Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi guys!

For this slight discussion, I assume that you've bought an haemonculi, so that Wracks are troops.

In the latest list I played, I had one unit of wracks, one of wyches, and two warriors, with dark lances.
All these four units were in raiders (flickershields).

Now, as the title says, what's the point of warriors in raiders?

Standback with a darklance in a standing still raider for 2 DL sniping? (could be done better by a 20 unit of warriors on foot with 2 DL - ie, toss 'em in cover, and they'll wither more return fire than their raider carried brethren).
Standback fire support with a SC in the unit, and DL on the raider? (Trueborn in a venom, with as many SCs as possible, do this better).
Close up firesupport, blaster and SC, and dissy on the raider? (Why be close when you can be far off in say a razorwing with dissys and SCs...)
etc. etc.

All niches I've come up with for 'em, have fallen short, due to the fact that I have other stuff, that could do it more reliably, or cheaper.
Fluffwise, it's nice to have an all-airborne army, but I just can't find a tactical reason for using warriors in a raider, instead of a 20 man unit holding a rear objective.

What's your ideas and oppinions?

And please don't say capture enemy objectives, 'cause that's what your wracks, and or Wyches should be doing, both more efficently and for almost the same cost.
(unless I'm totally wrong)

//Calle

If you INTEND to have wracks and wyches as troop choices, then there is no need for warriors in vehicles, let alone 5 of them taking up half space in a raider. ><

That's like saying, "I'm running a skimmer army, I can't seem to make this foot-slogging cronos pain engine fit into it, what's going wrong?

Theme your army. Why would you want to create a mishmash hodge-podge of units instead of a theme? Alpha-strike shooting or alpha-strike assault with some anti-tank support, but there's no point trying to force in units that don't fit your theme.

all those poisoned attacks are of course deadly to any model that relies on its high toughness to survive. blood thirsters, wraith lords, half the models in the tyranid codex. I'm not all that impressed with them either but I can see them in a niche role of hunting monstrous creatures. especially because they are so much shootier when they're in their raider.

How about staying back and holding onto your own objectives, while still providing some LR fire support when there's nobody close by to shoot at?

That would be 10 warriors + SC. There's no other troops unit that can provide it. You can argue over whether it's a good use for the points in your list, but this is the obvious niche to me.

(BTW, the reason to do this as raider + warriors instead of 20-man warrior squad is that you can shoot at two different things, and your raider is good at vehicle-busting while your warriors are good at killing infantry.)

What makes them more shootier in a raider than when walking abaddonfidelis? (curious, might have missed something).

@dash: who says I'm only using five in a raider? If I only used five, i'd probably toss 'em in a venom for a "low calorie trueborn"- version...
And I find that similee of yours kind of insulting, as it's not like I am trying to pack a slow moving unit, in a fast army, and trying to make it work.

Basicly what I'm asking is, why would one choose kabalites in a raider, in a DE army. want shooty? theres shootier units. want scoring units? There are better scoring units. (in the DE army)

Good point about being able to fire at two targets DaveL, hadnät thought about that...

//Calle

Yeah... consider the cannon.

I don't think they are a strong choice for troops. But what do they bring that wracks and wyches don't?

Well, theoretically, if you took a couple 10x warrior units with splinter cannons and blasters in raiders, then you've lessened the need for trueborn considerably.

5x trueborn with 2x splinter cannons, 3x blasters in a venom with extra cannon is a LOT of firepower, but it doesn't score, and it takes up an elite slot.

two units of ten warriors with splinter cannons and blasters in raiders can fill their role, and score to boot. They just cost more.

the mega trueborn unit has 4x splinter cannons (16 or 24 shots) and 3x blaster shots

the two warrior units have 2x dark lance, 2x blaster, 2x splinter cannons (8-12 shots) and 16 splinter rifles (16-32 shots) and you have access to splinter racks if you want to re-roll those.

It of course costs more, but it has 20 wounds and 2 armor 10 hulls to the 5 wounds and 1 armor 10 hull, and can shoot at 4 targets instead of 2.

If you had a plan for elite choices (incubi in raider, harlequin WWP delivery system, etc...) then taking warriors frees up those slots. That's about as convincing as I can be on why you'd ever take 'impure' vat-grown warriors.

Jag_Calle wrote:[b]What makes them more shootier in a raider than when walking abaddonfidelis? (curious, might have missed something).

yeah give the codex another look. its either raiders or warriors that have a special rule. IIRC they get twin linked in a raider.

