THE DARK CITY
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.



 
HomeDark Eldar WikiDark Eldar ResourcesLatest imagesNull CityRegisterLog in

 

 Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors

Go down 
+18
doomseer11b
Azdrubael
The_Burning_Eye
Burning-Fart
Skyboard surfer
Count Adhemar
Talos
koshi482
Cavash
Zanais
Mushkilla
Khain mor
Shadows Revenge
rotforge
Rancid blade
bklooste
Tony Spectacular
the hidden one
22 posters
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
the hidden one
Slave
avatar


Posts : 6
Join date : 2013-04-29

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeMon May 20 2013, 22:34

I have heard a lot of different opinions about the role of venoms and raiders, and which is better. I want to start a thread discussing the merits of both so:
10 warriors, splinter cannon, blaster
Raider, night shields
VS.
2x 5 warriors, blaster
Venom, double splinter cannon.

I know that the venoms are more expensive than the 1st group, but they are as close as people would actually make them.
Durability: the second group is MSU, so they are two groups. They can be a nuisance when you only kill one, and you can't split fire (screw you long fangs!) The raider has 3 hull points, which makes them more durable. They have night shields, which allows them to stay back farther and be more immune to meltas and other short ranged weapons. Venom gets free flickerfield, but they should be already moving. If their venoms explodes though, there squad is neutered. Venoms are smaller though, so can be more easily hidden.
Firepower
Venoms have 24 shots in total, and with 36 inch range. The squads have their blasters, and not much else. The raider squad has a splinter cannon, but guess what else has that? They have a blaster, but the other squads have two. They do have an actual threat with their splinter rifles, and the dark lance on the raider can kill tanks at long ranges, which is important. The venom squads can split fire too,
Speed, Maneuverability
Same max speed, but venoms are two squads.
Other points
The raider is bigger, but the venoms are famous for being fantastic, so the enemy will ofter focus fire on them. The venom squads can contest/capture 2 different objectives at once, but are not durable at all.

Those are my thoughts, but I am not very experienced with dark eldar, so I would like to hear your thoughts.


Last edited by the hidden one on Tue May 21 2013, 22:13; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Tony Spectacular
Kabalite Warrior
Tony Spectacular


Posts : 225
Join date : 2012-07-31
Location : Philadelphia

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeTue May 21 2013, 02:55

Raiders are AV10. Ravagers are 11. Raider durability over Venoms lies in their 3 HP.

_________________
Edited for stupidity.
Back to top Go down
bklooste
Kabalite Warrior
avatar


Posts : 127
Join date : 2013-05-14

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeTue May 21 2013, 08:23


Raiders carry an assault element , venoms rarely.. Venoms should really stay at 36" so can only be hit by long range anti tank...So blasters are not much use...( unless you go tank hunting with blaster born) . To use blasters your at 18" , they can walk 6" then their rapid fire guns are at 12" 20 Strength 5 shots from firewarriors or marines is not pretty.

So i see venoms as good with 3 wracks and 2SC stay at 36" to use the heavy 6 not assault 4 and it cost 95.. At 36" the only thing that will hit you will be heavy weapons which will likely penentrate. ( Or you go splinter born / blaster born or 5 wyches for heavy anti infantry firepower or anti tank ) . What do 5 warriors give you ? To use the weapons you have to get close.

Back to top Go down
Rancid blade
Kabalite Warrior
avatar


Posts : 151
Join date : 2011-05-27

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeTue May 21 2013, 15:50

I agree Bklooste, keep your venoms in the back field with night shields and two splinter cannons. They will sit back all game and blast away. I usually put wracks in them so that they can hold back field objectives or donate pain tokens to ICs.

A Raider full of warriors doesn't make much sense to me. They have to get closer to the enemy and when they get shot down you'll loose half your warriors... Raiders are good for delivering something somewhere, fast. After they've done that they're going to get shot down. So I'd rather transport something other than warriros... like grotesques. RB
Back to top Go down
rotforge
Hellion
avatar


Posts : 33
Join date : 2013-05-10
Location : Warsaw

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 00:05

So how do people use warrior gunboats to its full potential?

_________________
http://rotforge.blogspot.com - my painting blog
Back to top Go down
http://rotforge.blogspot.com
bklooste
Kabalite Warrior
avatar


Posts : 127
Join date : 2013-05-14

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 02:05

rotforge wrote:
So how do people use warrior gunboats to its full potential?

if 5 and Venom .
They are just minimum squads so you can get more venoms . 3 Wracks are good here but Wracks need a Haemi and if you loose 1 you take a check.

