Ravagers

Srota wrote:

Probably because they didn't care and just wanted to sell more covens stuff?

I think they figured most DE players had them already so why not nerf them and get people to buy something else.

Jokes on you GW I only own one and won't buy more because of the nerf.

Sucks because ranged anti tank in my pure DE lists is weak.

Ranged anti tank in EVERYONES dark eldar list is weak.

lament.config wrote:

Srota wrote:

Probably because they didn't care and just wanted to sell more covens stuff?

I think they figured most DE players had them already so why not nerf them and get people to buy something else.

Jokes on you GW I only own one and won't buy more because of the nerf.

Sucks because ranged anti tank in my pure DE lists is weak.

I don't think GW balanced the dex with their sales in mind. It does appear so, since all of our best options are just... gone.

Rather, I think somebody with little to no knowledge about Dark Eldar was assigned to this task. Probably a strongly spess mahreen/mon-keigh biased one at that. And all of that from the point of a 6th edition point of view.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

lament.config wrote:

Srota wrote:

Probably because they didn't care and just wanted to sell more covens stuff?

I think they figured most DE players had them already so why not nerf them and get people to buy something else.

Jokes on you GW I only own one and won't buy more because of the nerf.

Sucks because ranged anti tank in my pure DE lists is weak.

I don't think GW balanced the dex with their sales in mind. It does appear so, since all of our best options are just... gone.

Rather, I think somebody with little to no knowledge about Dark Eldar was assigned to this task. Probably a strongly spess mahreen/mon-keigh biased one at that. And all of that from the point of a 6th edition point of view.

I've often felt this is the case with the less straightforward armies. I used to played Nids and the transition from their 4th ed codex to their 5th ed one was agonising, and it only got worse from there...

I get the feeling that some guys at gw got their glasses handed to them by Venom spam or somesuch, have their undies in knots about that ever since and want all Dark Eldar players to suffer.

How else would you explain the hitload of nerfs we got with the last codex?

On Topic: i have a single Ravager and it rarely does much, although i almost always bring it, with lances mostly by the way, i probably need more, or lots of other intimidating stuff as distraction to allow a Ravager to shine.

And i probably have to try out dissies on it.

The nerfs are much more easily explainable strictly in terms of complexity. If something could be explained more easily with straight out of the box rules it was (bladevanes). Lethal Dose directly explains why this was a nerf, but isn't something GW would see as a nerf if they weren't intimately familiar with this particular army. If a character or an option wasn't available straight out of the box it was cut (Trueborn CCW's). Together these 2 things gutted our fluffy book, but were it not for the tempo change 5 moths later no one would have noticed.

amorrowlyday wrote:

Together these 2 things gutted our fluffy book, but were it not for the tempo change 5 moths later no one would have noticed.

I noticed the day it came out. That was a special day for me. It had been a long time since the 5th edition codex released, and I was super excited about the new codex, despite some rumors/leaks saying some negative things about the impending release. I was hoping they were wrong.

I took the day off. I picked up the book early, and read through the entire thing, fluff and all, cover to cover that day without stopping for breaks. I read it next to my mini-fridge to have drinks close at hand.

When I finished reading the book, I closed it, sighed a heavy sigh, and contemplated all the changes they made, in wonder. At the time, I still had hope that we'd get most of the 30+ nerfs fixed by followup releases of covens/kabals/cults supplements, thinking maybe they were attempting to emulate the gaming trend of day 1 expansions and paid "DLC". The following week, the covens supplement came out, so it kept my hopes up. There was even a rumor about a wych cult supplement in development among the rumors that got the rest of the DE releases right.

Then nothing. A couple blips on the radar happened later, with DE box sets and such since then, but other than that, nothing ever even attempted to fix the nerfs that occurred. To this very day, I'd rather play DE out of the 5th edition codex instead of our current one. Despite multiple years of rules changes, it still simply works better.

I actually think that GW might have actually had additional supplements planned, but based on sales of the covens supplement, decided not to release them. Publishing and distribution costs can sometimes be prohibitive, and companies can lose money if not enough books are sold, so it's possible that the number of DE sales of the supplement weren't up to snuff, so the additional supplements got canned, despite possibly even being "done" from a design perspective already.

That is my conspiracy theory for the day.

PsychicHobo wrote:

The Strange Dark One wrote:

lament.config wrote:

Srota wrote:

Probably because they didn't care and just wanted to sell more covens stuff?

I think they figured most DE players had them already so why not nerf them and get people to buy something else.

Jokes on you GW I only own one and won't buy more because of the nerf.

Sucks because ranged anti tank in my pure DE lists is weak.

I don't think GW balanced the dex with their sales in mind. It does appear so, since all of our best options are just... gone.

Rather, I think somebody with little to no knowledge about Dark Eldar was assigned to this task. Probably a strongly spess mahreen/mon-keigh biased one at that. And all of that from the point of a 6th edition point of view.

I've often felt this is the case with the less straightforward armies. I used to played Nids and the transition from their 4th ed codex to their 5th ed one was agonising, and it only got worse from there...

As someone with 15k points in Nids and 10k in DE Im actually kinda depressed with these armies atm.

Ive been playing Harlequins and Corsairs.

Its knight and day the difference in playability between even Harlequins (They are a lot better than everyone gives them credit for) and DE/Nids. Just f*&^ing stupid the difference with Eldar and DE or Nids (not flying circus)......


About the DE new book changes, many of it yes was due to No models/kits difference, but the straight up nerfs was along the line of GK's IG, Orks and BA's

This is actually when the CEO was fired and a new one was brought in, the new CEO did the opposite, made "good" rules to make better sells, and it worked, sadly 4-5 armies got left behind and never fixed.  After they started to make new Codex's they almost stopped right away and made this new policy to not make Codex's for some reason but a narrative focus.

I just hope we get something and Nids soon otherwise I'm selling my Nids and DE.


Edit: About Ravagers, IMO they are over costed and pointless, look at Hornets and many other units within the same cost range. But in a vacum for DE, I stopped taking them when CTC came out.

Marrath wrote:

I get the feeling that some guys at gw got their glasses handed to them by Venom spam or somesuch, have their undies in knots about that ever since and want all Dark Eldar players to suffer.

How else would you explain the hitload of nerfs we got with the last codex?

On Topic: i have a single Ravager and it rarely does much, although i almost always bring it, with lances mostly by the way, i probably need more, or lots of other intimidating stuff as distraction to allow a Ravager to shine.

And i probably have to try out dissies on it.

I too think that there was a bias in play.
I suspect that the Ravager in particular was a unit that looks more powerful on paper an thus got nerfed pretty hard.

"What, 3 Lascannon-like shots in a round for 105pts?? We have to pay 140pts for that!
This needs to be fixed ASAP and Aerial Assault needs to be gone as well to make it balanced."

Naturally, I don't think that a lot of thought went into the unit being an open-topped skimmer. Or that AV 11.


I am actually considering fielding a Dissie Ravager. I just cannot justify the presence of its overcosted Lances on it.

However, against AV10 the Dissies actually perform quite well, better than Lances actually. And they also offer great utility against 2+/3+ targets and are not as affected by firing Snapshots.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

Marrath wrote:

I get the feeling that some guys at gw got their glasses handed to them by Venom spam or somesuch, have their undies in knots about that ever since and want all Dark Eldar players to suffer.

How else would you explain the hitload of nerfs we got with the last codex?

On Topic: i have a single Ravager and it rarely does much, although i almost always bring it, with lances mostly by the way, i probably need more, or lots of other intimidating stuff as distraction to allow a Ravager to shine.

And i probably have to try out dissies on it.

I too think that there was a bias in play.
I suspect that the Ravager in particular was a unit that looks more powerful on paper an thus got nerfed pretty hard.

"What, 3 Lascannon-like shots in a round for 105pts?? We have to pay 140pts for that!
This needs to be fixed ASAP and Aerial Assault needs to be gone as well to make it balanced."

Naturally, I don't think that a lot of thought went into the unit being an open-topped skimmer. Or that AV 11.


I am actually considering fielding a Dissie Ravager. I just cannot justify the presence of its overcosted Lances on it.

However, against AV10 the Dissies actually perform quite well, better than Lances actually. And they also offer great utility against 2+/3+ targets and are not as affected by firing Snapshots.

I have 5 (well 6 but 1 is a Dias of Destruction, it is 2 Raiders together sadly) 2 of them are Dis Cannons.

Before i stopped playing pure DE at the end i was playing with 2 dis cannon Ravagers, i liked them much much more.

But I didnt play pure DE alot, coven is so good and I just took CTC and Grots, they killed more Vehicles than my lances ever did.

It is disappointing that the current state of the Dark Eldar is such that we're asking if one of our most iconic units is even viable. I'm sorely disappointed that this unit was nerfed in the 7th edition codex. If it was seeing a lot of play in the 5th edition codex, it was because it was our best Heavy Support option and we'd always have enough points to play them. It was not because the Ravager is an unusually strong unit in 40K. A couple people have mentioned that it could be reasonable if they were about half the price they are now and I tend to want to agree.

I agree with what other commenters have said about the Ravager. I think that the Disintegrators are their strongest option and you're better off looking for ranged anti-vehicle weaponry elsewhere.

I understand why comparing the Ravager to the Hornet makes sense when you're looking at competitive lists - and it's valuable analysis. My concern is that GW might not consider Forge World at all when they write these books and they might be inclined to say that if the Ravager is underpowered, it's because Forge World messed up and it's not GW's problem. But if we compare the Ravager to other options within the Eldar book, we will still find the same problem, if not to a lesser degree.

Points spent per S8 weapon

7e Ravager ~= 41.7
7e BL Falcon ~= 43.3
7e BL War Walker = 35
5e Ravager = 35

The Ravager probably doesn't look as terrible when you look at this list. But wait, we're not seeing Falcons or War Walkers in any competitive lists these days. And Falcons have AV 12, aren't Open-topped and for a nominal price can also mount a shuriken cannon. And War Walkers have an invulnerable save and the ability to move after shooting to keep them out of LOS. Even if we look at the 5e Ravager (which also had Aerial Assault), I'd probably still rather use War Walkers. I might even rather use Falcons if the Scatbikes and Hornets weren't an option.

If I were put in charge of making a change to the Ravager to be put out in an errata to fix the unit, then I'd want to look at simple changes. Here's my wishlisted Ravager:

105 pts
may be taken in vehicle squadrons of 1-3 Ravagers
equipped with Disintegrators or Dark Lances for 0 pts
Aerial Assault (may shoot all weapons at cruising speed)
Skyfire

I think with this modest change that Ravagers would be much more competitive. I would obviously still take the Hornet if I had the option, but I think this simple fix could tide us over until the next Codex. Well, at least where the Ravager is concerned.

I think we all can agree that we need the ability to take them as a vehicle squadron, but what benefit would you give the ravager if you took them in full units of 3?

I didn't mention it, but I think I'd rather leave the precise squadron benefit to GW.

I think I'd just want something simple like, on the turn the Ravagers arrive from Reserves, all their weapons counts as being Twin-linked.

fuhrmaaj wrote:

It is disappointing that the current state of the Dark Eldar is such that we're asking if one of our most iconic units is even viable. I'm sorely disappointed that this unit was nerfed in the 7th edition codex. If it was seeing a lot of play in the 5th edition codex, it was because it was our best Heavy Support option and we'd always have enough points to play them. It was not because the Ravager is an unusually strong unit in 40K. A couple people have mentioned that it could be reasonable if they were about half the price they are now and I tend to want to agree.

I agree with what other commenters have said about the Ravager. I think that the Disintegrators are their strongest option and you're better off looking for ranged anti-vehicle weaponry elsewhere.

I understand why comparing the Ravager to the Hornet makes sense when you're looking at competitive lists - and it's valuable analysis. My concern is that GW might not consider Forge World at all when they write these books and they might be inclined to say that if the Ravager is underpowered, it's because Forge World messed up and it's not GW's problem. But if we compare the Ravager to other options within the Eldar book, we will still find the same problem, if not to a lesser degree.

