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.
Necroagogo wrote: Has anyone had any success with running a 20-strong Warrior squad (2 blasters) with a Haemy and WWP? No scatter DS and a lot of shooty dice (for a turn, anyway).
You can try it...But There are other units/builds that kill infantry better with the WWP. Unless you are just trying to Destroy a MASSIVE blob (green tide?) this would probably be an over kill. Just WWP a Gunboat and you will get Twin-link as well as a Cover save(jink).
I will probably use this against my guard friend for giggles , He has been running a guard blod recently.
Wyzilla wrote: Saying the Eldar won the War in Heaven is like saying a child won a fight with a murderer simply because after breaking into his house, shooting his mother and father through the head, the thug took off in a car instead of finishing off the kid.
Necroagogo wrote: Has anyone had any success with running a 20-strong Warrior squad (2 blasters) with a Haemy and WWP? No scatter DS and a lot of shooty dice (for a turn, anyway).
Beat a Necron army with this once.
Automatically Appended Next Post: OP- check out these lists. Kabal themed, all functional.
SarisKhan wrote: I find this to be the optimal setup for Kabalites:
10x Kabalite Warriors, 80 pts.
• 1 Raider, 90 pts. (DL, Splinter Racks, Night Shields)
10-20 TL Poison Shots in a 3+ Jinking mobile platform with a single AT weapon. I've got 4 of those in my army as the core.
I am happy that you seem to be getting mileage out of those, but they really are not optimal. Your talking about 170 points for 10 TL shots at 24" range when a venom puts out 12 shots at 36" for only 105 and the guys inside can camp an objective to boot. Biggest issue with gunboat raiders that I have besides the overpriced cost is the marriage you are forced with between the total expense. Think about it, not only are you dumping 170pts into mediocre damage that is one dimensional (anti-infantry) but in order for the unit to operate effectively, it needs to remain inside the raider.
THE best way to run DE kabalites is MSU. It's the only really efficient way to build in lasting durability on such delicate units. Make several small units and make your opponents waste shots on single cheap targets. As soon as you deploy those 170pt tissue paper troops your allowing your opponent to make easy decisions about target priority.
This isn't even considering that in order to maximize their potential you are forced to get them to within 12" of the enemy. This puts them into template range, grenade range and assault range. If you want to steal that objective your forced to get even closer, or dump the occupants earlier and throw away their ride.
I had mixed results in 6th using gunboats and that was before the crew could get hit with templates and maelstrom meant getting closer earlier.
I'm not saying you can't make it work, but the much more consistent build is spamming cheap 5 man units in venoms or raiders. Also don't forget that if your playing RSR you already forfeit Obsec, so why not just take empty or near empty venoms over gunboats? I mean an Archon gets you a venom, as well as his 10pt lahmaen before even using FA slots. Add chain snares for only 5pts and you can even tank shock units off objectives, meaning you still have a use after jinking.
Food for thought.
Warriors aren't meant to be there to deal tons of damage, they are your objective holders. A minimum squad in a Raider with Night Shields is 115. The same squad in a Venom costs similar points, but only has: 2 HP, normal jink, and less cover when the vehicle is wrecked. Remember that unless it blows up, the vehicles are a nice piece of cover. Raiders are big enough and Warriors are small enough that if positioned properly they block LoS to your Warriors; if you played correctly it was wrecked on top of an objective.
I put my killy squads in Venoms, forcing my opponent to either go after my OBSEC troops who are in much more resilient (for DE) transports, or down the Venoms and let me take objectives from them.
Necroagogo wrote: Has anyone had any success with running a 20-strong Warrior squad (2 blasters) with a Haemy and WWP? No scatter DS and a lot of shooty dice (for a turn, anyway).
You can try it...But There are other units/builds that kill infantry better with the WWP. Unless you are just trying to Destroy a MASSIVE blob (green tide?) this would probably be an over kill. Just WWP a Gunboat and you will get Twin-link as well as a Cover save(jink).
I will probably use this against my guard friend for giggles , He has been running a guard blod recently.
I don't like that everyone lands in a cluster, and you have to give up shooting to spread out.
Necroagogo wrote: Has anyone had any success with running a 20-strong Warrior squad (2 blasters) with a Haemy and WWP? No scatter DS and a lot of shooty dice (for a turn, anyway).
You can try it...But There are other units/builds that kill infantry better with the WWP. Unless you are just trying to Destroy a MASSIVE blob (green tide?) this would probably be an over kill. Just WWP a Gunboat and you will get Twin-link as well as a Cover save(jink).*
I will probably use this against my guard friend for giggles , He has been running a guard blod recently.
I don't like that everyone lands in a cluster, and you have to give up shooting to spread out.
It works out way better to run 20 guardians, better weapons and battle focus for only a point per model.
*Ick! Now you just made that raider team a minimum of 265pts for 10 TL splinter rifles.
SarisKhan wrote: I find this to be the optimal setup for Kabalites:
10x Kabalite Warriors, 80 pts.
• 1 Raider, 90 pts. (DL, Splinter Racks, Night Shields)
10-20 TL Poison Shots in a 3+ Jinking mobile platform with a single AT weapon. I've got 4 of those in my army as the core.
I am happy that you seem to be getting mileage out of those, but they really are not optimal. Your talking about 170 points for 10 TL shots at 24" range when a venom puts out 12 shots at 36" for only 105 and the guys inside can camp an objective to boot. Biggest issue with gunboat raiders that I have besides the overpriced cost is the marriage you are forced with between the total expense. Think about it, not only are you dumping 170pts into mediocre damage that is one dimensional (anti-infantry) but in order for the unit to operate effectively, it needs to remain inside the raider.
THE best way to run DE kabalites is MSU. It's the only really efficient way to build in lasting durability on such delicate units. Make several small units and make your opponents waste shots on single cheap targets. As soon as you deploy those 170pt tissue paper troops your allowing your opponent to make easy decisions about target priority.
This isn't even considering that in order to maximize their potential you are forced to get them to within 12" of the enemy. This puts them into template range, grenade range and assault range. If you want to steal that objective your forced to get even closer, or dump the occupants earlier and throw away their ride.
I had mixed results in 6th using gunboats and that was before the crew could get hit with templates and maelstrom meant getting closer earlier.
I'm not saying you can't make it work, but the much more consistent build is spamming cheap 5 man units in venoms or raiders. Also don't forget that if your playing RSR you already forfeit Obsec, so why not just take empty or near empty venoms over gunboats? I mean an Archon gets you a venom, as well as his 10pt lahmaen before even using FA slots. Add chain snares for only 5pts and you can even tank shock units off objectives, meaning you still have a use after jinking.
Food for thought.
Warriors aren't meant to be there to deal tons of damage, they are your objective holders. A minimum squad in a Raider with Night Shields is 115. The same squad in a Venom costs similar points, but only has: 2 HP, normal jink, and less cover when the vehicle is wrecked. Remember that unless it blows up, the vehicles are a nice piece of cover. Raiders are big enough and Warriors are small enough that if positioned properly they block LoS to your Warriors; if you played correctly it was wrecked on top of an objective.
I put my killy squads in Venoms, forcing my opponent to either go after my OBSEC troops who are in much more resilient (for DE) transports, or down the Venoms and let me take objectives from them.
I agree and to go further I am not a fan of leaving my squads in their transports 100% of the time like most other DE players. I see it all the time and I understand why they want to but it just doesn't make sense anymore in 7th. Most games I play at least, are maelstrom, that means there are 6 objectives and we are placing 3. Place those objectives in protected areas fellas! There is no reason why minimum warrior units should be waiting inside of a raider for it to possibly create cover IF it doesn't explode and kill them. Obviously I am not saying to disembark your army, but especially with venoms teams, I like to dump the boys on a peripheral objective keep the venom separate. It creates two targets.