If 10 and Raider..
People use the splinter racks. While it puts out decent amount of fire power getting a raider that close to fire the troops seems counter intuitive to me... You may as well carry Wyches , Incubi or Wracks and assault the turn after.
Back to top Go down
rotforge
Hellion
avatar


Posts : 33
Join date : 2013-05-10
Location : Warsaw

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 02:11

Yea... the way I see it, you'd have to use the 10 man version as perhaps a counter for assault armies. Pop them out of cover when the opponent is closing in, to bring down the poison in rapid fire range. Otherwise, you're just begging to get gunned down real quick. Unless of course, you bring in enough target saturation that the other guy will prioritize a different target(s).

_________________
http://rotforge.blogspot.com - my painting blog
Back to top Go down
http://rotforge.blogspot.com
Shadows Revenge
Hierarch of Tactica
Shadows Revenge


Posts : 2587
Join date : 2011-08-10
Location : Bmore

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 08:31

you use 10 man by sitting them on an objective and having them plink away with their cannon, while the raider protects your other more important vehicles. Their job is to be annoying to kill, and just go to ground while you just snapfire 6 splinter cannon shots and threaten anything that gets close to you.

You can also then load them when against armies like tau or CSM that have a lot of ignore cover weapons, so they still provide some protection to them, and pull them up to be effective against troops when needs be.

To see how this works well, check Mush's last few batreps, he uses them effectively

_________________
Status:
Usurping Kabal leadership for his Patriarch

Current List:
First 2k GSC List
Back to top Go down
Khain mor
Sybarite
Khain mor


Posts : 272
Join date : 2013-04-26
Location : In the shadows

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 10:26

I really don't get why people refuse to take Dark Lances on their warriors; I've always used gunboats, old or new edition, i've kept using then and they've always been great. To be clear I'm talking about:
10 warriors, blaster, Dark lance, raider, NS, FF

Fragile kinda, but not as much as you think.

Frankly the Splinter cannon is useless on a raider squad. you've got plenty of splitner fire from a squad anyway.
Take several squads, you have more than enough splinter fire to take one any army. What does our army always lack, now more than ever? Anti tank.

Once those tanks are gone you can get close and finish off the massacre.

Quote :
A Raider full of warriors doesn't make much sense to me. They have to get closer to the enemy and when they get shot down you'll loose half your warriors... Raiders are good for delivering something somewhere, fast. After they've done that they're going to get shot down. So I'd rather transport something other than warriros... like grotesques. RB

Have you even read the lastest rules, have you played any games lately? Doubt it. if you did, you would know cc has been nerfed. Wyches are the worst troop choice in our army because of this. Wracks and grots perform a little better, but not as good at when the 2011 codex just came out.

Right now, the best troop choice we've got are warriors. cc may have been buffed, but guns are better than ever.

Quote :
So how do people use warrior gunboats to its full potential?

The ones I describe, are bascially long range anti tank ,as a main purpose. They're something close to a ravager, but a little less mobile. Blaster, splinter fire, are used as a last resort, but mostly as counter attack element. The blaster is in case you're winning and enough firepower has been taken down, so that your raiders can get closer safely.
The blaster and splinter fire are also used as an excellent counter attack, it's long range, but the enemy will try to get closer, once he's close enough, he'll suffer 3 Dark matter shots a lot of splinter fire. Gunboats are never alone, their buddies rain down some suppresive fire as well.

Quote :
They have to get closer to the enemy and when they get shot down you'll loose half your warriors...
You want to lose? Do this during all your battles. The main guns of warriors aren't their splinter weapons, it's the bigger guns. DL and blaster, smarter guys also have a dark lance instead of the splinter cannons who frankly adds nothing significant. A couple more shots doesn' t make much or any difference.
if you stay long range you have 1 DL, 6 Sc shots if you don't move, do you really think these 6 shots will do miracles? Vs a lot of well armored armies, you can expect these to kill pretty much nobobdy. VS low armor infantry, these won't kill as much as you wish either. 1 DL 1 DL on the warriors, now that's something else. 1 DL misses a lot, but does manage to hit a couple of times. 2 DLs, it's even better and chances of hitting sometihng are bigger than ever. The greater dangers on a battlefield usually can be taken out with a couple of DL shots. Against infantry the DLs also contribute quite greatly, as it's a sure killshot. Once it hits, you're pretty sure you'll kill, unless you somehow manage to roll a 1. The blaster also helps. get close, no movement, 3 S8 shots, several splinter shots, casualties should be expected for sure, no matter how armored they are.

