HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Dark Lance vs Disentigrator

Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
egorey
The Duck of Death
avatar

Posts : 767
Join date : 2013-02-25

PostSubject: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 04:24

So DL ravagers are still popular despite other options in a list for AT. I see some of the logic ...

1) Razorwings can now be slotted in fast attack so you can use both ravs and razors.
2) Ravs have range that other AT lacks.

So I'm playing raiders and ravagers in my list. Will a jinking raider be more efficient with disintegrators or with ravagers. I have AT in blasters, heat lances and haywire in DE lists. Talos and Cronos can be used ( even in formations which DS or scout) so why do I need ravs? A unit of scourges is arguably as effective and arguably as durable - especially in today's meta where lists emphasis drop pods, scouting, fast units. A blasterborn squad in a venom is more flexible as well. Even a voidraven  - although a bit more expensive is also more flexible and arguably more durable.

Now in 7ed we take out most vehicles and tanks by glancing them. Exploding a vehicle is no longer the optimum approach. Yet ravagers seem to persist in a lot of lists.

Disintegrators are quite good against a variety of units. Yes, DE have lots of poison  - I get that - but DE win by volume of fire so more is never a bad thing.

So what am I missing here?

_________________
Dear GW,
Paper is overpowered. Scissors is fine.
Signed,
Rock.
Back to top Go down
Thor665
Archon
avatar

Posts : 5526
Join date : 2011-06-10
Location : Venice, FL

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 06:10

@egorey wrote:
Will a jinking raider be more efficient with disintegrators or with ravagers.
You mean lances, not ravagers, right?  Laughing
I would say, clearly, that a jinking Raider would be more effecient with Dissies - that's basic math.
I think a Lance is more useful to a list than a Dissie though - and consequently tend not to jink.

@egorey wrote:
I have AT in blasters, heat lances and haywire in DE lists. Talos and Cronos can be used ( even in formations which DS or scout) so why do I need ravs?
36"+6-12" 3 Str 8 lance shots at about 40 points a shot. That's why I take them.

@egorey wrote:
A unit of scourges is arguably as effective and arguably as durable
The reverse of this is that they are arguably not as effective and not as durable. It tends to depend on target and enemy weapon capability.

I also don't get why the drop pod comment weakens Ravagers - Drop pods with some flamer tech weaken Scourges. Hell, drop pods with bolters weaken Scourges too - both of which  Ravager tends to shrug off. As noted - it depends.

@egorey wrote:
A blasterborn squad in a venom is more flexible as well. Even a voidraven  - although a bit more expensive is also more flexible and arguably more durable.
Yes, two more expensive units can be argued that they bring more options or durability to the field.
Of course - for the cost of a Trueborn unit in a Venom I can basically afford both a Ravager and a Venom, and overall have more MSU and more range.

I would also, personally, tend to dispute the Voidraven's survivability though I suppose that depends on the meta in your area. But an AV 11 vehicle that can use cover vs. an AV 10 flyer that generally cannot...eh...yeah, maybe the VR is more survivable? But it really depends on the enemy's list. A Serpent will probably eat either of them, a Knight will have a hard time dealing with the VR and an easier time vs. the Ravager. Very list dependent statement.

@egorey wrote:
Now in 7ed we take out most vehicles and tanks by glancing them. Exploding a vehicle is no longer the optimum approach. Yet ravagers seem to persist in a lot of lists.
I tend to do both - I care a bit less about exploding vehicles though, I care quite a bit about shaking them and forcing snapfire however. It is one of the reasons I find lances better than haywire Scourges in a basic sense. Maybe that's a reason people like Ravs still?

@egorey wrote:
Disintegrators are quite good against a variety of units.
I mildly disagree with this.