I am also curious as to why everyone is always jinking their venoms, with 36" range I have no issues staying out of threat range or finding a ruin to shot from behind, venoms are so tiny, they are easily 25% obscured.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/05/07 15:22:33
My Exp with gun boat raiders has been great, So fielding them instead of just a bunch of venoms with small squads works much better. im sorry you had some bad luck with them, but so far the gunboats never let me down as a objective hunter/holder. It fits my list much better this way
Wyzilla wrote: Saying the Eldar won the War in Heaven is like saying a child won a fight with a murderer simply because after breaking into his house, shooting his mother and father through the head, the thug took off in a car instead of finishing off the kid.
This is exactly what I've begun doing. I started it a few months ago.
At 1750 I have:
Archon, WWP, Armour of Misery
3 medusae, venom
5 trueborn with 4 blasters in a venom
4 10 man squads in raiders with night shields and splinter racks
2 voidraven bombers
3 squads of 3 reaver jetbikes with a blaster and caltrops
Absolutely love it. The warrior squads are deadly as hell, the bombers, while maybe not THE most competitive choice, are gorgeous models and I'm proud to own and use them, and the reavers are fun as hell.
I'm really liking it! And my track record has been amazing.
Spellbound wrote: This is exactly what I've begun doing. I started it a few months ago.
At 1750 I have:
Archon, WWP, Armour of Misery
3 medusae, venom
5 trueborn with 4 blasters in a venom
4 10 man squads in raiders with night shields and splinter racks
2 voidraven bombers
3 squads of 3 reaver jetbikes with a blaster and caltrops
Absolutely love it. The warrior squads are deadly as hell, the bombers, while maybe not THE most competitive choice, are gorgeous models and I'm proud to own and use them, and the reavers are fun as hell.
I'm really liking it! And my track record has been amazing.
Cool list, I like it! my only question is why only 3 reavers per unit? i would drop a raider to buff tho raider squads a bit with more bodies, but that is personal opinion. Mainly is just why so small of units and do you have luck with them at that low of squad count? alot of people that say they are weak use them small like that but those like myself that love em us bigger numbers. Just wondering how they work for you
I would sign this contract but I already ate the potato
GENERATION 9: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your sig and add 1 to the number after generation. Consider it a social experiment.
Actually it's because they're strong that I use that squad size. It has several advantages.
1: Small footprint. I can hide them behind relatively small terrain pieces.
2: With larger squads, I had difficulty getting everyone in btb for hammer of wrath. In fact, in a squad of 6 with 2 caltrops, when positioned to make sure the caltrops didn't die first to overwatch, it made it actually VERY difficult to get them into btb for hammer of wrath in many instances. This size almost guarantees the ones I want get there.
3: They're usually enough for the job. I don't send my reavers into squads of 10 space marines. When I used squads of 6 and 9, I found that only a couple rolls not going my way against full marine squads and the like meant I lost the whole unit. I devastate marine squads with my warriors, and finish them off with the reavers - they're usually up to the task. Great for killing things like thunderfire cannons and back of the board medusas and such, too, or taking that last wound off a tomb spyder or tervigon - things I might not want to devote a whole squad of warriors to.
4: At a single model left, the unit is able to rally. That model is usually the guy with the blaster and the caltrops, meaning the unit maintains most of its lethality with only a single guy remaining. He's REALLY annoying at that point, and he's a potentially devastating threat to vehicles, objectives, linebreaker, or a S8 shot that instakills battlesuits and marine HQs. Easily able to solo small squads of remnants.
Aww I see! Thank you that was very informative. Ill have to give the small squads more of a shot. I ran them in low numbers once and the way my opponent tore them up had me thinking they were better served in bigger numbers. I have had good goes with two units of 9 and three units of 6 but my tactics a bit different, I get these groups and use them to intercept things that threaten my raiders at range, then i break em off and let others shoot up what they had been in cc with.
I would sign this contract but I already ate the potato
GENERATION 9: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your sig and add 1 to the number after generation. Consider it a social experiment.
