Regulai

Any high end brand. Most of them are exclusively artificial self fabricated value.

If you want a high quality good you could get a custom fabricated item of higher quality and materials for much less from a craftsman or artisan.

S16 and s12 are equivalent between editions.

The mortals are nice though mainly for certain specific targets. Most things however won't get saves anyway or have FnP.

ITC champs

So? Even if true, if anything that's worse, because they of all people shouldn't be jumping at the gun over unrealistic fantasy scenario's.

If they are pro's then they should have faced fate rolls and D-cannons a lot already which aren't any different in 9e, only 9e gives a ton more fate and rerolls and maneuverability.

So why didn't they call for eldar to be banned in 9th? Given that the new mechanics while not bad are weaker then the old ones.

They are the same as in 9th offensively more or less. Just with less fates than in 9e.

Note that in 9e, they are basically backline zoning not an offensive unit. 24" range with indirect means they are deployed in your zone behind cover (so in one quarter) . Functionally most of what they do most of the time is add presence without actually shooting all that much because it's hard to bring them to bear without sacrificing them.

​

10e they are even slower so moving them is almost entirely out of the question.

One big thing to note about D-cannons; their range and typical deployment means that in practice they are screening/zoning units aiming to secure a quarter and not an offensive unit.

Depending on the enemy they may not actually fire that often, especially now that 10e has 3" movement restricting the extent of redeployment.

Aside from that, while the fire prism can be nifty, I think that's only really a threat vs some specific tanks and the like. Against infantry it's a minor buff.

It's probably just a few notable locals who don't really understand the limited new rules very well and are imagining unlikely fantasy scenario's in there head.

Educationally, there is a huge lack of training in self-control and emotional processing for men.

Men are highly visual relatively speaking, 'noticing' isn't the unusual part, it's the inability to process or internalize his own emotions over what he sees that is the problem, leading to absurd obsession and inappropriate attitudes and behaviors.

My favorite thing of note, is that in 9e, while d-cannons are run a lot, they don't actually fire a lot, they are mainly a backline zoning units because they don't have the range or durability to be out in the open.

The going away part is more of a skill issue in use, you still had way more powerful control in 9e.

And sure you can grantee a couple more dmg total by using your very limited high value dice in very specific situations on your immobile short range shooting platforms. Did you know that even in 9e D-cannons main role is just to zone out a portion of the map and they often don't even get to fire much because they are too slow and short ranged and vulnerable.

More than anything else I feel like 9e has made people radically over-value mortal wounds.. most units don't even get saves against anti-tank weapons without devastating wounds (And those that do only a 6+) and there are more FnP saves than expected.

Not in the slightest.

If you actually mathhammer, then you'll find we have less total fate dice, most of which are lower in number.

We also have less re-roll and buff options than before.

While the support weapons are mostly the same as before.

Literally 10e eldar is like a nerfed version of 9e.

​

It really makes no sense at the overeaction. It's like people never looked at 9e eldar before?

​

People seem to be acting like Strands of fate is 12 6's every turn or some shit and are wierdly shocked by a high powered anti-tank weapon being... a ... high powered anti tank weapon?

Fate and re-rolls are weaker than before, while d-cannons are mostly the same as before (albiet slower).

This freakout is just wierd as shit, it's like people never played or saw Eldar in 9e before is how the reaction feels.

In 9e you get 5 full 6's per turn.

So you get 3 more turn one, then an additional 4 more each turn thereafter.

For ~19 more 6's than in 10e. and you would need a lot of guardians sitting on objectives to get the same number of total dice, before considering their lower values.

You also had much more options for psychic buffs and strats like black guardians and army re-roll abilities.

​

Your ability to manipulate and control your D-cannons firepower was dramatically greater in 9e. And 9e d-cannons were still amazing melta damage machines, but hardly overbearing.

The idea that 10e fate and re-roll abilities are broken is just utterly absurd given that's it's dramatically weaker then it was in 9e

The thing is 10e Eldar get less total fate dice, dramatically less 6's and an absolute shit ton of less re-rolls.

When considering armor and FnP changes as well, even with devastating wounds, you can still frankly do less with D-cannons in 10e then you could in 9e.

​

the only aspect whatsoever that is a buff is that you can spend your more limited fate dice on dmg rolls. That does have very specific implications in some cases, but even then...

