Librarium Online Forums banner

The Fire Prism

2K views 25 replies 13 participants last post by  Viktor 
#1 · (Edited)
Hi,

Now i know there are many people out there who dont like Fire Prisms far be it from me to name any (....cough..*Viktor*....cough.....:D ) but to be honest i dont know why the defenition of the Fire Prism is not changed.

It seems to me that the fire prism is anti-marine rather than anti-tank. Most people appreciate and respect the fact that vehicle hunting is left down to Guardian units, Falcons and Fire Dragons althought there are many more units in the Eldar army list that have anti tank capabilities some that spring to mind are Vypers, Dark Reapers and even Shining Spears.

It seems to me that maybe the Fire Prism should be re-classified not only as a vehicle type but also a troop type. The reason that i say this is for one reason only and that is that the Fire Prism is perhaps one of the only Eldar weapons that has a combination of descent range and is also an area of effect weapon.

If you could field enough of these they would be, in my oppinion, extremely effective against infantry. Maybe GW should re-think their classification and change it to Fast Attack, it seems to be the only section that it would fit comfortably into. I do not think that it belongs truly in the heavy support section due to the fact that it has only one main armament where as the Falcon has 2 main armaments and can be given the Shuriken Cannon, but with a range of 60" you're not really going to be in range so much as to use the shuriken cannon if you upgrade you're Fire Prism with one.

If GW did that i think that many peoples oppinions of the Fire Prism would change overnight, upto 3 Fire Prisms and 3 Falcons in one army would be intimidating and they would make an excellent substitution for units like Swooping Hawks and Shining Spears, especially due to Eldar generally laking in the Fast Attack department (IMO anyways).

P.S.

sorry, wrong section.... Can this thread please be moved into the Eldar forum?

laters,


Eldrad.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Thread moved, now lets see,

Fire prsims are categorised (official) as heavy support, this seems eminantly sensible as they are clearly not troops, nor are they fast attack (whils tthey are fast - you yourself point out their range), they are not elite, having teh same stats as other vehicles, nor are they HQ, they absolutley belong in the heavy support.

Sure FPs can take out both tanks and infantry, the issue with FPs is nothing to do with what they can kill when they hit, it is the face that they only have a single shot which only hits half the time, making them unreliable, and for their points value, this is a waste. Personnaly I categorise them as expensive junk!
 
#3 ·
I reckon they should dump it altogether in the new codex and make it a forgeworld tank and bring in the nightspinner (make the nightspinner a bit better first though), The nightspinner looks just as (if nor more) cool as the fire prism and it doesn't suffer from crap ballisitic skill. The only thing that ticks me off is it isn't enough of an upgrade from the shadow weaver, just a massive range.
 
#4 ·
Sure FPs can take out both tanks and infantry, the issue with FPs is nothing to do with what they can kill when they hit, it is the face that they only have a single shot which only hits half the time, making them unreliable, and for their points value, this is a waste. Personnaly I categorise them as expensive junk!
I agree. To take out marines (unless they're Thousand Sons), Starcannons are a much better choice.
 
#7 ·
Without breaking the rules, how much is a Prism. About the same a Wraithlord? Cheaper than a Falcon?

I'm thinking that if the Prism hit on 2+ when it doesn't move, it would be a lot better. Then, it sometimes hits if it does move, and cant shoot at all if moves really fast. Like quick striking heavy support. Hit the target, and move on.
 
#11 ·
What kind of weapons does a night spinner have? Are they standard (in the codex)?
As far as I remember night spinners are a forge world tanks that look top heavy and the night spinner is like a barrage verson of the Eldar shadow weaver which all together sucks IMO.

I don't think they are much better then a fire prism, but if I had to choose I would take a night spinner.
 
#12 ·
Fire Prism costs 150, usually, if you take spirit stones and holo-field. The thing is, with that, it won't pay off its points vs marines:
1 full 2 partial means 1 hit. That'll kill 5 out of 6 times, meaing that in a 6-turn game it'll kill 75 points of marine, asuming it survives the whole time: not worth it for marine killing. If it was a large blast, this could change...
 
#15 · (Edited)
Yes, you can guide a prism and several people have tried and then gave up because in truth, it makes it even less worthwile because then you have another 75 points of farseer added on to the prism making it about 225 points and it will only get those points back if it finds a land raider or something like that. It is also a waste of an HQ choice. Not to mention a heavy support choice.

The nightspinner should be made a bit better, its ok as it is because it doesn't suffer from bad BS but i'd still take a falcon over it unless I know I'm against Orks or tyranids or even possibly guard. It might ruin the whole theme of the gun to give it an ap so maybe raise it's strength?

Remember it does have 2 of those guns and hence fires 2 barrages and hence has 2 blast templates with a massive range and its mobile unlike the support weapon platforms. You can give it a hol-field and spirit stones too. Just so everyone knows, The cost of a Nightspinner with holo-field and spirit stones is Very, Very similar to a falcon with a starcannon, holo-field and spirit stones.
 
#16 ·
eldrad said:
Hi,

Now i know there are many people out there who dont like Fire Prisms far be it from me to name any (....cough..*Viktor*....cough.....:D ) but to be honest i dont know why the defenition of the Fire Prism is not changed.
Heh, that's just not my personal opinion, but the general opinion based on facts. ;)

I really like the idea, but it is rediculously bad in-game.
 
#21 ·
Farseer Sareld said:
I still dont see why a highly concentrated laser beam should be a blast weapon. Make it a monster weapon that can destroy everything it hits, and let it cause d6 against infantry if you choose to zap them with it.
Because this as an expanded laser beam! :tongue:

It makes as much sense as krak missiles not exploding. :yes:
 
#22 ·
I've had a nightspinner for over 5 years and after playing 85% of my games against space marines I've just slowly abandoned it. The turret now sits on a multi winning paint comp tank on my shelf. I guess you can say it's a little more effective against troops than a fire prism but it has a hard time busting tanks. Id much rather take a falcon that can transport aspect warriors then start shooting up some infantry after it drops them off into enemy lines. Or you can just do what I do, don't secure the turrets on your tanks. Just glue the hulls and bodies and you can bits order turrets and instantly replace turrets when needed instead of buying $40+ worth of models.
 
#23 ·
Viktor said:
It makes as much sense as krak missiles not exploding. :yes:
They dont. They produce massive amounts of heat on impact, effectively melting its target. The present day equivalent, the HEAT, or High explosive anti-tank utilizes a explosive shaped charge to create a very high-velocity jet of metal in a state of superplasticity that can melt through solid armor and heat up the inside of the armored vehicle to thousands of degrees in a split second. But dont worry, they´ll teach you that in the army :yes:
 
#25 · (Edited)
Notice how this changed to another new codex thread??? Take the hint GW... not that you're listening:(

Anyway, what I'd like to see is this
S9 AP 1 lance 60" BS3(4) (It's a beam, so it's easier to aim... or some such reasoning), if it targets infantry, it gets d3 hits (as it sweeps through the squad).

Then, borrowing from the BFG:
For every hit, roll to hit again.

Might even need a points boost:D
 
#26 ·
Farseer Sareld said:
They dont. They produce massive amounts of heat on impact, effectively melting its target. The present day equivalent, the HEAT, or High explosive anti-tank utilizes a explosive shaped charge to create a very high-velocity jet of metal in a state of superplasticity that can melt through solid armor and heat up the inside of the armored vehicle to thousands of degrees in a split second. But dont worry, they´ll teach you that in the army :yes:
Oh. Well. Then it makes as much sense as the fact that my grots have a 17% chance of surviving an impact of said missile! :D
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top