Points spent per S8 weapon

7e Ravager ~= 41.7
7e BL Falcon ~= 43.3
7e BL War Walker = 35
5e Ravager = 35

The Ravager probably doesn't look as terrible when you look at this list. But wait, we're not seeing Falcons or War Walkers in any competitive lists these days. And Falcons have AV 12, aren't Open-topped and for a nominal price can also mount a shuriken cannon. And War Walkers have an invulnerable save and the ability to move after shooting to keep them out of LOS. Even if we look at the 5e Ravager (which also had Aerial Assault), I'd probably still rather use War Walkers. I might even rather use Falcons if the Scatbikes and Hornets weren't an option.

If I were put in charge of making a change to the Ravager to be put out in an errata to fix the unit, then I'd want to look at simple changes. Here's my wishlisted Ravager:

105 pts
may be taken in vehicle squadrons of 1-3 Ravagers
equipped with Disintegrators or Dark Lances for 0 pts
Aerial Assault (may shoot all weapons at cruising speed)
Skyfire

I think with this modest change that Ravagers would be much more competitive. I would obviously still take the Hornet if I had the option, but I think this simple fix could tide us over until the next Codex. Well, at least where the Ravager is concerned.

1 Word, Hornets.

Hornets are just better in every way to a Ravager. I just take Hornets now.

But for those who don't want to shell out extra money for forge world and the imperial armor books, ravagers are decent. They need some work but not terrible. 9 S5 AP2 shots at bs4 is pretty good. It needs its aerial assault back though.

Sarkesian wrote:

But for those who don't want to shell out extra money for forge world and the imperial armor books, ravagers are decent. They need some work but not terrible. 9 S5 AP2 shots at bs4 is pretty good. It needs its aerial assault back though.

I meant it as a comparative, i would LOVE to see them better and cheaper.

I also made my own i didn't buy them, i also made 2 Warp Hunters.

So I bought 2 Fire Prisms and went to ebay and bought 2 broken vipers (The vipers was 14$ for the 2). I went to walmart and got 2 thinker reuseable straws and just kit bashed it all for my Hornets and Warp hunters.

Sense I get 20% off GW, it was like 105$ USD to make 2 Warp Hunters and 2 Hornets.

The Warp Hunters are in ym Locker at my local store (We have lockers) so I cant give you a pic but here are the Hornet pics.

https://imgur.com/gallery/TcgWJ

Very impressive! Looks like the real thing!

amishprn86 wrote:

1 Word, Hornets.

Hornets are just better in every way to a Ravager. I just take Hornets now.

In the text you quoted:

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I understand why comparing the Ravager to the Hornet makes sense when you're looking at competitive lists - and it's valuable analysis. My concern is that GW might not consider Forge World at all when they write these books and they might be inclined to say that if the Ravager is underpowered, it's because Forge World messed up and it's not GW's problem. But if we compare the Ravager to other options within the Eldar book, we will still find the same problem, if not to a lesser degree.

and

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I would obviously still take the Hornet if I had the option

My premise is that the Hornet should be ignored because I don't think that Games Workshop considers Forge World models when writing books.

But if we do look at the Hornet with Pulse Lasers, they are 20 pts/S8 shot or over 208% more effective than the Ravager. Of course the Hornet is better, but this information doesn't help a Dark Eldar player very much unless they can ally in a CWE detachment. My motivation (as mentioned in my post) was to try to come up with a reasonable "errata" fix that I could see GW applying to the unit. Forge World doesn't tend to errata their models, so we're stuck with the Hornet they way it is.

fuhrmaaj wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

1 Word, Hornets.

Hornets are just better in every way to a Ravager. I just take Hornets now.

In the text you quoted:

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I understand why comparing the Ravager to the Hornet makes sense when you're looking at competitive lists - and it's valuable analysis. My concern is that GW might not consider Forge World at all when they write these books and they might be inclined to say that if the Ravager is underpowered, it's because Forge World messed up and it's not GW's problem. But if we compare the Ravager to other options within the Eldar book, we will still find the same problem, if not to a lesser degree.

and

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I would obviously still take the Hornet if I had the option

My premise is that the Hornet should be ignored because I don't think that Games Workshop considers Forge World models when writing books.

