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.

I have been talking to alot of players far and wide about Dark/Light Lances. And all I seem to get is hate. why does everyone hate them? they seem pretty good when mounted on Raavagers and all my raiders.

Cheers

I haven't heard much hate about them from DE players myself, though I do know a few of opponents who don't care for them.

The problem is the Brightlances for Eldar. They are statistically worse than a lascannon from AV10-13 and have twelve inches less range.That and they cost 3.5x as much on a weaker and less accurate platform.

The reason is that given their cost, they do surprisingly poorly against anything that is not AV14. They are basically an overpriced missile launcher if you are not targeting AV 13+. Taking on many light vehicles can be troublesome for DE as they have no cheap options to shoot at them.

Bwolf999 wrote:I have been talking to alot of players far and wide about Dark/Light Lances. And all I seem to get is hate. why does everyone hate them? they seem pretty good when mounted on Raavagers and all my raiders.

Okay, here is the deal...

When people think about using weapons to "kill" vehicles, that is what they are focusing on, getting a destroyed/wrecked result on a vehicle. So many people are marine users, and the only switch they have on in their brains is "melta = Blown up vehicle". That is all. Full stop.

Dark Lances are only found on an army most marine players cannot grasp on how to play. Why?

Lances are suppression weapons to allow your CC units to get into combat.

If you go with the logic that anti-mech weapons have to destroy vehicles every time they fire, then you won't like an army built on lances.

Dark Lances/Blasters are just fine as long s you use them correctly. If you expect melta results from Lances, then you will be disappointing.

By your logic hot sauce you need eather wracks with haemonculy (so you can glance) or you need wytches with hayvire grenades. Shurley you should be abel to kill tanks with lances as well?

BuFFo wrote:

Bwolf999 wrote:I have been talking to alot of players far and wide about Dark/Light Lances. And all I seem to get is hate. why does everyone hate them? they seem pretty good when mounted on Raavagers and all my raiders.

Okay, here is the deal...

When people think about using weapons to "kill" vehicles, that is what they are focusing on, getting a destroyed/wrecked result on a vehicle. So many people are marine users, and the only switch they have on in their brains is "melta = Blown up vehicle". That is all. Full stop.

Dark Lances are only found on an army most marine players cannot grasp on how to play. Why?

Lances are suppression weapons to allow your CC units to get into combat.

If you go with the logic that anti-mech weapons have to destroy vehicles every time they fire, then you won't like an army built on lances.

Dark Lances/Blasters are just fine as long s you use them correctly. If you expect melta results from Lances, then you will be disappointing.

BuFFo is right on this one. Dark Lances are just as effective as Missile Launchers at taking out vehicles, but Dark Eldar pay much more for their Lances than MEQ armies (Space Wolves) pay for their missile launchers. You will lose a shootout, that's why you need to take advantage of that speed and get in people's faces.

4 Trueborn in a Venom with 4 blasters is ridiculously good. Best 170 points you could ever spend in that codex IMO.

Niiai wrote:By your logic hot sauce you need eather wracks with haemonculy (so you can glance) or you need wytches with hayvire grenades. Shurley you should be abel to kill tanks with lances as well?

Well cactus farts, use Dark Lances to stun/shake a vehicle so your forces can get closer in. You keep on firing on the vehicles until they blow up eventually, but what you do not do is stun/shake a vehicle, and then continue to pour fire into it if there are 4 other rhinos that haven't been touched yet.

Griever wrote:4 Trueborn in a Venom with 4 blasters is ridiculously good. Best 170 points you could ever spend in that codex IMO.

How? 170 points for what is basically a ravager with an extra shot but only half the range, and AV10 instead of AV11, that can only move 6" and still fire, seems like a terrible waste of points overall. I suppose it's the best ranged antitank you can manage with an elite slot, but it still seems rather lackluster compared to a ravager or razorwing, so can't really be the best buy in the codex...

Griever wrote:4 Trueborn in a Venom with 4 blasters is ridiculously good. Best 170 points you could ever spend in that codex IMO.

Massivley agreed!

Such wonderful anti-tank + anti-infantry in one nice package!

Griever wrote:

BuFFo is right on this one. Dark Lances are just as effective as Missile Launchers at taking out vehicles, but Dark Eldar pay much more for their Lances than MEQ armies (Space Wolves) pay for their missile launchers. You will lose a shootout, that's why you need to take advantage of that speed and get in people's faces.

4 Trueborn in a Venom with 4 blasters is ridiculously good. Best 170 points you could ever spend in that codex IMO.

You lose shootouts with Space Wolves? Oy.....