Spellbound, can I ask why you opted for Blasters on your Reavers, rather than Heat Lances?
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
I tried the heat lance and just couldn't get the rolls. I had an opponent sit a ghost ark near some LOS blocking terrain, the perfect setup. With two squads of reavers doing jump shoot jump for four turns, I never got more than a hull point off the damn thing. Needing a 7 on 2d6 is apparently just too damn hard.
In the end I decided that the heat lance, while statistically better against something like a rhino or AV 10, was about the same against something AV12+. What pushed it over the edge for me was the fact that the Blaster, being S8, can wound most monstrous creatures on a 2+, wraith knights on a 4+, and hits the instant death threshold for marine characters. That's come in handy multiple times.
I really wanted the heat lance to work out due to AP1 and the fact that its melta range reached out to 9"! But the blaster allows me to stay out at 18" if I want to and still be effective. Keeps me out of assaults I don't want, and the reavers really don't want to be in them unless they're the ones charging.
Honestly I'd say that Heat Lances are really best on Scourges (unless you just really like Heat Lances), and that anything else should take Blasters.
AP2/AP1 got nerfed pretty hard with the 7th-edition damage table, so it's just not really viable to try and go for that explodes result, unless you can get at something really expensive (like a Knight). Heat Lances are cool and all, and Blasters are mathematically inferior at penetrating AV13/14 when compared to melta-range Heat Lances... but the Blasters work better on Reavers because the either want to be at arms length or right up in somebody's grill.
So yeah, Blasters. Generally a better pick, unless you decide to roll some kind of DS-scatter mitigation with Heat Lance Scourges, to meltacide them at something that's really expensive.
I had a game earlier and started Haywire on the board and Heat Lance off.
Haywire got shot off annoyingly but I managed to DS the Heat Lances next to a Whirlwind Scorpius and exploded it, taking out two SM with it. Made their points worth.
Haywire would have done well...I did play against a Knight. Only beat it through a lucky Talos Smash
Frozocrone wrote: I had a game earlier and started Haywire on the board and Heat Lance off.
Haywire got shot off annoyingly but I managed to DS the Heat Lances next to a Whirlwind Scorpius and exploded it, taking out two SM with it. Made their points worth.
Haywire would have done well...I did play against a Knight. Only beat it through a lucky Talos Smash
Hmm... I wonder what the mathematical difference between Haywire Blasters and Heat Lances is.
Let's do math for fun!
Haywire Blasters
Spoiler:
Assuming Scourges (the easiest/most cost effective HWB source), 4 weapons, 4 shots
4 shots x BS4 = 2.67 hits
This in turn becomes ~1.78 glancing hits, and ~0.45 penetrating hits. ~2.23 HPs removed
Not bad; definitely a great way to do a lot of damage to vehicles without regarding AV.
Heat Lances
Spoiler:
Scourges, again, due to mass Heat Lances even in MSU configuration
4 shots x BS4 = 2.67 hits
[due to the Lance rule on Heat Lances, AV12 results can be applied to AV12+ targets, such as Land Raiders, Leman Russ front/side armor, and similar]
Haywire Blasters are far more consistent in vehicle wrecking, but Heat Lances are no slouch. I think the main failing is that Heat Lances really need to be in that 9" melta range, and really heavily rely on penetrating hits in order to try and get an Explodes! result. I'm not going to try and run the numbers on the explodification potential of each, as truthfully I'm not quite sure how to check the results for that.
It is, however, the case that Heat Lances, due to their much higher pen rate when in Melta range are going to be a much better choice against an Imperial Knight, as that'll allow you to try and squeeze more HP loss out of Explodes! results.
In some ways, it's starting to feel like DE should generally skip Haywire Blasters. MCs are becoming ever more dominant, making Blasters more attractive, whilst Heat Lances have better potential against very expensive armored targets (like IKs).
