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.

But if the vendetta destroys a wraithlord that the eldar player is relying on for long-range anti-vehicle, then it is not vulnerable any more.

Realistically you're probably looking at 2 vendettas per dead wraithlord, reliably, but since the wraithlords do not have similar reliability at taking down the vendettas you're looking at a losing battle for the wraithlords for sure.

Mind you, that's just against Vendettas, which are probably the most efficient way to kill wraithlords in the game, but are also by no means the only way to kill wraithlords.

My point is, wraithlords often die pretty easily, and without having to dedicate all that much of your army to do so, which is to the detriment of the Eldar player.

2 vendettas vs. a wraithlord is 260pts vs. 130pts. Of course the vendettas should do better. It's seems silly to compare what twice as many points is going to do vs a wraithlord. How about a 10-man guardian squad with brightlance in cover vs. a vendetta. I don't think the vendetta stand a good chance vs. them and their points are almost the same.

Comparing units in a vacuum is not a good way to look at it as they rarely face off against each other without a whole army backing them up.

willydstyle wrote:One of the problems with the "you can't stun a wraithlord" idea is that it's pretty damned easy to kill a WL in one turn.

A single vendetta has an OK chance to do it.

Again with multiple shot units?

As I already pointed out with math, any unit that can kill a single WL in one turn will ALSO put 3 glances/pens on a Prism or Falcon, it takes the exact same rolls (barring S5). Unless that heavy tank went flat out to get a cover save,and therefore is already not shooting, then the same vendetta that would kill a WL in one turn (all 3 shots wound) would also put a serious hurt on the tank. Even if the Prism/Falcon went flat out and got a 4+ save, the tank would still take 1.5 glance/pens (so it still could be destroyed), and it will not be shooting for a second straight turn, at the bare minimum.

The vendetta is actually a greater threat to the tanks than the WLs...especially since Vends can outflank to get easy rear armor shots.

Nurglitch wrote:Yup, and a Vendetta that slows down long enough to put three Twin-Linked Lascannons and two Heavy Bolters on a Wraithlord has made itself vulnerable.

Speaking of, what is the "OK chance"?

3 shots with Lascannons at 4+ to hit re-rolled, and 3+ to wound is 2.25 wounds.

6 shots with Heavy Bolters at 4+ to hit, 6 to wound, and 2- to fail saves is 0.51 wounds.

Together that's 2.76 wounds, which is pretty decent considering that the Wraithlord only has W3.

I think it's more like 1.5 wound for the 3 lascannons and 0.16 wounds for the heavy bolters.

No, Nurglitch is entirely correct.

The downside to using a Vendetta, is that it will be putting itself in a vulnerable situation to attempt to take down a WL. In order to actually kill it in one turn, you are going to need good rolls, not average. As noted before, you will need two Vendies to drop a WL per turn. Not to say that it makes much sense to dedicate that much of your army to take down one WL per turn.

If the Vendie does not roll well, then that WL is going to turn around and shoot right back at it. With a full AT setup (BL/EML), the WL can reliably stop it from shooting the second turn.

WL are unique units, that can serve two primary rolls, while soaking up a considerate amount of damage. AT is how I prefer to use them, but Sword-lords en masse are pretty fun to scare certain armies with. 300 points of a 2000 point army, is a great way to distract much of your enemies firepower cheaply. As soon as you include WS in a list with WL, the WL will no longer be the center of attention, and the WS will be priority targets.

It is important to note, that it is not all that hard to avoid losing tanks in the first round. Part of this is the fact that you can flat-out, and reduce damage intake, by 50% all around. This is the strength of mechanized, the weakness is in it's target saturation. Footslogging units make target priority slightly more tricky, although targets are generally easier to kill. Tanks will allow around two rounds of shooting from an opponent, before allowing their cargo to step out and do damage. WL will allow the entire game of shooting, and there isn't all that much that can be done about it.

6 of one, half a dozen of the other really. Tanks do even worse against PK/PF, than a WL does, even though it is ten times easier to get that assault in on a WL.

2 vendettas is not a large portion of a guard army, and can take own the WL from 48" away, outside of the vulnerable range of most Eldar units.

Wrexasaur wrote:No, Nurglitch is entirely correct.

Why?
I'm thinking:
3 TL BS3 shots is 3x(0,5+(0,5x0,5))=2,25 hits
2,25x0,75= 1,5ish wounds.
What am I doing wrong?

Vendies with cargo, are going to cost around 200+ points each. That is 400 points, aimed at a maximum of 155 points.

I would much prefer to take out a WS w/ cargo (200+ points each), if I were to dedicate that much firepower to any unit. 6 LC shots, stand a pretty good chance of taking out that WS, especially if it has no cover save that turn. You would also be stopping two units at once, and chances are that you are going to have opportunities to take shots against a troop-laden WS.

I would rarely put a unit inside of a vendetta, as it gives your opponent easier target-priority choices.

Which comes back to the whole target priority.
If they opponent wants it dead, it's not hard.
It's up to the Eldar player to present more juicier (but defended) WS to make it a tough decisions of who to go for.

There are many ways to kill them indeed,due to the fact that they don't have an invulnerable save,but the thing is,they dont charge on their own,you hide them back and cover your troops,like guardians,until they get into position
Then you move them up as distractions so your guardians wont get shot at
This works just like those storm troopers in movies,"sector clear!"then move on
If you are lucky,one might actually get to do something in close combat!

Nivoglibina wrote:

Wrexasaur wrote:No, Nurglitch is entirely correct.

Why?
I'm thinking:
3 TL BS3 shots is 3x(0,5+(0,5x0,5))=2,25 hits
2,25x0,75= 1,5ish wounds.
What am I doing wrong?

My bad, my math was completely off, and I had to head out for a bit.

You and DarthDiggler are correct on your mathhammer, 1.5 wounds per turn is right.

Well I suppose, in theory this is all well and good, so is mathhammer, but it doesn't take into account luck or army composition, so I am gonna say, yak yak yak all you want.

Really? All this mathhammer simply corroborates my games with wraithlords vs. well-build lists. I run an Eldar army with 3 wraithlords, and I am quite aware of their abilities and shortcomings.

Wraithlords die against well-built lists, and they don't really take that much to take them down.

TH/SS terminators eat them alive.

Well...the WL is doing its job then for accepting the charge from the Termies, dying, and allowing everything else to move away/shoot them

I would also invite that very expensive squad of Assault termies to wail on my WL. They will drop the WL with professional ease, then get shot into little tiny pieces, by my concentrated firepower.

Krellnus wrote:Well I suppose, in theory this is all well and good, so is mathhammer, but it doesn't take into account luck or army composition, so I am gonna say, yak yak yak all you want.

You trollin'...

Tactics in the tactics forum are bad... or something... If you had contributed something besides, "Y'all be yakkin!", it wouldn't have been troll status.