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 haven't been able to find this anywhere on the forum. If it is, please direct me to it, and I'm sorry for a superfluous thread. Anyway, my question is simple; which do you use more, dire avengers or guardians? As a player still fairly new to the game, I would love to hear your opinion.

I, in my short experience, have always preferred avengers as they are less expensive to get a minimum size squad. The other selling points for me were there 4+ armor save. The fact that they can take a save against a bolter, while guardians can't, is a big deal for me. Finally, their gun ranges. That extra six inches is a huge deal, as they can shoot at most basic infantry without having to deal with twice the retaliation, rapid fire range. The guardians simply can't do that. Battle focus helps, but as its max move is the average move of infantry, they still get double tapped.

So, with my thoughts stated, its up to you. Which do you think is better?

They have different pros.
Dire Avengers - better save, better Leadership, costs less for minimum squad size, longer range.

Guardians - larger squad sizes equating to more shots, heavy weapons give them a longer wound range, can have a Warlock with Conceal.


All in all, Dire Avengers have been dropped from my lists and are proxied as Guardians.

Interesting... what was the tipping point for you? For me it was that i run a mech list and like to get as many vehicles, not bodies on the table. Dire avengers seemed the natural choice as their min squad size cost less than guardians min squad size. Also the range for me.

The HW platforms. Sometimes you need 11+ Bright Lances...

My Guardians have done very well. They managed to kill a Wraithknight. In Overwatch.

Part of it for me is I run an Ulthwe-themed army. My typical load-out is 2 Farseers, 9-10 Warlocks, 3 squads of Guardians with BL in Serpents (standard OP load-out), a couple of small Windrider squads, Crimson Hunter, War Walkers, Support Battery. Maybe Dark Reapers if I have the points.

Wow... lots of psykers. I typically dont like to run lots of psykers, but i can see why youd like a list like that. . You are right though, guardians would be better for that kind of list. anyone else have opinions?

Most of the other Eldar players run Guardians as well for various reasons, for one it is the HWP.
For another it is that for a given number of points you can field more Shuriken weapons thus giving you more pseudo-rends.

As Eldar don't really have a whole lot for anti-TEQ, more catapults is a good thing.

Of course it also depends on the list you are running. Serpent Spam - go with Avengers.

Also, on average against Bolter-esque weaponry you will be losing the same percentage of models each turn.

Guardians are the clear winners of this edition in the codex. Their pathetic range is mitigated by Battle Focus and the one advantage that DAs had was bladestorm, which is now a nearly army wide buff to shuriken weapons. Without the extra shots dires have lost a lot of their former appeal. Hawks are far better than dires now, with skyleap no longer requiring the exarch, and an extra shot to their guns. Jetbikes however, are still a superior troop choice for an Eldar army. Guardians simple lack the potential to do what other aspects can do better. Give the fusion guns to dragons, and the flamer templates to warlocks, and if you want to field long range guns then go with the Support Battery instead of that shriveled up weapons platform.

Why not have both?

I typically field 2-3 squads of guardians with 10 men and a BL weapons platform. Give them a serpent and they are a catch all unit that can fill multiple roles.

However, they cannot stand up against anything in combat. So I also like to take a squad of Dire avengers, give the exarch a shimmershield, and use them as a bunker for a farseer/eldrad. A full squad of Fortuned/Prescienced/Doomed Avengers can cause some serious hurt. Between (prescienced) overwatch and counter-attack (prescienced too), they make a decent unit to hold the line. Fortuned 5++ is nothing to scoff at.

I disagree with the statement about Eldar lacking anti-TEQ weapons. Half our damn army is perfect for that! Loads of AP1/2 in everything from Wraithunits, Starcannons, Fusion guns, rending catapults/cannons...and when it's not Ap2, there's the torrent of S6/7 shooting we have, which is even better against Terminators with 3++ saves.

I may be new, but it seems to me that Guardians and Dire Avengers are suited to completely different roles. Guardians stay back to hold objectives, while Dire Avengers function close to assault troops. Jetbikes are for quickly grabbing/contesting an objective, or coming in from reserves to bolster the army.

 Happyjew wrote:
Most of the other Eldar players run Guardians as well for various reasons, for one it is the HWP.
For another it is that for a given number of points you can field more Shuriken weapons thus giving you more pseudo-rends.

As Eldar don't really have a whole lot for anti-TEQ, more catapults is a good thing.

Of course it also depends on the list you are running. Serpent Spam - go with Avengers.

Also, on average against Bolter-esque weaponry you will be losing the same percentage of models each turn.

Imo its completely the opposite, Serpent spam lists do far far better with Guardians than Avengers. The only meaningful advantage Avengers have over Guardians is that they have a smaller minimum squad size, so if you are simply trying to squeeze in as many Serpents as possible then they have a role. However if you want your troops to achieve anything at all then Guardians are a much better choice. You only pay 25pts more for the base squad, but that gets you 20 S4 shots with quasi Rending, which is actually a legitimately threatening unit in its own right. When you are running 4-5 squads of them (lets face it, no one runs solo Serpents) then that is 80-100 shots per turn, which is exactly the kind of bulk firepower you want in a Serpent list to let you deliver a finishing punch after the Serpents take out all the high priority targets from range. Avengers aren't really any better footslogging options than Guardians either, the option for the support weapons gives the Guardians more flexbility.

jetbikes aren't just for quickly grabbing objectives, or coming in from reserves. If you've got the points to sink into it a 9 bike 3 cannon squad is actually REALLY strong, especially with warlock support (and especially especially if that warlock rolls a 4). T4 with 3+ 4+cover (or 2+ 5+cover with protect) putting out 14 twin linked pseudo rending shots, and 9 S6 pseudo rending shots is usually enough deal enough damage to a unit to severely diminish their numbers. Mind you that's a 233 point unit with a random power, so it SHOULD be good.

Besides bikes I tend also to use guardians. They are more versatile than avengers in regards to being able to effectively damage anything in the game with their HWPs, plus the larger numbers provide more shots. their shorter range doesn't matter as much when they put out so many shots that the enemy can't shoot back .
just watch out for assault... oh boy, should you ever watch out for assault, lol.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
I may be new, but it seems to me that Guardians and Dire Avengers are suited to completely different roles. Guardians stay back to hold objectives, while Dire Avengers function close to assault troops. Jetbikes are for quickly grabbing/contesting an objective, or coming in from reserves to bolster the army.

When Guardians had BS3 then yeah this is how things worked. The issue is that now that Guardians are WS/BS4 and I5 (so before Marines in assault) with basically the same weapon they are actually better point for point in the close up role as well. The added armour and Ld of the Avengers doesn't count for much, you are better off dumping 10 Guardians up close and running into cover afterwards rather than 6-7 Avengers you get for the same cost.