Basicly what I'm asking is, why would one choose kabalites in a raider, in a DE army. want shooty? theres shootier units. want scoring units? There are better scoring units. (in the DE army)

I would take wracks with liquifier guns. but thats just by looking at the rules. I havent played this army and only played against it twice so I'm not any kind of authority.

All niches I've come up with for 'em, have fallen short, due to the fact that I have other stuff, that could do it more reliably, or cheaper.
Fluffwise, it's nice to have an all-airborne army, but I just can't find a tactical reason for using warriors in a raider, instead of a 20 man unit holding a rear objective.

What's your ideas and oppinions?

And please don't say capture enemy objectives, 'cause that's what your wracks, and or Wyches should be doing, both more efficently and for almost the same cost.

The thing warriors do is capture objective and cause some damage without having to get out of the raider or get into close combat. Wracks and wyches will die from attrittion, its gonna happen. Warriors don't have to risk that.

I've considered a warrior raider build in my lists

9 warriors in darklance raider with splinter racks -- 160

--If your army has numerous threats, a couple of these will get ignored as long as they stay out at 36" and plink away with their dark lance
--However late game they can clear out wounded MSU units (w/ splinter racks 9 double tapping splinter rifles kill close to 3 marines cover or no).
--No blaster. Some builds that might be worth it but its pricey for a unit you don't want anywhere close to 18" away from anything until late game. Definitly the first option I would look to add if points are available though.
--No splinter cannon -- in this case effectively 19 points for something that doesn't benefit from splinter racks and doesn't provide all that much firepower when moving for the points. Great on venoms or trueborn, just not worth it on warriors imo.
--More guys -- you want then to score and its a safe bet your wyches and wracks will be wiped, so you will need the bodies. 5 kabalite are not the same as 5 marines. The idea here then is to make use of those extra bodies (hence the splinter racks).
--Left them at 9 in case a homunculus wants to hitch a ride. Nice mid/late game incase they've collected some extra pain tokens they want to pass on.

I've had great success with 5 warriors with a blaster in a venom with dual splinter cannons. The unit is only 125 pts and while is not very tought, can put out a load of poisone shots from the venom. The small warrior squad can claim and still put out some damage. 4 Squads of these at 500 pts and from the venom's alone will give you 16 wounds on anything at 48 inches (move 12 - shoot 36) range. Hug the back lines and throw out the shots.

Why are you limiting yourself to those 3 options? The three options that I think are most viable for warriors:

1. Unit of 10 w/ Darklance and Darklance Raider - novel concept, don't deploy in the raider

2. Unit of 5 w/ Blaster in Venom - good mix of anti-infantry with at least some anti-tank, redundancy is what makes it strong

3. 20 men w/ 2 dark lances - long range fire support, though not optimal as you're paying quite a bit per dark lance; it does have the added benefit of objective camping

OPtion 3 isnt exactly very good. There is really never a reason to use a 20 man unit like that unless you're using all your troop choices.. and also have points left over

2 10 man units will virtually always be better than 1 20 man for purposes of objectives

Another option is to use them somewhat like deepstriking MM land speeders by taking 5 with a blaster and blast pistol sybarite and then deepstrike somewhat close and see what happens as you can drop up to 3 lance shots into something nasty, or if they scatter away from your target then you can either disembark and still get 2 shots or just suck it up and take the 1 shot from the raider.

If you disembark and take the 2 shots then your opponent is then forced to deal with it as the unit is still a credible threat to vehicles and has to dedicate at least 2 units of fire at them to remove the threat while it's minimally costed.

Glad I found this thread, as I'm looking at Dark Eldar as my second army (Space Marines are my first, and I wanted something RADICALLY different).

From what I've seen/heard, although it may not be the best idea, 10 warriors in a Raider with a Blaster and a splinter cannon seems to be a nice utility unit that can hold it's own, in cover, from shooting. A couple of these units can be used to hold objectives.

Another idea is to have a couple of Warrior units deployed in the backfield without raiders. Have your Wyche/Wrack filled raiders rush up, deposit what's inside of them, and then rush back to pick up the Warriors. Wyches and Wracks seem (to me, at least) to be objective takers, not holders. Warriors can easily sit on an objective.

