# Regarding DE Warriors and Their Load-Outs



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

For an army with Warriors being the bulk, no Wyches, but eventually Wracks.

Splinter Cannon or Dark Lance?

Venom or Raider?

Sybarite wargear?

What do you think and why?

Thanks!


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

if your going for a warrior heavy army?

it depends, but most agree, Venom w/ 2 Cannons + blaster in the warrior squad for your troops.

4 blaster trueborn in a venom for elite.


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

This is similar to what I have heard, I have to ask though. What are the advantages to having 5 guys in a Venom as oppose to 10 guys in a Raider?


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

5 men in venom = (12 poison shots from venom at 36") 8 poison shots from squad (in rapid fire range (12") and 1 18" dark light shot.

10 men in a raider = 4 shots from squad due to adding a cannon and 18 shots from the rest in rapid fire range (a total of 22 shots within 12 inches) and the darklance from the raider.

if you look at it purely in this light, the raider seems abit better, having 2 more shots, but you lose 8 shots at 36" range, and your paying more points for the raider squad over the Venom squad.

the raider will be downed as fast as the venom, and the squads themselves inside the transports tend to be very squishy as they are, making them far less useful once their transport is shot down. Thus it is better to have smaller squads in more transports to give yourself more firepower at long range and effectively making your army more durable in the process.


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

Those are all valid points that I will have to consider. Thanks for that!

My only concerns would be that with the loss of 2 Dark Light weapons by choosing the Venom set up, I would be low on my anti-tank. But I suppose that is what Ravagers and Trueborn squads are for.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

how many points are you playing?

and are you sure you dont want any Wytch squads? I usually keep one or two as "counter assault" and "anti tank" units (Haywire nades are awsome)


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

Well so far I have been thinking in the general sense. I just got my first box of Kabalite's and I am hesitant to assemble them before I know what I'm doing.

I will probably aim for 1,500 - 2,000 before I start playing any games.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

well you will need to get more blasters from a bits store regardless, never enough blasters (I hate GW for that)

I tend to play between 1500 and 2k myself. DE do better in smaller games, in larger games, our power tends to get reduced quite abit...

http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=93022

here is my current 1500 list I enjoy, I have 7 blasters 10 dark lances and 2 wytch squads with haywires, usually turns out to be more then enough anti tank for me.


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

Awesome thanks! Now just so that I have something to compare with when I sit down I think it out, if I were to do a Raider set up, what would be the best load out for the Warriors?


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

well, I really would say its a bad choice. warriors in raiders just cost too much, they are almost 200 points for the squad, if you notice in my list, the venom squads are only 125


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

And luckily it doesn't take too much work to get 3 Blasters out of each Warrior box.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

Styro-J said:


> And luckily it doesn't take too much work to get 3 Blasters out of each Warrior box.


where do you get the third from? the pistol?


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

Yes. You have the Blaster, the trimmed down Dark Lance, and then splicing the Blast Pistol and a rifle or something.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

the blaster, the shredder can be modded to be a "unique" blaster (im using those for my trueborn) and I didnt think about the dark lance with the blast pistol added on.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

KaosHerald said:


> Awesome thanks! Now just so that I have something to compare with when I sit down I think it out, if I were to do a Raider set up, what would be the best load out for the Warriors?


The way I tend to run my kabalites in raiders is 10 strong, with a blaster and a cannon. They clock in at a decent 175 points. This way the units are all very flexible and can deal with a lot of situations.
Also, no upgrades on the raiders, they cost alot of points already.



KhainiteAssassin said:


> well, I really would say its a bad choice. warriors in raiders just cost too much, they are almost 200 points for the squad, if you notice in my list, the venom squads are only 125


I have to disagree with this. Although it may be easier to just place as many units on the board (and often very effective) it does not make it inherently better. 
Because, while you save 50 points per flying motorhome, gain a nice range advantage over footsloggers and more redundancy your units also tend to die horrible, useless deaths seeing as it only takes a stiff breeze to kill or incapacitate 5 man warrior squads. 

When bought in units of 10 they can still pose quite a threat once they their cruise is forcefully retired and the raiders provide a lot of extra long ranged antitank support, making you less reliant on the trueborn units, which also costs about the same as 10 guys in a raider.
Besides, people will try to kill the trueborn first (along with the ravagers) so spreading out your antitank firepower actually provides you with a not-so-apparent redundancy.

Not to forget, raiders are also better at providing mobile cover for your ravagers than venoms. Just so you know.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> I have to disagree with this. Although it may be easier to just place as many units on the board (and often very effective) it does not make it inherently better.
> Because, while you save 50 points per flying motorhome, gain a nice range advantage over footsloggers and more redundancy your units also tend to die horrible, useless deaths seeing as it only takes a stiff breeze to kill or incapacitate 5 man warrior squads.
> 
> When bought in units of 10 they can still pose quite a threat once they their cruise is forcefully retired and the raiders provide a lot of extra long ranged antitank support, making you less reliant on the trueborn units, which also costs about the same as 10 guys in a raider.
> ...


yes, if the raider gets blown up, the units will not be completely wiped out, but they are still next to useless outside of a vehicle, if they get charged they will most certainly die with anything. the extra long ranged AT shot from the raider is only necessary if you dont have the AT in other items, mainly, Ravagers, and atleast 1 Wytch squad with HWG.

Raiders provide mobile cover for ravagers a tiny bit easier, but its not impossible to provide cover to ravagers with terrain and Venoms still, so the point of it being easier is moot.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> yes, if the raider gets blown up, the units will not be completely wiped out, but they are still next to useless outside of a vehicle, if they get charged they will most certainly die with anything. the extra long ranged AT shot from the raider is only necessary if you dont have the AT in other items, mainly, Ravagers, and atleast 1 Wytch squad with HWG.
> 
> Raiders provide mobile cover for ravagers a tiny bit easier, but its not impossible to provide cover to ravagers with terrain and Venoms still, so the point of it being easier is moot.


Not really no. 10 man squads are still quite lethal, especially when there is cover around. Even better, they tend to rather easily pick up those lovely PfP tokens, making them, still quite useful outside their pimpmobiles.

Seeing as the only long antitank weapons comes from ravagers, the argument that the raiders lances are unecessary is silly. What else are you bringing with long range? Trueborn? The range on those is certainly not very long (only 24 if they are to stay in their gunboat. Which is almost always safest. And only 32 when they jump out of their gunboat, which leaves them very exposed. And doesn't compete with the 48 range from ravagers and raiders) and bringing up HWG doesn't really make sense. 

Also, in cover or not, ravagers still get blown to scrap. If not, your opponent is a moron. Having extra lances doesn't hurt. Of course, you lose long ranged anti-infantry with this setup, but it's not like hordes are your biggest concern when playing DE.
All I'm saying is to not dismiss the usefulness of raidersquads. They are too good for that. The 5th ed. DE codex actually provides you with a lot of options other than "lol, venomspam". 
On the point of mobile cover, yeah it's not really much of a bonus. Venomspan gives you more flyer to do it with which produces the same result. The difference is simply between using one, more expensive flyer or two less so.


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

1. thats a good one. if your units are within rapid fire range (what you need to really do damage) your 10 man squad is more then likely going to be charged and slaughtered.

the PFP tokens after the first do almost nothing for warriors. and if you dont get that token early (before they take a huge amount of casualties) the FNP does not save them that huge amount.

Assuming you know how to play, you would know that on a standard board (4'x6'), that 18" anti tank weapons can be more then enough. its not about long range unless your trying to out range your enemy. and since our weapons are 36" not 48" range, we will almost always be within range of most of the enemy AT weaponry anyway.

if the raider squads work for you, thats good for you, but they are not that good. the lack of durability on the vehicles from their low armor value and being open topped, means that every extra point you spend on that Raider squad, can mean one less vehicle target for your opponent, which means that they can effectively wipe out your forces that much easier once your vehicles are gone.

also: correctly positioned, 1 venom can give mobile cover to 1 ravager, its smaller but you must remember, you only need to cover half of the vehicle to give it cover, so if you have the venom directly infront of the ravager, oh look, cover from the enemies infront. use terrain aswell to your advantage etc.

1 raider squad is only slightly better for anti vehicle, and worse at anti infantry (due to the lack of range on rapid fire splinter rifles) but costs quite a fair bit more in points, which can, as Ive said before, mean the difference in how many vehicles you have.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

KhainiteAssassin said:


> 1. thats a good one. if your units are within rapid fire range (what you need to really do damage) your 10 man squad is more then likely going to be charged and slaughtered.
> By what? Zerks? That's right, everybody and their mother only employs CC specialists and only those. Also, noboby dies from being rapidfired by splinter guns and I am stupid enough to never avoid getting charged by terminators, zerks or whatever the hell.
> 
> the PFP tokens after the first do almost nothing for warriors. and if you dont get that token early (before they take a huge amount of casualties) the FNP does not save them that huge amount.
> ...


Which I agreed with. But you forget to mention a rather large increase in flexibillity once downed. Which they will be if our enemies likes to spam strenght 6+ weapons (Mechguard, SW, BA Razorspam, GK). You know, all the netlists.
My point is that raider rush worked very well for me (and many others) with the old codex. Saying that it isn't good is outright wrong when all that has changed is a slight increase in cost with a major increase in versatility. And of course, having options for other strategies than raider rush.
Really, all I'm conveying is, that if the OP have raiders, he should use them. Telling him to buy a bunch of venoms is kinda lame when he doesn't have to. We aren't discussing CSM here. :grin:


----------



## Majere613 (Oct 14, 2008)

The thing I find with Raiders vs Venoms is that they support two very different DE playstyles. If you're going mostly Venoms, the chances are you plan to get in close very fast where your blasters will be effective, and that you're going to use small, elite units like Incubi and Bladebrides for your CC punch.

If, on the other hand, you go Raiders (like I have) then you're generally going to be hanging back picking off high-value targets with Dark Lances and Disintegrators, before moving in to finish off the survivors with rapid-firing splinters and/or a mass Wych assault. I generally run two Lance Ravagers and one with Disintegrators, and between them and a shedload of Raiders there's enough firepower to deal with most threats- it's also very good against Razorspam, since you have plenty of seperate AT shots to take out those transports.

Both approaches are fine when used with intelligence. I've seen attempts to swarm Razorspam Space Wolves with Venoms that ended with the DE practically tabling themselves in two turns, and attempts to hang back that went badly wrong with lots of dazed Warriors and Wyches sat at the wrong end of the board being shot with Manticores. I've also seen Wolves picked to bits by stand-off and 'Nids murdered by rapid assault. Just pick the transport for your strategy and learn how it works, and all should be well.

Of course, there's also the Sliscus Splinterbus to consider


----------



## KhainiteAssassin (Mar 18, 2009)

rebuttles to your yellow text:

yes, because only CC specialists charge right? ill lay it out for you nice and simple: 1 str 3 attack per model at I5 is not going to keep a Tac squad of marines from winning combat thanks to T3 and the 5+ armor save. the only thing you do not need to worry about charging you will probably be able to Decimate warriors in one volley of their weapons, thanks to the low T and low save.

combined shooting, a tactic I use as DE, open the vehicle then use anti infantry shots to decimate whats left of the squad that just got kicked out of their transport. I dont know how godly your saves are, but when I have run a squad of 10 warriors, if the vehicle explodes (not hard as its on a 5+ thanks to open topped) I have easily lost at the minimum 4 models, thats almost half of the unit just from the vehicle being blown up, then add the enemy shooting the squad more then likely right after with some AI weaponry probably taking them down to a very small number as it is. Thus, you need to get that FNP BEFORE the vehicle goes boom, since it will do a fair number on your units, let alone what will happen once your out in the open. (which can be hard depending on the turn number)