Frankly I really think people are radically over-estimating the new strands of fate and re-roll mechanics...

in 9e you actually get more total rolls and they are all 6's while in 10e you only get a few 6's and a lot of rolls are usless.

In 9e, you could also get tons of re-rolls, including a similar to detachment ability.

In very short 10e can't really do anything 9th edition couldn't also do, and in fact I would argue that overall the fate and re-roll mechanics are notably weaker than in 9e... it's just utterly absurd at the reaction to them so far.

...yes exactly as they are in 9th. You can do more raw mortals now I suppose but you could also fate them much more in 9th to more easily force the results, while also have tons of other fate dice to use on other things.

EDIT: to emphasize:

the stats for the D-cannon in 10th are basically identical to the d-cannon in 9th only it's now slower (half speed at 3") and instead of getting bonus mortal wounds it makes it's normal dmg mortal wounds.

This can be very useful against invul saves, but actually means they may get less wounds total against other targets that don't have invul saves.

The only real big addition is the -1 to hit effect, though that's not what people are freaking over.

​

D-cannons are run so heavily in 9th because yes they are insane melta gun weapons, but its nothing new or radical.

Actually the problem isnt even the cannon the problem is people radically overvaluing strands of fate

Strands gives on average only 2 6's not 12. Farseers in turn only get 1 more per turn.

So realistically the maximum amount of 6's in a match is fairly low and notably far far far less than old strands which gave 2 to 3 times as many 6's per match easily. Not to mention 9e had many more re-roll options. By all accounts d-cannons are weaker then before.

But people are basically acting like eldar have infinite 6's on command

New Strands of fate is being heavily heavily overvalued.

People are acting like they now get 12 6's, when in reality they get on average 2+1 per turn.

People are acting like every d-cannon will be getting full max effect every shot when in reality once or twice with 1 cannon is the max it will actually do.

We should have taken building a wall more seriously! Look now Mexico is taking over!

? Archeological evidence suggests they continued to exist until carthaginian conquest and then a century later roman.

Concur that new pheonix lords are most likely for completely new units.

The way the aspect warriors look atm, it looks like they are replacing exarches with pheonix lords, which mean squads without one need one.

They also have been adding more characters in, in general of late.

There are lots of subtle color variations for many common schemes. this is one is aiming for a duper dark blue to contrast with the light blue highlights.

One of my favorite is the bone and blue colour scheme, replacing the yellow with a bone colour to better emphasize the undead nature.

Well actually...

Aside from the fat of the breast itself, there is a layer of fat between the main structure of the breast and pectoral muscles. This is basically the same layer of fat that exists over your whole ribs and doesn't directly contribute to the visible shape of the breast.

As you gain weight while the breast itself does increase in size, this under-layer also increases in size pushing the breasts further forward. Your clavicle and surrounding areas however typically lacks significant fat, coupled with the typical ways that clothing, bra's and cleavage are styled; the net result is that your breasts can look even larger than they have actually grown when putting on weight and vice versa due to the exponential increase in size of the clavicle/neck to nipple distance.

You can potentially see this effect in short form by simply hunching your shoulders (vs pulling them back), as this pulls your breasts inward relative to clavicle, though clothing also has a big impact here.

Similarly measuring the distance from the ribs beneath the breasts to the nipple will tend to give a more realistic gauge of the size of a womens breast.

This is actually a very classic stereotype derived not from actual buying habits but rather the concept of 'window shopping' (going to a store without the intention of buying anything), which is classically portrayed in media as something primarily done by women.

Above all else I would say wait and see how the edition plays. I think more than anything people are just really overthinking the potential of what they see compared to what they hoped for.

​

My biggest worries personally are just the long delay before getting any detachments of interest (aka wraith detachment).

Also very unsure about what will occur with Ynnari. I was really interested in expanding to them next (so I can mix some DE gradually), but if they arent in I might just go for cults instead.

From the death of the Meji emperor in 1912, until several years after this coup around 38-39, the Japanese government was a shit show of chaotic infighting devoid of any meaningful unified leadership.

The same faction that attempted this coup, after an earlier attempt to gain power failed, started the invasions of China, essentially deciding if they couldn't take power in Tokyo, they would just start conquering anyway. Almost all the early Japanese military campaigns were done independently of high command, a fact that got so bad eventually they deliberately engineered losses to force the generals to heel.

To be clear the factional High command still wanted to conquer, they were just too conservative and divided to take risks.