Welcome to Librarium Online!
Greetings fellow members of the gaming community;
I have seen a lot of posts since the recent release of the Eldar codex, they are comparing it to the Falcon, and they seem to think it comes up short, and a lot of them are still saying that the fire prism isnt worth its points. I think it is a very viable tank.
Yes, the falcon has a higher firepower output, but it has a considerably shorter range. Whether this is an advatage or not will invariably depend on the type of table you play on.
Combining prism fire can make for a devastating shot, yes. A large template will take a hefty bite out of a marine squad, but you don't need to combine fire. In fact, it would be more advantageous to split fire. But you always have the option. Land raider on the board, combine fire. A few rhinos that need to be addressed, indpendent fire. Or, a favorite tactic of mine is to pop the rhino, and toss the blast templates into the survivors.
The main advantage of a prism is its variable fire modes. Even a dispersed shot will wound MEQs on a 3+, and when they are making that many saves a failure is virtually assured. And a small blast will likely get 1 and a partial. Unless your opponent is very careful about unit spacing, you can be a nuiscance for quite some time.
The Falcon can carry troops, but the rather limited transport capacity renders it as more of a bonus function than an essential component of its function. The pulse laser is a very potent weapon, especially with its rate of fire, but basically the Falcon becomes a lot more expensive than the prism because its usefulness is intrinically tied to its secondary weapon. Yes, dropping a team of fire dragons into the heart of the enemy is an astoundingly effective tactic, but it could be performed just as well with a Serpent.
Both tanks have mediocre armor, and it is not particularly difficult to prevent them from firing for a turn. But they are still both fast skimmers. Their survivability, coupled with their ability to escape from danger makes it very likely that as soon as their targeting arrays come back online, they will be able to return to spitting death.
Again, nothing works in a vacuum. Whether or not the fire prism is right for you depends on your army composition. If you have enough anti tank, it can fill in for anti infantry. If you have enough anti infantry, it can serve admirably in an anti-tank role.
I think that maybe I just have a different outlook, because we only have 3 MEQ players here, so I need to think about what will work against Tyranids and Space Marines. Imperial Guard and Necrons. Tau and Chaos. Anything that has versatility gets a bonus points as far as I am concerned.
But, this is a discussion. Why do you dislike the prism? Why do you like the Falcon? Why do you think both choices are worthless and always take war-walkers?
* "I'm Significant!" -screamed the dust speck
* "Call me old fashioned, but an evil ascension to power just isn't the same without someone chanting faux Latin in the background."
Neither is strictly better than the other. A fire prism is a better choice for non-engagement armies, while the falcon is a better choice for those who wish to get squads forward backed up by a decent amount of medium-ranged firepower.
Both have their place, just not necessarily in the same sorts of army.
Having an army and not owning a rulebook is like owning a car with no steering wheel.Originally Posted by amishcellphone
Well IMO Fire Prisms are better against Guard. Large pie lates slaughter the infantry and the small pie plates would be anti-tank. The rest of your army can deal with the rest.
AGLOCO - Earn money by browsing the internet!Originally Posted by Krevzi and Me
I personally just like the feel of fireprisms more, and the fact that they are not crap, means that I'd probably take them over falcons, if I was playing a more shooty oriented army.
-The God of all Machines
First off a falcons survivability is much much higher than a wave serpent! The holofield is an incredible piece of equipment. With a falcon troop delivery is nearly assured. With a waveserpent you really hope you aren't entangled.
I don't think wave serpents suck though. The only reason I think the falcon may prove to be more popular is because of the nerf to the starcannon and the models that could carry it and the craftworlds that let us get our shooty on. In my opinion it is now hard to make a pure shooty standoff army with eldar.
And if you're getting close already a falcon is a better in-your-face brawler than the prism.
The other thing is that it is also hard to make an army that doesn't have solid anti guard/tyranid elements.
For example take our troops:
Pathfinders: Pop a carnifex as easily as your average MEQ.
Jetbikes: Shoot and scoot shuri cannon. MEQs think it tickles. Guard are wondering where their Anti-tank team went.
Dire Avengers: I shouldn't need to explain this
Guardians: Ok you could take a stargun and try to shoot at a distance, but I bet you aren't.
Therefore I feel versatility is acheived by having anti-MEQ in the other choices as anti non-meq is provided for in troops.
But again the prism doesn't suck by any stretch even against MEQ, and I expect to see lots of them. I just don't think they're going to be dominant.
Anyone that thinks any eldar unit (in the new codex) is bad compared to another then they shouldn't be playing eldar.
Can anyone tell me which is the best race in 40k? no, same goes for the eldar codex. A few of the crappier codicies (like SMurfs) have clear comparisons (Tornado's over Typhoons every time) but the new eldar codex is great in that every unit is dependant on your army.
Oh, but I think we can compare things like guardian defenders to storm guardians and such. and we can discuss falcons vs prisms, not by what is inherantly better, but what is more worthy of the heavy slot and the points in an army mostly composed of xx. Or whatever. Use examples.
Tenozuma - The Burninator... I came, I saw, I posted.Originally Posted by Aussie Bogan
Dark Eldar player.
Feel free to PM if you want any advice or help with anything.
Assume everything I say has a "what I think" disclaimer.
Hang out with all the other Aussie and NZ members at The ANZAC Clan.
Need advice, want to talk warhammer or just want a laugh? Come on LO Chat. http://www.librarium-chat.com/
Well for my army I personally prefer the falcons. When you have an immortal tank its best to get up close and personal. If it can't shoot then big deal, transport and tankshock. It is good against every kind of enemy and can operate alone. It can get quite pricey coming up to about 200 poiints but it beats a land raider in every way and is still cheaper.
The fire prism on the other hand requires 2 to start shining and those slots could be better used in support weapons, reapers or war walkers. They cost more than a full squad of reapers and reapers tend to do more damage for me.
Fire Prisms have a big advantage in having a cool model though... and that they haven't been used in so long people want to take them.
i do like the prism, though IMO, thes same task can be fullfilled more efficient by other units. A wave serpent with twin-linked brightlance has a better chance to destroy vehicles than the prism. a weapon that glances on a worst of 4+ compared to 5+ of the prism and is also cheaper.
against heavy infantery, a blast template doesn't do wonders (1 hit + 1 or maybe to on 4+) and S9 ist mostly overkill, as like S6-8 weaponary, it cant autokill T5 anyway. against light infantery, mass shuriken also seems more effectiv to me.
however, since the new codex, the fireprism has now BF4 and a choice of two ways to shoot, all at no point increase. yet, i try to maximise a single unit's specialized role, not taking or equippting units of an allaround purpose. and its the same way i like them to play. nevertheless, the prism has become quite tempting to me....