It is clear I am in the minority in preffering DAs. However, there is a method to the madness. Here are some numbers I crunched to reach my conclusion. First will be offensive power. All numbers are against a ten man marine tactical squad, all with bolters.
Guardians, 10 man squad
20shots
13.333 hit
2.22 wound with sixes, instantly killing marines
4.44 wound with ap5
marines fail saves on 1.48
guardians kill 3.69 marines
when dividing marines dead by total points squad cost, 24.39 points spent for each marine death, each round of shootin
DAs, 7 man squad as thats only one point more than 10 man guardian squad
14 shots
9.333 hit
1.55 wound with 6s auto death
3.10 wound with ap 5
1.03 marines fail save
2.58 dead marines
35.27 points per kill per turn
As you can see guardians are much more efficient offensively, if they are in range. Now defensively. Here the guardians are shot at 20 times as in order for them to shoot at marines, they need to be within marines rapid fire range. Yes they have battle focus, but even if they run 6 inches, the marines move 6 inches and are still able to rapid fire. For this demonstration, there is no cover nearby. Note DAs are only shot at 10 times as they can easily shoot while staying out of rapid fire range of marines.
Guardians
20 shots
13.33 hit
8.89 wound
no save because of ap 5, 8.89 die
89% casualties a turn
This means it takes one turn of shooting from a squad with bolters to completely wipe out or cripple a 10 man guardian squad
DAs
10 shots
6.66 hits
4.44 wounds
2.22 fail saves
2.22 die
31% fatalities a turn
This means it takes three turns of shooting to wipe out or cripple a 7 man dire avenger squad
As you can see, both serve important purposes. Guardians dish out a high number of shots for cheap, and dire avengers can survive nearly 3 times as long against standard infantry. Because of this, I can easily understand taking either one. However, because I believe that the troops transport and other sections of the army dish out enough fire, that you dont need a bunch more shots. What I need is a cheapish scoring unit that can survive if its serpent blows up, and in that role I believe dire avengers serve that purpose better. Thats my opinion at least. Now I know Ill still be in the minority, but now you have seen why I think what I do. Any more thoughts?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One thing i forgot to mention was that dire avengers have counterattack. Along with higher ld, this makes them less likely to wither in the assault.

PiperPilot wrote:

For this demonstration, there is no cover nearby......

What I need is a cheapish scoring unit that can survive if its serpent blows up, and in that role I believe dire avengers serve that purpose better. Thats my opinion at least. Now I know Ill still be in the minority, but now you have seen why I think what I do. Any more thoughts?

The first point is a major flaw in your reasoning, you just disembarked the Guardians from a Serpent - you have cover. Since you usually try and operate in pairs of Serpents you can easily give yourself cover even without allowing for the ability to Disembark and Battle Focus into cover.

If you want to keep a scoring unit alive then it is going to ground in cover, so again the Guardians come out on top because the 4+ normal does nothing when you are going to ground to get 3+ cover all the time (and more bodies as well). They actually survive Serpents exploding (not that they do very often thanks to the Shield) rather well since you can tank the hits on the platform.

For 25pts more (less than 40% of the cost of the unit) you get twice the damage output (both from shooting an assault) that kind of efficiency is incredibly rare in 40k. Having now seen enough games with people playing various different Eldar builds and playing Eldar myself I can safely say that I actually fear Guardians in Serpents, Avengers are only deck chair units. For a long time the big issue with Mech Eldar was that the Serpents did all the heavy lifting, but once you pop them the contents are worthless, Guardians break that mold and have fixed the underlying issue that Eldar infantry have had - they didn't hit hard enough vs their durability to be worthwhile.

Not to mention, Guardians will have a heavy weapon platform which can be fired on the move, giving an advantage over marines and DA.

I just find the extra 6" range really handy when the serpent is popped, or they need to get out. Allows me to place some wounds I couldn't do otherwise.

I run 10 Avengers normally, which is a bit pricier than 10 Guardians + Platform but they can take a character with them (while the Guardians fill it up).

I like squads of 10 avengers too - But my craftworld is based on biel-tan so more aspects = good.

Both are good - but I see it as

Personal preference>maths.

They both do a job and guardians may be better than avengers offensively, but DA are cooler

I like the fact that both are useful in the new dex and its nice having an actual choice to make

Because of 'offense' from Serpents, and the unit being inside a lot of the time, I prefer the better 'defence' of the Avengers as they may need to hold an objective outside my deployment zone.

2 options here for my meq builds.

1) take 5 man squads of DAs just for the waveserpent

2) take 10 man gardain squads for actuall damage.

never 10 man DAs

I'm an Ulthwe player and I field guardians... but I wish they were Dire Avengers.

12" is simply too close. More often than not you will need to battle focus to get into range which means you are going to be charged next turn and it will end badly for you.
I see a lot of people talking about Wave Serpents but you really don't want to put a tank that durable to shooting in danger of getting krak grenaded just so you can get a volley of guardian fire off.

Avengers have the ability to deliver the same quality of fire but at a distance safe from all but fast melee units as well as the ability to shrug off bolter fire.

Guardians bring versatility with platforms and Warlocks but those get expensive fast and the Warlock will fail to cast 1 time in 4 and kill himself 1 cast in 18.

A better question is DA or Guardian Jetbikes. To which the answer is "Guardian Jetbikes every time" They have superior speed hitting power, durability and when you roll up Protect and get terminator bikers it's hilarious.

To me, its seems that guardian squads are too suicidal. If they get close enough to shoot, than they can, and will be assaulted. Even if they manage to get into cover the threat of an assault is just to much.
You don't have to worry about this with DAs as you can nearly always position yourself in a way that will get you out of rapid fire range after you use battle focus.
Also, from 12 to 18 inches, dire avengers dish out twice the fire most basic infantry, while guardians still are running forward to shoot and then die. Even if they are able to get into 5+ cover, 6 out of ten of them still die after they shoot. The guardians lack of durability is to much for me.

Depends on too many things to give you a blanket statement for an answer. They both have pros & cons:

Guardians get a heavy weapon and a warlock which makes them more killy, but also much more costly if you really give them what they need.

Avengers have loner range and cost less for the minimum squad size. They also come with a better save and the exarch can be a micro-badass if you play him right.

If it comes to it, I almost always go Dire Avengers. Like SM, they can benefit from a form of Combat Squads if you just buy them as groups of five (4 DA +1 Ex). Sometimes you can even get away without taking an Exarch at all, but that depends on your enemy's list.

The only exception to this general rule is Guardians on Jetbike. One of the most comically one-sided engagements I've ever been a part of wass 2 squads of 9 Guardians on jetbikes with a warlock, making it a total of 10 units per. While expensive, those bikes were nightmarish killing machines with 3 cannons and 6 catapults all backed up by a warlock.

I don't think it's fair to say one is better than the other. They are troops choices, but they perform very different roles. Guardians are more suited to sitting in cover with their heavy weapon platform, plinking rounds down range and scoring. It's great they have Battle Focus, but let's face it, they're not going to get away from anything if they're in range to shoot and scoot. Dire Avengers are great at running around the field, kiting something around with Battle Focus, and whittling it down little by little. When they do get caught, their overwatch and Counter-attack ease that pain as well.

I also side with the Dire Avengers. I tend to be a bit of an oddball, but I like a squad of 9-10 with an Exarch with the Shimmer Shield. Its expensive, but I like them because they can hold objectives well.

- Dire Avengers with a Shimmer Shield are the most durable scoring unit in the entire codex against a Heldrake. That 5++ can be the difference between holding the winning objective and getting BaleFlamed and Vector Striked off of it. Because of the 5++ and larger squad size, Dire Avengers are more survivable against Heldrakes than Guardian Jetbikes or Wraith Guard (because demonforge will shred them )

- Dire Avengers have a 4+ armour save. Its pretty middling, but at least you get saves against Orc Shootaz, Bolters, and Flamers. I am aware that both Dire Avengers and Guardians should be in cover where possible, but enemies don't always put the objectives in cover, and ignore cover weapons are more common than they have ever been, and ignore cover weapons are often ap5.

- Dire Avengers have Leadership 9. Good leadership is important, it can be the difference between passing and failing a panic test and abandoning an objective at the end of the game. I want my troops to be reliable, and when I put them on an objective I want them to stay there, and not run away.

- Least Important, Dire Avengers have 18 inch range. They are slightly less risky for both themselves and their wave serpent when they contribute their dakka to a firefight. They can also occassionally beat things in close combat with counter attack. Occassionly.

For pure fire power to cost ratio, Guardians are a lot better. They are a lot cheaper, shoot just as hard at close range and can be accompanied by a Warlock for some psychic support. BUT there is more to the game than Fire Power per Cost. Most games come down to objectives, and Dire Avengers are straight up better at holding them than Guardians for all the reasons listed above.