@egorey wrote:
Yes, DE have lots of poison  - I get that - but DE win by volume of fire so more is never a bad thing.
Agreed - but why do you argue that we have so much AT fire options, and that validates not taking Ravagers (who outrange everything you list) yet somehow the prevalence of Venoms (and our basic infantry) doesn't suggest a lack of need for Dissies? When it comes to dealing with mech or dealing with infantry I know which one my lists tend to have the harder time with and which one I like to spam a bit more to ensure I get the results I want/need (hint: not killing infantry Wink ) That's probably another reason the Ravager still gets play. Also, if I want Dissies, i tend to find the Razorwing as the better overall option to get them onto the field with - I do run them sometimes and find them to work well there.

_________________


The Title Troupe! - Nom fellow posters for custom titles.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 08:57

Can't really disagree with anything Thor has said - I take lots of Dark Lances and some haywire blasters because in priority order what I want is:

1. Vehicles dead
2. Vehicles snapfiring
3. Vehicles with fewer hull points than at the start of the turn

As an example, last night I played against a guard list, my Haywire scourges dropped in and stripped 1 (yeah i know) hull point from a Manticore. Consequently I had to point some lances at it to get the result i needed, managed to shake it and the HWB finished it off in the next turn. I had nothing else that could have achieved that result, my blasters had been stranded out of range and only the dark lances could reach. Dissies wouldn't have even scratched the paintwork.

If someone decides to forego mech and brings a termie list, I have 13 lances, 2 blasters, a blast pistol and 4 heat lances to point at them, so i don't exactly feel I'm missing out on AP2 or better either.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
Demantiae
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 261
Join date : 2015-01-07

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 11:18

It's probably better to take a bunch of lances and turn them all at terminators if you need to (and still have that anti-tank punch if you need it) than take disintegrators that might kill the same terminators a turn faster. Just kite them another turn and lance them to death. Disintegrators used to be much better when they blast weapons (and strength 7 I think?). Then there was a good argument for taking them over lances but not now. Only good use for them I can see is if you had an assault raider primed with Grots and flamers and wanted to really damage a tough unit before you charged it. But then you could just aim some splinter cannons or shoot them up with scourges first and use the dark lance to hit a tank instead.

Thinking about combined arms and table top roles I'm struggling to see a solid reason to ever take disintegrators at all.

_________________
------------------------------
The Bone Flower
------------------------------
Back to top Go down
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2968
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 11:59

Unless I'm fighting nids or a specific GK list, I'd rather have more lances than disintegrators.

Vehicles tend to be far more of a concern than terminators. And, if I am facing a lot of terminators, I can still turn those lances on them. Whereas, if I'm facing a list with a lot of vehicles, disintegrators are going to be pretty worthless.

Maybe if they still fired as plasma cannons...
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 12:07

I think even against Nids I'd want lances. T6 on a lot of units make the dissies a sub par choice to wound, and though I've not run the maths to support it, my gut is telling me I'd rather be wounding on a 2+ with one shot than wounding on a 5+ with three shots (especially when you consider one of those is highly likely to miss anyway).

ok so what do I know - the dissie should give you a 2/3 chance of causing a single wound, the lance has a 5/9 chance, so 1/9 worse.

Counter to that though is that lances will insta kill warriors and raveners, dissies won't (though obviously against T4 their odds of wounding go up). A dissie should cause 1 1/3 wounds on a warrior, the lance has the same 5/9 chance, but would then instantly remove all three wounds.

Roughly speaking therefore, three lance should kill two warriors, three dissies would kill one warrior outright and wound another once.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2968
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 12:11

@The_Burning_Eye wrote:
I think even against Nids I'd want lances. T6 on a lot of units make the dissies a sub par choice to wound, and though I've not run the maths to support it, my gut is telling me I'd rather be wounding on a 2+ with one shot than wounding on a 5+ with three shots (especially when you consider one of those is highly likely to miss anyway).

ok so what do I know - the dissie should give you a 2/3 chance of causing a single wound, the lance has a 5/9 chance, so 1/9 worse.

Counter to that though is that lances will insta kill warriors and raveners, dissies won't (though obviously against T4 their odds of wounding go up). A dissie should cause 1 1/3 wounds on a warrior, the lance has the same 5/9 chance, but would then instantly remove all three wounds.

Roughly speaking therefore, three lance should kill two warriors, three dissies would kill one warrior outright and wound another once.

That's a good point, actually.

I'd forgotten about the various T4, 3-wound nids.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 12:16

I played some just before Christmas. Lost thanks to those new drop-pod nasties they have (that can somehow, despite being essentially mindless, claim objectives!) but did enjoy lancinf his warriors to death.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
katfude
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 35
Join date : 2015-01-08

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 12:49

wounds/hp caused. Dark lance is first column, second column is dissies.

GEQ .556 || 1.667
MEQ .556 || 1.333
TEQ .37 || .889
Nidzilla .556 || .444
T7 .444 || .222
T8 .333 || .222
T9 .222 || 0

10 .556 || .667
11 .444 || .333
12+ .333 || 0

Dissies are mathematically better against everything except Nidzilla and tougher, and can't touch most vehicles, though in a DE v DE matchup, are mathematically better at stripping HPs off of our own vehicles.

That said, I am a firm believer in having the tools to take all comers, so Lances win for me as they can shoot at anything and the stuff they are mathematically superior against will be eating a crap ton of poison shots anyway.
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2501
Join date : 2012-01-16
Location : Rutland - UK

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 12:56

This is the key point really - disintegrators perform worse than lances against almost all armoured targets, meaning you take them to shoot other stuff. The other stuff that we have lots and lots of poison to deal with.

Here's a point to ponder though - if you could take dissies on trueborn or scourges - would you? Is it the weapon that's the issue or the platform that you'd rather have lances on? I can see plenty of scope for taking a trueborn squad with 4 dissies in it, provided they were of an assault variety like the blaster is to the dark lance.

_________________
Tan? You're joking, I'm a gamer, you're lucky I'm wearing deodorant!

My Blog - The Burning Eye Blog (check it out - comments always welcome)

My Project Log - Visions of the Burning Eye

My Gaming Log - Chronicles of the Burning Eye

My Club - MAD Wargaming

My Fluff - Kabal of the Burning Eye, Cult of the Shadowed Blade and Coven of Distorted Perfection
Back to top Go down
http://theburningeye.blogspot.com
The Shredder
Trueborn
avatar

Posts : 2968
Join date : 2013-04-11

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 13:01

I think the weapon itself is more the issue.

If disintegrators were S6 or S7, that would be much more interesting.
Back to top Go down
egorey
The Duck of Death
avatar

Posts : 767
Join date : 2013-02-25

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 13:36

I think my point was that we have AT in other forms a DE list. Thor addressed this - the question is are the other AT options enough and are they reliable?
Lets look at what we have for mech:

Reavers
Scourges
Truborn
Blasters on warriorsand HQs
Talos
Razorwings
Voidravens

The first three are fairly quick and cannget into position (assuming the truborn venom is not destroyed turn one --- also we have formations with scout and WWP to get talos into play. The last two are coming from reserve and are arguably as effective as a ravager.

I think my issue is more to do with the ravager than dark lances, TBH.

That said I'm beginning to see why people still love their ravagers.

_________________
Dear GW,
Paper is overpowered. Scissors is fine.
Signed,
Rock.


Last edited by egorey on Fri Jan 09 2015, 14:58; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
sweetbacon
Sybarite


Posts : 368
Join date : 2014-02-09

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 14:26

@The_Burning_Eye wrote:
This is the key point really - disintegrators perform worse than lances against almost all armoured targets, meaning you take them to shoot other stuff. The other stuff that we have lots and lots of poison to deal with.