But if we do look at the Hornet with Pulse Lasers, they are 20 pts/S8 shot or over 208% more effective than the Ravager. Of course the Hornet is better, but this information doesn't help a Dark Eldar player very much unless they can ally in a CWE detachment. My motivation (as mentioned in my post) was to try to come up with a reasonable "errata" fix that I could see GW applying to the unit. Forge World doesn't tend to errata their models, so we're stuck with the Hornet they way it is.

Fine Compare FW DE to FW Eldar (this includes Hornets). It just DE are treated worst even in FW.

Eldar will always have it better.

But for me I can not take Ravagers after playing Hornets, its..... it kills me inside but I also play with my DE as Corsairs and just use a few Models that are not DE like Hornets.

I understand why players dont take Hornets and want a Pure DE army, I get it, but I was just compare and pointing out the difference in Power. We just need a New Codex.

Im about to just play 5th ed Codex honestly.

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

1 Word, Hornets.

Hornets are just better in every way to a Ravager. I just take Hornets now.

In the text you quoted:

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I understand why comparing the Ravager to the Hornet makes sense when you're looking at competitive lists - and it's valuable analysis. My concern is that GW might not consider Forge World at all when they write these books and they might be inclined to say that if the Ravager is underpowered, it's because Forge World messed up and it's not GW's problem. But if we compare the Ravager to other options within the Eldar book, we will still find the same problem, if not to a lesser degree.

and

amishprn86 wrote:

fuhrmaaj wrote:

I would obviously still take the Hornet if I had the option

My premise is that the Hornet should be ignored because I don't think that Games Workshop considers Forge World models when writing books.

But if we do look at the Hornet with Pulse Lasers, they are 20 pts/S8 shot or over 208% more effective than the Ravager. Of course the Hornet is better, but this information doesn't help a Dark Eldar player very much unless they can ally in a CWE detachment. My motivation (as mentioned in my post) was to try to come up with a reasonable "errata" fix that I could see GW applying to the unit. Forge World doesn't tend to errata their models, so we're stuck with the Hornet they way it is.

Fine Compare FW DE to FW Eldar (this includes Hornets). It just DE are treated worst even in FW.

Eldar will always have it better.

But for me I can not take Ravagers after playing Hornets, its..... it kills me inside but I also play with my DE as Corsairs and just use a few Models that are not DE like Hornets.

I understand why players dont take Hornets and want a Pure DE army, I get it, but I was just compare and pointing out the difference in Power. We just need a New Codex.

Im about to just play 5th ed Codex honestly.

I feel you. I'm about to make a Corsair army as well and I've been thinking about Hornets a lot as well.

I think the saddest part about the Hornet is that it would fit the Dark Eldar so much better than CWE. In essence, it's a lightning-raid style unit with glasshammer stats. How come we don't have access to that??
I guess it's easier to sell a model when its offered to a faction played by more people...

Even more, in terms of gameplay it really is not too different from the Venom if you think about it. From a gameplay perspective I love the idea of seeing Hornets and Venoms being used side-by-side.

I think Starweavers with side-guns could make an awesome conversion for a DE-esque Hornet.

In my codex, I just made the Hornet an upgrade to the Venom that loses its transport capacity, gains AV11 and has 3 Dark Lances. Naturally, the Ravager got some buffs as well.

Ravager just needs to be 75pts with can move 12" and still shoot all 3. It should be able to take in squads too.

2 at 150pts with 2 squads for 300pts, Seems about right to me in power wise.

But yeah Im having a blast with Corsairs and Harlequins.... sadly

amishprn86 wrote:

Fine Compare FW DE to FW Eldar (this includes Hornets). It just DE are treated worst even in FW.

Right, so my point is that I want to look at the game that Games Workshop made and ignore Forge World units. I've said it twice already and I don't know how else to say it but I don't think that GW considers the range of FW models when they write rules.

amishprn86 wrote:

Eldar will always have it better.

Yes, agreed. That's what I was trying to show with pts/S8 shot. That even if you look at Eldar models that GW made, the Ravager looks terrible. The Falcon and War Walker are more survivable, and the War Walker is a whole lot cheaper. Basically my conclusion is that GW really messed up with the Ravager because it is outperformed by other stuff they made that nobody's using these days.

I'm trying to imagine what a Dark Eldar player can include in their list and Forge World units can't be included in an Ynnari list so a Dark Eldar player will need to buy at least an HQ and 2 Troops before they buy the Hornets. But Dark Eldar can include War Walkers in an Ynnari list if they're so inclined. I don't think Disintegrator Ravagers are completely terrible either.

amishprn86 wrote:

I understand why players dont take Hornets and want a Pure DE army, I get it, but I was just compare and pointing out the difference in Power. We just need a New Codex.

Im about to just play 5th ed Codex honestly.

Yes to all this. Pulse laser Hornets are OP (potentially 80pts cheaper than their alternatives), Eldar are in really good shape and Dark Eldar are not. Dark Eldar are probably my pick for the weakest codex right now.

And I agree about the 5th edition Codex too. I haven't been on the forums for a while but is this a common sentiment? I've been saying this within my gaming circle, I've seen in twice here in the week or so that I've been looking around. If there is anything I like from the new book, it's the new PFP just because it makes the bookkeeping simpler. The rest is so garbage that I took 2 years off from the game after reading it.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

I feel you. I'm about to make a Corsair army as well and I've been thinking about Hornets a lot as well...I guess it's easier to sell a model when its offered to a faction played by more people.

I've been playing DE since 3rd edition on and off and it has been a struggle sometimes. Neglected by Forge World in terms of both models and apocalypse formations. Very slow codex updates and typically FAQ/errata which nerfs the book and doesn't make sense (like the shadowfield nerf). A lot of people I talk to at the gaming stores say that they really like the models and the lore but the books suck. I feel like the faction would be played by more people if Games Workshop catered to people who weren't masochists.

May I ask what the appeal of the Corsair list is? I've read the rules a few times but I can't help but feel that anyone could make a list that does the same thing, but better with the CWE book. What is their strength?

@fuhrmaaj

Corsairs never seem fun to me at 1st too till I read the rules and saw DE versions of it. They in the Fluff and Rules truly feel more DE than Eldar and just has a DE vibe to them.

They want to "run away" so Moral test for fall back you are -1 LD They are a true raiding army, they want to hit you hard, fast and Get out to do it again, not fighting Toe-to-Toe, But they can make Melee Toe-to-toe units if you wanted too. They feel more like a "Glass Cannon" army if you take them with Jet Packs instead of Transports

Instead of Battlefocus they have Reckless Abandon, it is a Free 6" move after you shoot if you are within 12" but if you are "jump or Jet" its 6"+D6. On average is more movement but at the risk of being closer, great for DSing style.

They still have Venoms so you can do the Venoms Spam, but the Venoms can take Shurikens if you wanted, the main HQ is basically a better Archon

Has a different WWP one like 5th ed DE, you place it and you can go in and out of it as you wish (In movement phases).

They act like Gangs as well, actually the rules make them into Gang and has Politics for each gang.
These Politics will buff each gang and each gang treat each other as allies not Battle Brothers.

Some of these buffs are, Tank hunter (Prefer enemy Tanks), Head Hunters (+1 VP if they kill the target unit), Sky Burners (1D6 scatter DS and re-roll reserves) there are 6 options to pick you can have up to 4 of these.

Another thing is you have all the same weapons as DE but most of them are 5pts cheaper, Blasters at 10pts not 15 etc... And you still have Eldar weapons too.

Wyches and Scourges make GREAT Corsairs conversions too, they basically where made for it even tho all the pics show Eldar models.

Edit: It plays like DE, feels like DE, you can make it a pure DE style army and just be better. and IMO it is more fun.

There are some Formations that are Extremely OP, many tournaments dont allow these formations and it gave Corsairs a Bad name, but without those Formations it is just a better DE army, or a weaker Eldar army.

Example of those formations:
3 Warp hunters in a squad: shoot an Massive TL Blast D-weapon at 72"
3 Hornets Squad: 1 turn only, May Jink and fire at full BS
3 Walkers in squad: DS and that turn gain 4++ rerolling with TL and Penning

I've got the rules for the Corsairs, I'm just wondering what the appeal is or what type of list you'd want to bring.