Spellbound wrote: I tried the heat lance and just couldn't get the rolls. I had an opponent sit a ghost ark near some LOS blocking terrain, the perfect setup. With two squads of reavers doing jump shoot jump for four turns, I never got more than a hull point off the damn thing. Needing a 7 on 2d6 is apparently just too damn hard.
In the end I decided that the heat lance, while statistically better against something like a rhino or AV 10, was about the same against something AV12+. What pushed it over the edge for me was the fact that the Blaster, being S8, can wound most monstrous creatures on a 2+, wraith knights on a 4+, and hits the instant death threshold for marine characters. That's come in handy multiple times.
I really wanted the heat lance to work out due to AP1 and the fact that its melta range reached out to 9"! But the blaster allows me to stay out at 18" if I want to and still be effective. Keeps me out of assaults I don't want, and the reavers really don't want to be in them unless they're the ones charging.
Thanks for that explanation.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
Haywire Blasters are far more consistent in vehicle wrecking, but Heat Lances are no slouch. I think the main failing is that Heat Lances really need to be in that 9" melta range, and really heavily rely on penetrating hits in order to try and get an Explodes! result. I'm not going to try and run the numbers on the explodification potential of each, as truthfully I'm not quite sure how to check the results for that.
Per pen, you have a 1/3 chance of explodification, 50-50 if the target is open topped.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but not so many as to give a clear-cut winner. It's definitely an area where local meta and personal preference can send you down either path.
I like one squad of each.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/05/10 14:47:28
Oh I know about the 33% explodification per pen, I was thinking more of how to calculate the results given multiple AP1 pens... but maybe I'm just overthinking it.
But yeah, HWBs are reliable from 0-24", but Heat Lances really need to be at 9" in order to shine. Bringing both is definitely a good way to go in a vehicle-heavy meta... but I think that given how MCs are starting to come more and more to the fore (particularly in consideration to the Cult Mechanicus rumors, as well as previous high-end MCs), then Blasters/Heat Lances are probably going to end up becoming better choices.
Blasters are probably the best MC hunter of the three choices, whilst HWBs are ideal for anti-vehicle and Heat Lances are about in the middle with an edge against AV.
I'd say more that two squads is a good amount. In terms of armament, for vehicle-heavy metas HWBs+Heat Lances are better, whilst for MC-heavy metas, then Heat Lances+Blasters are better.
If you want something that you can use to keep the Scourges at arms length from their target at all times, then HWBs+Blasters would be a good choice, as well as being a TAC option of sorts since you can cover both anti-vehicel and anti-MC.
Of course, DE have anti-MC in spades anyways, so Blaster "spam" ends up being of little use unless you're facing 2+ armor MCs or GCs.
Whiskey144 wrote: Oh I know about the 33% explodification per pen, I was thinking more of how to calculate the results given multiple AP1 pens... but maybe I'm just overthinking it.
you need to use shots to kill, that is really the only stat the matters.
So assuming 3 hull points, 50% chance to pen, and 16% chance to glance and 33% chance to explode...
The first hit has a 16% chance to glance, a 33% chance to pen but do nothing, and a 16% chance to do 3 hull points(33% chance to do nothing)
average hull points done = 1
The second hit, or the hit on a 2 hull point vehicles(like after 1 hull point has been stripped) has a 16% chance to glance, a 33% chance to pen but do nothing, and a 16% chance to do 2 hull points(33% chance to do nothing)
average hull points done = .83
The third hit(hitting a vehcile with 1 hull point) treats explode just like glance really.
Average hull points done = .66
Now pens are better than glances. You can neuter a tank by taking away its main gun, imobilizing a transport, and exploding hurts troops inside and near by. Which is great.
But using that kind of math you can compare how much better pens are than glances
Dark Mechanicus and Renegade Iron Hand Dakka Blog
My Dark Mechanicus P&M Blog. Mostly Modeling as I paint very slowly. Lots of kitbashed conversions of marines and a few guard to make up a renegade Iron Hand chapter and Dark Mechanicus Allies. Bionics++