Here's a point to ponder though - if you could take dissies on trueborn or scourges - would you? Is it the weapon that's the issue or the platform that you'd rather have lances on? I can see plenty of scope for taking a trueborn squad with 4 dissies in it, provided they were of an assault variety like the blaster is to the dark lance.

This is an interesting question. Personally, if Trueborn could take Disintegrators, I'd probably run them, as a squad with 2-3 Dissies in a Venom should erase one TEQ per turn from 36 inches, thereby freeing up your Dark Lances/Blasters/Heat Lances to shoot at vehicles.
Back to top Go down
The Strange Dark One
Wych
avatar

Posts : 619
Join date : 2014-08-22
Location : Private subrealm of the Eldritch Skies Kabal.

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 17:28

@sweetbacon wrote:
This is an interesting question.  Personally, if Trueborn could take Disintegrators, I'd probably run them, as a squad with 2-3 Dissies in a Venom should erase one TEQ per turn from 36 inches, thereby freeing up your Dark Lances/Blasters/Heat Lances to shoot at vehicles.  

Yeah, I've been thinking the same actually. It could be a really fun weapon if units Trueborn or Scourges (relentless).
Back to top Go down
sweetbacon
Sybarite


Posts : 368
Join date : 2014-02-09

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 19:11

@The Strange Dark One wrote:
@sweetbacon wrote:
This is an interesting question.  Personally, if Trueborn could take Disintegrators, I'd probably run them, as a squad with 2-3 Dissies in a Venom should erase one TEQ per turn from 36 inches, thereby freeing up your Dark Lances/Blasters/Heat Lances to shoot at vehicles.  

Yeah, I've been thinking the same actually. It could be a really fun weapon if units Trueborn or Scourges (relentless).

Totally agree.   I think Trueborn should be the equivalent of Sternguard, i.e., shooting specialists that can take any weapon for any occasion.   This (ideally) would include HWB, Heat Lances, Shard Carbines, and Disintegrators.  Due to the nerfs to the infantry-borne Splinter Cannon, all they are now is a very expensive Blaster platform.
Back to top Go down
clever handle
Kabalite Warrior


Posts : 122
Join date : 2013-07-10
Location : Right behind you

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 19:34

@The Strange Dark One wrote:
@sweetbacon wrote:
This is an interesting question.  Personally, if Trueborn could take Disintegrators, I'd probably run them, as a squad with 2-3 Dissies in a Venom should erase one TEQ per turn from 36 inches, thereby freeing up your Dark Lances/Blasters/Heat Lances to shoot at vehicles.  

Yeah, I've been thinking the same actually. It could be a really fun weapon if units Trueborn or Scourges (relentless).

since when are scourge relentless? They're JUMP-PACK infantry not JET-PACK infantry aren't they?
Back to top Go down
Unorthodoxy
Beating A Different Drummer
avatar

Posts : 837
Join date : 2014-03-25
Location : Western Washington

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 22:09

My question is WHY take the lances ON that specific platform when anti tank is prolific in Dark Eldar lists.

And ocne you have enough Anti-tank on other units...you no longer need them on Raiders nor Ravagers. Its EITHER overkill or it's wasted opportunity.

Disintegrators are awesome weapons. They just are. No Multi laser is going to tell me otherwise. You're telling me you'd mount lascannons on a Chimera? NO! You wouldnt and for all the same reasons you shouldn't on a Raider. Movement and jinking make a lascannon almost worthless and the army can already field them better elsewhere with orders and Psyker powers to fuel them.

I dunno what the hoopla is about Lances on Ravagers and Raiders but UNLESS you have a Coven list like mine, you really do want Disintegrator Cannons. hell i was FORCED by my list to add the lances and its under extreme protest that i finally had to do it. But Covens are melee oriented and not at all good at anti-armor from range so you have to make concessions.


_________________
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Back to top Go down
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com/
1++
Hekatrix


Posts : 1036
Join date : 2011-06-27
Location : Sydney

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 22:44

Dont get me wrong I'm a big fan of Lance Ravagers but if you are finding that in your meta you are seeing Terminators and loads of MEQ out in the open a lot (pod armies) then Dissies on Ravagers are going to shine.

