I am not a huge PvP fan so more than likely I will be trying to keep the 'nid populations in check if thats even still a thing.
20 Carnifexes and a Hive Tyrant.... I think that's the point where you lure the damnable Black Ships to the planet and just Exterminatus the whole rock.
I demand that this be a thing when we get Harlequins - I want to see our Bards fly around the PvE zones spamming everywhere with massive low-damage auras, and then kiting a tide of PvE Tyranids into the middle of some SM/Ork conflict.
I don't know where you got your list of assumptions. But I am very, very, very happy for some variations between the factions. I don't want them all playing the same, else we might as well have 1 faction. 1, Why? Because they are specialised? How does this require more or less teamwork. Any team wanting to do well will require teamwork, the fact the long range is better at range and the short range is better at short range and both are more fragile, will require people play to the class, no more or less. 2, Any PUG that doesn't have teamwork vs any pug or premade that has teamwork will more than likely lose, from any faction. 3, Anyone playing any class from any faction well should do well 1 on 1 or in a team situation. Unless a specific class is poor 1 v 1 or in team situations. If you were going to do a list of weaknesses that get called eldar specific, it should probably start with being more fragile, which will likely be the biggest thing people talk about and GOOD they should be. Despite my avatar I am a huge eldar fan and I am a fan of variety, so I will be extremely disappointed if their strengths and weaknesses are not implemented as distinctive.
Isn't this where you just call in Fuegan because he does this worse than this kind of thing in his sleep? Also I'm inclined to agree with @Torrential under the proviso that fragility is meant to be counter-balanced by raw firepower i.e. Eldar = Glass Cannon. As long as we're not dealing with a higher TTK against Marines than Marines have against Marines (does that make sense o.o?) then it ought to be fine~ What I don't want to see is Eldar performing poorly and it being placed squarely on the players because "they aren't skilled enough". The Eldar community wants to see Eldar that are somewhat difficult to play but very rewarding, but does that necessarily mean that they should be difficult to pick up and play?
In response to your response to me. 1) Because Brent, the man designing the game, said so. That's why. 2) This is true, but will be of an even greater magnitude with a fighting force whose efficacy is more dependent upon teamwork and diversity than the others. 3) It is not illogical to speculate this would manifest to an even greater magnitude on a faction described as "extremely specialized" in relation to the other faction classes. I got my speculations from the statements of the people creating the game. I chose the words "implication" and " allusions" for their specific meaning. Also, my speculation wasn't explicitly or implicitly denoted to be a list of weaknesses. Learn to read and get the stick out of your ass.
1) I know it is a game dev but the why is important. I get the feeling because someone thinks specialised means more teamwork is needed, where practically teamwork is always needed. 2) No. It is always needed. 3) Why? 4) Right back at you. If your retort is learn to read, get over yourself and follow your own advice on your insult. You think you remember the devs saying both that they require more teamwork and they won't be harder to play. That's a contradiction right there, the hardest thing in this game is good teamwork.