ok I play against IG alot (one of my best friends) and he dominates with range, and I have still had my blasters down his throat fairly early, you dont need your opponent deployed down the middle in order to use them. you have to remember, its effectively a 24" range for the blasters in venoms after movement, but your also not limited to just that 6" move if your not intending on shooting, so turbo boosting closer if your fighting a ranged mech force that requires ALL your guns to be able to hit units in the back (IE: Razorspam lists that sit at the back using their 48" range abuse) otherwise, you use your ravagers (and in my case 2 Raiders with Wytches in them) to deal with those vehicles that may take priority in the back and let your venoms deal with the approaching DT vehicles, which will almost certainly be in range even if you dont move.

yes, I will concede the point that venom spam lists do have that issue with the FoC in bigger games, but that does not really happen to a well built list until about 2000+ points (2500 is where it gets really bad for me) and once you hit 2500, the BRB even states using multiple FoC's should be discussed.

one must make due with what one has on hand. thats no secret, but I use some spare points I save from raiders to buy FF's for the ravagers, since its very hard to keep them completely in cover while allowing them to unload into enemy vehicles as it is due to enemy mobility as it is.

you are making one assumption that is incorrect though, I am not Necessarily saying that warriors in raiders is a bad thing, infact I have won games with it almost as easily as I have with my venomspam lists when I was facing off with friendly lists of my buds. BUT what I am saying is that Venom warrior squads are superior to Raider warrior squads, and that he should use raiders for Alternative means (a wytch squad or two like my list i linked earlier has) to better use the higher capacity on a unit that wont practically fall apart without the vehicle if it gets caught in any kind of unfavorable position.

Footslogging DE warriors, without perfect favorable maneuvers or a shit ton of luck, tend to die very easily.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

> rebuttles to your yellow text:
> 
> yes, because only CC specialists charge right? ill lay it out for you nice and simple: 1 str 3 attack per model at I5 is not going to keep a Tac squad of marines from winning combat thanks to T3 and the 5+ armor save. the only thing you do not need to worry about charging you will probably be able to Decimate warriors in one volley of their weapons, thanks to the low T and low save.


Never said they were awesome CC troops. But their presence forces your opponent to do something about them and and risk either A) They get into a troublesome position or B) killing them and let the rest of your force take those fewer shots to the face. Being in cover helps out a lot as it is rather easy to get from their dead transport in most cases.



> combined shooting, a tactic I use as DE, open the vehicle then use anti infantry shots to decimate whats left of the squad that just got kicked out of their transport. I dont know how godly your saves are, but when I have run a squad of 10 warriors, if the vehicle explodes (not hard as its on a 5+ thanks to open topped) I have easily lost at the minimum 4 models, thats almost half of the unit just from the vehicle being blown up, then add the enemy shooting the squad more then likely right after with some AI weaponry probably taking them down to a very small number as it is. Thus, you need to get that FNP BEFORE the vehicle goes boom, since it will do a fair number on your units, let alone what will happen once your out in the open. (which can be hard depending on the turn number)


Unfortunately, they are not very godly. Fortunately, raiders don't always explode when destroyed and if they did the remnants would be considerably more useful than those coming out of a venom. Each time a venom explodes, it pretty much means you have paid 125 points for a transport with a one use only extra firepower.



> ok I play against IG alot (one of my best friends) and he dominates with range, and I have still had my blasters down his throat fairly early, you dont need your opponent deployed down the middle in order to use them. you have to remember, its effectively a 24" range for the blasters in venoms after movement, but your also not limited to just that 6" move if your not intending on shooting, so turbo boosting closer if your fighting a ranged mech force that requires ALL your guns to be able to hit units in the back (IE: Razorspam lists that sit at the back using their 48" range abuse) otherwise, you use your ravagers (and in my case 2 Raiders with Wytches in them) to deal with those vehicles that may take priority in the back and let your venoms deal with the approaching DT vehicles, which will almost certainly be in range even if you dont move.


