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!
Like Sharp Cheddar
No, although there are some units/tactics that are cheesy
I don't care, I play cheese like dairy is going out of style.
I haven't posted on Librarium for a while, so hello to all again!
The reason for this post is to address an issue that has come up at my gamers store regarding the issue of "cheesy" or "broken" units - a reference, essentially, to any unit that is very good, perhaps too good, for its point cost.
Many things have been labeled as cheese in my store - Space Wolves, Certain Tau Skimmer Tactics, Super-upgraded nob biker squads, etc.
The issue Im concerned with, however, is whether or not Eldrad is a cheesy choice for an army. Now I know that many players in this particular forum take Eldrad, so Im also interested in the responses you have gotten from your opponents when you have taken him.
I rarely run Eldrad in my lists, but have taken him now and again to mix things up. I find though that taking Eldrad is a point of ridicule sometimes, to which I question rhetorically: Are some units just too "overpowered" to take, even if they are in the codex?
My personal opinion on "cheesiness" has always been that the only things that are really cheesy are:
1 Dubious tactics that take advantage of places where the rules are muddled
Example (Firing Master of Ordiance out of Chimera to get less scatter)
2 Taking multiple units ad nauseum
Example (3 units of 3 warwalkers with scatter lasers)
So is taking Eldrad cheesy?
The Hand that guides.
He is the best bang for your buck the eldar have in the HQ slot IMO. If people want to call it cheesy I can understand. I don't have alot of problems fielding him in a tourny though, compared to what other codexes can do us having a really good psyker pales in comparison.
I play Ulthwe eldar and still get people saying he doesn't belong in lists. I do get some good natured jokes directed at me when I field him in lists with friends ( So eldrad is taking break from the blackstone fortress I see ). Out side of the friends I have had alot of people make off hand comments about him and sometimes even come right out and say he is cheesy/broken. In the end it seems like eldar in general have a very cheesy reputation so no matter what I field I get people upset about it. Which has led me to not care alot about what people say about my list ( unless they are friends because they are more important than a game ).
With the new Space Marine and Space Wolves special characters (surprisingly the Guard ones seem rather balanced,) Eldrad can hardly be called cheesy. He's a great bang-for-the-buck Farseer, and that's what I run him for, as opposed to running two to get the same effect. If *everyone* I played against didn't use special characters I might be less tempted to take him every time.
He doesn't fundamentally change the army or give you ridiculous global powers *cough*Njal*cough*, but really, we don't have too many great HQ options. You can get a Farseer, a near useless Autarch, the Avatar, an overpriced PL, or you can take Eldrad or Yriel, the latter of which I've never used, but doesn't seem like he'd be worth as much as the Avatar.
Maybe it's just me but it feels like the army just is weak without the psychic power support, and needs it to stay even with others. Maybe I just suck
All competative players will use units that give at least half decent bang for buck - how many of your local gamers turn up with an allied CC inquisitor or ranks of vanguard marines on foot for instance?
Eldrad isn't there to break/ruin the game in your favour, he's just relatively cheap.
Now players who re-model their firewarriors / skimmers to get around the blocked LoS issues...
I voted for the 3rd option, but I'm of the mind that nothing is cheesy. Lash Princes, Eldrad, Relentless Longfangs, whatever. It's either better than average, or the alternatives are poor - whichever it is, to deliberately pick a sub-optimal choice (except for fluff reasons) is not giving the opponent your A game. I'd rather have a challenging match against a so-called cheesy army than play a game knowing my opponent could have picked his list better. At best I'd have a hollow victory.
Is he undercosted? Yes.
Does this inherently make him cheese? No.
The bigger problem is a great many players feel there are only 3 HQ's for eldar: Eldrad, Yriel and the Avatar.
Our army list isn't cheesy at all compared to the people that have gotten 5th edition codices.
If anyone calls cheese on you, refer them to the guard player fielding 8 vehicles in 1k points.
But in general, I never call cheese. Everything has its ups and downs. If you can't deal with it, then you need to refine your list or your strategy.
He's cheaper than a regular Farseer with the same powers and comes complete with special abilities (divination is amazing). He's still not 'cheesy' though. I don't take him, and it's for a very specific reason: he has no Jetbike.
I feel it's necessary to point out that many of his powers never see use. Even with three per turn, you'll rarely use Mind War or Eldritch Storm. I also think it's worth saying that not everything needs a glaring weakness.
I think he's pretty nasty, and in 4th edition he might have deserved to be called cheesy. Anymore however, I think he's well in line with the super characters of 5th ed. One of my friends really dislikes the fact that he can solo a carnifex-- which admittedly might be a bit much, but that's gonna take a couple turns and not even a guarantee to make his points back. Beyond that though, he's hardly unstoppable and he's expensive.