It's sad to admit, but most armies are marine ones, most players you'll face are marines. Those 3 dark matter shots matter, as the splinter fire won't kill anything at times. I don't think anyone isn't familiar with rolling tons of poison shots and doing 0 casualties, because of misses and then the saves of the marines who take care of the few shots who got through.
This reason above is one of the many reasons why Venoms are less effective than raider squads.
The splinter fire kills nothing at times. I've seen plenty of Battlereport and battles of my own to see this. I also have Venoms too, I like the models, of course I had to own some and used them. I frankly don't use them in the powergaming lists I build. You can expect them mostly in friendly games for the fun of using them.
Another thing that's wrong with them: the missing DL. it's dumb ,but that baby can take out a land raider. it isn't a fact to be ignored.
Another reason already mentioned here: the small capacity. A raider gets shot down, you'll have a usable squad, even if the crash goes bad. Venom goes down, pray you've got a usable squad. In most cases, some casualties will make the 3 manned squad unusable, as it will be killed very shortly after. Even if you are lucky and the 5 survive, without a transport they're srcewed, especially if it's a cc squad and they're situated at the other side of the board.

Take a bigger type of armylist. 6 venoms vs 6 raiders. The transport capacity only. 30 vs 60 or a little less than 60. All crash, you're 30 guys will be reduced for sure, most squads will be unsuable. More importantly, objective capturing will be difficult with small sqauds, or very vulnerable squads, who will mostlikely be finished by a smart opponent. If somehow the 6 raiders are shot down, you'll still have workable squads, reduced by the crashes maybe, but usuable, but this is unlikely to happen, you have to make very bad decisions to lose all your troops raiders.
The DL don't just provide anti tank, they contribute to their survival directly by dealing with the enemy tanks who usually take down our raiders. 6 DL are nastly, be a smart guy and add some on the warriors, even nastier. Once things are safe, the blaster is just overkill, you end up using it as anti infantry honestly.


Most people just take a blaster in their squad, but this also forces them to get closer and expose themselves ot get killed very often. It's better not to rush the use of the blaster and rush to get it into range. With DL in the squad you won't. You know you can't move, it's long range, you just shoot. The blaster will be used at one point, but no rush. Because of the range of the blaster, you must consider it more as a bonus weapon rather than a primary weapon. You'll rarely get to use it anyway. Either you're in full noob mode and go aggresive, you'll get a shot, but you'll be killed. In defensive counter attack mode you'll ge to shoot it a couple of times somewhere near the end of the battle, with the big difference that your squad will still be usuable and mostly intact if the battle went well.

Because of the range of the blaster, a venom with a blaster on board, isn't considered as a real anti tank unit. A raider because of it's range and the fact that it can move and shoot, is a real anti tank threat. Putting a DL on board increases that danger.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dark Lances vs Splinter guns: anti tank vs anti infantry

All dark eldar armies, absolutely all always have plenty of anti infantry, whether it's due to cc units the army has or the sheer number of splinter fire. People overestimate the enemy infantry and underestimate the enemy tanks. MC and any big thing can also be considered as a tank, it's shot down by DLs as easily. All armies have tanks and they're the main killers on the battlefield, same is valid for us.

Focus your army on anti infantry, where will that lead you? A lack of DL vulnerable to armor. When I say armor, it's not just the tanks, but any infatry with good armor saves. Splinter fire is nice, but it doesn't kill everyone,

Taking venoms before raiders will lead directly to a lack of anti tank. I've seen people overuse Venoms, venoms on all their squads, not just their troops. This lowers the number of DLs and increases the fragility of their army. Having more smaller squad isn't reall worth it, when you see how fragile they are. It's sad, but 8-10 is so much better than 3-5 squads. It certainly makes a great difference.
This type of army will usually turn to haywire and shorter ranged anti tank weapons, such as heat lances and blasters. Shorter range and more fragile troops is just begging for trouble.