Again, this is just speculation on my part. I've never used the army, even in its former incarnation.

well you dont want to mix your special weapons. if you do, no matter what you shoot at, you won't get your full potential. for instance if you shoot a tank with the blaster the splinter cannon is useless. if you shoot orks with the splinter cannon the blaster isnt at its best. use duplicate copies of the same weapon to make sure you kill what you shoot at the first time and get full use out of your guns every turn.

Hmm...

Well, what would you suggest for a 10 man unit meant to sit back and hold objectives? And I don't mean just objectives in your backfield - I'm talking about closer to the middle objectives.

That's sort of why I had the SC/Blaster combo. Warriors are effectively useless without a Blaster/DL if facing a vehicle. I would think (even hope!) that the Cannon would make up for the lost anti-infantry from the Blaster.

I like the unit of ten Warriors with a SC and blaster in a raider. It gives you lots of options.

I don't think Warriors are a great choice for holding midfield objectives tbh, they are probably too fragile and won't be getting Pain Tokens most of the time (unlike Wyches who if they win combats will probably end up with one or Wracks who start with one). Warriors can still do the job if you take enough of them, but Wracks or even Wyches (in cover with FNP) are probably better suited for that.

Warriors are only useless against vehicles if they don't have a Raider, that gives you a mobile Dark Lance which is far more useful than an infantry model with one. Personally I think the options are:

5 Warriors, Blaster, Blast Pistol in a Venom. 1 Blaster keeps the unit really cheap but with the short range you really need two Darklight shots to be a reasonable anti tank threat. The Venom more than makes up for the reduced number of Splinter Rifles. Obviously a good candidate for a MSU based list.

10 Warriors, Splinter Cannon, Raider, optional Splinter Racks. Reasonably cheap, good anti infantry and longer ranged anti tank thanks to the Dark Lance. Many people are adding Blasters to this config as well, but 1 Blaster isn't enough by itself to threaten vehicles so I would rather just stick to being an anti infantry unit and leave the anti tank work to the Raider (+ other stuff).

10 Warriors, Dark Lance, Raider. Sits at the back and shoots stuff, Raider should probably have Night Shields. You can deploy the Warriors in the Raider, but most of the time you will be better off sitting them in cover so the Raider can stay mobile. No point adding a Blaster as they are supposed to be hanging back.

20 Warriors on foot, 2 Dark Lances (ideally) or 2 Splinter Cannon (cheap option). Probably needs a Pain Token to start with, but can sit on an objective (or two given its size) in cover and is going to be very difficult to shift with shooting. If you add a Sybarite with Agoniser and Phantasm then not many assault units are going to threaten them either. Dark Lances are more helpful than Splinter Cannons as infantry are very unlikely to be walking at you anyway. You could also add the Duke for an stupid amount of anti infantry firepower, but obviously the unit is getting pretty expensive if you do that.

Now, I like that 20 warriors on foot. What I would most likely do to support that would be the x3 Haemonculi.

Say I do take the 20 Warriors on foot (this is going to get a bit away from the topic of Warriors, and more towards how to support them). Would a combination of 2 units of 9 wracks in raiders (with the other 2 Haemonculi in there) and another 2 raiders with Wyches be considered a good option? Or perhaps a variation on that, with some other DE units?

I agree with Shep and Powerguy. The options they listed are solid, from what I've seen so far and my (limited) experience with the new DE.

personally i field 4 x 10 warriors with blaster/SC in a raider with splinter racks and flicker fields. they have prooven extremly reliable more often then not in multiple roles. either rushing forward to establish a fire base, or being mobile and unleasing fire from the raider. in both scenarios ive never really had issue with how they perform against MC or infantry. plus the extra 4 lances the raiders bring is a nice punch to help out the ravagers.

Well they have their uses for raider. However footslogging 20 isnt too bad of an idea throw a haemonculus in them put them in cover and it isnt easy to shift 20 warriors with feel no pain in cover. and honestly to get a large mob of them is not too expensive 180 points which I think is 10 points more than a 10 man tactical marine squad and honestly 20 guys with BS4 and 4+ wound always is of better quality in such a number.

However in a raider you are considerably faster which is always a plus and with 2 key upgrades flickerfields and nightshields you can at times be more survivable however if a raider(or venom) with warriors gets shot down well that sqaud will likely be dead or crippled near the point of death.

Still be it raider(or venom) or mobs of warriors They have uses it depends on your plan just remember your warriors themselves as far as points go are pretty cheap so dont be afraid to abuse them.

