Deep dive: Eldar mechanics

@kadaeux
that is what i meant for tau
180° broadsides that overlap into 90°front that both sides can fire
there is always 90° at the back that is unfirable so i didnt include the overlap in the front in my explanation
it would let tau fire half its firepower when broadsiding and unleashing full firepower when front facing
currently with 270° turreted there is no downside to broadside firing and focusing weapons is a ridiculous dice roll

I'm going to bump this since there's already been 2 closed events; Alpha and Beta.

I'll start with the most pressing questions:

  1. Did they ever address death-beam Pulsars from the first game?
  2. What about Holo-fields? Do they resemble the TT?

@lkhero
death beam pulsars only existed in the first game for a short while
these days eldar have more use from bombers and skills, mostly using pulsars to tear down voids quickly to open a ship up against skills but never really for their damage

if questions about beta, they are hard to answer and much of it was going to change

last edited by Ashardalon

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero
death beam pulsars only existed in the first game for a short while
these days eldar have more use from bombers and skills, mostly using pulsars to tear down voids quickly to open a ship up against skills but never really for their damage

if questions about beta, they are hard to answer and much of it was going to change

Can you describe how the Pulsars operate right now?

@lkhero 🤔 pretty sure thats still under NDA
tho im not a legal expert

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero 🤔 pretty sure thats still under NDA
tho im not a legal expert

I was referring to the first game because you said "death beam pulsars only existed in the first game for a short while.."; implying that they changed them already in the first game. I think I saw a video or two a year or so ago that suggested this wasn't the case.

I'll try and be a bit more specific: Are they still cooldown-based weapons that do damage over time vs. rapid-fire lances (in BFG1)?

@lkhero Still a cool down weapon. Though they have seen a nerf, they are functionally the same as they’ve always been.

@lkhero sorry got confused
yea they are still activated skills with a cooldown
but they are no longer insta kill weapons like they where for a while
eldar mostly rely on ordnance and skills
pulsars are a great weapon to strip a ship of voids once its caught in a stasis field opening it up to other skills like psy storm, not so great for just clicking a button and winning the match
also has decent crit rate for further disabling a weakened foe if you are using disruption bombs alongside the stasis

they didnt completely rework the weapons, just tweaked the numbers to turn them from a match winning weapon into a tool to open up a enemy
their hull damage is not their purpose
eldar in BFG1 is 90% skill use
stasis bombs, disruption bombs, psychic storms, augur disruption alongside bombers
i have seen some masterful use of torps, and eldar torps are really scary and could achieve a dps kind of eldar but even they are better as a way to complement skill use, but those tend to go more the augur disruption route then psy storm build

generally pulsars are less relevant than back when they where death beams, but their mechanics and use havnt changed much
just the purpose
sorry for the confusion

last edited by Ashardalon

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero sorry got confused
yea they are still activated skills with a cooldown
but they are no longer insta kill weapons like they where for a while
eldar mostly rely on ordnance and skills
pulsars are a great weapon to strip a ship of voids once its caught in a stasis field opening it up to other skills like psy storm, not so great for just clicking a button and winning the match
also has decent crit rate for further disabling a weakened foe if you are using disruption bombs alongside the stasis

they didnt completely rework the weapons, just tweaked the numbers to turn them from a match winning weapon into a tool to open up a enemy
their hull damage is not their purpose
eldar in BFG1 is 90% skill use
stasis bombs, disruption bombs, psychic storms, augur disruption alongside bombers
i have seen some masterful use of torps, and eldar torps are really scary and could achieve a dps kind of eldar but even they are better as a way to complement skill use, but those tend to go more the augur disruption route then psy storm build

generally pulsars are less relevant than back when they where death beams, but their mechanics and use havnt changed much
just the purpose
sorry for the confusion

Then that's pretty crappy.. because that's not what Pulsars are in every single version of the canon and fluff. They are not cooldown weapons, they are simply rapid-fire lances.

Ordnance and skills are OK I guess? Except, again, I think while those are essential weapons for the Eldar player and lore-accurate, Pulsars are a race-defining weapon. If the devs cannot get this right, then I fear for CW and DE design.

