Trueborn Tank Busters

So although I have had a discussion of Trueborn vs Scourge, I still was pretty into trying out the trueborn. So after I finished painting my Razorwing, I began building my new Kabalite squad, and after looking at bits I've had from other sets and the new, I had more than enough pieces to make a Anti-tank squad of trueborn, six deep in number, three have Dark Lances, two have Blasters, and a Dracon, with a Blast pistol and a Agonizer. In a most recent game, a squad of Space Marine devestators an opponent had, they did quite well, and as I saw easily earned their points value, I'm assuming I can do the same with the trueborn, the squad is all lances, the Dracon, using the Agonizer is purely if for whatever reason they do happen to get into close combat, all have the stats of a syarbite, not to mention the Dracon has three attacks with an agonizer, and I feel that would do some decent damage, although I may cut the Dracon from the squad to make for lower points cost and using a venom as a dedicated transport.

If I were to use them on a Venom, firing from firing ports on the venom could have some serious firepower right? Two splinter cannons, and a squad of lances, would make an issue for most enemies I'd think or at least draw some serious firepower from other units perhaps. Either way, I already have them painted differently to field their role, Bright crimson on their helmets, and dark red clothing with some Sotek Green highlights along their black armor, instead other regular Kabalites with their blue and Kabalite green armor. Anyone want to share some experiences of Trueborn strength?

I wouldn't use lances and blaster if you plan on moving the transport because in that case the dark lances are wasted. But if you only use Lances, it could be a viable option. But I wish I could use four lances in one squad.

I don't know if this is a misprint, but you said 3 trueborn had Dark Lances. This is illegal as only 2 trueborn are allowed to take heavy weapons.

That aside, I wouldn't advise mixing special and heavy weapons. Nor, for that matter, buying a Dracon.

Is generally accepted that the most common best way to field true-born is on a venom (more survival-ability) and with 3 blasters. And, i comply with that.
Only once had deployed 5 men troop with 2 lances on a top of a building and not moved them from here for the whole game. They performed well, but the army list and the deployment was tailored against my enemy (necron w/ monolith in a ruined city due a narrated campaign).

I think the best way to field them is five with four Blaster in a Raider with night shields for better survivability.

Yeah it was a mistake, I misread the codex, but even still, two Dark Lance and two Blasters, although, mixing special and heavy weapons doesn't seem to be an issue for me, if I don't really plan on making them move too far, especially when its under a circumstance of all the weapons are still lances, weapon statistics are identical except for the fire range, the Dracon is a still iffy option, I just know that his combat skills in close combat as well, would actually prove pretty worthy, although I figure they would be fired at long before getting charged, but yes, I just know that dark eldar units are paper, so I wouldn't want them to die early, a Venom is still paper too, but generally has a better survival chance than if they weren't in the vehicle.

Thats also an interesting option to think of, I need to buy a Raider, its a better transport for fire power, whereas the Venom seems meant more for close combat units closing in.

Don't forget that you can jink with the Raider and still fire at full BS for the true born. That's damn awesome! And necessary because that unit will be a fire magnet.

mostly because it has the (not so unpredictable, also) chance to blew up a land raider during a passing-by.

RCZ wrote:

Is generally accepted that the most common best way to field true-born is on a venom (more survival-ability) and with 3 blasters. And, i comply with that.

Out of interest, why only 3 blasters? Seems like you might as well take 4.

RCZ wrote:

mostly because it has the (not so unpredictable, also) chance to blew up a land raider during a passing-by.

A 1/27 chance, to be precise.

The Fume Knight wrote:

Yeah it was a mistake, I misread the codex, but even still, two Dark Lance and two Blasters, although, mixing special and heavy weapons doesn't seem to be an issue for me, if I don't really plan on making them move too far, especially when its under a circumstance of all the weapons are still lances, weapon statistics are identical except for the fire range

That's the thing though, why not just have all blasters?

I mean, if you're in range to fire the 2 blasters (or even the blast pistol), then the extra range of the lances is obviously wasted. Likewise, if you're only in range of the lances, then the blasters are wasted. What's worse, Your blasters could be just 1" out of range, but you can't move without forcing your dark lances to snapshot.