The range of the DL is just so important, it's a huge underestimated advantage. The best way to remain alive is to stay as far away from your enemy as needed. Long range weapons are actually limited in the game, most troops don't have basic 36 " weapons, keeping your warriors safe when they're at long range. The more DLs you have, the faster you'll down those who usually kill your raiders, like I already said.

Again on the use of the ; 10 warriors, blaster, Dark lance, raider, NS, FF
If the raider gets shot down, you still have a DL and a usable squad to capture an objective. In fact in some cases depending on the strategy, you disembarc the squad somewhere behind on an objective, to seperate thme from their raider. The raider can move and shoot, the DL on board won't force it to stay immobile anymore to shoot. If the raider is shot down, you still have a DL for sure.
The usually 10 man, 1 SC, 1 blaster squads aren't much of an anti tank squad once their raider is down, because of the range of the blaster mainly.

Base an armylist on the number of DLs you can take in it : this is the key to any good Dark Eldar list, the better tournament armylists are based on this fact.

Like I already said, venoms decrease the number of DL in your armylists. This vehicles is an alternative for our raiders, but it certainly never was meant to be the main transport vehicles of our army, it's no point focusing on it either. It may seem a bit silly, but this is enough to make you win a lot more battles.

BTW Raiders are obviously better than venoms, there no doubt about this fact. Ask all the tournament players who actually manage to get far in those tournaments they enter. Loads of raiders and DL, easy way to win.
The bigger the battle, the less good Venoms are.

A couple of simple reasons why venoms are used:
- they're cool, cool models make you want to buy and use them.
-most people play smaller types of battles
-most people don't have huge armies, some even just make one armylist and never buy anything more, this contributes directly to the reason here bove.
-most people don't play tournaments, they play friendly battles between firends, just for fun.
-most people don't bother to analyse the codex fully, such as all the things I mentioned about raiders and venoms.
-Very few know how to make good effective armylists and very few actually know how to use our units to their best potential.
Spend some time reading comments in the tactical section, most are almost spam, very few are actually valid points.

a lot of people never get the hold of this army, a lot quit and sell their army. Can be because of the fact that they full too many venoms and not enough raiders. I remember last week I saw a DE army being sold on ebay, it had 30 wyches, 6 venoms...how weird : ).
BTW that set up ,as troops, it's close to impossible to win with such an army. It's too bad to admit it, but Wych Cults are the least effective sub army we've got now. Wyches + masses of Venoms is asking for an easy defeat.I really hate to admit it, because I own 80 wyches. They're better in raiders, but even then... a full wych Cult doesn't work like in the old days. I'm waiting for a future edition where Wuch Cults will be usable again. I enjoy the models anyway.


_________________
The Dark Moon Kabal

The Biggest Kabal ever, be sure to check it out if you haven't, old and new units.
The Biggest Dark Eldar Apocalypse force you'll find on the net.

My Eldar Facebook Page, feel free to join. All Eldar factions allowed!
Back to top Go down
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=254489
Mushkilla
Arena Champion
Mushkilla


Posts : 4017
Join date : 2012-07-16
Location : Toroid Arena

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:00

Khain mor I think you need to come to terms with the fact that the Dark Eldar book is quite diverse, and there are many different and succeful ways of playing Dark Eldar.

The player who won best Dark Eldar at throne of skulls ran a wych cult list with loads of venoms. There was a very successful dark eldar foot list with a massive beast star with eldrad and Vect that won several big tournaments in the US. Darklight runs a venom spam list that he is very successful with in tournaments. I run a raider/reaver heavy list that does well. There are loads of effective ways to play Dark Eldar. Smile

_________________
Latest Report: BR4: The Repugnant Ramblers Vs Imperial Knights - 1250pts
Pragmatic Realspace Raider Series


“Even the Black Buzzards thought highly of him, and those maniacs were renowned for hating everyone.” - Tantalus, by Braden Campbell


Last edited by Mushkilla on Wed May 22 2013, 12:03; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Zanais
Kabalite Warrior
Zanais


Posts : 116
Join date : 2012-04-09

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:01

Khalin, I disagree with you.

If you think about Wyches as CC squads, than yes, they suck now. But dont's say Wyches with haywire granades are not competitive AT option. Its cheap and almost guaranteed to destroy any vehicle except flyers.

