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 recently wrote a blog post detailing my top 2 units\choices for each force organization slot for the current Dark Eldar codex. It is not aimed at competitive tournament play, more just what I have found to be most effective in each slot during normal gaming, and hopefully it can assist new gamers looking to play DE with some direction. I know it can be difficult trying to figure out what to start accumulating when playing a new army.

Below is my intro and the first category, the entire write up can be viewed at the link at the bottom of the post. I am sure there are plenty of disagreements with my selections and I would like to hear from my fellow 40k community (DE player or not), either in this post or the comments section of the article.

"In this article I will be ranking the top unit\selection in each of the different force organization categories along with a runner-up for my favorite S&M loving space elves, The Dark Eldar. I have been playing Dark Eldar for a few years and have been able to put most of the units in the new codex through their paces in-game. I am not claiming to be an undefeated Warhammer superstar like most posters on this grand ole’ innanet hype themselves up as. I have won my fair share of games using the new codex and this article is more my personal choices in each slot for a regular game, not what fits best for a super-competitive 3+ game tournament. For anyone not familiar with Dark Eldar in the 40k setting, they are a perfect example of a 'Glass Cannon'. Which means that they can dish out an incredibly large amount of punishment, but in general cannot take it.

Each force organization slot will have two listed units; ‘The Balls’ which is in my opinion the best selection for the slot and a ‘Runner Up’ who falls just a bit short of the glory of being numero uno. The only exception to this is that I broke the HQ slot into named and generic selections and rated them both separately. I did not take specific theme builds into account for the most part, so if running Baron Sathonyx with giant Hellion squads is your thing you might be disappointed. Feel free to post your disagreements in the comments section!

Heavy Support

The Balls – Ravager
This thing is consistent, doesn’t cost very much, and provides your army with speed and the ability to bring a large amount of firepower to bear after moving. Throw in Night Shields and FlickerFields and Ravager’s are unmatched.

Runner Up – Talos
Outfitted correctly this thing is a beast in close combat. With its high strength and toughness, and the ability to have up to 8 attacks on the charge it can cause massive damage. It can make short work of enemy Dreadnought’s or knock a Stormraven out of the sky with ease. Its weakness when compared to the rest of the DE army is definitely a lack of speed, and a legit argument can be made for the Razorwing Jet Fighter in this slot instead."

http://www.3forint.com/2011/06/dark-eldar-force-org-slot-rankings.html

And here is a link to the general 40k area of our blog where we have articles on different armies, up until this point we have focused mostly on GK, Orks, and DE.

http://www.3forint.com/search/label/40k

I think the hard part of doing this with a relatively versatile codex like Dark Eldar is that there are a variety of different builds that can put a wrench into your rankings. Sure, the Ravager is obviously the most point efficient lance delivery system. However in a Web Way Portal list a Talos is more valuable or "the balls" as you so eloquently put it.

Another good example is the troop section. It is so list dependent. I like the idea, but I don't know that you can make such huge generalizations. Now, if you narrow it down to Mech Dark Eldar...

After my successes with the Razorwing, I'm doing to disagree with the Ravager being the "balls". The Razorwing is equally efficient and at times, with good scatter rolls, outshines the Ravager hands down.

Xelkireth wrote:After my successes with the Razorwing, I'm doing to disagree with the Ravager being the "balls". The Razorwing is equally efficient and at times, with good scatter rolls, outshines the Ravager hands down.

I strongly agree with this. Use of the Razorwing basically depends on whether you use Raiders or Venoms as your transport; if the former, use a Razorwing, if the latter, a Ravager.

The simple truth is that heavies in the Dark Eldar Codex round out the list, and that the Razorwing supplements anti-infantry nicely.

Biggest problem with the 'Wing is finding that 40 extra points to include it. It really outshines the ravager vs. anyone who doesn't run mech, and is only slightly inferior vs mech, although only half as efficient.

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:it really outshines the ravager vs. anyone who doesn't run mech, and is only slightly inferior vs mech, although only half as efficient.