@Unorthodoxy wrote:
My question is WHY take the lances ON that specific platform when anti tank is prolific in Dark Eldar lists.

I thought the answer was quite obvious; because Ravager w/ Lances is our longest ranged AT weapon. Move 6" and fire 3 @ 36" for a 42" threat range. Move 12" and 1 of those shots is snap shooting (loss of efficiency there)

The next threat ranges for AT (also note I am not including any manipulators like WWP):
Trueborn w/ Blasters have a 24" threat range (or 30" if u disembark)
Scourge w/ Haywire have a 30" threat range
Reavers or Scourge have 30" threat range (21" to be in Melta range)

But I feel like I'm telling u things you already know. So therefore the question then becomes "If I don't want to use Ravagers as my AT, what will be my next choice and how will I use them.

_________________
"I'm alive from this pain!"
Back to top Go down
Thor665
Archon
avatar

Posts : 5526
Join date : 2011-06-10
Location : Venice, FL

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 22:50

If I want lances on a mobile platform my options are as follows;

Raider
Ravager
Razorwing
Voidraven (basically)

I have a few other options that can handle vehicles at range, albeit less range;

Scourges
Talos
Reavers
Warriors/Trueborn/Archon w. Blasters
I guess anything with a blast pistol or grenade they can toss.

I have a handful of things that do pretty well in assault;

Talos
Cronos
Grots
Reavers
Anything with Haywire Grenades...or I suppose other grenades theoretically.

And that's about it besides real hail Mary type stuff.
What I actually see though is a lot of things that can do anti-mech, which is what I feel people are arguing, yet only a small handful of things that do anti-mech at the range and ability of the Ravager. In fact, only 4 things - 2 are flyers and start in reserve so they don't do much on Turn 1 if that's what you want from them.

That basically leaves the Raider and the Ravager that do what the Ravager does.
The Ravager does it better and more affordable than the Raider - straight up.

The only other competition even in the ballpark is the Scourges (who can do it via haywire blasters or regular blasters) and relative quality and cost of those versus the Ravager (which can be debated) the final answer is that they don't compete with the Ravager for range.

So, if I want long range anti-mech shooting (optimal for killing artillery type vehicles, Tau suits, most enemy tank type units, et al) my primary and singular option is the Ravager. Nothing else in the codex does what it does as well as it does.

I can understand people deciding they don't need *that particular ability*.
But I find it really odd that people wish to argue that I have other or better options to do it.
No - I don't. Not from the DE codex.

That is why lances are chosen. Dissies also have uses, but a Dissie Ravager is less needed because for infantry killing of that sort (which is killing specialized high armor infantry) Turn 2 is usually perfectly fine to do it, and there's this thing called the Razorwing which is pretty sweet - and for all other needs we have the Venom, or assault units, or Warrior squads, et al and don't really scream out a 'need Dissies!' energy.

_________________


The Title Troupe! - Nom fellow posters for custom titles.
Back to top Go down
clever handle
Kabalite Warrior


Posts : 122
Join date : 2013-07-10
Location : Right behind you

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 23:11

I think Thor's pretty much hit the points (and others!) but what really needs to be hit home is why that range is so important. Regardless of MEQ/TEQ/GEQ models, if they're inside a box, our splinter simply can't have any effect on them. Neither can our melee units. Dark eldar assaulting needs to happen turn 2, or our fragile units will get shot off the board before they can have an impact - this is almost mandatory to ensure you're shutting down opponent shooting in a meaningful way. How do you hope to do this if you haven't removed the armor from the table? It takes on average 7 lance shots to destroy a rhino with no coversaves and average rolls. That's 7 lance shots to remove 3 hullpoints at AV11.... due the the inherent fragility of our choices, we absolutely need to accomplish our goals ASAP. Which means we need to start having an effect on enemy hullpoints turn one. Waiting for flyers is bad news. Same with anything wielding a blaster. That range allows us to have a meaningful impact on turn one no matter what.

If you don't start impacting the game ASAP you will lose. Plain and simple. I'd suggest that in the covens, this is even more mandatory.
Back to top Go down
The Strange Dark One
Wych
avatar

Posts : 619
Join date : 2014-08-22
Location : Private subrealm of the Eldritch Skies Kabal.

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Fri Jan 09 2015, 23:13

@clever handle wrote:
@The Strange Dark One wrote:
@sweetbacon wrote:
This is an interesting question.  Personally, if Trueborn could take Disintegrators, I'd probably run them, as a squad with 2-3 Dissies in a Venom should erase one TEQ per turn from 36 inches, thereby freeing up your Dark Lances/Blasters/Heat Lances to shoot at vehicles.  

Yeah, I've been thinking the same actually. It could be a really fun weapon if units Trueborn or Scourges (relentless).

since when are scourge relentless?  They're JUMP-PACK infantry not JET-PACK infantry aren't they?

Well, they are not, that's why I put it in brackets. It is only a hypothetical scenario in which they could take Dissies, so it's not too wrong to assume that if that'd be the case, they could be made relentless as well? Wink

Should have made this more clear, probably.

_________________
Discontinued: Dark Eldar 7th Codex Redux
A pragmatic custom codex for pragmatic realspace raiders.
Back to top Go down
a1elbow
Kabalite Warrior
avatar

Posts : 100
Join date : 2011-05-29

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Sat Jan 10 2015, 03:27

I think the issue is that, because AI is so readily available and effective for DE, the AA is more necessary. Most DE lists will come with enough AI that they can handle a horde army. A DE army facing mech without enough AA options is going to have a long road.

Some of this is the fragile nature of DE. Almost any weapon can impact our vehicles or troops, but the opposite is true of the majority of armies. S5 is enough of a threat that Raiders and Venoms have to be wary of it. Our S5 isn't accomplishing much vs other armies' vehicles.

Having said that, now that DLs are an upgrade and Ravagers typically only get to shoot two weapons, I do take a single Disentegrator on mine.

_________________
My list
Back to top Go down
PainReaver
Sybarite


Posts : 374
Join date : 2012-10-21

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Sat Jan 10 2015, 07:14

DE's AA options only come with its flyers.

I wish we had something that could counter air units whilst not being a flyer and also be capable against ground targets. Like a Dev squad with frag, krak & flakk.
Back to top Go down
clever handle
Kabalite Warrior


Posts : 122
Join date : 2013-07-10
Location : Right behind you

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Mon Jan 12 2015, 18:02

@PainReaver,

I believe he meant "AA" to refer to "anti-armor". I've honestly found that DE's best anti-air defence is our speed. It is relatively simply to move out of the effective arcs of most flyers, thus ensuring those expensive models are only meaningfully impacting the game 2 or 3 turns, unless they choose to hover
Back to top Go down
egorey
The Duck of Death
avatar

Posts : 767
Join date : 2013-02-25

PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    Mon Jan 12 2015, 20:09


In point of fact I see much more Flyer, FMC builds about then mech builds ( only wave serpent spam and some nec brges - but nec has flyers as well). Even SM use flyers and gating cent squads - to which ravs are not the answer.

I understand what people are saying - i'm not sure I agree that ravs are useful. I think they are necessary in certain coven builds - which lack AT - but otherwise - hmm.

_________________
Dear GW,
Paper is overpowered. Scissors is fine.
Signed,
Rock.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Dark Lance vs Disentigrator    

Back to top Go down
 
Dark Lance vs Disentigrator
Back to top 
Page 1 of 3Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
THE DARK CITY :: 

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Drukhari Tactics
-
Jump to: