Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
As an eldar player, I am almost always accused of cheese when I wipe out an enemy army.. especially if I have dared not to take any of the crappy weapons of the eldar armoury (read: non-starcannon or non-bright lance weapons), and I simply cant see why on earth marine players whine so much about that little weapon. I for one have to this day never seen a marine player take cover, and that is not because there isnt enough of it, it just seems that many marine players have blind faith in their power armor. Is that the eldar players fault?
Think about it, a BS3 starcannon will only kill 0.833 marines/round if just the marines are in 5+ cover, which can be found as well as everywhere on any good table, that is 18.75 points worth of bolter marines per starcannon per turn. Now, consider that the eldar are fragile, and that starcannons are quite expensive. And especially bacause you guys play marines, you have the perfect answer to everything I can field as an eldar player. Consider the following:
The most common starcannon mount; A starcannon vyper is 65 points, which means that it has to shoot away at marines in cover for 4 turns to earn back its points. Thats four turns that my open-toppen AV10 skimmer has to spend within 36" of your armies, how on earth can you claim that it is too good, when even your basic gun can destroy it with ease?
The second most common starcannon mount is a guardian squad, and that is even easier to dispose of. First of all, the guardians wont be able to shoot you with anything but their one little starcannon, because of their crappy range with their shuriken catapults, so the damage output from this squad is dispite of the starcannon lower than average, and even a small squad with no warlock is still more expensive than a vyper, though somewhat more difficult to kill, if it wasent because a drop podding dread or a single round of bolter fire could utterly destroy it in turn two.
So to summarise; starcannons kill marines, sure, but they are also quite expensive, opposed to marines. Why is the starcannon considered cheesy when all you need to do to defeat it is to use cover and fire back? It seems like such an easy thing to me, but I guess I must be missing something. Please enlighten me.
Nope your not missing anything. I have offered to swap armies with all my friends before and show them just how uncheesy everything is. Every single time they refuse which simply shows that they know it was skill that beat them and not cheese. Cries of cheese are just players denying that you might be more skilled than them.
It's not the starcannons its the skill level. Since eldar require skill to play most eldar players try to pick up skills as quickly as possible making them better than marine armies that simply sit behind their power armour every game.
Check out my Codex: Farmyard Animals here!
If anyone wants any kind of help writing fluff for any kind of GW army just ask.
The thing I hate is how everything new coming out seems to have AP3. Sniper drones, vespids are the recent example. God knows what else will be coming out soon in new Codexes. If everything is supposed to be able to punch through Power Armor, then why wear armor in the first place? Model for model Space Marines are already nearly twice the point cost of anything else save Necrons and Grey Knights.
Part of the fluff is they have seriously massive armor that is hard to get through. And if everything new rips right through it then we're screwed. That save is part of the reason each guy is 15 points instead of 6 or 8, if that save is going to be made meaningless over the course of time then make the marines cheaper so losing them in droves won't be so bad.
The reason your army *may* have been cheese is if it was Siam Hann. Get a bunch of bikers, give them all Starcannons. That is a skilless army to play with, as it's complete cheese.
But that's my two cents and I'm having a bad day so forgive me if I'm being overly harsh
May your aim be true, and your targets plentiful.
Eldar armies require skill to play? Please...
While I'm not saying that they are completely on auto-pilot, the majority of the Eldar players I've played against use 2 or 3 cookie cutter combinations with no creativity at all. Sure, 5+ cover saves are great and I can shoot back when I make them! But since you like to generalize so much, maybe it's not so easy killing something that has re-rollable 4+ invul. saves? Or the fact that the starcannon makes mockery even of terminator armour, which isn't much cheaper than the platform?
I'm reading about vypers and how easy they are to destroy. Three words for you: Crystal Targetting Matrix.
Guardian squads against marines? Sure, I can shoot back. Especially if they are deployed 30'' away. Also, comparing a small guardian squad without a warlock against a drop podding dreadnought or marine squad doesn't really cut it, especially points wise.