@caliger_reborn said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero Still a cool down weapon. Though they have seen a nerf, they are functionally the same as they’ve always been.

I can't thumbs down enough, and that's not directed towards you.

The Solar Sails mechanic that CE had in Armada1 is a great example of table-top canon/lore transferring well to a video game. The mechanic symbolically displaying that the sails trap solar currents and then expending it in a great burst of speed.

The Pulsars? I can't even. Would it REALLY be that difficult to make them lore-appropriate while still preserving the faction's playstyle? I swear, it's almost as if I complained enough about this exact thing that Tindalos is straight trolling at this point.

If DE or CW Eldar is like this, I'm refunding instantly.

Did they at least change Corsair Holo-fields to Kinetic Shrouds? For the love of Isha.

@lkhero we are talking about BFG1 eldar pulsars now
they didnt do a complete weapon rework months after release because you complained
thats not trolling
so making assumptions about how this will relate to how dark eldar will work in BFG2 is kindof unfounded
well... not kindof, completely unfounded
can people please stop having tantrums about things they have no data on
pretty please?

also, didnt holofields in BFG1 kindof already worked more like kinetic shrouds then holofields
i remember complaints about that for some reason

but make sure you make your possible criticism clear during the first beta now
they have planned a longish inbetween time precisely for implementing possible larger changes if they are necessary
tho dont make assumptions on its necessity before you actually have seen a pulsar fire in BFG2

last edited by Ashardalon

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero we are talking about BFG1 eldar pulsars now
they didnt do a complete weapon rework months after release because you complained
thats not trolling
so making assumptions about how this will relate to how dark eldar will work in BFG2 is kindof unfounded
well... not kindof, completely unfounded
can people please stop having tantrums about things they have no data on
pretty please?

also, didnt holofields in BFG1 kindof already worked more like kinetic shrouds then holofields
i remember complaints about that for some reason

but make sure you make your possible criticism clear during the first beta now
they have planned a longish inbetween time precisely for implementing possible larger changes if they are necessary
tho dont make assumptions on its necessity before you actually have seen a pulsar fire in BFG2

I'm sure there's a language barrier now.

First, I'm saying that if Pulsars are the same as if they are in Armada1; being cooldown-based, fixed-fore, beam weapons, then that's completely awful because it's lore-inaccurate and doesn't add much to gameplay. Can you tell me why I shouldn't be concerned if after the release, they still haven't changed the fundamental design of this weapon?

Second, I can definitely relate how the Pulsars were designed in the first game to the second game and apply them to all 3 Eldar factions. That's because they use essentially the same kind of weapon variant. Corsairs and CW both use the Pulsar and Dark Eldar use Phantom Lances (with maybe the new Void Lance). We already know that they [Tindalos] made Mimic Engines similar to Silent/Stealth command, which seems like a fitting design choice, but again, if the primary weapon used by the Eldar is completely non-canon then I'm going to call it out.

Imagine if the Nova Cannon fired slow-moving balls of plasma or if the Tau Railguns shot macro weapons or if the Tyranids licked the ships as an attack. That's what the Pulsars are right now to the Eldar if they stay the same as in BFG:A1. I have every right to be concerned.

@lkhero
there where complaints about point limit > was changed
there where complaints about only being imperial campaign > was changed
there where complaints about the leveling in pvp > was changed
there where complaints about the game being mostly skill spam > was changed
basicly every complaint made about bfg1 was considered in making bfg2
so
@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

Second, I can definitely relate how the Pulsars were designed in the first game to the second game and apply them to all 3 Eldar factions.

is not a good assumption considering the data available, considering eldar pulsars where complained about

you seem to know eldar pretty well, so its great to have you here ready to give criticism about them as soon as the beta releases just like i will do with tyranids (ps tyranids do have licking weapons in lore tho those never existed in the TT 😞 )
there are many people who see the beta as just a way to play the game faster
so the more people to give actual criticism and write it out the better

but you cant really criticize something you know nothing about and the refund treat is silly
if the game sells well they will make a eldar campaign and you will have to re buy it anyway so its an empty treat
so hold back and conserve your energy for just a little while so you dont exhaust your ranting muscles before the rants actually start
it will make your criticism better constructed and more relevant once it matters

last edited by Ashardalon

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

@lkhero
there where complaints about point limit > was changed
there where complaints about only being imperial campaign > was changed
there where complaints about the leveling in pvp > was changed
there where complaints about the game being mostly skill spam > was changed
basicly every complaint made about bfg1 was considered in making bfg2
so
@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

Second, I can definitely relate how the Pulsars were designed in the first game to the second game and apply them to all 3 Eldar factions.

is not a good assumption considering the data available, considering eldar pulsars where complained about

you seem to know eldar pretty well, so its great to have you here ready to give criticism about them as soon as the beta releases just like i will do with tyranids (ps tyranids do have licking weapons in lore tho those never existed in the TT 😞 )
there are many people who see the beta as just a way to play the game faster
so the more people to give actual criticism and write it out the better

but you cant really criticize something you know nothing about and the refund treat is silly
if the game sells well they will make a eldar campaign and you will have to re buy it anyway so its an empty treat
so hold back and conserve your energy for just a little while so you dont exhaust your ranting muscles before the rants actually start
it will make your criticism better constructed and more relevant once it matters

First of all man, I can very well complain about the state of Pulsars because they have NOT been changed in the first game. You provided a bunch of examples of things that were changed from the first game, but over the course of how long? Many, if not all of those concerns were brought up in the very first closed event of the first game. I'm sure plenty of old beta testers can tell you that.

Tell me truthfully man, how much experience do you have with the first game and Tindalos as a developer? I can tell you straight up that all those concerns you said were addressed, I brought them up very early when I first played the game (minus the campaign) when it was in pre-order status and it took them months if not a year out to address. By that time, I have already completely lost faith in the developer's ability to make any changes. I originally started writing these out similar to threads like this, but eventually, I just blew my lid and was banned from the forums for talking to NDA testers about upcoming changes to the game. Part of the reason I gave up entirely was that the information that I got from them did not give me confidence on the future of the game (hint: it was not what you said was fixed above).

So yes, pardon me if I feel like we're going down the same route, especially after months of silence (I seriously thought the game was canceled) and zero gameplay footage. What do you expect? I can only take my experiences from the first game and make the same observations. The difference in your example of my knowledge of Eldar and you of Tyranids is that we've seen Tindalos' vision of Eldar already in the first game. I can use historical context to gauge what's to be expected and rant while you cannot. If Pulsars were changed in the first game (after feedback), the large majority of this banter would not exist. You do see the difference right?

last edited by LKHERO

@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

First of all man, I can very well complain about the state of Pulsars because they have NOT been changed in the first game. You provided a bunch of examples of things that were changed from the first game, but over the course of how long? Many, if not all of those concerns were brought up in the very first closed event of the first game. I'm sure plenty of old beta testers can tell you that.

these things where not changed in the first game
these are things that have been changed in the second game because of feedback
and most of these things where impossible to do in the first game, how would you even control that many points in BFG1 its nice vs ai with the autocontrol doing most and spending most of the time getting nice screenshots but it wouldnt work for actually playing
just adding another campaign? it wouldnt be a good financial decision, so they instead focused on the second game where they could do these things
beta in BFG1 was mostly just tweaking numbers a little, thats why they want a longer inbetween time this time to make sure they can do more with feedback this time, another complaint they decided to address
sure you can complain about pulsars in the first game but you cant about the second because you dont know anything at all about pulsars in the second

@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

Tell me truthfully man, how much experience do you have with the first game and Tindalos as a developer? I can tell you straight up that all those concerns you said were addressed, I brought them up very early when I first played the game (minus the campaign) when it was in pre-order status and it took them months if not a year out to address. By that time, I have already completely lost faith in the developer's ability to make any changes. I originally started writing these out similar to threads like this, but eventually, I just blew my lid and was banned from the forums for talking to NDA testers about upcoming changes to the game. Part of the reason I gave up entirely was that the information that I got from them did not give me confidence on the future of the game (hint: it was not what you said was fixed above).

