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 a 5 man warriors with a blaster, should I put them in a raider or venom

I have three 4 man trueborn unit all blaste. In a venom with 2 cannon

I plan to have six 5 man unit with blaster in raider

should I put them in venom with extra cannon instead of a raider.

Also I have 22 KP in 1750 points so I was thinking of putting them as 10 man warriors units

so I need some advice on this please


Thanks !!!

There is no definitive answer to this due to the inherent flexibility of the Dark Eldar codex. People like Venoms for 5 man Blaster units so they get a good mix of anti tank from the unit and anti infantry from the Venom, but it very much depends on your list. If you think you need the anti tank then take Raiders, otherwise take the Venoms. For 10 man units (presumably just with a Dark Lance since you only need 5 for the Blaster and taking both is a waste) Raiders are the only choice and are still solid even if you won't be using them much to move the unit around. Dark Lance squads are still perfectly competitive, they just tend to get overlooked in favour of Blaster heavy builds at the moment.

There is no definitive answer to this due to the inherent flexibility of the Dark Eldar codex.

5 Warriors with 1 Blaster in Venom-125

10 Warriors with 1 Blaster in Raider with flickerfield-175

at 36" moving 6-12"

Venom-12 poisoned shots
Raider- 1 Dark Lance shot

at 18" moving 6"

Venom-12 poisoned shots, 1 blaster
Raider-1 Dark Lance, 1 Blaster

at 12" moving 6"

Venom-20 poisoned shots, 1 blaster

Raider- 18 poisoned shots, 1 Blaster, 1 Dark Lance

I'd say point for point there is pretty close to a definite answer. Venom squads are great as long as you have more lances in other places. I'd say that for Warriors there is never any point to the Sybrite (especially no point to taking any CC weapon) and really little point in the heavy weapon at 10. DE are always moving. The need to sit still isn't good.

I think I have enough Dark lance and blasters

if I put everyone in venoms I have 9 dark lance (ravagers), 18 blasters

So that's probably enough but I am worried about KP because I have 22 kill points that's alot.

Kill points mean nothing if you kill everything they have. Don't worry about it; focus on annihilation.

The Venom/Raider question will be one you address list to list based on what else do you have. If you have lots of anti-tank elsewhere (Ravagers, Scourges, Trueborn w/ Blasters, etc.), you can utilize more Venoms. If your units are more anti-infantry (Wracks, Incubi, Beastmasters, etc.), you will probably need the extra lance shots. Make sure you have a balance of what you need and you'll figure out the right ratio.

JGrand wrote:

There is no definitive answer to this due to the inherent flexibility of the Dark Eldar codex.

...
I'd say point for point there is pretty close to a definite answer. Venom squads are great as long as you have more lances in other places. I'd say that for Warriors there is never any point to the Sybrite (especially no point to taking any CC weapon) and really little point in the heavy weapon at 10. DE are always moving. The need to sit still isn't good.

That was a terribly flawed analysis and you completely missed my point about flexibility, for one thing why would anyone take 10 Warriors with a Blaster in a Raider? No matter what you have taken in the rest of your slots you can build just about any other slot to cover weaknesses. If you want to be mobile you take 5 with Blaster in either a Venom or a Raider, if you want range and survivability then 10 with Dark Lance in Raider (deploy separately). Where are you getting more Lances in other places is the main question, 9 from your Ravagers and then what? Only having vehicle mounted Dark Lances leaves you very vulnerable to being stunlocked. A static unit with a Dark Lance is still a very solid choice, it sits on an objective (so you don't have to worry about a) keeping your more offensive units alive and b) then turning them round to get back in time) and will be firing that Dark Lance for the entire game unless you put some serious effort into killing them (because you have 9 wounds to get through first). Compared to a Blaster unit, which is likely to die if it disembarks but has a limited range so often has to, the Dark Lance squad is clearly superior if you want anti tank firepower. It also puts out a respectable amount of anti infantry firepower at 24" (if you run out of vehicles to shoot) and has a great damage burst at 12" (or 18" if you move) which is better than a Venom's.

I agree Sybarites aren't usually that useful, but there are situations where they are worth it. In 5 man units they get you a Blast Pistol (none of the assault upgrades are worth it) which turns your anti tank ability from an unreliable single shot to a semi reliable two shots. Its expensive, but definitely worth it if you are pushing an MSU Blaster/Venom heavy list. They are also definitely worth it on 20 man units (not that they show up that much) as 20 guys failing Ld and running is never a good thing, if you have points it can be nice on 10 man units as well.

I'm quite sure venoms are the better choice because of the mentality that you HAVE to take a unit in order to get one. No one seems to think raiders are better than the unit they transport, but people will take 3 wracks just to get another venom.

If venoms came in a squadron of 3 as a fast attack choice, they would be better than vypers hands-down, that's how good they are. The 5+ save and transport capacity is a bonus, really.

Oaka wrote:I'm quite sure venoms are the better choice because of the mentality that you HAVE to take a unit in order to get one. No one seems to think raiders are better than the unit they transport, but people will take 3 wracks just to get another venom.

If venoms came in a squadron of 3 as a fast attack choice, they would be better than vypers hands-down, that's how good they are. The 5+ save and transport capacity is a bonus, really.

I have seen not uncommonly people take 3 wracks in a raider.

Depends on your list

I'm not so familiar with venoms, but I've had good luck with Raiders and 10-man squads with a dark lance in it. my only complaint, though, is that every army I've come across has made it a point to take them out before they do any real damage, which either works or doesn't. With either boat, if any firepower gets leveled at it it is TOAST, but usually you get one good shot at something before you get a rocket up your shnozz. If you're taking the 4/5-man Trueblood teams, i think that the venom's probably the better choice as you've got enough neat weapons inside it to accompany some splinter-y goodness, but with warriors I like the raiders and 10 man squads better because of the option of seating them in some cover and running your gunboat across the board to give a Talos or that suddenly vulnerable witch squad some sudden cover. Happens more than I'd like to admit.

So that's probably enough but I am worried about KP because I have 22 kill points that's alot.

Well, this balances out with objective based missions where your army will eventually have an advantage.

I would like to point out that over reliance on ravagers for long range tank hunting (with no other actual dark lances) is often a mistake. You get only 3 targets to shoot at turn 1, and have to get out of your venoms if you want to fire blasters. Getting out that early with 5+ armor is usually a death sentence. Also, getting seized without raiders to screen your ravagers means you will most likely lose them before they ever get to do anything. This means your venom fire will probably not having anything to hit, since the enemy is still in its transports.

I recommend having at least a few other DL units, whether than be infantry based, or raider based. It gives you additional platforms where you can affect the enemies mech, and honestly, it doesn't cost you that much firepower. DE get plenty of it as long as they don't go crazy on deathstars or bloated wargear characters/sarges.

That was a terribly flawed analysis and you completely missed my point about flexibility, for one thing why would anyone take 10 Warriors with a Blaster in a Raider? No matter what you have taken in the rest of your slots you can build just about any other slot to cover weaknesses. If you want to be mobile you take 5 with Blaster in either a Venom or a Raider, if you want range and survivability then 10 with Dark Lance in Raider (deploy separately). Where are you getting more Lances in other places is the main question, 9 from your Ravagers and then what? Only having vehicle mounted Dark Lances leaves you very vulnerable to being stunlocked. A static unit with a Dark Lance is still a very solid choice, it sits on an objective (so you don't have to worry about a) keeping your more offensive units alive and b) then turning them round to get back in time) and will be firing that Dark Lance for the entire game unless you put some serious effort into killing them (because you have 9 wounds to get through first). Compared to a Blaster unit, which is likely to die if it disembarks but has a limited range so often has to, the Dark Lance squad is clearly superior if you want anti tank firepower. It also puts out a respectable amount of anti infantry firepower at 24" (if you run out of vehicles to shoot) and has a great damage burst at 12" (or 18" if you move) which is better than a Venom's.

I've stated before that I don't really like entirely Venom spam armies. I have 3 Raiders in my 2K list in addition to the Ravagers. I just would never waste my time filling them with Warriors. If you want close combat, Wyches are the best troop choice. Objective grabbing, then go Wracks. Warriors are good mainly for the special weapon. The splinter fire is decent, but the shot range means that they have to kill what they fire at or face retribution. Even modest shooting or CC will make Warrior squads fold.

I don't advocate 10 man Warrior squads because of a lack of mobility, relatively high cost, and over generalization. Sure, the lance is good, but is it really worth the cost of a Ravager to get? Not only that, but even in cover the unit is easily broken. The lack of mobility is pretty mediocre as well. Finally, you have to face the fact that for most of the game the rest of the unit is sitting around and wasting time. At least Space Marines can combat squad to do that. Warriors are just not efficient as a shooting platform.

I agree Sybarites aren't usually that useful, but there are situations where they are worth it. In 5 man units they get you a Blast Pistol (none of the assault upgrades are worth it) which turns your anti tank ability from an unreliable single shot to a semi reliable two shots. Its expensive, but definitely worth it if you are pushing an MSU Blaster/Venom heavy list. They are also definitely worth it on 20 man units (not that they show up that much) as 20 guys failing Ld and running is never a good thing, if you have points it can be nice on 10 man units as well.

25 more points for a 6" shot and +1 leadership...you have to be kidding me. Bloated wargear on big warrior squads is the path to a bad list. Same could be said about small ones.

I like how people always add "if you have points" before suggesting something bad.

How do you have points to buy bad stuff? Why not use your extra points to buy good stuff?

Over 2k, this phrase might have meaning due to FOC. 2k and under, you can still find efficient spots to spend your points without resorting to anything that is only worth it "if you have points".

Syrabite in a warrior squad? Never ever ever worth it.

my 2c.

edit: I should also add that I tried to make a 10 man warrior squad work for the longest time. 10 bodies, splinter cannon in a raider. Okay, you think that could be a load of splinter shots, right? Okay now try to get them in a spot to use the splinter shots where they don't fold right away to whatever you shot at and didn't 100% kill. 10 man squads in raiders are not going to be worth it most of the time. I have since come around to the 5 man blaster/venom squad, and it sure makes a far more efficient use of the points.

I like how people always add "if you have points" before suggesting something bad.

How do you have points to buy bad stuff? Why not use your extra points to buy good stuff?

Exactly. Why would you ever have 25 points for each Venom or Raider squad of Warriors to add a Sybrite with blast pistol?

Except they aren't bad upgrades? You are looking at things in a vacuum too much or just have a very narrow view of what makes a competitive DE list. Do you also think Infernus Pistols or Hand Flamers or Fusion Pistols are bad upgrades? Put it like this, I really don't fear a squad of Warriors with a Blaster or indeed any single shot weapon as an anti tank threat, the percentage chance of causing meaningful damage is so low I can just about discount it. If you add a second anti tank shot then suddenly that unit becomes a threat, because on average its going to get at least some form of damage result. This is the same reason people take combi meltas on Sergeant's or Wolf Guard, the change from one shot to two makes a huge difference and for them its a one use only deal. 25 points to turn a unit from a minor anti tank threat to a meaningful one is not expensive at all, its 2 points more than the Wolf Guard I mentioned above. Dracos's stuff about FOC slots has some merit, but almost every DE list above 1500pts has 6 troops already (and 3 Ravagers, your obvious choice for anti tank) and making them better is always a good thing.

You would seriously discount getting Ld9? Everyone runs Avatars in foot Eldar lists because they are worried about Guardians running off, so how is this any different? Marines which Combat Squad with a ML in the backfield are often only Ld8. Interestingly if you compare a fully kitted out Tactical Squad (Melta, ML, Combi Melta, Rhino) point for point with 10 Warriors with Dark Lance + Raider they work out very similar in effectiveness (Marines cost more, have slightly better anti tank but its slow and short ranged). As I said for small 5 man units the Ld buff by itself doesn't mean as much (you take the Sybarite for the Pistol in that case) because they are easy to kill and expendable, but on 10+ man units which are going to sit on an objective and hold it (they aren't easy to take out because you have pushed a heap of stuff at the enemy which is more important to deal with) then you want that unit to stick around. For 10pts its well worth it.

Its a very rare DE list which doesn't have 3 Ravagers already, so yes I definitely think Warriors with a Dark Lance are worth it for their cost. It's a durable (for DE) scoring unit, which is massive by itself. It's 9 models that will have 4+ cover which you have to kill before you stop it shooting, which is much much harder to do than simply shaking a Ravager. For many armies its actually harder than completely killing a Ravager (who are almost always the first things people target as well). How is the unit easily broken? Ld 8 isn't terrible at all and you have to invest a decent amount of firepower to get them below half strength, the Sybarite upgrade which you seem to be completely dismissing helps out here as well.

They don't need to be mobile for most of the game so its not really an issue, decent deployment and 36" range should give you plenty of targets. That's ignoring the Raider of course, which definitely qualifies as a mobile unit. You use them to grab objectives on your side of the board, which they should be able to get to in 1-2 turns if they aren't deployed right on them to start with. If there is nothing for you to grab in or near your deployment zone (which is essentially impossible in all standard missions btw) then you can always send a Raider back to pick them up.

I agree Marines are in many ways more flexible because of Combat Squads, but then 5 Marines with a ML are much easier to torrent off an objective than 10 Warriors (assuming you aren't stupid and put them out of cover). They also don't have anything like the same anti infantry damage burst that the Warriors have at close range to keep assault threats etc off them.

@ Dracos. 10 Warriors with Splinter Cannon in a Raider is not a good choice, that's an anti infantry unit and is clearly not as good as a Venom in that role. From your wording you also seem to suggest that you have been using 10 Warriors (in general) IN a Raider, rather than deploying them separately. You park the Warriors in cover and fire the Dark Lance at stuff all game and use the Raider as a mobile gun, which can screen more important Raiders, contest objectives and Tank Shock stuff all over the place. Deploying a heavy weapon in the Raider leaves you with 2 static units rather than one (or you move and waste shots which you clearly want to avoid) and makes you more vulnerable because of explosion results (and even wrecks causing you to get pin) and potential difficulties getting cover if the Raider goes down early. It also means your opponent can shoot at a single AV10 open topped vehicle and shut down 2 Dark Lances with a single shot rather than 1. The only time I put them in the Raider is in DoW (or full reserves if I'm force to use it) so I can get them into decent firing positions moving on, or late game to quickly reposition to objectives.

Except they aren't bad upgrades? You are looking at things in a vacuum too much or just have a very narrow view of what makes a competitive DE list. Do you also think Infernus Pistols or Hand Flamers or Fusion Pistols are bad upgrades?

Yes. They are too many points (maybe not as much the hand flamer) for just one shot at next to no range. Add in the fact that Warriors aren't a close combat unit and that it's 25 points and it's a bad upgrade. I bet you like plasma pistols too...

25 points to turn a unit from a minor anti tank threat to a meaningful one is not expensive at all, its 2 points more than the Wolf Guard I mentioned above. Dracos's stuff about FOC slots has some merit, but almost every DE list above 1500pts has 6 troops already (and 3 Ravagers, your obvious choice for anti tank) and making them better is always a good thing.

25 points over 5 Warrior squads pays for another Warrior squad in a Venom. It's a bad deal.

You would seriously discount getting Ld9? Everyone runs Avatars in foot Eldar lists because they are worried about Guardians running off, so how is this any different? Marines which Combat Squad with a ML in the backfield are often only Ld8.

LD 9 is very sold, no doubt. Still, my 5 man disposable Warriors who die to a small breeze don't need it.

All the stuff comparing DE to space marines.

Paraphrased because there's no need to repeat it all. This is the fundamental problem in your analysis. DE are incredibly different from SM and should not be looked at in the same way. Kitting out T4 guys who auto regroup even under 50% and who have 3+ saves is more justifiable than kitting out T3 5+ guys who run away. DE Warriors do not need to fill the same role as a tactical squad. The Tac Squad is attempting to be good at everything and great at nothing (maybe surviving). Warriors provide a cheap scoring unit with access to vehicles and assault weapons. The poison is a nice addition but not something to count on.

Trying to setup and play DE like Space Marines the path to bloated wargear, confused units, and loses.