Wave Serpent vs. Raider

Venoms should be about 55-60, raiders 60-65.

And there is the problem. I think 55-60 without guns is fair for Venom. Raider is 66% tougher and little bit stronger, little slower and degrades, so it should be what? 50% more expensive? That makes it like 80-90 pts...

Yeah I don't think raiders should be cheaper than rhinos without weapons, base cost of 80-90 for a raider seems reasonable.

55-60 for a venom though sounds good, combined with splinter cannons going down to say 10pts for a final cost of 75-80 with 2 splinter cannons.

I agree. They are so much better than Rhinos...

10 points for the splinter cannons and bring back assault 6 instead of rapid fire

15-20pts cheaper isnt game breaking at all.

They already have a strong weakness compare to others, T5 for a Raider is very weak when looking at T7.

I mean Repressors are 91pts base, the other thing that is better on a raider is the fly keyword, yes that is VERY strong, but a pseudo open top Rhino with +2 wounds, thats a 12W T7 3+ open top rhino for equal points to a raider.

Final Note: Compare the Venom to a Starweavers

This raises an interesting philosophy of game design:

Do we want Dark Eldar units to be:
1) Cheaper
2) Better
3) Both

Xm0shcryptX wrote:

10  points for the splinter cannons and bring back assault 6 instead of rapid fire

I wouldn't care if they stayed the same price if they went to assault 6. Then we would gain firepower and speed. Being able to advance and take the -1 to with 6 shots per cannon would be great. It would be a basty buff to compensate for the ball breaking nerf we got hit with going to rapid 3.

lament.config wrote:

Xm0shcryptX wrote:

10  points for the splinter cannons and bring back assault 6 instead of rapid fire

I wouldn't care if they stayed the same price if they went to assault 6. Then we would gain firepower and speed. Being able to advance and take the -1 to with 6 shots per cannon would be great. It would be a basty buff to compensate for the ball breaking nerf we got hit with going to rapid 3.

Honestly? for 15 points I want 2 of the three following: Assault 6, Wounds on 2+, Damage 2.

I'll take one of the above for 7 points.

FuelDrop wrote:

This raises an interesting philosophy of game design:

Do we want Dark Eldar units to be:
1) Cheaper
2) Better
3) Both

I'd rather it be cheaper, but this will be different for everyone, i like more glass.

I imagine Somalia Pirates with a small speed boat and a cannon mounted on the front with lots of them storming a cruise ship down lol

amishprn86 wrote:

FuelDrop wrote:

This raises an interesting philosophy of game design:

Do we want Dark Eldar units to be:
1) Cheaper
2) Better
3) Both

I'd rather it be cheaper, but this will be different for everyone, i like more glass.

I imagine Somalia Pirates with a small speed boat and a cannon mounted on the front with lots of them storming a cruise ship down lol

Interesting. I want a bigger cannon, since I feel we have the glass part more or less down pat by this point.

FuelDrop wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

FuelDrop wrote:

This raises an interesting philosophy of game design:

Do we want Dark Eldar units to be:
1) Cheaper
2) Better
3) Both

I'd rather it be cheaper, but this will be different for everyone, i like more glass.

I imagine Somalia Pirates with a small speed boat and a cannon mounted on the front with lots of them storming a cruise ship down lol

Interesting. I want a bigger cannon, since I feel we have the glass part more or less down pat by this point.

With it being cheaper you can just have MORE CANNON! WAHAHAHAHAA

amishprn86 wrote:

If they were cheaper, we wouldnt have having this discussion at all. No one would care if its not very survivable when we can field 5 instead of 3.

But when its comparable (aka close in cost) to a much more survivable one with fire power also (9 S6 is pretty good) then you have a problem.

This sums up the issue very well. you can keep it precisely the same for all I care, but cost it appropriately. Right now it is ridiculous setting these two options up side-by-side.

holy moly. I've been treating raiders as T6 since the beginning of 8th! I musta just mixed up the S and T.... I'll have to apologize to my opponents......Luckily I think I've used them maybe three times....

Aschen wrote:

holy moly.  I've been treating raiders as T6 since the beginning of 8th!  I musta just mixed up the S and T....  I'll have to apologize to my opponents......Luckily I think I've used them maybe three times....

A strong breeze will destroy them. Coincidentally, that same strong breeze will not assist it in moving as fast or faster than a WS.

Okay. Lets talk numbers. To kill a Raider you need:

120 S3-4, noAP shots at BS4+, equals to 40 Termagants with Devourer = 320 points, 60 guardsmen in Rapidfire range = 240 points (but both have to get into range, which you know... they shouldnt)

90 S4, noAP shots at BS3+, equals to 585 points of Tacticals in RF!

45 S5, AP-1 or better shots at BS3+, equals to 225 points of Devastators - 3 full squads with HBs

45 S6, noAP shots at BS3+, equals to 315 points of Scatbikes

17 S8, AP-1 or better D2 shots at BS3+, equals to half of the above in RF!

9,6 S9, AP-1 or better Dd6 shots at BS3+, equals to 348 pts of Lascannon Devs.

Considering that you do not ever have to be closer to the enemy than 18'' if you do not want to, considering that you wrap with Venoms and planes or cheap beasts or whatever stuff you wrap with against the plasma DSers and similar shenanigans (so no RF), I consider our 115pts boat pretty tough for the points given its relative insignificance. Our Worst enemy is Heavy Bolter equivalent, but I do not see those THAT often. Certainly not 3 squads of them at the same time.