i was in the beta for 1 pretty early on giving feedback
i have aproximatly 1000 hours in the game and still play it and can win against everything but one build
i have had good conversations with some of the devs giving me lots of hope about the game
you are right about them abandoning the first game way too soon but i dont think they did it because of ill wil, pretty sure they ran into engine problems that couldnt be fixed easily
so they made a new game keeping all those complaints in the back of their mind while doing so
except for aircaste tau BFG1 is a great game that was pushing its limits, not much more could have been done to it
tho they really should have done something to aircaste

@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

So yes, pardon me if I feel like we're going down the same route, especially after months of silence (I seriously thought the game was canceled) and zero gameplay footage. What do you expect? I can only take my experiences from the first game and make the same observations. The difference in your example of my knowledge of Eldar and you of Tyranids is that we've seen Tindalos' vision of Eldar already in the first game. I can use historical context to gauge what's to be expected and rant while you cannot. If Pulsars were changed in the first game (after feedback), the large majority of this banter would not exist. You do see the difference right?

Youtube Video

there ya go, gameplay footage, tho its a journo playing so dont use it as balance reference, he is pretty bad

and here i am as someone who has actually seen the new pulsars telling you to not jump to conclusions
hold it until you have seen ANYTHING from eldar
and then rant, rant a lot if you think it necessary
eldar are one of the hardest to balance so keep that energy to give useful criticism that could improve the game instead of wasting it on nonsensical gibberish about a game you havent played in a year

from speaking to the devs they want to make this the most amazing 40k game ever
so help them do that by giving good useful criticism when you can instead of constant depressing rants for no reason

last edited by Ashardalon

I'm sure it's a language issue at this point, but just to be crystal clear, I have EVERY reason to give early criticism. How the hell am I supposed to know that Pulsars have changed since the first game? Do you not see the disconnect here? I can only see what I know historically and what I see in front of my face. You have hidden knowledge and yet you come in here debating with someone who is kept in the dark. That's pretty infuriating to say the least, especially if all you say is "you don't know." NO SHIT, I don't know, I can only assume based on information that I have. If you have something to share, then do it. If not, stay quiet like Caligar since he's probably sitting in his seat waiting for me to jump for joy when I see the new Eldar in A2.

Also, you keep to keep in mind that the same devs also told us who have played BFG:A1 that they wanted to make "the most amazing 40K game ever". But like you said: "you are right about them abandoning the first game way too soon but i dont think they did it because of ill wil, pretty sure they ran into engine problems that couldnt be fixed easily". Again, the people on the sidelines i.e. me and the majority of the people who did not make it into the beta(s), only have our history, experience, and the first game to make references to. Why do you think most people who have played one or more betas of A2 don't engage in these discussions? I'm just going to take context from what you've said so far and apply a fairly large grain of salt. If they fix Pulsars, great. If not, then lol, what more can we do?

From what it looks like, they're using the same engine (Unreal 4) with slightly different UI. Let's also be clear on another thing: Updating UI != engine limitations. If we're talking specifically about Pulsars, I'm not buying engine limitations for a second because you can literally swap a Prow Lance from a Dauntless, slap it on a Corsair ship and have it fire 3 times as fast. There's even built-in ROF values that you can modify.

PS - The footage you linked is something a lot of us have already seen. It still doesn't clear up my qualms about Pulsars though.

last edited by LKHERO

😑 this is pointless and frustrating
im just saying its pointless to give criticism about assumptions

@ashardalon said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

😑 this is pointless and frustrating
im just saying its pointless to give criticism about assumptions

Agreed and likewise. I will take what you said with a grain of salt and look forward to seeing how they addressed Pulsars in the pre-order beta(s). If not, I'll just link back to this thread since I felt like I expressed my viewpoints enough.

@lkhero said in Deep dive: Eldar mechanics:

If not, stay quiet like Caligar since he's probably sitting in his seat waiting for me to jump for joy when I see the new Eldar in A2.

Bingo, my dude, just you wait.
Im just keeping a finger on the pulse of the community in the meantime, since I can’t really say anything (although I wish I could).

last edited by CALiGeR_Reborn

Also it is theoretically possible to make the pulsars hero wants in BFG1 with existing assets in a mod, but it’s extremely difficult given their are no tools and the FX don’t always line up or work as intended.

last edited by CALiGeR_Reborn

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.