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.

Let's take a look at two wraith constructs in the new Eldar Codex, the Wraithlord and the Wraithknight. Interesting enough the Wraithlord was not buffed while the Wraithknight was significantly.

I'll compare a dual Brightlance Wraithlord to a dual a Heavy Wraithcannon Wraithknight.

Cost: Wraithlord(160) Wraithknight(295)
The Wraithknight is 184% the cost of the Wraithlord.

Durability: Wraithlord has 3 T8 Wounds at a 3+AS vs 6 T8 Wounds at 3+AS with FNP, Poison, Sniper, and ID Resistance.
The Wraithknight has over 300% the Durability of the Wraithlord.

Mobility: Wraithlord moves 6" vs 12" Jump Movement.
The Wraithknight is twice as mobile as the Wraithlord.

Close Combat: The Wraithlord has 3 attacks at S8 vs 4 attacks at S10 and Stomp.
The Wraithknight has significant combat advantages including horde resistance and the ability to remove models from play.

Ranged Combat: The Wraithlord has 2 S8 AP shots and 2 Flamers vs 2 36" Strength D Shots that can fire at multiple Targets.
The Wraithknight's Ranged Damage varies from 0% to upwards of 700% more powerful depending on Targets or or a GMC, SHV, MC, Cover a Saves, Invuln Saves.


These numbers give a pretty clear indication just how powerful the Wraithknight is compared to its closest cousin, and it is significantly greater than the 84% higher points cost. The Wraithknight was superior to the Wraithlord or multiple Wraithlords in virtually every respect in the 6th Edition codex. The Wraithlord received no meaningful buffs while the Wraithknight has gained over 50% higher durability, greater CC abilities, and Destroyer Weapons....

How in a codex that felt almost every unit needed to be more powerful, including Windrider Jetbikes, Farseers, Wraithknights, Wraithguard, Wraithknights, Warp Spiders, etc, and yet they felt like the Wraithlord didn't warrant any significant changes. This level of sheer incompetence at internally and externally balancing a codex is mind boggling.

Can someone give me a valid reason to voluntarily field a Wraithlord on even a semi competitive level?

another important thing to note, is that the wraithknight has access to an invulnerable save, witch is a big deal because AP3 is not hard to come by nowadays.

I assume you meant reason to field a wraithlord?

Yes. Taking the Wraithhost formation for battle focus on the guard with webway buddies. You're required to take a wraithlord, just as gw wanted.

gummyofallbears wrote:another important thing to note, is that the wraithknight has access to an invulnerable save, witch is a big deal because AP3 is not hard to come by nowadays.

That is true, but I felt like comparing me lee versions of both was just too detesting. Though Dual Scatter Lasers and Glaives would have painted a worse picture.

Rypher wrote:I assume you meant reason to field a wraithlord?

Yes. Taking the Wraithhost formation for battle focus on the guard with webway buddies. You're required to take a wraithlord, just as gw wanted.

I did.

And that is not a reason to voluntarily take one, it's a Tax for the Wraithhost Formation.

because on low point game (1000 pts or less, I play a lot of these). They actually are very good and aren't a point sink like the Wraithknight.

epronovost wrote:
because on low point game (1000 pts or less, I play a lot of these). They actually are very good and aren't a point sink like the Wraithknight.

How is that a competitive or semi competitive choice?

Under 600pts
Bike seer
Scattbikes
Scattbikes
Wraithknight

May want to edit the last sentence..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ninja editted

Because in small point game with heavy terrain, night fighting rules (or at least some weather effect), and funky scenarios (which is what we usually use), small size units sneaking around to grab objectives are very useful. Jetbikes can crash and wraithknights are large and overkill. You don't need a wraithknight to kill multiple small units of 5 Scions or small gretchins mobs. I buy things for a job. Shure the Wraithknight is much better at everything, but faced against small units of light infantrie, I might has well use a wraithlord for similar results and almost half the price.

if they had given the wraithlord an option for a scattershield....that would have helped!! I mean their little brethren can take a shield, the big brother has access to one but no, the lord pretty much has to take shots to the stones every time.

and i usually play 2 of them (probably just 1 now due to formation)

You might also compare Possessed with Khorne Berzerkers as well? GW has internal imbalances all the time.

Size. You can't hide the Wraithknight. Anything on the board can shoot at it.

Physical size is, I think, factored into thwir points values.

Alcibiades wrote:
Size. You can't hide the Wraithknight. Anything on the board can shoot at it.

Physical size is, I think, factored into thwir points values.

Essentially factored as a wash. LOS is a double edged sword, smaller and easier to hide is the same as easier to hide from. Whereas the bigger and hard to hid it is, the more difficult it is to hide from. And it isn't like with Ruins and standard terrain the Wraithknight isn't getting cover or at least starting off the game with it.

I can't imagine "size" had much too with the pricing disparity, and if the Wraithknight recieved even a fraction of it form that it was misplaced.

I'm definitely a proponent of size DOES matter, but not in the case of the Wraithlord vs the Wraithknight.

Yeah it is bad. However wraithlords have been getting shafted since they took away their D cannons back in 4ed. Every edition thereafter they have removed stats or options until this edition...maybe I shouldn't have abused people with them so much back in 3.5ed.

IMO the wraithknight is definitely undercosted. However you should not expect a linear progression for stat increases. As is clearly shown when comparing possessed and any other unit having half the stats at half the price is a much better deal. The wraithlord would actually be a pretty good unit if it was changed in any one of a number of ways such as; came in units of 1-3, paid less for weapons, or was given access to high threat weapons (ie D cannon).

For the vast majority of units it is better for the models to be small enough to gain cover saves from ruins. You may notice that many people find the small DP, Be'Lakor, and avatar models to be much more powerful. This is because they can be hid out of LoS. This is especially powerful in the craftworld warhost detachment where the wraith host wraithlord can JSJ from behind LoS blockers with double starcannons, bright lances, or EML (not bad considering the flak missiles).

The last advantage is MSU. The wraithknight is a LoW and so can only get 1 in a CAD whereas the wraithlord can have 3 HS slots. With units like grav cents (which can nuke a wraithknight in a single volley). This same unit killing a wraithlord is much less painful. Still IMO the wraithlord should have kept the D cannon upgrade all those years ago.

I think the comparison approach here is just a bit wrong.

Wraithlord vs Wraithknight. Which model would be more profitable to sell for GW? WK. Get a WK - it's gona always have better rules.

The Wraithlord is a character. Smash those enemy HQs in challenges into the dust

Nothing like charging a DE players super Incubi unit, only to challenge and pulp the only model that's a threat in the first round of CC!

 Zagman wrote:
Can someone give me a valid reason to voluntarily field a Wraithlord on even a semi competitive level?

In the formation you can run 6", so if you run them barebones with a sword (even though they are still significantly worse than wriathknights) they pretty much have a 12" move, and when fielding 2+ of them, can be an interesting game.
Of course thats just for friendly games. In competitive level, no, not all.

A real shame, as I have two, and really love the model... I do have to wonder if their development team actually *play* this game...

Then field them, so what? People are a bit spoiled since the Wraithknight came upon them; it's not that the Wraithlord is absolutely bad.

Bharring wrote:
Nothing like charging a DE players super Incubi unit, only to challenge and pulp the only model that's a threat in the first round of CC!

people still take super Incubi units? Thought those got repeatedly nerfed to the point of uselessness.

Best reason to take a Wraithlord? Taking like 10 in a Tourney that disallows more than 1 LoW or ranged D

Exergy - my meta is quite casual. Hence the Wraithlord and Incubi are more common than WK and Grav Cents.

Goobi - most of those tournies limit you to two sources, so would limit you to 6.

Craftworld warhost. 1 source