But when about 2/3 of competitive armies are mech, why would you include it in a general tournament list?

Magister187 wrote:

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:it really outshines the ravager vs. anyone who doesn't run mech, and is only slightly inferior vs mech, although only half as efficient.

But when about 2/3 of competitive armies are mech, why would you include it in a general tournament list?

Giving up 1 lance and 1 armor is worth gaining closed topped, 4 S6 missiles, and an upgradeable TL splinter riffle. Even at 40-50 pts premium. If you can't find 40 pts of war gear that you don't need, then you are running a tighter list than most I've seen on here. Many people splurge on tooled up CC characters/sarges/units, and don't look at the opportunity cost of doing so.

Running 1 with 2 ravagers is pretty strong, I don't think anybody is saying to go with tripple razorwings (though at higher points it is an attractive option).

Razorwing Fighters....

Most tournament lists are heavily mechanized. Most non-tournament armies aiming for "competitive" standings are also heavily mechanized.

To deal with a heavily mechanized army, you need anti-tank. As much anti-tank as you can put on the field.

For Dark Eldar...every Razorwing you field instead of a ravager is less anti-tank, and therefore simply a bad idea for a competitive list.

That said Dash, I think you are also undervaluing what s6 can do. Consider the current big mech armies: av11 marines, av12/10 side IG, and 10 open toped DE.

It goes without saying that 1 s6 blast type weapon versus the open topped DE is better than another lance, and you have 4 such shots all frontloaded on turn 1.

Versus AV11, you have 4 frontloaded s6 shots, which earn 4x the glances and 33% more pens than that 1 extra darklance on a ravager. So again, better than the 1 extra darklance on the front end... and seeing as DE need to frontload their damage thats a good thing.

Only versus guard's av12 will the s6 missiles struggle... BUT you can usually maneuver for side shots on av10. If the 4 frontloaded missiles were better versus marines av11, then versus av10 its even better.

So I disagree that the Razorwing is a bad idea for a competitive list, and per my criteria listed above the math supports me.

I like the ability to alpha strike the missiles, but its a one turn deal and I am personally not lucky with scatter rolls. Although the math might bear out I feel more comfortable in general having the consistency of the Ravager and as many DL's on the table as I can reasonably get. Missiles definitely favor certain matchups though.

The missles can also come in handy against long fang or devastator units

CKO wrote:The missles can also come in handy against long fang or devastator units

But again...those missiles are one shot; while splinter cannons fire every turn. Every venom is causing 4-5 wounds on average per turn - mathhammer says that my Kabalite/Wych/Haemonculi/Beast combo army kills 11 marines per turn just with splinter cannons.

DevianID: STR6 large blast is *not* better than another lance for dealing with armour. Needing a 3+ to glance instead of a 5+ to glance is preferable. 4+ to penetrate instead of penetrating on 6s. Not to mention blasts scattering 66% of the time.

Then there is Turn 2+ to consider, where one shot weapons are gone. Dark Lances continue firing. Missiles don't.

Single turn efficiency for a 40% point increase is not an effective choice. No matter how you cut it it comes up short over the course of the game.

In a friendly game go for it. In a tournament list it's just wrong to suggest to people that this outperforms a Ravager. Personally the only heavy support choice I regularly consider instead of a Ravager is a Heat Lance armed Talos. But he serves a different purpose

I'm going to have to agree with dash/hulk here. Certainly, DE need to find ways to frontload their damage. This much is obvious and a basic concept in the army. However, you can't simply ignore the other factors. Anti-infantry ability in the DE army is common, everything can do it. What isn't easy to get are anti-tank weapons. The ravager is the most efficient platform for this. Nothing the razorwing brings can compare because it is more expensive, and doesn't fill the need of anti-tank as well as the ravager.

Ravager is the clear "nuts/balls" in the heavy support slot, and really nothing else comes close.

Exception: Ravagers might not fit in a harly/wwp list, and therefore the Talos is best in slot there.