*shrugs*

I just don't see the appeal of mixing weapons like this.

Agreed. If you're going to mix blasters and lances, max out on blasters first. 18" reduction in range is well worth assualt instead of heavy. Imo in a venom 4 blasters and a dracon with a blast pistol > 3 blasters and 2 lances if slightly more expensive. In a raider I don't see why you wouldn't just max out on the 8 darklight weapons you can put in that vehicle: 4 blasters 2 lances Dracon w/pistol and an Archon with a blaster and a wwp. Sure that means your firing one round of snapshots with the lances, but it also guarantees you one round of firing at a vehicles rear armour which is pretty nice, especially since you pick your target.

Mixing weapons with trueborn is almost never a good idea. I like taking two units of 4 with blasters. Both in venoms or one in a venom and the other in a raider with a WWP. I often deep strike them to get side and rear armour shots. My usual AT is 2 blasterborn units, 1 unit of haywire scourge, 2 ravagers and 2 razorwings when not on AI duty. Sometimes a second scourage unit if I drop a razorwing.

amorrowlyday wrote:

Agreed. If you're going to mix blasters and lances, max out on blasters first. 18" reduction in range is well worth assualt instead of heavy. Imo in a venom 4 blasters and a dracon with a blast pistol > 3 blasters and 2 lances if slightly more expensive. In a raider I don't see why you wouldn't just max out on the 8 darklight weapons you can put in that vehicle: 4 blasters 2 lances Dracon w/pistol and an Archon with a blaster and a wwp. Sure that means your firing one round of snapshots with the lances, but it also guarantees you one round of firing at a vehicles rear armour which is pretty nice, especially since you pick your target.

To be honest, whether in a Raider or not, I'd max out at 4 blasters (Archon notwithstanding).

The Dracon and Blast pistol are both hilariously overcosted (as is the blaster, for that matter, but we work with what we've got), and I'd rather not have to be within 6" of my enemy to fire at full capacity.

Dark Lances seem like a dubious investment on a unit I want to keep mobile, and aren't remotely cheap either.

Moreover, this raider configuration would require buying additional trueborn, which I'd never ever want to do.

Agreed, but it is the maximal darklight output footprint possible. Personally I like big game hunter squads (3 blasters and 2 splinter cannons in a venom) and multiple mixed unit scourges (2 HL or HB and 2 Blasters) much better than maxed out trueborn raiders.

If I'm taking them, it would probably be 4 blasters in a venom (or raider, depending on the rest of the list and my preference). The dracon and blast pistol is definitely sinking too much into them.

Why always the Venom instead of the Raider? You want them to stay alive and that's much more likely to happen in a Raider.

CptMetal wrote:

Why always the Venom instead of the Raider? You want them to stay alive and that's much more likely to happen in a Raider.

Well, some possibilities:

1) To get another venom in the army.
2) To get a mix of anti-infantry and anti-tank.
3) Because you plan to drop them off early on (perhaps into cover, or to get extra range on their first shot), rather than keeping them in the transport.
4) Because you don't have enough Raiders.

5) Because sacrificing a +1 to your cover save for a 5+ invulnerable save seems worth it
6) Because you want to keep the points you're spending on this unit small

None of these are enough to necessarily always choose the venom over the raider (I switch between them depending on a balance of factors). They just play into the decision.

Jimsolo wrote:

6) Because you want to keep the points you're spending on this unit small

But... a Raider is cheaper.

Not if you factor in the night shield

I prefer the venom because it has a smaller footprint and that makes it better at surviving. Both can be good. If I want my archon with a blaster in will put him in a blasterborn raider. Usually with night shields

Okay. The smaller footprint is a reason. At least it you play on tables with enough line of sight blocking terrain. The tables I use, would make it difficult to get it totally out of the line of sight. Cover? Easy. Complete without line of sight? Not so much.

Another reason I prefer venoms is that the smaller footprint makes them less likely to misshap when deep striking. Which I do quite often at armour 12 is a pain in the is. dsing also makes sure that they get to hit

That's true too. I've completely stopped dsing raiders without wwp for that reason.

My DE vehicles would find a way to mishap on an empty field.