-edit- sorry I have little to say about the raider/venom I dont use them much I mostly mob guys but still they have had good uses for me before. Kinda a love/hate relationship

Why am I seeing people suggesting only 9 Warriors in a squad? It's impossible to do that, as you now HAVE to have 10 warriors to get either a dark lance or a splinter cannon.

Honestly, a 10-man squad in a Raider is better than a 20-man on foot.
1) Raider with 10 Warriors and a DL costs you 175 points. A 20 Warrior squad with 2 DLs costs you 230 points.

2) Raider provides the Warriors with a vehicle for protection. While it may not seem like much, it means that any enemy infantry that wants after them has to bust the Raider open first.

3) If you actually wind up wanting/needing to move your warriors, you'll do it faster in a transport than you will footslogging. Move 12", 3" disembarking (more, since you can go from the tip of the model), then running.


On the topic of Blasters with Warriors, they just aren't worth it. You don't want Warriors that close unless they are mopping up a small amount of infantry; they are much more fragile than any other troop choice, and unless you have a haemi on the squad (shouldn't) then they don't even have a pain token. Bad news bears.


I think they are most effective sitting on an objective as a gunboat that takes potshots all game with a Raider and a single DL. That gives a minimum of 10 DL shots from that squad during the game, at different targets. If you're shooting at AV 12, that means you'll hit about 6, and of those 1 should glance and 2 should pen. Not bad. If it's AV 11, bump it up to a glance and 3 pens. For 170 points, that is probably worth it.


TBH, I think one of the most effective things is a squad of 3 Trueborn with two DLs in a Raider. Basically a stationary Ravager, meaning your opponent now has to deal with 6 of them instead of three. >=)

The only one who said 9 was winterguy, and he did not include a DE "Heavy" weapon.

9 Is a good idea at times, mainly if you plan on taking Duke Sliscus in that unit, or you want the Cheapest 9-model unit you can for adding the Dias of Destruction to Vect.

This was an old DE use and still could be viable.

5-man squad with Blaster and perhaps Blastpistol. You are not stationary and have fielded a vehicle that can control an objective and/or generate two lance shots.

The raider means - if it survives - you can try to do the eldar last turn objective snatch/contest. 150 pts for 2 blaster shots is no outrageous and with 3 ravagers also piling in, you have a fast high firepower army. The pts saved on the 5-man squad results in at least one more choice for you on the board - one more troop or elite slot filled.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:well you dont want to mix your special weapons. if you do, no matter what you shoot at, you won't get your full potential. for instance if you shoot a tank with the blaster the splinter cannon is useless. if you shoot orks with the splinter cannon the blaster isnt at its best. use duplicate copies of the same weapon to make sure you kill what you shoot at the first time and get full use out of your guns every turn.

Conversely, if you have a blaster and a splinter cannon, then you can use the splinter cannon as your primary gun but if your top killing priority becomes a land raider (because its the only thing contesting a vital objective, for example) then you don't end up with a unit that can't contribute to that.

Efficiency is good, and definitely something to strive for. But a unit like kabalite warriors is more like the tac squad, they don't do efficiency well, but they can do a reasonable job at being flexible.

I don't often take units like this, because I mostly agree with you. But its not going to work to reinvent the purpose of this unit. Its a 'one special, one heavy, and some basic guns' kind of unit, and it should take the best special and the best heavy that it can.

I will admit, I’m still wrapping my mind around the new DE codex but I have an 1850 point army list I’m building/painting toward.

In this list I have 2 squads of 10 Kabalite Warriors with a blaster and blast pistol mounted in a Raider with Night Shields. As a long-time Eldar player I kinda viewed them as more versatile, less resilient Dire Avengers that can shoot from their transport. Again, as an Eldar player torents of fire on infantry are extremely valuable to me and a squad that can do that from the "protection" of a transport for cheaper than a DA squad always perks my interest.

I am definitely interested in Wracks down the road but their lack of fleet disturbs me. If (when) the raider goes down, the Wracks lose a lot of mobility (duh). If they get caught in the open on their way to the action T4 + FNP isn’t gonna cut it.

At least with the Warriors I can remain in/near the cover of the wreck or move to nearby cover and establish a fire base that can threaten everything in the game except a Monolith.

That was my thought process. I try to be forward thinking in that my Raiders WILL get popped and retaining some of my unit usefulness when that happens is important to me. I guess I’ll find out for sure when the plastic boots hit the ground.