Friday, May 24, 2013

GW misposted FAQ? Some insight into Monofilament weapons and Support Weapon Batteries...

GW has randomly posted an Eldar FAQ update for June, perhaps in anticipation of errors already in the Codex? Regardless, it refers to the weapon profile of the Shadow Weaver which will shed some light onto Warp Spider and Night Spinner weapons as well as Support Weapon Batteries.

Specifically, the link can be found here until/unless GW takes it down.

First off, the Shadow Weaver is a weapon that Support Batteries can upgrade to. It use to be simply just a S6 AP- Heavy 1, Barrage, Blast. The new rules according to the FAQ are:

Reference – Profiles, Ranged Weapons
Replace the Shadow Weaver's profile with the following.
Shadow Weaver Range 48" S 6 AP 6 Type Heavy 1, Barrage, Blast, Monofilament

-Notice how it is a Heavy weapon and has the Monofilament special rule? This probably means that Support Weapon Batteries will remain Heavy weapons and that anything that uses Monofilament as a weapon (i.e., Warp Spiders, Night Spinner and Shadow Weaver) has this special rule.

-As far as the Night Spinner went, it was Rending and models hit were in Dangerous & Difficult terrain. This probably means that Warp Spiders will have this set of rules as well so we can probably look forward to Rending S6 AP6 Warp Spider shots and the Dangerous+Difficult terrain is a nice bonus too!

What do you guys think?


  1. Again, nice bonus there, but now I fear my 30 spiders will be competing with the new fliers for spots - unless the squadron rule is true....

  2. I don't think that is a bad thing...I hope everything in the new Eldar codex is so useful that it will be a tough choice what exactly we will want to include in our armies. Then we might not have to focus on trying to build an army with what is the best unit and instead just build an army we think is cool/like. One day we might want to build a Saim Hann style army, another Iyanden and yet another Altaioc or Beil Tan and hopefully still be able to do as well with any of them!

  3. Iyanden is similar to Deathwing at this point, right? Wraith guard, knights, lord, etc.

    Do you think CC WG would be able to roll in a Wave Serpent? Can't see wanting to walk them across the board. Sound like great Obj holders for sure.

  4. If things are still the same as far as transport capacity, I see no reason why any configuration of Wraithguard shouldn't be able to embark on a Wave Serpent at 5 strong with maybe a few ICs like it currently is.

    Also, I think that Iyanden can be similar to deathwing in playstyle but will be more flexibility because of the other elements an Eldar codex has to work with (like Fire Dragons and perhaps that new Psyker flyer).

    Wraithguard with axe/shield is most likely S6 AP2 (in CC) with a 4++ and at T6, that is pretty darn survivable against anything except S7/8 low AP weapons but that is what the 4++ is for...I've personally always wished Wraithguard could get a 4++ or some form of invul and this answers all of those needs. One unit of this setup should be a great bulwark for any Iyanden style army and hopefully you can get Fortune for this squad...

    One thing I especially like about the new Wraithknight is how if anything, it will be a prime target and distract your opponent from targeting your Wraithguard so in essence, Wraithguard armies can be that much more resilient.