Dark lances on Warriors are not good. Sorry, but 115 points for 1 Dark Lance shot? Dont overrate DL's. You still need to hit and you still need to penetrate. Few such squads means you get less other stuff, less other stuff means you are easier to kill as an army. Dark Lances with Heavy1, cutting off your movement (last time I heard its bad thing in DE army), make your sqads just sitting there and and trying to kill enemy with one shot. You say you can kill land raider with DL's. Well, your 10 guys sqad with 1 DL has 7.40% to kill that Land raider with one shot. Not great.

Venoms with 5 man squads with blaster is not perfect but in my opinion its far better. Yes, you probably wont get pain token on it. But pain tokens many times wont help your T3 guys. Yes, you have short range on blaster, but its assault 1, you can move and shoot all the time. And yes if your venom with warriros going to be exploded than you might lose whole suqad. But guess what, its far better to run with your little squads on foot, than flying in paper plane. Target saturation, Venom flying one way, 5 man with AT gun going other way. We would I want to keep 10 guys in Raider who goes down easier than Rhino?

You hate Venoms, but they are great you like it or not. 12 splinter shots WILL kill stuff, and will kill marines. Sometimes those 12 shots wont kill much, sometimes they will force many saves. Dark lance which shoots into marines wont kill much also. Venoms cover whole anti-infantry in army, making possible to focus your other stuff on AT.

Raiders are good, but when I need more AT I just take Lanceborns or Haywire Wyches or even Blasterborns. Far cheaper and more effective in my games.

_________________
Sorry for my English Cool
Back to top Go down
Cavash
Lord of the Chat
Cavash


Posts : 3237
Join date : 2012-04-15
Location : Stuck in an air vent spying on plotters

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:39

Mushkilla wrote:
Khain mor I think you need to come to terms with the fact that the Dark Eldar book is quite diverse, and there are many different and succeful ways of playing Dark Eldar.

The player who won best Dark Eldar at throne of skulls ran a wych cult list with loads of venoms. There was a very successful dark eldar foot list with a massive beast star with eldrad and Vect that won several big tournaments in the US. Darklight runs a venom spam list that he is very successful with in tournaments. I run a raider/reaver heavy list that does well. There are loads of effective ways to play Dark Eldar. Smile

I agree with Mush here completely. DE are an army that can be played with multiple different list styles and, in the right hands, they can all be successful. Recently I've been having great luck with Splinter heavy Gunboats, two Pain Engines, A Parasite Engine, some Scourges and Grotesques. Not everything in that list is everybody's cup of tea, but I get great results from it.

Now, this list may not work for Mush, but then again Reavers aren't my favourite unit. I respect that he might not find my list as effective, but I don't find Reavers as effective for me. There is not single way to play Dark Eldar.

Quote :
Base an armylist on the number of DLs you can take in it : this is the key to any good Dark Eldar list
I don't find that this works for me. I find Haywire Blasters, Heat Lances or just about anything else better from destroying vehicles than Dark Lances. It might be my luck with the dice, but they don't work for me.

_________________

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors YiVCUio
Back to top Go down
koshi482
Kabalite Warrior
koshi482


Posts : 175
Join date : 2013-05-20
Location : United States

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:48

i agree I hate missing almost all my dark lance shots. But have great luck with haywire witches and blaster reavers.

_________________
Fetch me another plaything. This one seems to have broken.
                                      -Urien Rakarth
Back to top Go down
Mushkilla
Arena Champion
Mushkilla


Posts : 4017
Join date : 2012-07-16
Location : Toroid Arena

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:49

Exactly Cavash. In my opinion the best thing you can do is find a list that best suits your playstyle. Very Happy

_________________
Latest Report: BR4: The Repugnant Ramblers Vs Imperial Knights - 1250pts
Pragmatic Realspace Raider Series


“Even the Black Buzzards thought highly of him, and those maniacs were renowned for hating everyone.” - Tantalus, by Braden Campbell
Back to top Go down
Zanais
Kabalite Warrior
Zanais


Posts : 116
Join date : 2012-04-09

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:51

YEah, I tried reavers, no, sorry, they always die for me. I stick with Venoms, Kabalites and Blasterborns. Far more efficient in my playstyle. But its good that our codex has so amny options not like cookie cutter Necron build etc.

