Spending 50% of your points on Land Raiders makes you neither original, deep, nor interesting as a tactician, player, or sportsman.

2) The beatdown-control thing is misapplied (I'm unconvinced that M:tG has any bearing on 40K), and the 4-elements thing is really slick, but not particularly enlightening - it feels artificial, a mold that the author forces 40K tactical thought to conform to, rather than one that fits it particularly well as-is. 

Why bother fitting 40K into grandiose theories based on popular conceptions of ancient thought that very obviously have had nothing to do with its design or development?  Such schemes, while fun, don't really allow us to express anything about the game that was hidden before thanks to our manner of perception.

 
"I personally don't use Guardians at all...there's something about 500 year old artists dying en masse I find distressing."

-Lascidel

Instead of tallying my wins and losses and posting them here, I instead took the total W/L/D's from all of the 40KO signatures in existence and put them here.  Enjoy!

W: 6296540262043640254 592655492524
D: 100
L: 4

Offline stezerok

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
  • Country: 00
  • For Jason Lezak, and the Missing Photo Op...
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2007, 01:57:20 PM »
I've read the Water Warrior stuff, and my impressions are these:

1) Spending 50% of your points on Land Raiders makes you neither original, deep, nor interesting as a tactician, player, or sportsman.

2) The beatdown-control thing is misapplied (I'm unconvinced that M:tG has any bearing on 40K), and the 4-elements thing is really slick, but not particularly enlightening - it feels artificial, a mold that the author forces 40K tactical thought to conform to, rather than one that fits it particularly well as-is. 

Why bother fitting 40K into grandiose theories based on popular conceptions of ancient thought that very obviously have had nothing to do with its design or development?  Such schemes, while fun, don't really allow us to express anything about the game that was hidden before thanks to our manner of perception.

 

I'm going to have to disagree with you on a few of these. The first, as you've mentioned about the LR's, is that on the one hand I agree it is not original, it is not deep, and it is not interesting. However. I can say that as a GK's player that is still an extremely difficult list at best, and with the level of AT used in 40k 2x av14 tanks (while nothing to scoff at) are nothing to say are cheezy. Those tanks both have practically no anti-infantry aside from a heavy bolter that has a 90 degree arc, and because they arent Monoliths, can still easily go down to BL's, any form of Melta, any Tau AT gun, and any str 9 gun. These are all things that are commonsight in 40k armies. Most importantly however, he specifically notes that it is the ideas that he speaks most about, not the list. The list is meaningless without the concept, and furthermore is meaningless to us as it is a completely different army.

Now as far as both of the concepts and being misapplied I'd also have to disagree here. The fact is that in any strategy one must understand what each players essential strengths and weaknesses are. From here one can then coordinate how each player is going to attack, or defend. So while M:TG has no bearing on 40k, the principle used in that game can still be applied to every RTS, TCG, or Board Strategy Game. The idea that one must understand that a player gains the advantage by playing extremely aggressively, and that the opposing player due to a lack of such units must play more defensively, is not a new concept to 40k, only the terms are. The second with the "elements" while a corny way of breaking down tactics, is a rather useful idea when you think about it. its an easy way to break down every aspect of the game into such elements and allows us to identify weaknesses of such elements. I think the idea that every army is comprised of a single element is an oversimplified manner of things, but ultimately I think it fits well enough to possibly base ideas around.

As far as "fitting 40k into grandiose theories based on popular conceptions" I think that just because these were not things thought about during the construction of the game does not mean that they still cannot be applied making your argument that they have "nothing to do with its design or development" null and void. War, had no designer nor developer. Yet people still applied principles much like these to it, and were successful from it. Because anytime you can take a complex theme, and break it down into a less complex analogy, then you are allowed to identify things easier. I think the author understands this, and rather than "conforming" tactica thought to it, he presents an analogy to help present a different way of looking at things. He's not changing anything. He's renaming them.

Offline chaos0xomega

  • Hilary Clinton FTW!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4283
  • Fabricator-General of being banned.
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2007, 02:08:51 PM »
The link doesn't work for me...

I will say though, that it is very difficult to classify armies and fight in a specific style dictated by that classification. It is indeed possible to build a list by that classification, but one fo the beauties of 40k is it's organic play. Throughout the course of the game, things change on both sides of the tables, forcing players to remain on their toes to 'plug gaps' so to speak.

Magic is slightly more static (IMO) than 40k, and while it would work real well there, not so much in 40k.

BANNED!
This user has been banned for regular breaches of Forum rules.

Offline stezerok

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
  • Country: 00
  • For Jason Lezak, and the Missing Photo Op...
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2007, 02:48:58 PM »
The link doesn't work for me...

I will say though, that it is very difficult to classify armies and fight in a specific style dictated by that classification. It is indeed possible to build a list by that classification, but one fo the beauties of 40k is it's organic play. Throughout the course of the game, things change on both sides of the tables, forcing players to remain on their toes to 'plug gaps' so to speak.

Magic is slightly more static (IMO) than 40k, and while it would work real well there, not so much in 40k.



yea it doesnt work for me either... I'll need to see whats up...

Offline wper34

  • Echo! Echo! Echo! Colonel
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
  • Country: th
  • What? ~nyo
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2007, 04:17:19 PM »
You mean this proper & working link, right?

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=101214

Anyway, back to the idea of "Water Element" Eldar...

After having read all that quickly, as far as I am concerned, I have an opinion that an Eldar army operating in this manner would not be that effective. The main reasons being are that:

1. Most of the Eldar units are pretty much specialised & having the quality of being fragile at the same time that they are better off going offensive at the enemy. (As in the style of Fire element tactic)

It is another story, if you are using some flexible units that can take on wide variety of types of enemy units. Also, it would prove to be difficult to pull out the stype of Water element tactic, given that a loss of certain Eldar units can seriously hinder the army performance. By this, I mean I think Eldar units do not have much the quality of being tough or a bit like Earth element before being able to react.

2. The Eldar units within an army should work with one another. By this, I mean there is strong emphasis on co-operation between all units within an Eldar army for it to be effective.

I am aware that, if certain elements of an Eldar army are wiped out, then that Eldar army may struggle against certain types of enemy due to the lack of appropiate units to deal with them. I believe that most types of Eldar army cannot really afford to react toward enemy actions, as the key to the style of Water element tactic is to be patient and at accordingly to the situation. If the enemy was to take an initiative by destroying certain elements in an Eldar army which are main threats to them, then there is a chance that the enemy would be able to destroy the Eldar units. (Could be by luck or for whatever reasons. We never know what could possibly go wrong or happen in a battle.)


Well, those are just my opinions. An interesting topic that you bring up, BTW. ;)
« Last Edit: June 29, 2007, 04:24:04 PM by wper34 »

Sentinel Commander of 34th Neros Regiment
My Army Principle: 1. Quantity 2. Quality 3. Variety
Anime Mecha Vocaloid (And Neko) Lover ~nyo

Hymirl... I think you'd better start eating reading the rulebook. :P

Offline Magus_42

  • Deathwing Veteran
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3757
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2007, 04:33:05 PM »
I would say that my Eldar experience is directly contrary to wper34. I find that Eldar do rather poorly when they are overly aggressive. Eldar units are too fragile and, typically, to expensive to simply rush at the enemy and attempt to overwhelm them. I have found that Eldar do best when they remain patient, using their mobility to avoid a full-on engagement until they can find and exploit a weak point in their lines. If I had to choose one of these elemental categories, I would say that my Eldar army are typically "Air".

On the subject of the Elemental categories. I think there are prefectly good English words for describing these various tactical approaches. They're right their in the definitions (defensive, aggressive, reactive, mobile). I see no point in attaching silly monikers to them, that simply confuse the issue.

Offline wper34

  • Echo! Echo! Echo! Colonel
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
  • Country: th
  • What? ~nyo
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2007, 04:51:22 PM »
An interesting point you make there, Magus_42...

I would agree with you that Eldar should not be used in an overly aggressive manner. Yes, some of Eldar units are simply just too fragile to conduct full-on offensive tactic with the whole army, but I actually did not think about doing that would be such a good idea.

Although my question is should Eldar be actively seeking to find enemy weak spots and destroy them quickly? (I would like to hear some opinions about this issue.) Somestimes, it is not really that easy to classify what categories should certain actions/styles of playing to be falling under, as there is often a number of different elements involved in certain style of tactics.

I must say that I am not really an Eldar player myself. My thoughts only come from glancing at the Eldar codex with tiny bit of experience from fighting against them & seeing them in action.

Sentinel Commander of 34th Neros Regiment
My Army Principle: 1. Quantity 2. Quality 3. Variety
Anime Mecha Vocaloid (And Neko) Lover ~nyo

Hymirl... I think you'd better start eating reading the rulebook. :P

Offline Magus_42

  • Deathwing Veteran
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3757
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2007, 05:08:08 PM »
I probably should have made it more clear that my comments apply to the Eldar armies I typically field. I generally run mechanized lists, and find that an immediate rush towards more resilient units will get my army overwhelmed, while using the mobility and relative resilience of my skimmers to pick my fights usually produces a more favorable result. It is certainly possible to build an Eldar list that can rush straight for the enemies throat, or a wholly defensive army.

It's also important to realize that tactics depend as much on your opponent's army as your own. My army will be much more aggressive when facing a Tau gunline than when attacking a mob of genestealers. That's another reason I don't particularly care for this classification system.

Offline stezerok

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
  • Country: 00
  • For Jason Lezak, and the Missing Photo Op...
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2007, 05:21:55 PM »
should Eldar be actively seeking to find enemy weak spots and destroy them quickly?

well, I would say that that is the goal that every army has in mind during combat, it is the means through which this occurs however...

the reason I bring up this topic is because I actually believe that Eldar can perform any of these various styles. (I would agree with you Magus that the names are definitely corny in that respect) I've seen hyper aggressive armies, extremely mobile armies, and stand and shoot armies all made from the Eldar codex, and none of which I can say has performed poorly. My question is though: how would we Eldar fair with this "water warrior"/reactive style army? Again he states that several of the key elements to such an army is: assault weapons, which then allows for mobility, and a LD that allows for every aspect of the army to perform exactly how it is supposed to.

Now one thing that Wper34 mentioned that is the interesting part to this question is the unique way that Eldar are specifically dedicated to their target. Meaning that losing a single aspect squad suddenly throws off how you are going to counter a specific enemy. But I believe that this could make for a more unique way of designing this reactive style army. I think the main bonus for us is that fast/skimmer transports with star engines allows for people to be anywhere you want when you want, thus making that an easier way for us to reach an opponents weakness when it opens itself to us.

It's also important to realize that tactics depend as much on your opponent's army as your own. My army will be much more aggressive when facing a Tau gunline than when attacking a mob of genestealers. That's another reason I don't particularly care for this classification system.

this btw for anyone who was wondering is the epitome of use of the Beatdown/Control theory archetypes.

Offline Magus_42

  • Deathwing Veteran
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3757
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2007, 06:21:31 PM »
All armies, with the exception of those with forced movement rules, are reactive if played well. Every army determines its plan of battle when it gets to the table and adjusts tactics for a specific opponent. Some armies simply favor one style over another.

The question, then, really, is if the Eldar army list favors a purely reactive game plan. I think that answer is "no". His definition of the "water" style emphasizes the need for generalist troops, something the Eldar are sorely lacking. His grey knights combine mobie firepower, decent assault capability, and resilience. They are fully capable of forming a firebase one game, and leading an all-out assault the next. Eldar have units that can do each of these things just as well, in fact, usually better, than the grey knights, but we lack units that can do all of them as well. Eldar tactics depend on multiple units providing support to each other, and that prevents them from having the same level of reactiveness as that article is describing. You can't re-define a unit's purpose on the fly. If your harlies are gunned down by an enemy squad, you can't react and lead a counter charge with a unit of fire dragons, for example. It's simply not going to work.

That's not to say that Eldar can't be played reactively. Like I said above, every army should adjust to it's opponent's gameplan. I just don't think that the Eldar meet the definition of a "Water" army that he set forth in his article.

Offline Sapphon

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1128
  • Country: 00
  • No quantity of firepower matches my arrogance
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2007, 06:56:21 PM »
My distaste for the elemental classification system aside, Eldar make pretty bad water warriors with only one exception: Aspect Warriors in Falcons.  They're an extremely flexible and reactive force that is mobile and can be relied upon for durability.  I've played games in which my Aspects wouldn't be useful (Fire Dragons vs. non-Zilla Nids), and they just sat in the tank the whole game and preserved VP's.  I've also played games in which I've held CC aspects in the tanks until turn 5, shooting and hiding with the Falcon until the appropriate time to counterassault.  But without the durability, moblity, and long-range shooting of the Falcon, I don't think any Eldar unit can be used in the water way of things.
"I personally don't use Guardians at all...there's something about 500 year old artists dying en masse I find distressing."

-Lascidel

Instead of tallying my wins and losses and posting them here, I instead took the total W/L/D's from all of the 40KO signatures in existence and put them here.  Enjoy!

W: 6296540262043640254 592655492524
D: 100
L: 4

Offline Andaah

  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1914
  • Confused..... often...
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2007, 07:15:58 PM »
Mech Eldar most embodies this way of warfare. It aptly describes how I approach a game.

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #13 on: July 2, 2007, 07:06:42 AM »

I like this thread; it is essentially referring to the philosophy of Eldar warfare. As a man of the art, I would like to share my thoughts on the elements that rule over the Eldar war host. At first glance we can classify some units according to the well known elements of nature: fire goes for fire dragons (a sudden explosion of energy that can destroy anything), water is for the avenger (the flexible, all around, resilient warrior who patiently bites of the enemy force), scorpions are the earthly ones (hidden in the ground emerging to strike and slower moving but more strong and durable than the other Eldar) and banshees are an air aspect, since they move fast, hit fast, and use a sonic weapon to cripple the enemy. Then there is aether most probably represented by the spiders, the most versatile and be-all aspect of them all, a bit of fire since they have a ton of str 6 shots, air cause they are fast, earth since they are tough, and water for they are elusive.
Apart from the above there are other Eldar warriors and machines of war that can be classified according to elements or even zodiac signs. The three water signs are Pisces, Scorpio and Cancer.  Pisces is the master of blending and mutability, he is resilient by being flexible and blending with the environment, typical Piscean Eldar warriors are the rangers/pathfinders, and they literally disappear into the environment, get to the best infiltrating positions and carry a weapon of patience that can convert the size and strength of the foe into its greatest weakness.  For Scorpios the obvious choice can be the striking ones but that’s not really-only it. Scorpio apart from the known to us scorpion is also dedicated to the serpent and the hawk. The serpent that evolves and rises to become a falcon hence the transformation of soul. As such swooping hawks, falcons and serpents can represent this water element, the serpent is the fast close to the ground sting deliverer, the falcon the king of skies and the hawks are the vengeful birds of prey. Then comes cancer, a sign of mysticism, hidden truth, death and healing and with a strong shell to protect itself, I can see wraithlord and wraithguard written all over, enough said.
So if you want to create an Eldar water army your best approach would be, serpents with avengers and all the upgrades, wraithlords and/or falcons, pathfinders and hawks to fill in other roles. This would be an all around patient force with tons of vp denial and would use the battlefield environment in the way that water would flow through the ground. This type of force would rely on delaying the enemy plan and denying the enemy of accomplishing objectives or dealing damage.
Hope to see your comments soon…

The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline stezerok

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1150
  • Country: 00
  • For Jason Lezak, and the Missing Photo Op...
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #14 on: July 2, 2007, 01:07:22 PM »
I like your analysis thus far. I think  that one important unit that was left out would be Guardians, though they are a tough one. I think the idea of mobile fire power is what makes them an ideal suit for a water warrior style army. The only real problem I have with your analysis is that it very rapidly approaches become an air style army, as it is very heavy in the mobile department. Though I think that you are correct in assuming that what we cant handle in toughness we can make up for in mobility. I'll keep thinking about it, and possibly even come up with a list. Thanks for the inspiration thus far!

Offline foolsling27

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #15 on: July 2, 2007, 10:44:26 PM »
The guy is trying to rationalise 40k to martial arts ("This is true of my martial arts and my war-gaming")...but let's not patronise him for that. What he meant by water was just an all-rounder army. The description is essentially "not the other types".

The most important thing for him was the flexibility a "water" army affords. For Eldar, he wouldn't have liked all Wraith or Scorpion ("earth" and "fire" respectively). It's a good point because the playing styles become routine, and it's too easy to counter. He didn't make a good case against "air", because he probably realised that mobility was a key to flexibility.

This might be a bit arrogant, but the impression from the article was that "water" was just the poor man's balanced "air". They both play according to the situation, but the mobile army can decide where and when to engage much more effectively.

The linked post tells you to play smart, gain local superiority, and not to overcommit. Eldar players should be good at this.

Offline Mordekiem

  • Initiate
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2345
  • That was easy!
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #16 on: July 3, 2007, 02:19:26 AM »
My thoughts on the elements first.  I think the idea of 4 elements is sound, but his description and take on them is incorrect.  I don't think fire or earth have anything to do with numbers or model count directly.  I would not call a marine gunline army an earth army.  I don't think fire means the army must be an assault army.  I think the author was more right on with Air and Water.  But it is still a very rough idea he is presenting.  But the basic idea of four elements is sound.  Asian cultures have been using such ideas for thousands of years and they apply as much to wargames as they do to martial arts or real warfare.  He is just misapplying it to 40k.
He is also mixing army types and tactics.  His description of a water army is more of tactics, while his fire and earth descriptions are of army types.  For example I think you could have a fire army (offensive army) and yet play it reactively (water tactics).
Now you could call these things anything you want.  I've heard people refer to armies by using a compass and other concepts.  But hey all do boil down to the same idea, it is just how you put your ideas into words so others can understand.  It doesn't make the 'elements' better or worse, just one way to describe armies.

Now back to eldar and there 'style'.  Eldar can be any style you want due to the great number of specialists we have.  I think you can easily mix styles and tactics as well.  Using his descriptions I'd call my army water and air with some earth.  I play all mech and mounted so definately air.  I use infantry based firepower units to deal damage, but have them mounted for speed (air).  And when I play I play very reactively.  In fact I usually defer first turn so I can go second and see what my opponent did.  But it depends on the mission, my opponent, the terrain, etc.  Someone mentioned that all armies should play this way, but not neccesarily.  Some armies are made for taking it to your opponent from turn one and forcing them to react and be defensive.  Against alot of armies this works well.  Against someone who is prepared for it not so much.
Back to mixing elements eldar definately can do any of those.  In the end it comes down to peoples playstyles.  Some like to go straight at there opponent.  Some like to use speed to dance around there opponent.  Some like to hold tough and whittle the enemy down.  Others like to react and counter.  All are viable.

As for Magic, you could use bits and pieces of the game, but overall it doesnot translate over.  The 5 elements of magic don't transfer worth beans.  First of all there is no good and evil.  There also really isn't a 'nature' power.  The variety of deck types does not transfer over very well.  Control/beatdown is one type of deck of many.  And in 40k you pretty much have to have beatdown.  but there is no control really.  You don't force your opponent to do things.  you can't take his units and use them against him.  You can't deny him units or take away whole turns from him where they can do nothing.  I have yet to see any 40k player control anything that is already dead.  So the magic 'connections' just don't hold water for me.
Mordekiem

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #17 on: July 3, 2007, 08:24:17 AM »
   Oh yes you can control the game! Just place 5 dark reapers at the center and the enemy marines will cram up behind the central building to avoid death. Then watch as the two prisms take turns of delivering indiscriminate fire on the beleaguered troops. How about pinning, especially the Eldar and their dark cousins can really use terror tactics, last game vs. 15 destroyer Necrons I deliberately spread my fire and tank-shocked whenever possible, after 10 tests a 5 destroyer squad broke and went off table! A lost battle turned into a massacre in one move!
   The principle of the 5 elements is really very ancient and is likely to have derived from Greek-Egyptian magi. Hermes (known afterwards as achieving Godhood) was the first to introduce them along with alchemy and what is now called the Kabalah. In the following centuries, after massive destruction and war this knowledge was re-implemented by the Pythagoreans, Platonics and Jewish priesthood. It essentially dictates a way of understanding the world via schema parallelization. IOW what we are doing right now, converting abstract moves in a game to a pattern resembling the nature of water and the other elements.
   The five elements combined form the pentagram, a classic symbol of protection and wisdom with its reversal meaning the opposite. When your pentagram is used right, the opponent sees it reverse and gets the worse while you are getting the best. The effort of the general is to angle the two fighting star symbols in such a way that their sum vector points to the enemy.
   There is virtually no operating army in 40k that does not consist of a little bit from every element. The water generals GK still have fire-power and earthly toughness along with airy land raiders to get them there. Earth then gets into air freezing it and turning it to water, water also comes from the burning of earth to air which then comes down as rain. I.e. the GK get in transports and become water, come out and fire and produce rain.
   Now about the real types of commanding according to elements. Fiery armies and generals rely on short bursts of explosive energy, or high energy inflicted upon less for longer times.  A classic fire approach with Eldar is 3 warwalkers sprinting out of cover and pumping tons of shots at the enemy. Or a fire dragon squad moving with a serpent and suddenly destroying a 500 point unit in one blow! These units and generals work like hunters, and in the Eldar war machine like feline beasts of prey. Like a lion, the dragons unit may be waiting for 3-4 turns to attack but when it does, it is deadly. A fire general must therefore learn to ease his temper and know when to attack, but when he does he must obliterate like there is no tomorrow. The fire general usually has limited resources and chances of attack and must therefore be very skilled; he must constantly be on hunting mood and must be ready to take the best risks. The fire general wins through skillful killing. The main enemy of a fire general/army is a water army, which is too elusive to hit and kill outright. The best victim is an earth army, he will usually hit that static wall with haste and his fire will outright chew all resistance.
   In relation to the other armies, the Eldar are indeed the most fire tempered. Some might say "but BA have more assault and Tau have firepower". Yes, but nothing matches the sudden destruction the Eldar can bring, in fact they are so devastating that they can literally obliterate half an army in one blow and look good doing it. The sudden and immense devastation is also seen in the other players’ reactions yelling cheese at the Eldar above anything else.
   This however does not mean that the feline space warriors have no other elements within. Earth generals can be found leading Eldar armies as well. Ever seen those guys with 2-3 largish guardian squads Avatar and one or two Wraithlords and some scorpions infiltrating? Yep, that’s them, I met one at the last games fair in Athens and he made it 2nd I must inform you (in reply to all those crying for the falcon no brainer…). What he did is to set up a solid line and wage a total war of attrition with the enemy. Scorpions were usually send to suicide to delay the enemy and keep him afar and under fire, snipers taking damage and yet surviving and then punching some carnifex to the ground. Wraithlords taking on tanks, 2 preds for each WL only for the WLs to win! Avatar making guardians a nightmare and prohibiting central control to the enemy. The earth general is the most static and to some extent reactive, he wins through positioning. His problem is that he cannot sift position if something goes wrong. His main advantage is that he takes minimal risks and will do well on most battles. His plan is to hold the enemy down and keep him coming piecemeal, then falling into a wall of bricks and perishing. His most favorite enemies are air and sometimes water, while fire as we described above is his worst match. Air will lack the hitting power to shift the mountain and water has a chance of drowning the earth army, but can also be absorbed/reflected.
   Air armies are all about mobility, it is the sacrifice of hitting power and enhancement of speed that gives such armies/generals power. The air general strives to be unpredictable and abrupt, in that respect he resembles the fire general yet the difference is that instead of killing blows the air general relies on a series of isolated mini-strikes. A classic Eldar air force is one with many vipers, falcons, hawks, spears and bikes. These units will try to approach isolated formations and instead of utter destruction will at first eliminate the enemy return fire. They will hit tank sides and rear, force morale checks, and finally dedicate all firepower to whatever remains unaffected, thus minimizing their own losses by disruption, some critical killing and target saturation. The air general wins through discipline and concentration. The worst enemy of the air is earth; imagine all those light skimmers with their tons of str 6 firepower falling into a solid block of 25 terminators! Fire is usually an even match and water is to be decimated. Yes air is the best way to destroy water, since the air does not try to capture or burn it, the air simply moves it out of the way or avoids it. Example, the fluid avenger force will not have enough speed to counter the Eldar air army and will fall out of place going piecemeal or the air will be so fast that its power will destroy portions of the water army one by one.
   Finally the water army, the most elusive with the cunning generals leading it. As I said water armies rely on blending with terrain using it as much as possible and some mobility to remove serious threats. Fish of fury tactics fit well here as well as some solid core at the center. One never really knows what the water general will do next as in the maelstrom of currents all possibilities emerge. A classic Eldar water stratagem occurs when the next to infiltrate rangers appear right next to a squad of Necron warriors/destroyers and at the first turn move/fleet and charge 12”+d6” thus negating an undesired firebase. The Necrons did not expect that, even if someone infiltrated that close it would be stupid their general thought. Yet the water general is a master of deception and will sacrifice 200 points on turn one since that will allow him to switch to an all out attack to the vulnerable Necrons. He adapts to the foe and kills him in a 100 different ways. The water general wins through deception and patience. The best match-up for the water general is a fire one especially if he is very aggressive and can get angry easily. Earth is an even match and air is difficult to control.
   However there is also another type of general, THE general, the top of the pentagram, the Aether one. More soon…
« Last Edit: July 3, 2007, 08:30:33 AM by Ianos Stormbringer »
The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline moc065

  • Infinity Circuit / Necrontyr Lord / KoN Warlord
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8827
  • Country: ca
  • King of the Preemptive Strike
    • klucas.piczo.com
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #18 on: July 3, 2007, 09:44:49 AM »
Holy longwinded responses (but at least they are interesting).

Here is my take on few things brought up.
1, Elements and Eldar:
Now this I feel is a very personnal thing and if the general Choses to build his army like one of the Elemental Catagories, I think it could easily be done. For instance; I normally play Saim-Hann style armies, my armies tend to be much like the Wind, moving in to do their job (shooting) and then blowing out of the area before they take on too many casualties. So I guess Eldar could be like an element, wether of not all armies would/could fit into one of the Elemental Catagories though --- I think Not.

2, Aggression and Eldar:
Again, a very personnal attribute. I almost never play an aggressive style (with Eldar or even with my SMurf's)... I tend to slowly pick the enemy apart through coordinated shooting that begins with the enemies most priority target. Now everyones proirities are different: I tend to take out fastest units first (not always the best shooters), but this is because my goal is to avoid HtH. If you are running a Tank heavy list, then you better work on the enemy anti-tank first ---  and of couorse the priorities will change for every army out there, as well as for every opponent. If you are running a less fragile army and you prefer to be in HtH, then by all means you should be more aggressive; but, never (I Repeat - NEVER) confuse aggression with mindlessly throughing your army at the enemy, you should always chose what units will fight where and when so that you can maximize their potential.

3, Water themed Eldar:
This could easily be done.... Build a very mobile, fluid army, that can blend in with the terrrain and hits the enemy in waves. Use multiple Wave Serpents/Grav Tanks (painted with appropriate Wave Patterns) and units that are fluid.
First Wave.... Farseers Doom the enemy while all the Wave Serpents/Water(Fire)Prisms use their long range weapons to soften the appropriate enemy unit(s)
Second Wave.... The Dire Avengers (Blade-Storm) after disembarking.
Repeat if Necessary....
Final Wave.... Storm Guardians, Swimming (Striking) Scorpion mass in to finish off the weakened enemy.

Hell you could even have a bunch of Water Vypers in there to lend support, or some Jetbike doing some mini "Tide" action as they ebb in and out with their harrasment or lend a hand with HtH.

4 and final thought, On Control:
You most certainly can and should control the game....
Starting with the Set-up. Most opponents do not set-up blindly, they look at where your units are going and try to adjust accordingly; so beat them to the punch, use your set-up to help them decide their own placement.
During the game, I build firing lanes that most opponents wisely avoid; thus I can herd them, or if they are fool-hardy I can just blast away at them.
Target Priority, also helps control the game,,,, If you remove the enemies Anti-tank, then all of a sudden your tanks can move around with impunity,,,, the same is true for any facet of the enemy army.

Anyway..... there is my 2 cents on the subject(s).... I hope it helps someone.

CaHG
Join POC: Saim-Hann
or Read the Guide to Eldar
or read the Guide to Necrons


And Click here if you like Magic The Gathering

Offline Mordekiem

  • Initiate
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2345
  • That was easy!
Re: "Water Element" Eldar
« Reply #19 on: July 3, 2007, 11:11:05 PM »
   Oh yes you can control the game! Just place 5 dark reapers at the center and the enemy marines will cram up behind the central building to avoid death. Then watch as the two prisms take turns of delivering indiscriminate fire on the beleaguered troops. How about pinning, especially the Eldar and their dark cousins can really use terror tactics, last game vs. 15 destroyer Necrons I deliberately spread my fire and tank-shocked whenever possible, after 10 tests a 5 destroyer squad broke and went off table! A lost battle turned into a massacre in one move!
I will give you pinning.  It does give you a little control over your opponents units.  I disagree with the reapers, though.  You are not controlling the enemy.  You are just giving him difficult choices.  But those choices he makes are still entirely up to him.

Otherwise I really like your interpetation of the elements.  I think you did a much better and balanced job at it than the linked article.
Mordekiem

 


Powered by EzPortal