Other than implying I'm an idiot who have no idea on how to play DE, I'm not sure what your point with this is. My point however, is that the longer range on the raiders lances means you don't always have to turboboost down to your opponent (which, even if you get cover) gives him the first shot against you. The range on the raiders gives you that, in many situations. Sometimes it's worth shit, sometimes it pays off big time.



> yes, I will concede the point that venom spam lists do have that issue with the FoC in bigger games, but that does not really happen to a well built list until about 2000+ points (2500 is where it gets really bad for me) and once you hit 2500, the BRB even states using multiple FoC's should be discussed.


Really? In a 1500 pts. match I often have 3 ravagers and 6 raider squads of 10 man. And points over for a cheap, but still good, HQ. So for higher points games all I really can fill up on is elites (because who cares about the FA section when all others are so much better?) So to me, you really seem to be pushing the limits even at 1750 with a venomspam list. Now, venomspam with 2 FOC... That's just evil.



> one must make due with what one has on hand. thats no secret, but I use some spare points I save from raiders to buy FF's for the ravagers, since its very hard to keep them completely in cover while allowing them to unload into enemy vehicles as it is due to enemy mobility as it is.


If that is all the spare points you get out of venomsquads I'd just leave them at home. :biggrin:



> you are making one assumption that is incorrect though, I am not Necessarily saying that warriors in raiders is a bad thing, infact I have won games with it almost as easily as I have with my venomspam lists when I was facing off with friendly lists of my buds. BUT what I am saying is that Venom warrior squads are superior to Raider warrior squads, and that he should use raiders for Alternative means (a wytch squad or two like my list i linked earlier has) to better use the higher capacity on a unit that wont practically fall apart without the vehicle if it gets caught in any kind of unfavorable position.


Well then, better not put them there in the first place then.
Besides, my beef is really that you say venomsquads are inherently better then raiderdittos. That really is not always the case and I'd hate for everyone getting into DE to think that. I will give you that venomspam lists seem to do better than their raider-heavy counterparts on the tournament scene.



> Footslogging DE warriors, without perfect favorable maneuvers or a shit ton of luck, tend to die very easily.


Nobody needs luck if they are as awesome as me!


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

Oh sweet 3 pages! I wonder what is going on in this threa....



XD
Anyway, thank you all for all your arguing, it is actaully very helpful since I get to see the various sides of the spectrum  I will have to agree that for the tournament scene, Venoms are probably the way to go. I think another point that can be brought up is that you will have more units for capping objectives.

But, this brings up a huge point. I do not play my armies competitive in the least. I mean my main army is Word Bearers for Tzeentch's sake XD I have no plan to run Wyches so I am probably just going to stick with trying to be as fluffy as possible without the army being a total drive. (I do like winning at times ) 

Are Raider set-ups terrible? No I don't think so. Are they better then Venoms, probably not. But I definitely love the looks of Raiders and they go with my army better. Plus I don't have to go hunting for extra weapon bits 

Thanks again for everyones input though! It all really helped, and I certainly know what I would do if I joined the Tournament scene with DE!


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Frankly, just use both.

Venom spam is pretty boring, Raider spam only slightly less so. I use 3x Ravagers, 3x Raiders and 3x Venoms (Not necessarily all with Warriors inside) and I get the best of both worlds. I'm not completely screwed if my Ravagers go down, I have a decent amount of ranged anti-infantry, and I have some large squads and some small squads. Never really had any games where I felt like I couldn't win. /shrug


----------



## KaosHerald (Jan 7, 2010)

Sethis said:


> Frankly, just use both.
> 
> Venom spam is pretty boring, Raider spam only slightly less so. I use 3x Ravagers, 3x Raiders and 3x Venoms (Not necessarily all with Warriors inside) and I get the best of both worlds. I'm not completely screwed if my Ravagers go down, I have a decent amount of ranged anti-infantry, and I have some large squads and some small squads. Never really had any games where I felt like I couldn't win. /shrug


That's what I got to thinking. Venoms will probably still be used by my Trueborn units  And your right it is boring, I should give myself and my enemy some variety and beauty to look at on the table during our games


----------