_________________
Sorry for my English Cool
Back to top Go down
Talos
Kabalite Warrior
Talos


Posts : 166
Join date : 2011-09-15
Location : Malmö

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 12:57

Way I refuse to take the darklance on warrior squads:
What are warriors good at?
Scoring objectives, mass splinter fire and blaster suicide. All those are done better by other units in our codex.
If I bother to have scouring unit on my home objective, it usually a unit of 3 wracks, hiding outside los for a few gameturns, and then idle on the objective. Mass splinterfire warriors is not really impressive, and in this department they are outshined by almost every other unit that have access to splinter weapons.
Then the darklance, its expensive, the lance itself is overpriced, it has an additional cost of 10 warriors, who want be able to do anything way you firing the lance. This is around 115pts for lone lance shoot, great investment of pts. Speaking of there AT weapons, all of them are overpriced, the blasters short range place the unit in assault distance after firing, and then there is the blast pistol…

Some like warriors, I don´t.

Cavash wrote:
Quote :
Base an armylist on the number of DLs you can take in it : this is the key to any good Dark Eldar list
I don't find that this works for me. I find Haywire Blasters, Heat Lances or just about anything else better from destroying vehicles than Dark Lances. It might be my luck with the dice, but they don't work for me.

This is true for me, my darklight never does anything of note. Perhaps that’s way I consider the 25pts lance overpriced.
Back to top Go down
http://www.olasart.se
Count Adhemar
Dark Lord of Granbretan
Count Adhemar


Posts : 7591
Join date : 2012-04-26
Location : London

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 14:06

Khain mor wrote:
I really don't get why people refuse to take Dark Lances on their warriors

Because 115 points plus a transport is a lot to pay for a single BS4, S8, AP2 shot. Especially when there are plenty of other options available in the army that bring more darklight for fewer points. You seem to have a very blinkered view of units and some of your opinions, particularly those expressed as 'facts' are a little hard to support if you analayse the units either in a vacuum or as part of an army. Still, each to their own and if you find fun and success with your style of army then more power to you!

_________________
Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors YhBv3Wk
You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. In what world could you possibly beat me?
Back to top Go down
Skyboard surfer
Kabalite Warrior
Skyboard surfer


Posts : 154
Join date : 2013-02-20
Location : Enfield Webway

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 15:25

If I want DL with footsloggers then I put one or two with a small Trueborn unit and leave them sniping at long range. Putting DL with kabalites kills their mobility if you actually want to hit anything with it.

_________________
When my cats aren't happy, I'm not happy. Not because I care about their mood but because I know they're just sitting there thinking up ways to get even.
Back to top Go down
bklooste
Kabalite Warrior
avatar


Posts : 127
Join date : 2013-05-14

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 15:43

Khain mor wrote:

Quote :
A Raider full of warriors doesn't make much sense to me. They have to get closer to the enemy and when they get shot down you'll loose half your warriors... Raiders are good for delivering something somewhere, fast. After they've done that they're going to get shot down. So I'd rather transport something other than warriros... like grotesques. RB

Have you even read the lastest rules, have you played any games lately? Doubt it. if you did, you would know cc has been nerfed. Wyches are the worst troop choice in our army because of this. Wracks and grots perform a little better, but not as good at when the 2011 codex just came out.

I agree with your general premise but i disagee with a few things .. I dont like gun boat "Warriors" you have to get so close you may as well Assault. ( Yes you face 1 round of BS 1 over watch which is no threat to Wracks or Incubi)

I think Venoms are great but NOT to get in 24" at that range your in range of most things in the game and even Strength 4 and 5 can cause problems. Also its more than a few shots , you can get 3 splinterborn , and they get 24 shots.. and the only thing that can hit them is heavy weapons. The splinter born cost 111 ( 4.6 per shot) . 5 warriors in a venom cost 110 ( 8.4 per shot ) since they need to move and get 13 shots ( 5 + 8 ) or 18 if you want to get to 12" which would be suicide..

I also prefer 3 Wracks at a cost of 95 , they can give their token as has been mentioned , they stay at 36" , normally 12 shots . for a cost of 8 per shot. Since the wracks stay on the vehicle the fact that i loose 1 is an LD check is not important as i only really loose them if i loose the venom.

Again the 36" fire venoms can keep an enemy army under fire at minimal risk ( and if they fire at them they are not firing at your Ravengers)

Regarding Dark Lances Yes... 3 Ravengers. Shoots for about 1 per 110 points of army. Or 1 lance / disruptor per 90.

Now Assault , yes wyches are worse , they are not our worst unit . Wracks and Incubi are better for assault but if you have lots of Wyches you can make do with less Dark Lances and use them as Tank Killers. WIth all out shooting once a unit has been weekened you just assault it to kill it , move your heavy fire power to other units.. The 6th edition changes are not bad .. if your vehicle blows or the BS1 over watch you are unlikely to loose a Wrack or Incubi . Wyches will lose 1.. on average but people who use wyches will hit with lots of 10 or 2 * 5 so the overwatch is limited.

I do think we work best as a shooting army with assault secondary. With our maneuvarabilty we can set the match up we want eg Incubi vs fire warriors assault , wyches with haywire vs vehicle , assault teminators etc.. Spam doesnt work ( except venoms but the units they carry shoudl vary)

Dark Lances on warriors are ok but only after you have villed Ravengers and True born..

I should add with 10 warriors with splinter ranks on a raider is 160 points and you get 10 shots or 20 shots at 12"
, asuming 67% to hit , the reroll means fire is 33% more effectiive. So its 12 per effective shot or 6 per effectiove shot if you are at 12". They also get AT shots or can buy more so its slighty better , but unless yoiu willing to take them to 12" they are not comparable.

10 Trueborn on a raider with rack , 2 SC and 8 * carbine is 250 points ... you get ( assault) 24+ 8 shots , or 6.25 per effective shot but you need to be at 18".

Number wise for shooting elite slots should be filled by true born.

Double posting is against the forum rules. Please use the edit button in future. Thanks. Smile - Mush




Back to top Go down
Mushkilla
Arena Champion
Mushkilla


Posts : 4017
Join date : 2012-07-16
Location : Toroid Arena

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeWed May 22 2013, 17:10

bklooste wrote:
10 Trueborn on a raider with rack , 2 SC and 8 * carbine is 250 points ... you get ( assault) 24+ 8 shots , or 6.25 per effective shot but you need to be at 18".

Why does the raider have splinter racks? Splinter racks only affect splinter pistols and rifles, they do not affect splinter cannons and carbines. Sadly.

_________________
Latest Report: BR4: The Repugnant Ramblers Vs Imperial Knights - 1250pts
Pragmatic Realspace Raider Series


“Even the Black Buzzards thought highly of him, and those maniacs were renowned for hating everyone.” - Tantalus, by Braden Campbell
Back to top Go down
bklooste
Kabalite Warrior
avatar


Posts : 127
Join date : 2013-05-14

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeSat May 25 2013, 09:05

Oops , so gun boats are not worth it...with racks . Venoms are. better.
Back to top Go down
Burning-Fart
Slave
avatar


Posts : 3
Join date : 2013-06-11

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeThu Jun 20 2013, 10:42

Hi,

partly i agree with Khain mor.

10 Warriors with dark lance and a blaster in a raider with NS and FF seem to me quite good. It's not only the output (1 DL shot for 130 points or 2 when in 18" range). This configuration gives me also some flexiblity during depployment phase.

The NS and FF can give my ravagers some cover and forces the enemy to shoot the raider first (when i have to start second, and don't want to go into reserves with my ravagers). I can deploy the squad disembarked in cover, when i use the raider as cover. Small Warrior squads in venoms can't do that.
We all know these things: The Dark Lances fail in penetrating Land raiders so often... but sometimes, the first hit destroys the enemy vehicle. So it's possible that 2 of 3 shots of a ravager are wasted. If my first DL shot (raider) destroys a vehicle or cripples it, I can still decide to focus on another vehicle or the disembarking squad with my warriors. It's the flexibility that makes you pay.
When thinking of deepstriking enemies, the raider with 10 warriors with DL and blaster can lay effective "suppressing" fire - against armored enemies.
I use them in an army with 3 ravagers, so other - more cost-effective - options were already taken.

I have to admit, that venoms seem to be the better option for assault squads. But then i ask myself: Why do I need the second SC then? Probably I want to hide my 5 Inccubi with venom behind LOS blockers. Probably the venom will be destroyed after rushing forward and disembarking my assault troops.

Also, I usually field one wreck squad (3). Without a venom.

And of course, there are more ways to be successful than to stick on the kabal theme and outshoot the enemy. But i think, the best way to create a solid army for harder friendly games or smaller tournaments is to mix these elements. Sadly, spam lists (not only venom spam) tend to win greater tournaments.

Sorry for some grammar mistakes, I'm not a native english speaker.

