Latest posts for the thread "Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?"

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

Hi guys, i've been thinking about taking the Eldar Wraithlord, nice model with some real conversion potential, plus a very good mobile gun platform or close combat nightmare. However i have concerns about how easy it is to kill, particularly with those nasty Lascannons, Krak Missiles etc. So my question is how to use a lord effectively and try and not lose 100+ points of model within the first few turns, my lord is a long range variant with the generic BL, EML and double flamer set up. If it's not worth using i'd just replace it with a Fire Prism.

Any and all help really appreciated

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Powerguy — GMT

In a foot based list they are usable, but they are very vulnerable to anti tank weaponry, for many lists its not that hard to blow them away in a single round. If you can find them cover then they are usable, but they will eat a Long Fang volley to the face and die otherwise.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

Your title question sucks and is virtually unanswerable. Anyone who gives you a direct answer is either being disingenuous or is not knowledgeable.

Nothing is that black and white, and you are hurting yourself by asking for a binary answer.

You need to give more information such as the army style you like to play, the setup of the unit and the purpose you hope it will fill.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

MekanobSamael — GMT

Well, you've got your work cut out for you. It's a really solid model, to be sure, but with no invulnerable save it needs to hang around behind a building. Also, they need to follow a warlock around to avoid shutting down at inconvenient moments. My advice would be, if at all possible, to have him set up shop somewhere a) in cover, b) with decent firing lanes, and c) within assaulting distance of contesting your home objective. This way he's a good, durable anti-tank weapons platform, who doubles as objective denial. The wraithlord is fairly solid against most melee troops that are packing weapons with strength lower than seven, and he can stand up to a few turns' worth of power fist swings unless your opponent rolls unreasonably well. With luck, he shoot a few enemy tanks and then tie up a scary enemy unit and prevent them from being a nuisance. Sanguard, Zerks, Gaunts, Tyranid Warriors, and Flawed Ones are all great units to throw a wraithlord at. Also, if you can nail an IC without an invulnerable save (you're S10, so you can ID him if you're very lucky), so much the better.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

It shoots more than a Fire Prism, dies more than a Fire Prism.

Find the right kind of list and they die less then a Fire Prism. They have to be in a foot list otherwise their range is not good enough, and they will become targets for all the AT fire(this will happen anyway). If you can get a walking screen for them (Wraithguard) the 4+ cover save is really good.

Best thing to do is play them in your current list(as a proxy) and see how you feel about them compared to Fire Prisms, and decide from there.

I love pathfinders, but they just aren't as good as I tried to convince myself they were. Make your choice based on playing them, rather than theory, because you cannot account for all the variables that will count for and against them.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

MekanobSamael — GMT

Wraithlords have one huge advantage over fire prisms--they will never die to one shot (at least, one that doesn't cause ID).

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

cromwest — GMT

I play mech marines and just speaking from an opponents point of view I have never had them last more than one turn (in range) against me. I don't know much about them other than there high toughness, have few wounds and no invul. When I ask if they are in range and the the answer is yes they die. I really don't know what there shooting is like but they are easy to kill unlike eldar tanks which give me fits some times. I think any really shooty army would probably be able to kill them as fast as me and I run a pretty basic competitive mech build. I don't know what they are good against but I can tell you what they are bad against and thats alot of long range anti tank.

Seriously from the point of view of some one who plays against them I would be a lot more worried about a bunch of eldar tanks vs wraithlords. I always seem to roll a 1 and 6 when I fire at the tanks, its got to be my least favorite mechanic in the entire game.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

And only in the most extreme circumstances will a Fireprism die to one shot. You have to hit, then pen, then roll damage. Taking a standard STR9 AP2 lascannon, let's look at the following:

If we ignore Cover saves, because both of them can get cover saves if positioned correctly but the cover can also be negated effectively if your opponent has a brain. Also let's assume opponent has already rolled to hit so just wound:

Since if you have WL there won't really be any other targets for this gun

Wraithlord T8 -> 3+ to wound from a str9 gun ap 2 no armor save

66% chance to wound. 4 - 5 shots to take down the WL considering number of wounds.

The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

glance can't blow up the FP unless it's ap1 so it will take 4 shots to pen, and then you still need to roll damage. On the damage chart you are looking at 33% chance to get a 5/6. So basic stats, you need 4 shots to get then pen, then you need another 3 pen's at least to destroy. 12.5% to kill it. Roughly 30% chance to rip off a weapon. It will still take more fire to render the FP useless, since it can still ram/tank shock without guns.

So you are right, FP "could" die to one shot, but it's really not going to happen.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Yuber — GMT

phyrephly wrote:And only in the most extreme circumstances will a Fireprism die to one shot. You have to hit, then pen, then roll damage. Taking a standard STR9 AP2 lascannon, let's look at the following:

If we ignore Cover saves, because both of them can get cover saves if positioned correctly but the cover can also be negated effectively if your opponent has a brain. Also let's assume opponent has already rolled to hit so just wound:

Since if you have WL there won't really be any other targets for this gun

Wraithlord T8 -> 3+ to wound from a str9 gun ap 2 no armor save

66% chance to wound. 4 - 5 shots to take down the WL considering number of wounds.