Meh, faith in ravagers is misplaced. If 1 extra darklance was as good as Dash/Hulk claim, then venoms would be raiders. After all, anti-infantry in the DE army is common, what isnt east to get are anti-tank weapons.

Also, your not open topped...

And to Dash, your rebuttal makes no sense. Needing a 3+ to-glance is clearly demonstrated to be worse than needing FOUR 5+ to glance rolls. Frontloaded damage is also better than sustained damage, especially on an opentopped target like a ravager.

I think the topic, and perhaps Dakka in general, suffers from 'What is the best' syndrome. There is no single best. The ravager has the most dark lances, but the missiles on the flyer can be just as good or better in many situations. Like the situation where your heavy support gets shot at after your turn 1 alpha strike.

Plus, 1 good blast from a s6 missile can easily do over a dozen wounds. You have 4 such missiles. A venom deals a static 4 wounds a turn. Thus the missiles can indeed vastly outperform massed venoms.

Dont get me wrong, its not like I am saying you should always take the fighter. But to write off the fighter is a huge mistake, and simple math shows its potential greatly exceeds its competition in several categories.

Meh, faith in ravagers is misplaced. If 1 extra darklance was as good as Dash/Hulk claim, then venoms would be raiders. After all, anti-infantry in the DE army is common, what isnt east to get are anti-tank weapons.

Also, your not open topped...

The Razorwing is a decent choice, BUT.... It costs a good amount more. If you want the Flicker Field then it is 155. Take the Splinter Cannon (which I would not but some have advocated it in this thread) then it's 165. The Ravager is 115 with Flicker Field. The second problem is addressed below.

And to Dash, your rebuttal makes no sense. Needing a 3+ to-glance is clearly demonstrated to be worse than needing FOUR 5+ to glance rolls. Frontloaded damage is also better than sustained damage, especially on an opentopped target like a ravager.

Usually the Razorwing is unloading it's payload the first turn it's on the table. If it doesn't, it will not survive to do so. Which means that it almost has to shoot infantry to be effective. Strength 6 is good, but when it scatters 66% of the time and has limited shots, it's wasted on vehicles. So, the Razorwing is limited to either hoping that the enemy has targets outside of transports or coming from reserves.

Hoping that the enemy has infantry targets worth shooting is not the greatest gamble in a take all comers list. Also, you are shooting one less vehicle with lances per Razor that Dark Eldar can't get enough of. Ask any experienced DE player; there are times where even the most lance packed list wishes it has more. So, you can deploy and take a gamble that you are playing the right list. Or you could reserve to a wait to ensure that there will be plenty of de-meched targets. But again, you are taking anti tank off the table. Which DE need.

I think the topic, and perhaps Dakka in general, suffers from 'What is the best' syndrome. There is no single best. The ravager has the most dark lances, but the missiles on the flyer can be just as good or better in many situations. Like the situation where your heavy support gets shot at after your turn 1 alpha strike.

Plus, 1 good blast from a s6 missile can easily do over a dozen wounds. You have 4 such missiles. A venom deals a static 4 wounds a turn. Thus the missiles can indeed vastly outperform massed venoms.

Dont get me wrong, its not like I am saying you should always take the fighter. But to write off the fighter is a huge mistake, and simple math shows its potential greatly exceeds its competition in several categories.

If the point costs were the same then I would agree with you. A 40 point difference between the two is pretty rough. 3 Ravagers with ff and 3 Venoms cost 540. 3 Razor's with ff and 3 Raiders with ff cost 675. Each has 9 lances. The Venoms have 36 poisoned shots a turn. The Razor's have lots of 1 use missiles that scatter. Also, they cannot fire on tanks with those lances on the turn they use the missiles unless they want to waste the missiles. This type of comparison is why most would consider the Ravagers more optimized.

Also, don't forget that you will almost never get cover with a Razorwing while a Ravager can find cover a good amount of the time.

But as I showed you don't have to shoot the missiles at infantry if that is not a good option turn 1. 4 s6 missiles does great damage to vehicles if that is what your priority is. Venoms never ever hurt vehicles on the other hand. Just food for thought.

Also, don't forget that you will almost never get cover with a Razorwing while a Ravager can find cover a good amount of the time.

This is a good argument in my opinion. It is much easier to use cover to block LoS and get covers saves with the Ravager than it is with the Razorwing model.

JGrand wrote:

And to Dash, your rebuttal makes no sense. Needing a 3+ to-glance is clearly demonstrated to be worse than needing FOUR 5+ to glance rolls. Frontloaded damage is also better than sustained damage, especially on an opentopped target like a ravager.

Usually the Razorwing is unloading it's payload the first turn it's on the table. If it doesn't, it will not survive to do so. Which means that it almost has to shoot infantry to be effective. Strength 6 is good, but when it scatters 66% of the time and has limited shots, it's wasted on vehicles. So, the Razorwing is limited to either hoping that the enemy has targets outside of transports or coming from reserves.

Hoping that the enemy has infantry targets worth shooting is not the greatest gamble in a take all comers list. Also, you are shooting one less vehicle with lances per Razor that Dark Eldar can't get enough of. Ask any experienced DE player; there are times where even the most lance packed list wishes it has more. So, you can deploy and take a gamble that you are playing the right list. Or you could reserve to a wait to ensure that there will be plenty of de-meched targets. But again, you are taking anti tank off the table. Which DE need.

This is why you take Nightshield on Razorwings ahead of Flickerfields (usually both is a bad idea, too expensive), with 48" range they can actually dodge most incoming fire completely (unlike Ravagers where Nightshields are of no use vs the incredibly common 48" range anti tank weaponry). I'm not sure what kind of lists you are playing, but EVERY army has infantry targets worth shooting, the only problem is that they are often in transports so the trick is to have enough anti tank firepower to start opening them up before the Razorwings are firing. Certainly I think the Dark Eldar codex is capable to mustering enough anti tank firepower to be competitive without using Ravagers, Trueborn with Blasters or Dark Lances, Warriors with Blasters or Dark Lances, Scourges with Dark Lances, Reavers with Heat Lances and widespread access to (cheap) Raiders with Dark Lances can get you enough anti tank. Remember you aren't aiming to kill every vehicle, just disable what you can and open up a select few for the Razorwings to remove with pie plates.

Remember that Razorwings can take Disintegrators, which combined with the Splinter Cannon (which you only bother buying in this loadout) turn it into a very good anti MEQ platform. The best possible target for a Dark Lance Razorwing would be a vehicle with a disembarked squad right next to it (which is a pretty common occurrence really), whereas Disintegrator Razorwings will just focus on and wipe the unit instead.

The problem with making it an "anti-MEQ platform" is that you are really doing it wrong if you are giving up your heavy support slots to up your MEQ killing potential. Damn near 1/2 the codex is good at killing MEQ, its really not an great place for that.
Taking a dedicated (or even slanted towards) anti-infantry vehicle, at a premium, in today's heavily mech slanted metagame is really just not optimal. How much trouble do you think an average DE army has with infantry based armies?

DevianID wrote:
And to Dash, your rebuttal makes no sense. Needing a 3+ to-glance is clearly demonstrated to be worse than needing FOUR 5+ to glance rolls. Frontloaded damage is also better than sustained damage, especially on an opentopped target like a ravager.

Really?

You've a 1/3 chance to hit. You're going to get 1.5 (I'll be generous and call it two) attempts to glance on a 5+. Once per game. Opposed to Dark Eldar, with three shots (2 hits) needing 3+ to glance the same AV11.....every turn.

On the flip side, people giving communal bad advice helps me win tournaments.

So I advocate the Razorwing Fighter wholeheartedly. EVERYONE knows that the most competitive DE army consists of Urien, two grotesque units on foot, 18x Reaver Jetbikes, 3x fully loaded Razorwing Fighters, and haywire grenade-less bloodbrides escorting the grotesques up the field.

Dashofpepper wrote:On the flip side, people giving communal bad advice helps me win tournaments.

So I advocate the Razorwing Fighter wholeheartedly. EVERYONE knows that the most competitive DE army consists of Urien, two grotesque units on foot, 18x Reaver Jetbikes, 3x fully loaded Razorwing Fighters, and haywire grenade-less bloodbrides escorting the grotesques up the field.

Well played, sir.

To be fair, the to hit on a scatter is much better than 1/3, and you know that Dash. Minus BS and taking the target size into consideration means the hit rate is much higher (depends on target of course). A rhino hull can have a scatter of 2 inches (roll of a 6) and still hit with the center hole most of the time. That means a little less than half of the scatters with effectively be hits. So it comes pretty close to the same chances as firing a solid shot. Against a rhino you need a 6 to pen, sure but you also get 4 chances at it, and 2 dark lance shots. For simplicity sake I'm going to just say 50 percent total hit rate, make the missile barrage pen 33 percent of the time you fire all of them. (real number is most likely better, but i'm lazy and not going to do the math for that). 2 dark lances also, which pen at 33 percent each. Total pen rate? 99 percent. Which is the same as the ravager. And I'm assuming that the razorwing scatter results aren't friendly. Sustained fire the ravager out preforms the razor 33 percent, but 66 pen rate is still decent, and the versatility of the razor against all target types makes it worth considering. For your list? Venom spam needs all the DLs it can get, since it relies on infantry holding blasters (18 range) to do its antitank. But there is more lists that can win with DE than just one. I would think a guy who wins with necrons would find more builds than just one out of a "good" book.

Personally, I don't think that the -1 dark lance makes the Razorwing that much worse at tank popping than a Ravager. What I think makes it worse is just the fact that they cost 40 points more. Forty points. That's 4 wyches. If you add a couple of toys to the Razorwing, then the cost difference equals a Venom. That's just too much.

I see the Razorwing as a vehicle that can do both anti armor and anti horde...the problem is that every other cost effective unit in the codex is so good at one thing, it is much more cost efficient to make everything single-purpose.

notabot187 wrote:To be fair, the to hit on a scatter is much better than 1/3, and you know that Dash. Minus BS and taking the target size into consideration means the hit rate is much higher (depends on target of course). A rhino hull can have a scatter of 2 inches (roll of a 6) and still hit with the center hole most of the time. That means a little less than half of the scatters with effectively be hits. So it comes pretty close to the same chances as firing a solid shot. Against a rhino you need a 6 to pen, sure but you also get 4 chances at it, and 2 dark lance shots. For simplicity sake I'm going to just say 50 percent total hit rate, make the missile barrage pen 33 percent of the time you fire all of them. (real number is most likely better, but i'm lazy and not going to do the math for that). 2 dark lances also, which pen at 33 percent each. Total pen rate? 99 percent. Which is the same as the ravager. And I'm assuming that the razorwing scatter results aren't friendly. Sustained fire the ravager out preforms the razor 33 percent, but 66 pen rate is still decent, and the versatility of the razor against all target types makes it worth considering. For your list? Venom spam needs all the DLs it can get, since it relies on infantry holding blasters (18 range) to do its antitank. But there is more lists that can win with DE than just one. I would think a guy who wins with necrons would find more builds than just one out of a "good" book.

Pen rate of 99%? You did math wrong friend. You subtract them from 1 and multiply the results together.

For example, if you have 3 33% chances to pen, the chance of not getting a pen on any of them is (1-0.33) X (1-0.33) X (1-0.33) = 2/3 *2/3*2/3 = 8/27= 0.30.

So 3 33% chances to hit gives you 30% chance to get no hits on any of them, for a 70% chance of scoring at least one hit.

Dracos I figured he was doing 'expected' pens. If you use actual % then differences are not so easy to see.

Dash also did the math wrong, so its a wash I suppose.

1 dark lance of course has a 66% chance of hitting, and versus a rhino has an 11% chance of a single glance or a 33% chance of a pen.