I made a jetpack list just to see what it might look like but I feel like I could do better with the Craftworld Warhost Formation (the Decurion style CWE formation). Your entire army will Battle Focus 6" every time, which I think is better than Reckless Abandon because you don't need to be within 12", you can use it before shooting and you can do it in any direction. I'd take Storm Guardians for free fusion guns and power swords and a Dire Avenger Shrine which I think is better than Jetpack Reavers. I think you come out ahead of a jetpack Corsair list.

I saw someone ran a Corsair bike list with two DE Scalpel Squadron Formations (source) at LVO in February. But again, is it better than a CWE CAD with Scatterbikes? The biggest potential advantage I see is that CWE might be limited to taking one Hornet Squadron because ITC rules say that every Forge World unit is 0-1 unless it's in your army list. So taking a Corsair list in an ITC setting is potentially the only way to take more Hornet Squadrons.

So I guess what I'm asking is why you would choose Corsairs over Craftworld Eldar. For example, maybe you disagree and think that Jetpack Reavers are better than equivalentish CWE units. I don't know if it's too much to ask but it'd be cool to see some kind of list outline, an explanation of how it works and why the CWE can't do it better. I'd be interested in converting my wyches into corsairs, like you suggested, if I could see the value of the army.

Oh, cool Hornet conversion btw

They are better at Null Deployment for sure, the bikes cost alittle more but gain outflank and can move after shooting if they are to close to the unit. Everything can DS, then move and assault move, O rif its  a vehicle (warp hunter or lynx) give it the 5++ and DS it to give it a 4++ for that turn.

You can spam Bikes or JSJ troops, you can spam the vehicles easier too.

With the nerfs ITC give the they are for sure weaker than Eldar, they lose a few of the strengths.

Without the Nerfs they are slightly less than Eldar sense Eldar can take those formations too and Eldar can spam WK's if you wanted Corsiars can not.

The list is hard to say b.c there are a few completely different types of play.
Null Deplyment
Vehicle  and D-weapon heavy
MSU spam
Melee Alpha/beta strike Army
Full JSJ MSU
Venom Spam
2++ Deathstar


The melee list (ICT and Adepticon wont allow this) uses as much Psychic to gain the main teleporting power, also the Prince takes the Eldar Artifact "shard of anaris" its a +2 strength rending with fearless (you need fearless for this) and challenges you gain ID and Flesh bane.
You can take this as a Bike unit (What i do) or Malevolent band. The Bikes gain t4 and 3 of the bikes can take a power weapon.

The Goal is to just teleport into melee, with 10 bike but 4 of them are all Power Weapons, as long as its not Armor 2 you will kill it

You can make a unit with 14? man unit with 3 2++ saves (SF's) and FnP this is another option.

MSU JSJ spam is really fun, I played it against a GT list of White Scars (Skyhammer and everything crazy). We ended the game turn 3 as a tie.
This list is just Spam Reavers and Balestrike's. The Balestrikes are really fun, a unit full over heavy weapons that are relentless is so fun. I have 3 units of these, 2 with Shurikens Cannons and 1 with EML (mostly for range).
I have 2 Units of Reavers with Flamers and the rest with Fusions
I play this list as my "fun" list

The Tournament list is just Min/max Warp Hunters, Lynx, Hornets and take Reavers to save points ((5pts for 2 Fusins on JSJ guys is pretty good). Take Barons to help them live longer.

Venom spam is fun too, Ive done it a few times, it comes out to 60pts with 2 Shuriken cannons instead of 65pts as to DE. But it has Scout. 5pts cheaper with S6 and Scout. This is why I 1st got Corsairs.

Venom spam doesnt have to be with just Troops, the Elite Reaver unit can take them too. I give 2 of them power Weapons a and call it a day. The Troups I give 2 Fusions.

I normally only do 6 venoms, b.c I ahve 2 Bike units still (1 for the Prince and I think I needed for a baron?) And I have 2 Warp Hunters with 2 Hornets.

That was a lot. LOL.Hope this helps, even tho its off topic.