The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

glance can't blow up the FP unless it's ap1 so it will take 4 shots to pen, and then you still need to roll damage. On the damage chart you are looking at 33% chance to get a 5/6. So basic stats, you need 4 shots to get then pen, then you need another 3 pen's at least to destroy. 12.5% to kill it. Roughly 30% chance to rip off a weapon. It will still take more fire to render the FP useless, since it can still ram/tank shock without guns.

So you are right, FP "could" die to one shot, but it's really not going to happen.

It happens. But yes, Fireprisms are prolly more survivable than WLs.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

HawaiiMatt — GMT

phyrephly wrote:
The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

Interesting math. I always thought 9 + 4 was 13 and would pen the AV12 skimmer...
Shouldn't that be 50% pen (4, 5 or 6), and 16% to glance?

-Matt

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

HawaiiMatt wrote:
phyrephly wrote:
The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

Interesting math. I always thought 9 + 4 was 13 and would pen the AV12 skimmer...
Shouldn't that be 50% pen (4, 5 or 6), and 16% to glance?

-Matt

You are right /blush. I calculated incorrectly.

Reworking the numbers:

16% chance to glance means nothing to the Fire Prism then.

50% chance to pen, and 33% chance to destroy. 3 Shots Maximum will kill the FP which is roughly the same as the WL, but the FP's will be hidden at the back of the field and not walking up the field and still less points than a WL with BL/EML.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

phyrephly wrote:The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

glance can't blow up the FP unless it's ap1 so it will take 4 shots to pen, and then you still need to roll damage. On the damage chart you are looking at 33% chance to get a 5/6. So basic stats, you need 4 shots to get then pen, then you need another 3 pen's at least to destroy. 12.5% to kill it. Roughly 30% chance to rip off a weapon. It will still take more fire to render the FP useless, since it can still ram/tank shock without guns.

So you are right, FP "could" die to one shot, but it's really not going to happen.

Bad math is bad. Bad interpretation is bad.

First off, on a S9 vs AV 12 you have pens on 4-6, and glances on 3s.

Secondly, how did you come the the conclusion that there was a 33% chance to glance? Even based off your inability to subtract 9 from 12 you still were wrong. 1/6 was 16.6667 last time I checked. Then we have your chance to pen, which should be double since you know, you said there are 2 possible d6 results that can pen vs 1 possible result that can glance.

Every step in your math is wrong. Its pretty horrible to read.

Your conclusions based on bad math are even wrong. A 1/3 chance does not mean that you "need 3 shots to achieve the result". No matter how many identical shots you fire, the 1/3 is still 1/3. FYI, the Lascannon hit has a 1/2*1/3 = 1/6 chance to wreck or explode the Fireprism. Immobilize is 1/2 *1/6 + 1/6 *1/6 = 4/36 and weapon destroyed is the same at 4/36. So 4/36 to immobilize, 4/36 to weapon destroy, 1/6 to wreck or explode. The math is not as one-sided as you are implying.

As for the statement that an event with a 12.5% chance is not going to happen, that is just obtuse. Please stop giving out bad advice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

phyrephly wrote:
HawaiiMatt wrote:
phyrephly wrote:
The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

Interesting math. I always thought 9 + 4 was 13 and would pen the AV12 skimmer...
Shouldn't that be 50% pen (4, 5 or 6), and 16% to glance?

-Matt

You are right /blush. I calculated incorrectly.

Reworking the numbers:

16% chance to glance means nothing to the Fire Prism then.

50% chance to pen, and 33% chance to destroy. 3 Shots Maximum will kill the FP which is roughly the same as the WL, but the FP's will be hidden at the back of the field and not walking up the field and still less points than a WL with BL/EML.

Lol how did you get 33% chance to destroy? You have to multiply the chance of a pen by the chance that pen will destroy (the 1/2 * 1/3). Stop with your math, its bad.

edit: Inbefore him saying he was talking about 33% for a pen to destroy. The next sentence clearly shows his intentions as he said 3 shots maximum (a dumb conclusion anyways, but very indicative).

edit: I can also make math errors aparently...

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

Dracos wrote:

As for the statement that an event with a 12.5% chance is not going to happen, that is just obtuse. Please stop giving out bad advice.

I never said it would not happen, I said it didn't mean anything. The discussion is wether the WL is TOUGHER than the FirePrism, and a glance (unless with AP1) can't kill the Prism outright.

So using your math, how many glances will it take to down the Prism?

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

A value greater than 0 but less than or equal to infinity.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

phyrephly wrote:I never said it would not happen, I said it didn't mean anything.

phyrephly wrote:So you are right, FP "could" die to one shot, but it's really not going to happen.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
The problem is that you are looking for certainty when the dice are anything but. Probability is the opposite of certainty. Dice deal in probabilities, not certainties.

edit: To summarize, a lascannon has a 1/6 chance to destroy, 4/36 chance to immobilize and 4/36 chance to weapon destroy. All these results reduce the effectiveness of the FP. More than looking for which is "tougher to kill" (since that depends entirely on what you are shooting with), you should be looking for what fits best in the army you are playing. Both units have their place in the army.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

At no point did I make any statements about certainty. I have played both WL's and FP's alot, and without anything but experience the WL dies more often. But that's not just math, that includes all the other variables like power weapons and range.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

phyrephly wrote:So using your math, how many glances will it take to down the Prism?

This is your statement about certainty. The term "will" means that there is a point here you can shoot enough to guarantee it be taken down. Many of your statements are along similar lines.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Yuber — GMT

Dracos wrote:
phyrephly wrote:So using your math, how many glances will it take to down the Prism?

This is your statement about certainty. The term "will" means that there is a point here you can shoot enough to guarantee it be taken down. Many of your statements are along similar lines.

I'm sure you really know what he meant.

Manchu reminds you: Personal attacks are a violation of Dakka Rule Number One.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

But it's ok, I did make a mistake. This entire thread still ultimately comes down to the type of list you play not just the comparison between FP's and WL's.

In an earlier thread I pointed out that you can't compare red apples and green apples and in this case it is also very true. Their only similarity is the fact that the use the same FOG slot.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

scuddman — GMT

The wraithlord is actually very very survivable with smart play and some eldar synergy.

As a ranged, mobile gun platform, it should always have cover. On top of that, if you really need it to survive, a farseer or what not can fortune the cover/armor save.

The wraithlord also has the hidden benefit of being able to "hide" in hth.

Also, you need to kill every single wound to stop it from shooting.

Against a fire prism, any damaging shot short of immobilized turns off the prism's shooting.

The main drawback of wraithlords is that they are only viable in certain builds that support them. There are also more things than ever in the current 40k that rend/poison/autowound, etc etc.
As a result, the wraithlord isnt the powerhouse it was in 3rd.

Edit: Oh one VERY important mathhammer thing that lots of people fail at.

If something has a 1 in 3 chance to kill something, that does NOT mean that if you do that something 3 times you have a 100% chance of success.
Example: Say a lascannon has a 1 in 3 chance of killing some vehicle. Shooting the lascannon 3 times at the vehicle does NOT have a 100% chance of killing the vehicle.
Instead, you use something called the Binomial Distribution: <- although this is not perfectly accurate, because the Binomial distribution assumes independent sequences, and 40k weapon calculations are not independent.
Something with a 1/2 chance of killing something fired 2 times
Shot 1: 2 outcomes
Shot 2: 2 outcomes
The outcomes are: (Shot1hit, shot 2 hit), (shot 1 hit, shot 2 miss), (shot 1miss, shot 2 hit), (shot1 miss, shot 2 miss)
Your odds of getting at least one hit: 3/4 NOT 100%

Example: To calculate the psycannon's effectiveness at killing a single marine, with the psycannon's 3 shots. This is usually calculated as the chance of doing at least one unsaved wound.
This is notably different from shooting 3 strength 6 shots from different squads. This, because the dice rolls are NOT independent, is calculated as the chance of doing at least one unsaved wound with the first shot, + the chance of the 2nd shot doing an unsaved wound if the first shot misses, + the chance of the 3rd shot doing an unsaved wound if both the first and 2nd shot miss.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

phyrephly wrote:And only in the most extreme circumstances will a Fireprism die to one shot. You have to hit, then pen, then roll damage. Taking a standard STR9 AP2 lascannon, let's look at the following:

If we ignore Cover saves, because both of them can get cover saves if positioned correctly but the cover can also be negated effectively if your opponent has a brain. Also let's assume opponent has already rolled to hit so just wound:

Since if you have WL there won't really be any other targets for this gun

Wraithlord T8 -> 3+ to wound from a str9 gun ap 2 no armor save

66% chance to wound. 4 - 5 shots to take down the WL considering number of wounds.

The same gun, against the fire prism:

Str 9 vs 12 front armor: 4 to glance 5/6 to pen

33% chance to glance

25% chance to pen.

glance can't blow up the FP unless it's ap1 so it will take 4 shots to pen, and then you still need to roll damage. On the damage chart you are looking at 33% chance to get a 5/6. So basic stats, you need 4 shots to get then pen, then you need another 3 pen's at least to destroy. 12.5% to kill it. Roughly 30% chance to rip off a weapon. It will still take more fire to render the FP useless, since it can still ram/tank shock without guns.

So you are right, FP "could" die to one shot, but it's really not going to happen.

you forgot factor in Holofields

Automatically Appended Next Post:
i agree that every problem has it's solutions, the comparison to the WL and FP is range and endurance, the FP clearly out ranges the WL but slightly suffers for accuracy (with the whole blast rule and all) the WL on the other hand isn't subject to that rule (unless using EML plasma missile) but has a max of 48" range. BTW Dracos, the question doesn't suck and it clearly is answerable if there are people ANSWERING IT , and sue me: i'm new to the forums. The question is merely about how to field and use a WL in the best possible way according to experience.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

schadenfreude — GMT

Walking target stand, but a damn good one. The wraithlords killing power for it's point cost is very unimpressive. The wraithlords durability for it's points value is impressive. The hard choice eldar players have to make a choice between crazy durable and low firepower wraithlords are or crazy firepower low durability war walkers.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

MekanobSamael — GMT

So, to summarize,

BS*(1/2)*(1/3) = BS*16% = chance to kill a fire prism with a lascannon.
BS*((1/3)*(1/2)+(1/6)*(1/6)) = BS*19% = chance to kill a fire prism with a meltagun (this is outside of half range).

Chance to kill a wraithlord with a lascannon/meltagun: 0%.
Chance to stop it from shooting for a turn: 0%.
Chance to blow its main gun off: 0%.

It's either firing or dead. You've got a 66% chance of inflicting a wound with a lascannon assuming you hit (BS*50% with a meltagun), so yes, it should take 4-5 shots to kill it, not accounting for ballistic skill.

So, killing wriathlords is good and easy for armies that pack a ton of lascannons (i.e. Guard), but the advantage is decidedly with the wraithlord when considering weapons like meltaguns, which can have that nasty little 2d6 AP, +1 on the VDT against vehicles, but are wounding even less against a wraithlord. Most lance weapons are suffering from the same problem: relatively low strength and relatively low spamability.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Just Dave — GMT

Dracos wrote:Your title question sucks and is virtually unanswerable. Anyone who gives you a direct answer is either being disingenuous or is not knowledgeable.

Nothing is that black and white, and you are hurting yourself by asking for a binary answer.

You need to give more information such as the army style you like to play, the setup of the unit and the purpose you hope it will fill.

For one thing, that isn't at all constructive. For a second, you are ironically the one seeing things in black and white. Most people I expect - I'm one of them - will see the title and rather than seeing only 2 possible answers, will see someone asking for help with the Eldar Wraithlord.

Anyways, Wraithlords are these days an 'average' unit, whereas Fire Prisms are still a 'good' unit. As such, on paper at-least, fire prisms are superior. However, Wraithlords still have a role and a fair bit of capability.
As has been said, they absorb a fair bit of fire-power. Whilst they aren't as tough as we'd expect a WL to be, they still require multiple krak or lascannon shots to take down, whereas a Fire Prism can potentially be felled by just one. However, your Fire Prism is generally staying out of reach of the enemy if possible and is therefore less likely to recieve said Lascannon or Krak Missile shots. Similarly, they are less imposing than a Wraithlord, particularly to the inexperienced.

Also, Wraithlords are more flexible, being suited for hordes, anti-tank or close combat.

Ultimately I'd say Fireprisms are a better unit, however Wraithlords are still capable and if you don't want an uber-competitive list then Wraithlords can still work. My advice would be to ignore Dracos and the chip on his shoulder and to post the rest of your army list and typical meta to see how a Wraithlord would fit in over-all?

Bright Lance, Missile Launcher and 2 flamers is widely recognised as the most competitive build for a Wraithlord. So thats atleast a start!

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

I like how you say that one unit is good, the other is average, and then use your say-so to conclude that one is better.

I told him his question sucks because it does. I also told him how to fix it.

Your "advice" is lacking any kind of context, which anyone with good advice to offer would need. You even acknowledge that at the end of your post. You tell him to ignore me, but then tell him to do the same thing I told him to do: give us context for the advice he is looking for.

Finally your last phrase is the most accurate, denoting the most dynamic build for the Wraithlord. However, no one can say if that is an appropriate addition to his army without knowing what the army is. That's what I said at the start.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Yuber — GMT

I dont know anything about eldar, but IMHO, heavy support assets are supposed to be providing, well, heavy support.

From what Ive read with previous posts, Fire Prisms have more fire power compared to the WL. But people are forgetting that all you need to do against a fire prism is to penetrate it: Immaterial to whether its destroyed or not because a shaken result is enough to keep it from firing.

And ofcourse, a heavy support gun not firing, even for just 1 turn is huge, or even CRITICAL for some turns.

In this case is where I think the WL shines. It has to take 3 unsaved wounds to stop it from firing. Its resilience is amplified thanks to its ability to countercharge and the prevalance of cover.

WL are probably better when spammed, then again Im not an eldar player.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Just Dave — GMT

Dracos wrote:I like how you say that one unit is good, the other is average, and then use your say-so to conclude that one is better.

And? I stated that I'd class one as 'average' and one as 'good' and then I explained why I believe that.

I told him his question sucks because it does. I also told him how to fix it.

Your "advice" is lacking any kind of context, which anyone with good advice to offer would need. You even acknowledge that at the end of your post. You tell him to ignore me, but then tell him to do the same thing I told him to do: give us context for the advice he is looking for.

Finally your last phrase is the most accurate, denoting the most dynamic build for the Wraithlord. However, no one can say if that is an appropriate addition to his army without knowing what the army is. That's what I said at the start.

I accept, it wasn't the best question ever asked, however as you can see from the response, it still had the intended effect and received information on what's generally a better unit. Whereas you simply criticised the OP's post, I at-least tried to offer some advice.
I fully accept I partially did tell him the same thing you did, however I did it with less aggression and I still provided some advice none-the-less. Advice outside of context can still be helpful. Advice within context is MORE helpful...