With 1 s6 missile blast, you hit 33% of the time. After that, you have a 1/6 chance of not scattering at all, and if you go with the above assumption that 2 inches still hits a rhino (close enough) then the scattering shots still hit at full str 42% of the time. So 66% scatter by 42% still hitting, added to the 33% that you simply roll a hit in the first place, and you do full damage on a rhino 61% of the time. Now, Rhinos are a bit more than 4 inches long but not quite 4 inches wide, so without the proper dimensions in front of me I cant calculate the exact scatter arcs, but 61% of the time is close enough for warhammer army work.

So what is the % that a single blast will do something to a rhino... well 10% chance that you get a glance and 10% chance that you get a pen. This is with a single s6 missile. The single extra dark lance, as above, has an 11% chance of glancing and 33% chance of penning, and a 55% chance of doing nothing.

The FOUR missiles have a 34% chance of one or more glances, a 34% chance of one or more pens, and 40% chance of doing nothing. I know the numbers dont add up to 100 there, but that is due to overlaps when you get both glances AND pens--something that single extra dark lance cant do.

In any event, I go through this math to again illustrate my point that the razorwing is not a bad choice. Dash seems to think that if you take a razorwing you are a bad player because it is always a worse choice. This is proved entirely false. The razorwing is different, with different strenghts. If the single extra lance was as good as Dash claims, then venoms would be trash--yet Dash seems to like those.

DevianID wrote:Dracos I figured he was doing 'expected' pens. If you use actual % then differences are not so easy to see.

Dash also did the math wrong, so its a wash I suppose.

1 dark lance of course has a 66% chance of hitting, and versus a rhino has an 11% chance of a single glance or a 33% chance of a pen.

With 1 s6 missile blast, you hit 33% of the time. After that, you have a 1/6 chance of not scattering at all, and if you go with the above assumption that 2 inches still hits a rhino (close enough) then the scattering shots still hit at full str 42% of the time. So 66% scatter by 42% still hitting, added to the 33% that you simply roll a hit in the first place, and you do full damage on a rhino 61% of the time. Now, Rhinos are a bit more than 4 inches long but not quite 4 inches wide, so without the proper dimensions in front of me I cant calculate the exact scatter arcs, but 61% of the time is close enough for warhammer army work.

So what is the % that a single blast will do something to a rhino... well 10% chance that you get a glance and 10% chance that you get a pen. This is with a single s6 missile. The single extra dark lance, as above, has an 11% chance of glancing and 33% chance of penning, and a 55% chance of doing nothing.

The FOUR missiles have a 34% chance of one or more glances, a 34% chance of one or more pens, and 40% chance of doing nothing. I know the numbers dont add up to 100 there, but that is due to overlaps when you get both glances AND pens--something that single extra dark lance cant do.

In any event, I go through this math to again illustrate my point that the razorwing is not a bad choice. Dash seems to think that if you take a razorwing you are a bad player because it is always a worse choice. This is proved entirely false. The razorwing is different, with different strenghts. If the single extra lance was as good as Dash claims, then venoms would be trash--yet Dash seems to like those.

Value Proposition, you pay 30% more points for that. I think you are throwing points away, but ultimately, whatever you want.

While yes you do pay more points you are paying for something you can't get elsewhere. What is the value of dealing 30 some wounds to an ork mob after all while still being good for marines. Plus not being open topped has a value. If it was more than 40 points I would agree but keep in mind I also don't think the fighter is always better either. I am advocating that it has value competitively in de but as always it depends on the synergy of the rest of your list.

Wait, wait, wait....we're actually advocating that shooting Razorwing missiles at Rhinos is ok? This is a joke right?

If you take the average of two missiles hitting per Razorwing, that's six total hits. So, one glance and one penetrate on average. One of those is likely covered (this is CoverHammer 40k after all) and you are left with a huge waste.

The advice in this thread is just bad.

Yes...yes it is.

Success in 40k is based on risk management. I believe that advocating the Razorwing over the ravager for anti-tank duty on the premise that for one turn the razorwing can theoretically do more damage than the ravager at a significant increase in cost....is bad advice.