You seem to forget all the advantages eldar have and are trolling the marine forum as if a massed starcannon volley isn't capable of taking out whole squads at a time. Sure, a vyper without CTM and a guardian squad of 7 without a warlock would probably get destroyed very easily, but not from bolter fire, because they can stay out of range of it, and they will, unless their player is a complete muppet; eldar armies have other things to shoot at besides those two examples btw. I've fought against massed starcannon eldar in tournaments, especially with my sisters of battle. By the end of each game the only surviving models were maybe one squad over half strength and my Exorcists, only because the starcannons couldn't damage them. I made use of cover as well.
(Rescinded to not cause a flame tossing spree.....)
Deathwing palyers have somewhat more of an issue with multple Starcannon armies.
Especialy when they are on very survivable platforms such as WraithLords, Falcons small Guardian squads with conceal (at least 4 of these) which require far more firepower to target than they're worth plus having the crucial ability to move and fire. The whole point of 40K is mobility, if 4 Starcannon squads can end up facing off against just 1 SM squad using thier mobility they win with minimal losses.
Every time you read this sig: a fairie dies!
Well, the eldar codex makes it hard to make varied lists that are also competitative, and especially if you usually play in a competitative enviroment there is not much to do other than purely relying on the few of our most expensive units. I agree that it is boring, but thats not the point. It will hopefully get fixed in the new dex.Originally Posted by idinos
I am also sorry if you feel that I am generalizing too much, but my point still stands. Many marine players tend to forget about cover, and call cheese if someone punishes them for it. And for killing stuff with 4+ invulnerable saves? Well, I know that pain. Librarians with iron halos and VoT has a similar save, and the ability to do damage on top of that. And they can also sport the only re-rollable 2+ invulnerable save in the game if they have a bike and an artificer armor on top of that. And what are those terminators doing in my line of fire anyway? Im no marine expert, but whenever a terminator is used in a way that allows him to get shot, I would say that he is used in a wrong way. Teleport homers, land raiders and drop pods are there to solve that problem.
[/off topic]A drop pod dread is about 130 points IIRC, correct? And the smallest guardian squad with a starcannon you can field is 90 points (5-men+ platform). The guardians will die in the turn the dread arrives, and the turn after the unharmed dread is free to engage other targets and make more points back. It was just an exampke about how one could rip that guardian squad fast, but a single round of fire from a land speeder, a dev squad or whatever else you have will also silence them. And I dont suppose that you intend to keep your marines static 30" away?Originally Posted by idinosIt is very rare to find a table where a vyper can withdraw completely from the enemy LoS, and even then there is still deep strikers, fast enemy units and indirect fire to worry about. To be honest, I never found that upgrade worthwile at all, especially because vypers are skimmers and therefor easy to target in spite of the terrain.Originally Posted by idinosI am sorry if you feel that I am trolling, I just thought that this forum were the right one to post in.Originally Posted by idinos
And on the question of tooling up against marines and being able to field armies that are unreasonably strong against one kind of opponent, well, tough luck. Every army can tool up against everyone else, thats just how the game works. The gross overepresentation of marines and MEQs in the competetitative gaming enviroment just calls for it, but I can assure you that the starcannon army will meet its doom ifit encounters orks, dark eldar, or IG. MEQs should never have special advantages over other armies, because they are the most numerous. Just like an army that is relies heavily on starcannons will have a significant advantage against marines, an army that relies heavily on autocannons will have a significant advantage against eldar ect. I fail to see a diffrence.Well, it all depends on how you view armor. As an eldar player, I have never viewed armor as a primary mode of defence, and I dont think that it is supposed to. Armor is a soldiers last defence, that *might* save them if every other attempt of defending themselves fail. No one, not even terminators, are meant to be shot, but as it will inevitably happen from time to time, and because those soldiers are to valuable to loose, great amounts of rescources are used to minimize their losses through even the most primitive way possible; passive protection. An armor save is a blessing, not a right IMO.Originally Posted by EscaflowneOn your note on terminators, se my previous statement on their usage.Originally Posted by Silver Wings
I wouldnt know about wraithlords, as I find them silly and never use them, but I think that you are overrating falcons and guardians. Even with conceal, a round of fire from a tac squad will either wipe the guardians or make them leg it. Falcons can also ba a pain, but there are greatly overrated too. They are after all only AV12 vehicles, that can be brought down ever so easy by a dev squad in a single or two rounds of fire, and the short ranged weapons and its lousy BS will make sure that it wont cause too much damage before the enemy at least have had the chance to shoot it down.
And 4 starcannon squads will never just face one tac squad.. the starcannons alone would cost 200 points, and to that comes the guardians that is needed to mfield it. 1.2 guardian squads with starcannons might be a fair match for a tac squad, but 4 is just extreme.
Last edited by Sareld; May 24th, 2006 at 17:47.
The way I see it starcannons are cheese because of their potential (and their AP).
There are VERY few weapons that can bust hordes (heavy 3), bust MEQs (AP2) and can also take out light to medium tanks (S6).
I have seen this argument used against assault cannons, but assault cannons have a shorter range, are far more vulnerable when on an LST or cost a huge amount of points (terminators) or are walking lascannon bait (dreadnaught).
The point? starcannons can be hidden behind a wall of wounds, sure, guardians aren't tough, but when you can keep the SC pumping out fire (and you have this across 3-4 units) it adds up.
I know people ***** about marines being too tough, but seriously, they are meant to have the best armour, yet there are way too many weapons that are AP3 and most of them can be taken cheaply.
Just because the eldar are BS3 doesn't mean they are crap, if they took out 3 terminators in a game they have netted themselves 120 points easily, and even though the SC isn't cheap it is a bit powerful.
To summarise: its not the weapon as it it is, it is its potential that makes it cheesy, it can do it all.
Do not compare it to the AC, since the AC has far more drawbacks than people like to admit.
*LMFAO HAHA rolls onto floor laughing hysterically*Originally Posted by LordLink
its not just the starcannons, but the platforms its mounte don and the other parts of the eldar. for example, those starcannons you said that killed 18pts of marines every turn, take a squad of 3 vypers with a farseer guiding them, then see what i mean.
also the falcon, the king of cheese, the tank that is virtually impossible to destroy can mount this weapon wih a bunch of other ap2 guns.
the wraithlord, the tower of cheese, way to little points fo rwhat it does, and also carries starcannons
im not good at explaining, but as said, its not just the weapon, but its potential then i add on top of that the platform its mounted on.
2000pts Orks 4-2-1
The point is that Guardians can move and outrange SM Tacticals, 4 of them working in concert can turn thier guns on SM's from out of range for turn after.Originally Posted by Sareld
You find Wraithlord silly, well unfortunatly no one where I play does.
3 are a common sight with 3 Bs 4 Starcannon. Oh and terrain is at a premium, they can kill xpt Tacs but you fail to consider thier effects on more expensive Assault Marines, Devastators and i still do not get your argument on Terminators. Playing DW against a 3 WL with Starcannon list plus mobile, longer ranged Guardians with Starcannon is not an enjoyable experiance. IG have a scattering of Plasma Guns and Lascannon, lots of SM take majority ML.
Your Terminator points are a little strange. You suggest a 250pt+ armoured vehicle against an army with Bright Lances?
Your only safe in Assault, neither Drop Pods or Temeport Homers allow you to do that witout spending lethal turn in the open.
Afew Starcannon are fine, but have you seen the Eldar list which won the last UK Grand Tournament, Starcannon and WL and a Seer Council comprised of more Seers than I thought Eldar had.
Every time you read this sig: a fairie dies!