Ultimately I did suggest the same thing as you did, however I also offered some advice none-the-less. I expect I was largely bitter about your unwarranted aggression.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

DarknessEternal — GMT

MekanobSamael wrote:So, to summarize,

BS*(1/2)*(1/3) = BS*16% = chance to kill a fire prism with a lascannon.
BS*((1/3)*(1/2)+(1/6)*(1/6)) = BS*19% = chance to kill a fire prism with a meltagun (this is outside of half range).

Chance to kill a wraithlord with a lascannon/meltagun: 0%.
Chance to stop it from shooting for a turn: 0%.
Chance to blow its main gun off: 0%.

It's either firing or dead. You've got a 66% chance of inflicting a wound with a lascannon assuming you hit (BS*50% with a meltagun), so yes, it should take 4-5 shots to kill it, not accounting for ballistic skill.

This is right on. Shaken and Stunned kills a Fire Prism for one turn. Weapon Destroyed kills it for the game. The odds of those occurring are much higher than the odds to kill a Wraithlord.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Warboss Imbad Ironskull — GMT

@Dracos: Considering that the OP may actually just be starting out and so is asking for advice on using Wraithlords in general so he can see if he wants to include one in his army build.

While it can be usefull to know if a unit will work effectivly or not based off of a players army composition that does not mean that advice can't be given on the best way to use them. Very rarely do topic titles encompass the entire meaning of a thread which is why the OP then went on to explain what he wanted to know.

Now you obviously understood what he was asking as did everyone else. The differance is everyone else actually did something usefull versus getting all huffy and saying "your question sucks so I'm not going to answer it, instead I'm going to try and attack any advice given" all the while not giving any yourself to provide why any advice you would give would be so much better then that given by anyone else.

The title of the thread draws attention to it (as is its purpose). This is followed by the OPs actual question which is perfectly reasonable and clear in its meaning. If you think that an answer can't be given without knowing his army list (because there is no possible way anyone could give general advice on effective ways to use a wraithlord) then ask him what his army composition is, and don't try and stop others from giving him advice.

And instead of telling others to stop giving the OP bad advice how bout you quit attacking people and actually give some advice yourself. You seem to think that no one is as knowledgable about the subject as you so grace us with your briliant methods of using a Wraithlord that shows why the things people have said are bad advice instead of just claiming that it's bad advice. If you won't (or can't) do that then that means you're just being a troll for your own reasons.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

So in what way was your post helping the OP there?

Until the OP responds with what kind of army he uses, all the speculation in the world isn't going to help him.

Can we say that in general, many foot lists use Wraithlords better than the Fireprism? Sure, but that's not true for all foot lists.

Can we say that in general, many Serpentspam lists use the Fireprism better? Sure thing.

Lets wait until the OP tells us what other units he likes to use, so we can help him with which choice best compliments that.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Warboss Imbad Ironskull — GMT

Nothing in my post helps the OP directly but at the same time my comments aren't directed at the OP they're directed at you because you are getting in the way of others helping him. So trying to justify what your posts with the fact that I haven't given any advice won't work.

You don't get it do you? What if he dosen't have an army and so is asking so he can determine what type of composition he wants his army to have. In that case what you call "speculation" is very helpfull to him.

And YOU are not included in the statement "so WE can help him" because you are doing no such thing which is exactly my point. You make it out to be that nothing said so far can be in any way usefull to the OP simply because his army composition isn't known, that's wrong because an armies over all composition is determined by the most effective way to use units together. In order to do that you have to know what works and what dosen't work which is exactly what the other posters are providing in this thread and you are just getting in the way of that.

And I doubt that anything you would have to say would be any differant then what has already being said except they aren't waisting the OPs time. So I'm going to give you some advice. Unless you are actually going quit assuming that the OP already has an army (I myself have no clue if he does or not) and could quiet possibly be asking for advice so he can determine the composition he wants and unless you're going to say something constructive and usefull to the OP don't waste his time or get in the way of others who are actually helping.

Note: that's how I'm helping is by trying to convince you not to waste everyone elses time when you're not even doing anything usefull.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

Lol. So far I've offered some help in terms of mathhammering out some numbers. I've added more to this thread than you have.

Your criticism to me could have been in a PM, so as to not waste people's time with your antics. But instead, you need to prove how tough you can be on the internet. Good for you. You stood up to the big meany that told the OP his question is unanswerable without context. Way to go.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Lord Rogukiel — GMT

Stop the flaming. Please. You sound like a bunch of 10 year olds fighting over who is right about a question on opinions, which are personal and therefore neither right, nor wrong.

Back on topic:

As mentioned before, one lucky shot may kill a vehicle of any kind, FP included. It definately takes more than one shot to down a wraithlord.

The main problem with wraithlords, is that most opponents will target them instantly before they can get in CC, cause once they do and with their chosen target, its going to hurt.

So it really depends on your list. Don't take WL in fast mech lists, they'll fall behind or be forced to babysit guardians (wraithsight is a big disadvantage in fast lists)
In footslogging list, take them if they fit into your plan and can positively contribute to the battle.

And just think of this, if your opponent spends an entire turn shooting with everything he has at a 130 point wraithlord, then he hasn't been shooting at anything else

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Warboss Imbad Ironskull — GMT

@Dracos: Oh yea because I really need to prove how tough I am to someone I will never even see. Yeah that's me 100%, yet you'll notice I'm not the one who is reverting to immature/uninformed comments, and notice I'm not the one attacking people in an unwaranted aggressive manner.

The fact is you have not helped the OP, you have not answered his question (which if it was unanswerable others woulden't have answered it). So you helped (if you can all it that) with a math error that someone else would have caught and would have handled in a proper manner. All you have done is get in the way of those who are helping him and been aggressive in the process. Nothing you have done has been of any real use to the thread.

You think it can't be answered unless the OP says what else he has or is wanting to take. Fine, think that no one is making you post in the thread. But don't get in the way of others who are actually being of use.

It's obvious you are going to just keep getting in the way so I'm going to quit trying to convince you to stay out of a situation in which you aren't doing anything.

To everyone else I apologise that this has gotten off track. Hopefully it will get back on track and deffinitly will if Dracos is ignored which he should be.

@ Lord Rogukiel: I apologise if telling someone they aren't doing any good makes me sound like a 10 year old

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Dracos — GMT

So you're done with the flame posts then?

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Just Dave — GMT

*climbs up onto moral high-ground*

Are you both done with the flame posts then?

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

@OP, have you managed to decide how you feel about the WraithLord yet?

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

here is my list

2500 point
----------------HQ--------------------------------------------------------------

Eldrad Ulthran

Farseer
Runes of Witnessing
Spirit Stones
Fortune
Doom
Mind War
Jetbike

Jetbike Warlock Bodyguard (5)
Enhance
Embolden
Destructor (3)
Singing Spear

------------------------------------Troops------------------------------------------------------
Dire Avengers (10)
Exarch with Diresword and Shuriken Pistol
Defend
Bladestorm

Guardians Jetbike Squadron (3)

Guardians (10)
Warlock
Conceal
Bright Lance

-------------------------------------Elites----------------------------------------------------------
Howling Banshees (10)
Exarch with Executioner
Acrobatic
War Shout

Harlequin Troupe (10)
Troupe Master with Power Weapon and Fusion Pistol
Shadowseer
Death Jester
Harlequin’s Kisses (8)
Fusion Pistol

Fire Dragons (5)

------------------------------------Transport-------------------------------------------------------
Wave Serpent
Twin – linked Bright Lances
Sprit Stones

Wave Serpent
Twin – linked Eldar Missile Launchers
Sprit Stones

¬------------------------------------Heavy Support----------------------------------------------
Fire Prism/ Night spinner *2
Holofields
Spirit Stones

Wraithlord
Bright lance
Eldar Missile Launcher
Flamers – Free (2)

Grand Total – 2500

Replace Farseer with Avatar of Khiane or Yriel Prince of Iyanden

Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ Dracos and Just Dave: i really appreciate your help guys but i'd rather the models fighting rather than you two so both of you please be nice (not matter how tempting it is)

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

wuestenfux — GMT

Against the new DE, it is more a liability. Poisoned weapons kill it with ease.
However, against other armies like SM it still can be a brick.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

yeah... how would one deal with poisoned weps? my friend runs Nids and the toxin sacs could be an issue

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Gavin Thorne — GMT

Cover save providing screening unit? I'm pretty sure that the plethora of DE poisoned weapons are going to put MC's in general in a spot of hurt. In your 2500 list, I'd run 2 prisms and 1 spinner, assuming you have them, or even 3 prisms. With stones and fields, their survivability is pretty top notch and they can dish out respectable damage firing individually. I don't think the WL really has a place in your list other than to absorb fire, really. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I think the 155 points you're spending can be better spent elsewhere.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Brother Bartius — GMT

I won't critique your list as there's other places to get advice on it however I've never managed to make a mix of foot and mech work for Eldar.

I run 2 wraithlords in a footslogging list that also includes the Avatar and 3 War Walkers.

Generally if you ram the fortuned Avatar down your oponents thoat then they usually concentrate their high strength weaponry on him as he's a scarier prospect than the 2 wraithlords.

As others have said in this thread multiples of them work better than one. They do provide some good ranged anti tank firepower if you equip them with BL and EML.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Lord Rogukiel — GMT

Game wise the tactics above are pretty sound.

Background wise, just say its not alive anyway, so what's poison going to do to psychoplastic?

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

ShadowZetki — GMT

Wraithlords are difficult to use in a footslogging list but think of it like this, better they get shot at than the rest of your army right? They are pretty damn hard to kill IMO and have 3 wounds for under 150points? That is definately a steal, who cares if it has no ++ save atleast it has a 3+ It can be destructive but mostly I'd use it as a freaking huge meatshield, 1 or 2 of them can last 2-3 turns easy maybe 4+ turns main thing is I think with a footslogging list such as yours keeping your infantry and supporting ranged vehicles is a higher priority than worrying about if the wraithlord even gets into CC still as a meatshield it makes its points back with interest by absorbing firepower rather than something you should care about and it can buy you some time by simply distracting your enemy

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

Thats a fair comment, but then the question is anti infantry or anti tank?

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

ShadowZetki — GMT

Black Dragon Ninja wrote:Thats a fair comment, but then the question is anti infantry or anti tank?

I'd say for the sake on not relying on something that is going to be used as a meatshield anti-infantry, hell give it the sword if you want both but leave the shooting as anti-infantry so you can walk him up and shoot.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

well if i go anti infantry i was thinking scatter laser and starcannon meaning i've got 6 S6 shots at 36", admittedly the range isn't much (for a Heavy Support choice), but it's not bad in the S department. BTW with the extra 15 points, what should i get for them?

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

stompydakka — GMT

Ghaz+wraithlord=ghaz dinner O.o

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

IG88 — GMT

Fire Prism is no where = to a wraith lord

Good opponents will shake and move when firing at prism's, you can't do that to a wraith lord.
A wraith lord can take a beating, then still move, shoot and fight or at least influence an area of the battle field, I find the prism to be highly overrated, the cannon isn't great at killing tanks and is ok at killing infantry. The wraith lord is just as good at killing tanks at range, killing infantry with dual flamers then can beat whats left with st 10 attacks. Fire prisms only have a little speed on the lord, thats about it. This is coming from an experienced general, not a math-hammering forum junky.

Also, long fangs do not own wraith lords considering it takes at least 10 missiles to reliably kill one and thats when one is not in cover, double that for one that is. Hardly a case of owning if you ask me.

Bottom line is an aggressive wraith lord will always have more influence on a game than a pop shooting grav tank or a wraith lord that tries to sit back all day and not get stuck in. To get the most out of the lord you need to advance or defend in an aggressive manner and use all of its assets, the big gun the flamers and the strength 10 attacks.

and just like anything else spamming magnifies effectiveness, 1 wraith lord is a pain that can be dealt with, dealing with 3 wraith lords is hard if not impossible for a lot of lists.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Yuber — GMT

IG88 wrote:

Fire Prism is no where = to a wraith lord

Good opponents will shake and move when firing at prism's, you can't do that to a wraith lord.
A wraith lord can take a beating, then still move, shoot and fight or at least influence an area of the battle field, I find the prism to be highly overrated, the cannon isn't great at killing tanks and is ok at killing infantry. The wraith lord is just as good at killing tanks at range, killing infantry with dual flamers then can beat whats left with st 10 attacks. Fire prisms only have a little speed on the lord, thats about it. This is coming from an experienced general, not a math-hammering forum junky.

Also, long fangs do not own wraith lords considering it takes at least 10 missiles to reliably kill one and thats when one is not in cover, double that for one that is. Hardly a case of owning if you ask me.

Bottom line is an aggressive wraith lord will always have more influence on a game than a pop shooting grav tank or a wraith lord that tries to sit back all day and not get stuck in. To get the most out of the lord you need to advance or defend in an aggressive manner and use all of its assets, the big gun the flamers and the strength 10 attacks.

and just like anything else spamming magnifies effectiveness, 1 wraith lord is a pain that can be dealt with, dealing with 3 wraith lords is hard if not impossible for a lot of lists.

OMG. So true.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

isn't the entire point of a FP to be long range fire support, it isn't supposed to be in the thick of the fighting (although i'll admit that doesn't alway work) but still WL are mid range fighters while FP's are supposed to blow holes in the opposing army.

BTW how is the FP over rated? it's got the best non Ordinance gun in the game (excluding the Railgun...)

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

phyrephly — GMT

Black Dragon Ninja wrote:isn't the entire point of a FP to be long range fire support, it isn't supposed to be in the thick of the fighting (although i'll admit that doesn't alway work) but still WL are mid range fighters while FP's are supposed to blow holes in the opposing army.

BTW how is the FP over rated? it's got the best non Ordinance gun in the game (excluding the Railgun...)

I posted earlier in this thread, the biggest problem is that you are attempting to compare Green Apples and Red Apples. They SEEM the same but they really aren't.

Neither one of these two units will be in the same competitive list. In isolation, or say a 1v1 game I would rather have a WraithLord than a Fire Prism. But in terms of competitive build and cohenrency with other units I would rather take 2 - 3 fire prisms.

I have 3 prisms in my list, and in a game I played last week against necrons, my best two units were FirePrisms and FireDragons. Having a STR7 AP2 Large Blast, sure hurts ALOT of the Necron units and eliminated WBB. Even the STR6 AP3 Large Blast from 2 Prisms wrechs a MEQ's day.

I have seen a Wraithlord survive combat with a MEQ squad and come out victorius on the other end (after 3 turns). But in terms of sheer killing power, nothing touches the Prism.

And the question is destructive monstrosity or walking target stand? The answer is both. WraithLords kick @ss in every role you give them, but when you are running wraithlords, there are bound to be no other targets for your opponents AT weapons. They will be eating lots of big fire, and maybe that's their role.

I just prefer the versatility (tank shock, ramming and big guns) that is provided by the FirePrism.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Yuber — GMT

Black Dragon Ninja wrote:isn't the entire point of a FP to be long range fire support, it isn't supposed to be in the thick of the fighting (although i'll admit that doesn't alway work) but still WL are mid range fighters while FP's are supposed to blow holes in the opposing army.

BTW how is the FP over rated? it's got the best non Ordinance gun in the game (excluding the Railgun...)

My friend. If it can be shot, it's in the thick of the fighting.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

ShadowZetki — GMT

Yeah prisims are by far a better choice to ruin someones day, but like I said if you do take a wraith lord that thing will soakup so much firepower it isnt even funny, thus diverting attention from your militia whom have 12-18inch guns and paper aromor (excluding the guardian jetbikes and paper armor does not apply to dire avengers)

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

ramongoroth — GMT

If you can get wraithlords cover then they are a very sturdy unit. Prisms I've found a bit unreliable as an anti-tank platform. I do like their cheaper cost though. To me it depends on what the rest of your list looks like. If you have lots of skimmers then prisms compliment them well. If you have a mixed army then wraithlords perform their role as ranged anti vehicle and close combat support for your troops. Prisms do give you a better shot against blessed hull raiders and monoliths if those are around in your area.

Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

stealth992 — GMT

I play chaos pretty much all assault. When my buddy plays eldar he puts Kaine and Wraithlord in front of his army and I gotta assault through both of them. It's a real pain in the ass, then he guns me down afterwords. Wraithlord is pretty good to run straight up to a landraider and go boo!

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

Black Dragon Ninja — GMT

well, i've been told that i should either go: CC WL, long range Anti infantry or long range anti tank, the current model is kinda doing the splits between infantry and tank specs and i'm wondering what the better is with my army list in mind (see above)

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

lonedrow02 — GMT

necro post
What works best for me is to put 2 WLs in cover with my battery of D-Cannons and have them surround the hidden cannons. Equip them with EMLs and you have not only an excellent guardian for your D-cannons but also anti-tank. Between the coversave, armor save, and 3 wounds these guys will be in for at least 2-3 turns of firepower. ONLY 115 pts a model!!!
hiding them with your d-cannon battery is essential to combat deep strikers. pop transports with the WLs then have your d-cannon annihilate what comes out of it.

Re:Eldar Wraithlord: destructive monstrosity? or a walking target stand?

dayve110 — GMT

I ran a wraithlord in 1500 point tournament yesterday.
he survived 2/3 games. It may be important to note i also took 2 war walkers and they survived all 3 games.

The wraithlord set-up i chose was scatter laser shurican cannon and the walkers were all scatters. The wraithlord was 120 points, as were the 2 walkers.
I found the walkers to be low priority once my opponents noticed my rolling, 6/16 hits is not a big threat. The wraithlord however took the brunt of enemy shooting but most of the time i was able to get him into cover, or provide cover with careful placement of wave serpents. Considering every shot that was fired at him could have wrecked one of my transports he earnt his place quite easily.

In the first game he managed to come on behind a vindicator (wierd deployment, thats battle missions for you) with his 7 S6 shots he managed to wreck it, he then charged into a unit of CSM and ended up running them down along with their attached sorcerer (which is why you an icon of chaos glory over any of the others) After that he crushed an obliterator into the ground and spend the rest of the game stuck in combat with some death guard. In that game he did exceptionally well, and got very lucky as he did take 6 lascannons to the face and survive.

The second game was where cover proved very important, facing off against 3 obliterators it was a difficult choice for my opponent, shoot at the lord in cover? or the walkers in cover? The lord would be slightly harder to wound, the walkers might only end up being shaken. In the end the opponent gave up and concentrated on my serpents and the tasty morsels held within.

For the third game the lord again took fire, cover proving very usefull against the lascannons coming his way. The only time he was out of cover was to charge a grey hunter unit in order to assasinate a psyker that was disrupting my own psykers. After that the power fist in the unit managed to being him down.

So all in all... just going by those games alone, the wraithlord can be a destructive monstrosity if he gets in the right place, hard to do when he is so slow but if you group together and the enemy comes to you he is a decent counter attack unit, even if kitted out with 2 guns and no sword. Sending him against big units however means he'll likely be there for the rest of the game, or get brought down by power fists. The only reason i see in charging units is to wipe out a small unit, stop a unit claiming an objective by contesting or pulling them away from it with defenders react or charging in with the specific intention of killing a charecter. As for a firebase... use him to compliment the rest of your force. If he is kitted out for anti-tank while the rest or force is anti-infantry then he WILL become a big target and go down quickly, same goes vice versa, depending on your opponets force. If however he is kitted out to simply add to your firepower (scatter lasers on the lord, serpents and walkers) then he wonts stand out as a threat as much and may simply be ignored in favor of something easier to kill.

When it comes to cover saves, i find them essential, even when theres little cover on the board he can sit behind serpent or falcon or prism and still manage to see over the top, or angle him slightly to the side to gain LoS over the curve of the hull. Plus, i WANT my lord to be shot at. He can take at least 3 shots that could kill 3 of my vehicles. One lucky shot on a serpent and its gone, that same lucky shot on a wraithlord and its still standing with 2 wounds.