Best regards
Burning-Fart
Back to top Go down
The_Burning_Eye
Trueborn
The_Burning_Eye


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

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeThu Jun 20 2013, 14:18

These days I tend to like to get my units to specialise, so the idea of taking a dark lance and/or blaster in a unit where all the other members are focussed on anti infantry shooting is a waste, I'm either wasting the dark lance shot by shooting at infantry (yes, I know it is likely to kill something, but the cost doesn't justify the extra killing power above a splinter rifle) or wasting the other potentially 18 shots by shooting at vehicles.

I'm currently using a list incorporating two warrior gunboats with splinter racks and one splinterborn gunboat with shardcarbines, splinter cannons and the Duke. These deep strike into the game up close to enemy infantry units and are capable of inflicting serious damage (especially the Duke's unit).

Compare that to taking MSU's in Venoms and there's less reason to take the duke, who buffs your game in so many other ways, and results in the majority of my AI fire being able to be taken down very quickly (I have really bad luck sometimes).

My list is supplemented in the AT department by two small units of scourges with HB's, and a big unit of wyches with HG's. I've got a DL Ravager, but it rarely kills more than one thing per game (first turn takedowns of a battlewagon and the central section of a Fortress of Redemption being the highlihgts).

As Mush and Cavash have already stated though, there are plenty of viable options in the DE codex, and finding a way of blending your own playstyle with your local meta and the models you like is the key to victory. I could never take an army to the field that just consisted of six MSU's in Venoms for my troops choices, not because it's ineffective, but because I think it's boring.

In response to the OP therefore, I think the units aren't directly comparable, as I'd use a venom warrior squad in a very different way to a raider gunboat.

_________________
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
Azdrubael
Incubi
Azdrubael


Posts : 1857
Join date : 2011-11-16
Location : Russia

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeThu Jun 20 2013, 15:43

While we are it - does anybod considering new use of Trueborn?

Something like 5 Trueborns, 2 Splinter Cannons, 3 Shard Carbines, Haywire Grenades, Venom.
Thats 17-21 shot just from the unit, i.e. close to 10 man warrior squad and being able to eat vehicles.

If you do use haywire wyches you can add some more while having more AI.

On the subject - it appears to me that both units have somewhat different uses.

A raider gunboat with shields and racks is more effective at mid range dancing, if you play armies that does go midfield this is important. At a relic mission this is also important. Point for point you spend less and get more if you are using raider gunboats at the enemies that come to you.

Whatever the enemy army it still can be started in reserve, the squad can still start game in area terrain outside of boat, it is usable always.

Venom, obviously is far more effective at long range shooting with 48" range. So, the squad inside means very little, if however you are not taking it for squad inside. Like haywire wyches - which rush forward to blow enemy wall of tanks.

If you build an all-round army my answer for topic-question is not chose, but take both. You will have solid mid-range and long range shooting while having points for something more.
Back to top Go down
doomseer11b
Sybarite
doomseer11b


Posts : 304
Join date : 2012-10-09
Location : South Carolina

Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitimeThu Jun 20 2013, 18:05

I don't really understand half of what is being said.  Something about 3 wracks and 8 points per shot????  Anyway, why would we bring 3 wracks in a venom?  I don't see the point.  I could bring 2 squads of 3-4 trueborn with 2 splinter cannons for a total of 48 points, stick them in a ruin, keep there transport empty.  So 3 squads of splinter born each with 12 shots at 36" and the venoms they're not in.  It cuts down the need for a five man squad as they're getting a cover save and not moving and the enemy usually focuses on the venoms.  It's cheap and leaves you with options to bring venoms without having to fill them.  Also a good back up vehicle if a smaller squad needs a ride. Or you can put more 45 point warrior squads in it, personally I like the 24-36 inch range with the venom.  Just adds a little more effectiveness and also puts more cheap troop choices on the board that could e dropped off in some terrain to claim obj's while the trueborn and venoms take out their troop choices

_________________
"... get me the holy hand grenade!!!! .... 1..2.....5, 3 SIR 3!!!!"
Back to top Go down
https://www.twinlinkedgaming.com
Sponsored content





Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors Empty
PostSubject: Re: Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors   Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors I_icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
Raider warriors vs. Venom warriors
Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next
 Similar topics
-
» raider vs venom
» Venom or Raider?
» Raider vs Venom (again)
» Raider/Ravager Gunners as Kabalite Warriors
» Why venom over raider

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

COMMORRAGH TACTICA

 :: Drukhari Tactics
-
Jump to: