HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesNull CityFAQUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 warriors and why?

Go down 
AuthorMessage
JayDee327
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 60
Join date : 2015-03-07

PostSubject: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 18:28

Okay so I have twenty warriors and I was wondering what to rig them with. Should they be in my raiders or in my venoms. Sorry fairly new and just trying to get rolling.
Back to top Go down
Deamon
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 254
Join date : 2012-05-09
Location : Drummondville

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 18:42

It really depends of your play style. Some people prefer them in raiders with splinter racks and night shield. Other play them in venom, naked or with a blaster. 5 man squads in venom is generally considered to be the better option since it perform better at long range (while the gunboats are better within 12" of the target).
Back to top Go down
JayDee327
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 60
Join date : 2015-03-07

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 19:09

Noted.
Back to top Go down
Mngwa
Wych
avatar

Posts : 955
Join date : 2013-01-26
Location : Stadi

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 19:18

@Deamon wrote:
5 man squads in venom is generally considered to be the better option since it perform better at long range (while the gunboats are better within 12" of the target).

...but their only AV-shot (from a blaster) is at a smaller threat range (24" or 30" snapfiring, compared to 42" or 48" with passengers snapfiring) and always wastes 4 to 8 splinter shots if shot at a vehicle. The raider also rocks an additional hull point, and even with night shields and/or splinter racks will not be that much more expensive than a venom (even cheaper if without either of those, which it can be).

So, decisions, decisions...
Both with their usual load outs (two cannoned venom w/ warriors w/ blaster, and dark lance raider /w 10 warriors, maybe a weapon upgrade) still do kinda have the same role, so the biggest questions are probably would you wish to have more long ranged Anti Infantry or Anti Vehicle, and in addition do you want slightly beefier squads with possibly more access to weapon upgrades.


But hey. Don't forget that you can always take 20 with a haemonculus and a Webway portal. Add in archons with blasters if 4 dark light-shots aren't enough. Who needs transports?

EDIT: If you have 20 warriors, you could also always make a mix of 2 units in venoms and 1 in raider. Never need to go all out on one thing, either!
Back to top Go down
Klaivex Charondyr
Wych
avatar

Posts : 918
Join date : 2014-09-08

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 20:09

Quote :
But hey. Don't forget that you can always take 20 with a haemonculus and a Webway portal. Add in archons with blasters if 4 dark light-shots aren't enough. Who needs transports?

That is the exact moment where the leman russ command tank survives with 1 HP and the wyvern scores 50 wounds on your 20 wariors.
Back to top Go down
Unholyllama
Sybarite
avatar

Posts : 267
Join date : 2013-08-27

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 21:06

Warriors depend heavily on what your play style is; however, there are a few additional comments worth noting from what's already been said.

1. Warriors are the cheapest troops we have. This is more of a "should we or shouldn't we take warriors" comment but it's important to remember it.  They fill the troops roles and are more point efficient than Wyches.  In a CAD, they gain objective secure as does their dedicated transports.

2. Transports are almost always taken. Whether it's a duel spinter cannon venom or a spinter racked Raider, warriors in transports help them survive and gets them into position faster than on foot.  A Raider with spinter racks within rapid fire range will do an amazing amount of damage; however, 1) you have to get into range and 2) it's 1 target instead of 2 if you want 10 warriors in transports. Lastly - getting within the 12" rapid fire range means that you'll be getting assaulted in the following turn if there's any survivors.

3. A single blaster adds options at a cost.  Upgrading a warrior to have a Blaster can provide weapons options against vehicles or TEQ.  But it's a single shot with a target often different form the rest of the unit.  Sometimes it's better to stay focus and let other anti-tank units fill this role instead.

Personally - I tend to run 5 Warriors (no upgrades) in a Duel Splinter Cannon Venom. Between Ravagers, Scourge, and Flyers, I have plenty of anti-tank and prefer anti-infantry instead through mass poison.  I run a lot of MSU to force my opponent to spread their fire or go after only a few small units instead of 1 larger unit.  In addition, I tend to run them outside of rapid fire range as getting wtihin those 12" means that they are getting charged the next turn if there's any survivors.
Back to top Go down
JayDee327
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 60
Join date : 2015-03-07

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Thu May 07 2015, 21:45

Lots of good info guys. I love this forums support!! I have two venoms and two raiders. And I have one razorwing.
Back to top Go down
Jimsolo
Dracon
avatar

Posts : 3064
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : Illinois

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Fri May 08 2015, 00:34

I prefer ten with a splinter cannon in a raider with a d Lance, splinter racks, and night shields, if I have the points.

Five with a blaster in a dual splinter cannon venom if not.
Back to top Go down
ruinous1
Slave
avatar

Posts : 7
Join date : 2015-04-13

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Fri May 08 2015, 07:32

I really enjoy using both. My current 1850 has three of the raider loadouts with splinter cannons and two of the venom loadouts with blasters, and they perform really well together. It's a rewarding play style and you have enough long range firepower to put the pressure on while the raiders close in and finish everything off.
Back to top Go down
WrackYourBrains
Hellion
avatar

Posts : 50
Join date : 2014-10-07

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Fri May 08 2015, 12:56

If you crunch the numbers, five warriors in a venom with dual cannons is a more point-efficient way of getting your poison at most ranges than ten in raider with racks. In rapid fire range it's near enough a tie. For many people this is enough to justify the venom over the raider.

It's also worth considering (as plenty of others have mentioned):
* The venoms are a little quicker, since they can move 12" and keep most of their firepower at full BS. Moving a raider 12" means your warriors are firing snap shots (but at least they're twin linked).
* Venoms fit a MSU build better, and are physically smaller and are easier to hide.
* Adding a blaster to the venom adds versatility, but if you fire it at a vehicle then your four splinter rifles are wasted. It's also effective at a much shorter range than the raider's lance, and many people prefer their anti-tank weapons to be brought to bear on turn one rather than waiting to get close.
* Twin linking adds much greater reliability. You have a chance to mitigate a bad set of to-hit rolls, so you'll find that raider warriors whiff less frequently.
* Raider squads are a little tougher, with the extra HP and twice the wounds, at least in theory.

It's also worth noting that there has been plenty of debate regarding passenger firing from jinking vehicles. I don't want to bring up the debate again here, but to summarise: rules as written give a good justification for the argument that jinking passengers can fire at full BS, but others prefer to play with rules as (probably) intended and say that jink should be a tactical choice (i.e. you choose to be aggressive or defensive) and that passengers in jinking vehicles can only snap-shoot. For the record, I'm in the latter camp.

Personally I like a mix of the two; both units are pretty decent. I prefer raiders mainly because they're more iconic (and I play mostly casual games) and because long range AT is so useful, but the venom is probably the better option for competitive play.
Back to top Go down
Manners_Cat
Slave
avatar

Posts : 17
Join date : 2013-06-21

PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   Fri May 08 2015, 23:46

It depends on your playstyle, local meta and personal preference.

I run a fairly even mix of both which works well for me, with lances, splinter racks and cannons (wasting points like a boss) in the raiders and blasters in the venoms.

_________________
"What shadows we are"
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: warriors and why?   

Back to top Go down
 
warriors and why?
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

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

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Drukhari Tactics
-
Jump to: