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.

Worst unit? Tankbusters?

Rocky1 wrote:Not going to lie I'm surprised guardians haven't been said more.They are 1 pt less than a kabalite and have a worse ws,bs, initiative and a worse weapon.

Me too. Guardians will die to FireWarriors in shooting and CC I think. Besides, any 30" gun is much better than 12" gun on a S3 T3 A1 5+save model. One surviving GH has a decent chance of killing 10 guardians in CC next turn. And he WILL be in assault range.

Macok wrote:

Rocky1 wrote:Not going to lie I'm surprised guardians haven't been said more.They are 1 pt less than a kabalite and have a worse ws,bs, initiative and a worse weapon.

Me too. Guardians will die to FireWarriors in shooting and CC I think. Besides, any 30" gun is much better than 12" gun on a S3 T3 A1 5+save model. One surviving GH has a decent chance of killing 10 guardians in CC next turn. And he WILL be in assault range.

At least Guardians can buy a relentless heavy weapon. Of course they still suck badly.

I'll throw a token on the pile for Fire Warriors.

Worst Troops unit in the game? I'd go with Bloodletters myself.
An assault unit with 0 shooting, a 5++ save, no transport option of any kind and is forced to always deep strike into play! At least Daemonettes have 'fleet', Bloodletters are crap or else super expensive because you're forced to use units of 12-14+ if you want them to actually achive anything worthwhile. Oh, and a unit of 12 runs you just shy of 200pts.

Worst unit in the game? I'd say it belongs to Chaos Furies.
Sure spawn are pretty bad, but you can get them for 'free' if you really want them!

I'm going to have to go with fire warriors but I think conscripts deserve an honorable mention.

For 1 point less you get: ws2 bs2 ld5 with no option for special or heavy weapons... a joke of a unit.

The only thing that stops them from being worse than fire warriors is that you have several other options to choose from in the IG codex.

It's sad how everyone hates on tau.

Firewarriors have earned their place in the 'worst units of the 5th edition" list. They simply are outclassed by all other Troop choices, even in shooting.

Lord Solar Awesome wrote:I'm going to have to go with fire warriors but I think conscripts deserve an honorable mention.

For 1 point less you get: ws2 bs2 ld5 with no option for special or heavy weapons... a joke of a unit.

The only thing that stops them from being worse than fire warriors is that you have several other options to choose from in the IG codex.

Make an excellent meat shield when accompanied by Space Stalin, they can be a real pain in close combat and are still quite cheap.

Experiment 626 wrote: Worst Troops unit in the game? I'd go with Bloodletters myself.
An assault unit with 0 shooting, a 5++ save, no transport option of any kind and is forced to always deep strike into play! At least Daemonettes have 'fleet', Bloodletters are crap or else super expensive because you're forced to use units of 12-14+ if you want them to actually achive anything worthwhile. Oh, and a unit of 12 runs you just shy of 200pts.

In all respects, when used correctly they can be amazing, though I agree Letters really need a boost to be more effective (4+ Save for starts.)

Ailaros wrote:
But that's not a fair comparison. The firewarrior's extra range means that the firewarriors get to shoot at the guard squad with 4 shots a model before the guard player even gets to shoot that single 12" volley.

This is assuming LoS, no movement, etc. I can count on one hand the number of times the 30" over 24" I've seen come into play in games with and against Tau in the last two years. Firewarriors just are not effective shooting platforms for their cost. Given the mechanized metagame, prevalence of outflanking/deepstriking units, and much greater access to high speed units across the board, that 30" range doesn't mean much.

Plus, I'd like to see a lasgun take down a raider or a wraithlord - something which is plenty possible with firewarriors.

Possible, not probable or easy, it's desperation shooting when you've got nothing better to shoot at. Yeah, nice, but that still doesn't mean that they're anything approaching good for their cost.

The guardsmen also have the option of taking things like Lascannons for those jobs, giving them range and firepower superiority.

Yes, they have lost some of their relative potency, and I won't say that firewarriors are the best troops choice in the game, but they're still not the worst by a long shot. They may have become less efficient against the usual recipients of small arms fire, but they haven't gotten much worse against those things that firewarriors could take down that anyone else's small arm can't.

Which isn't saying much given that just about everything in the game can do that well..

Pulse rifles do everything that other small arms do, but they also come with a bag of other things they can handle that nobody else's small arm can (well, outside of GK's superstormbolters).

Which most other units make up for by having access to organic special and heavy weaponry. A guardsmen squad can be equipped to present a lethal threat to a Land Raider at any range or pack enough AP2 firepower to potentially kill a Wraithlord in 1 round of shooting with no saves. Fire Warriors cannot.

Give me a small arm that can reliably take down monstrous creatures, light vehicles AND ignores GEq's armor on a unit that always gets a 4+ against small arms wherever they go, and you've got something pretty useful, especially once you start looking at them in the context of the army (that can support them with markerlights, etc.).

As a player with 3 4+sv armies (IG Stormtrooper/Carapace Vets army, Tau, and Eldar), the combination of these three things isn't what it seems to be in conjunction with their cost and lack of CC/Ld ability. They also aren't particularly good at most of those things whereas other units like guardsmen and the like can be much more capable of engaging enemy units with organic heavy weapons.

Tau players at the moment like to bait people into pitying them, which I don't fall for. It's not the strongest codex, certainly, but that doesn't mean we all need to join the pity-party...

Methinks you're projecting an entirely different lense onto this than what people were going for here.

For everyone that thinks the worst unit is anything other than an Ethereal; I want you to ask yourself something. Is your unit capable of fighting, shooting, making an armor or invul save, and not kill your own units when it dies. If you answer yes to ANY OF THESE then it does not claim the title.

Vaktathi wrote:I can count on one hand the number of times the 30" over 24" I've seen come into play in games with and against Tau in the last two years. Firewarriors just are not effective shooting platforms for their cost. Given the mechanized metagame, prevalence of outflanking/deepstriking units, and much greater access to high speed units across the board, that 30" range doesn't mean much.

People not taking advantage of a unit does not mean the unit itself is bad. Certainly the inability to do anything to AV12+ prevents them from being one of the best troops choices in the game, but the lack of does not automatically make it the worst, especially in an army that can field a LOT of deepstriking melta and railguns. Why do firewarriors need to be able to take a lascannon analogue when they're in an army that otherwise has little problem handling heavy vehicles.

Vaktathi wrote:Yes, they have lost some of their relative potency, and I won't say that firewarriors are the best troops choice in the game, but they're still not the worst by a long shot. They may have become less efficient against the usual recipients of small arms fire, but they haven't gotten much worse against those things that firewarriors could take down that anyone else's small arm can't.

Which isn't saying much given that just about everything in the game can do that well.

Conscripts plus SITNW kick butt. I'm going with small ork/ gaunt squads, so easy to kill.

Totalwar1402 wrote:Termagaunts. Over-priced, near useless in CC, mediocre at range and vulnerable to any shooting; thats before you consider paying through the nose for synapse support. I've had hoardes of them bounce of guardsmen.

This is me quoting someone who does not know how to play Tyranids. Hi!

If you take Termagants in a vacuum, then sure; they're weak, do little damage and are unlikely to win you the game alone. However the same can be said for alot of Tyranid units, as none are meant to used alone. Nids work best when you combine their abilities with nearby units in - excuse me while I use a dirty business word - synergy.

Screening - While Termagants aren't known for any natural talent in cinema, they are pretty good at forming a DON'T MELEE THIS shield around key units. Don't want your precious Zoanthropes tied up and distracted from exploding nearby tanks? A dozen cheap termagants will see them through safely!

Tarpit - You know what I do when I see a Dreadnought or other big scary walker heading toward my big fleshy MC's? Well, what I do after I stop laughing anyway. I spawn 3D6 termies and send them skittering off to meet their new bestest friend. And they'll be great friends too, because chances are they're spending the rest of the game together. Sure the big mean dread might stomp a couple of the little guys each turn as he plays with them, but that's a small price to pay for keeping him happy and not running off trying to hug your larger bugs with his big power fists.

Objectives - So yeah, T3 troops with virtually no save aren't the best option for holding an objective, right? Well maybe not. You see these T3 troops with virtually no save have a plethora of other abilities sitting in the Tyranid codex just waiting to be piled on. Free poision and counter-attack from a nearby Terivgon. Preferred Enemy from mister Swarmlord. Defensive grenades, cover save and dangerous terrain protection from a Venomthrope. And let's not forget the best one of the lot - FNP from a Ld10 psyker. Now don't they seem like some nice ingredients for that objective you just have to hold?

Dakka - What's better than a Termagant that fire once a turn and takes forever to get in range of the enemy? Why it's 20 Termagants that fire 3 shots each as they arrive right in face**** range on an enemy objective in their spore pod! Devilguants are the perfect tool for that situation where you just bought too many dice and are now sad at not getting to use them. Also they're pretty useful for clearing bunkers out too. Just remember not to drop your 60 dice directly on the enemy models - it may save time but some opponents consider it rude.

But yeah, Rippers ****ing suck.

worst infantry? mandrakes -_- I have tried so hard to make those pretty models work and they just dont

Am I the only one that thinks most players severely underplay small arms fire? They seem to think that all that matters in a squad is the special/heavy weapon. I don't know what game they're playing, but my guard kill nearly as many troops with their lasguns as the flamer or autocannon does. It's absurd that they complete discount basic small arms fire when considering units, like in the case of fire warriors.

An enemy tervigon spawned three units of termagaunts. They took up a lot of fire, got in range of a 20 man blob in cover, and almost wiped them out once in 12" range.

Ailaros wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:I can count on one hand the number of times the 30" over 24" I've seen come into play in games with and against Tau in the last two years. Firewarriors just are not effective shooting platforms for their cost. Given the mechanized metagame, prevalence of outflanking/deepstriking units, and much greater access to high speed units across the board, that 30" range doesn't mean much.

People not taking advantage of a unit does not mean the unit itself is bad. Certainly the inability to do anything to AV12+ prevents them from being one of the best troops choices in the game, but the lack of does not automatically make it the worst, especially in an army that can field a LOT of deepstriking melta and railguns. Why do firewarriors need to be able to take a lascannon analogue when they're in an army that otherwise has little problem handling heavy vehicles.

Nonsense. Tau get almost all of their anti vehicle shooting from their crisis suits ( twinlinked missile pod or missile pod + plasma ) or their heavy support choices. The actual amount of reliable anti vehicle firepower is, especialy if we consider the Tau army's dire need to destroy enemy transports before they get close, rather on the low side ( perhaps 10 crisis suits and 9 broadsides, not bad but also not that impressive ). Wasting suits by deepstriking them into your enemy's lines is the height of idiocy. Usualy the only melta that a tau army gets is from Piranhas. You might assume that we think, that firewarriors have to be able to deal with heavy vehicles. We don't. Their weakness is that, unlike other, actualy adequate troopchoices they also fail at disabling light and medium vehicles, which make up the majority of tanks in the current gameplay. S5 is basicaly useless in that regard. If your crisis suits/ broadsides failed to stop a vehicle then your Firewarriors are very unlikely to help in that regard.

Ailaros wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Yes, they have lost some of their relative potency, and I won't say that firewarriors are the best troops choice in the game, but they're still not the worst by a long shot. They may have become less efficient against the usual recipients of small arms fire, but they haven't gotten much worse against those things that firewarriors could take down that anyone else's small arm can't.

Which isn't saying much given that just about everything in the game can do that well.

Then you're saying that firewarriors can do things that other things do well. That's a great reason for why they're not the worst.

KingDeath wrote:[

Unreg1stered wrote:Am I the only one that thinks most players severely underplay small arms fire? They seem to think that all that matters in a squad is the special/heavy weapon. I don't know what game they're playing, but my guard kill nearly as many troops with their lasguns as the flamer or autocannon does. It's absurd that they complete discount basic small arms fire when considering units, like in the case of fire warriors.

An enemy tervigon spawned three units of termagaunts. They took up a lot of fire, got in range of a 20 man blob in cover, and almost wiped them out once in 12" range.

Do the math yourself if you wish but a squad of Firewarriors is just as good ( or rather, mediocre ) against infantry outside of cover as a squad of pure boltermarines. Of course the boltermarines get much better stats, extremely effective special rules, free grenades/ bolt pistols as well as free or at least quite cheap special/ heavy weapons.

Firewarriors get..well, 6 inch more range.

^This pretty much. A whole Squad of FIre Warriors with a Shas'ui and Bonding Knife (So they're Ld 8 and can regroup below 25%) is 135 Points, just for twelve fire warriors and it's sergeant. Compared to the 170 Point Space Marine squad, with Sergeant, Leadership 9, with ATKNF, Combat Tactics, Chapter Tactics, a free special and heavy weapon, AND access to a decent armory.

Fire Warriors are starting to show their 4th edition economy.

KingDeath wrote:Do the math yourself if you wish but a squad of Firewarriors is just as good ( or rather, mediocre ) against infantry outside of cover as a squad of pure boltermarines.

Firewarriors get..well, 6 inch more range.

Firstly, they're just as good in that one role, but tell me how well boltguns are doing against DE skimmer spam and other things that pulse weapons can handle that bolters can't.

Secondly, a 10-man squad puts out as much damage to the same target types that boltguns can hurt. That's not terrible. Yes, the marines also get a bunch of neat other add-ons, but the marines also cost 50% more than the firewarriors do too.

I don't understand how Fire Warriors are coming out worse than Guardians, is it the point difference?

Ailaros wrote:

KingDeath wrote:Do the math yourself if you wish but a squad of Firewarriors is just as good ( or rather, mediocre ) against infantry outside of cover as a squad of pure boltermarines.

Firewarriors get..well, 6 inch more range.

Firstly, they're just as good in that one role, but tell me how well boltguns are doing against DE skimmer spam and other things that pulse weapons can handle that bolters can't.

Secondly, a 10-man squad puts out as much damage to the same target types that boltguns can hurt. That's not terrible. Yes, the marines also get a bunch of neat other add-ons, but the marines also cost 50% more than the firewarriors do too.

I think you still did not grasp the problem. Spacemarine Bolters don't have to down vehicles because the squad gets free/cheap special/ heavy weapons for the job.
The number of targets that a pulserifle can realisticaly hurt better than a marine bolter is limited to av10 vehicles ( w00t, Dark Eldar, which are better dealt with by crisis/ broadside suits ) and t6 creatures ( if you come to the point at which you have to take a 1/6 chance + save to actualy hurt a monstrous creature then you are in some real trouble ). Against t3 and t4, the intended targets for anti infantry weapons, they are just as meh as marine bolters. Unlike marines they suck against everything else ( and no, 2 damage results for an entire firewarrior squad against a Dark Eldar vehicle isn't good ).
The increased cost of spacemarines is more than payed for by their much better stats and free equipment and extra rules.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hazardous Harry wrote:I don't understand how Fire Warriors are coming out worse than Guardians, is it the point difference?

Both are limited by their inability to influence the battle in a meaningful way.
I would still rank Guardians a tiny bit higher than Firewarriors because they can take a relentless heavy weapon and their lower cost.
Still, the difference is small.

How about the best?

DPBellathrom wrote:worst infantry? mandrakes -_- I have tried so hard to make those pretty models work and they just dont

Dude sometimes they accidentally work! Outflanked 10 of em against my necron friend, finished off a single scarab base and a spider, and managed to pin a 10 man squad of lychguard the following turn before getting ripped apart. It was pretty glorious.

Anyone mention Necron Scarab swarms? They're just like rippers...

DemetriDominov wrote:Anyone mention Necron Scarab swarms? They're just like rippers...

Eh IDK... Ive seen them get into base with a LR and took it down with ease... Yeh they die easily but if you use them right they are a pretty good little unit.

Well do your codex allow more then 1 type to be a scoring unit?

Crusader squads as its the only option for BT's

To be honest I don't think that Blood Claws are awesomely bad. I just think that they are overshadowed by Grey Hunters, which are brilliant, so when you compare the two, of course they are going to look bad.

The difference between Rippers and Scarabs is that Scarabs eat tanks.

akkados wrote:Well do your codex allow more then 1 type to be a scoring unit?

Crusader squads as its the only option for BT's

DA Tactical Squad. Nuff said.

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

akkados wrote:Well do your codex allow more then 1 type to be a scoring unit?

Crusader squads as its the only option for BT's

DA Tactical Squad. Nuff said.

Don't you have something that can make termies a scoring unit?
at least I think 1 SM faction could.

Please right if I'm wrong, I might be way off since I don't have DA codex

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ah here it is yes you can in fact change all your deathwing terminators to be used at troop choice.... O.o I wish I had that

And fearless scouting bikers...

But, by default, we only have Tacs as scoring units.

Eldar guardians.