So... l can't make myself think of Raiders as "soft" given these numbers. That is not "strong breeze" guys... srsly... T5 is the same to a Lascannon as is T8. There is not enough S10+ shooting to be considered a problem. And yes. There is arguably bigger threat to Raiders in CC, but well... you want them to be there and you really need them to soak the overwatch so... who cares?

Giving Raider T6 would help him greatly, but It might be just too much. Right now they are going to be killed by units 3 times and more expensive save for those HBs. I say that is fine.

But on a bit deeper note - Raiders do not work well in a vacuum. Noone can expect to slap them on the table like a Wave Serpent and expect it to perform the same. Its the same with almost all our units. They do not work well alone. They need to cover each other, synergy in the tactical sense.

The fragility of a Raider becomes obvious when you compare it to other army's transports.

A Rhino, for instance, is 43 points cheaper but has +2 toughness and +1 save (as well as a -1 to hit for a turn and a chance to heal itself!) - you'd need 135 shots from MEQ on average to take them out.

Wave Serpents are 14 points more but gain +2 T, +3 W, +1 save, reduce all damage taken by one... and to rub it in, they're also moving 2 inches faster.

When Heavy Bolters - a weapon designed to be anti-infantry - are one of the biggest threats to a vehicle, then yeah, I'm pretty comfortable saying that it's a fragile vehicle.

EDIT: Burnage beat me to my 1st point, Editing that out.


We dont want them to work like a WS, we are saying that for a few points more the WS is LARGELY more survivable.

SO MUCH more survivable that the open top rule for us isnt even worth the trade off. ESPECIALLY if you are transporting Melee units.

PS, averages are good, but there are so much re-rolls, and then when you add the powers/stratagems. Its easy to lose 2-3 a turn.


The other problem is the Transport count, Falcons/WS are 6 and 12 transport where we are 5/10
Our units are in 5/10 for min/weapon options.  Why are we only 5/10 man transports? That is a LARGE handicap for us, no Unit can be with a Character in a Venom no unit can have a 10man bonus weapons and a character in a raider.

I have NEVER lost more than 2 raiders and one Venom in one turn and that was against DSing Alpha strike specialists that dedicated their lists to that single purpose of alpha strike. And just because of my bad deployment so totally not Raider's fault. Which is... you know... fair... I expect a well built alpha strike list to take out 20%+ of my army. If they would not, what good is it for? I just make sure they take out the elements I want them to and not those my opponent wants to. If he DSs AT, I wrap with infantry. If he DSs AI, I wrap with vehicles. If he does both, I wrap with whatever I can afford to lose.

As to the comparison - Yea. You know I do not like these comparisons as I consider them largely irrelevant. Its like saying that Fire raptor has better firepower than 2 RWJs while costing the same. Or Reaper vs Ravager. The reality is much more complicated.

Anyway, not to move in circles, that is all I wanted to say on the issue and do not really want to start an argument over something that neither of us can influence. Consider it or discard it at your leisure. :-) Cheers.

Ive lost 4 in a turn before ive even lost Tantalus and a raider..... And not its not due to deployment, cant stop 48" range AT guns with all re-rolls in the mass.

Was it really average roll or bad luck? Thats 40 wounds, 60 with unvul, thats like... roughly 24 lascannons with rerolls to hit and wound

aurynn wrote:

Was it really average roll or bad luck?  Thats 40 wounds, 60 with unvul, thats like... roughly 24 lascannons with rerolls to hit and wound

Its not 24 when you re-roll everything and when you have other guns that also re-roll everything.

I counted 24 hitting on twos and wounding on twos so it would be 22-23 with 3+ rerolls.
But anyway so what you are saying is that his whole shooty army built to be as efficient at shooting as possible killed 25% of your army's total in transports? Seems still fair and good. And pretty much normal for everybody. That amount of shooting will kill more than 2 Fire Raptors for 600 pts. It could kill an Imperial Knight and get another one down by 1/3. It could easily kill mortarion for almost 500 pts or 2 Land Raiders. Or 4 and a half Rhinos. All that without the "other weapons" you mentioned... So yea... You got off pretty cheap I'd say. I dont want to sound mean but the only thing that would actually be resilient against that kind of shooting is the Wave Serpent. My point is arent we focussing our ire at the single most resilient tank in the game for its cost? Comparing our vehicles and crying that CWE got it and we dont? Does the WS help CWE win GTs? Is the alleged wekness of raiders really the issue? I dont really think so.

aurynn wrote:

I counted 24 hitting on twos and wounding on twos so it would be 22-23 with 3+ rerolls.
But anyway so what you are saying is that his whole shooty army built to be as efficient at shooting as possible killed 25% of your army's total in transports? Seems still fair and good. And pretty much normal for everybody. That amount of shooting will kill more than 2 Fire Raptors for 600 pts. It could kill an Imperial Knight and get another one down by 1/3. It could easily kill mortarion for almost 500 pts or 2 Land Raiders. Or 4 and a half Rhinos. All that without the "other weapons" you mentioned... So yea... You got off pretty cheap I'd say. I dont want to sound mean but the only thing that would actually be resilient against that kind of shooting is the Wave Serpent. My point is arent we focussing our ire at the single most resilient tank in the game for its cost? Comparing our vehicles and crying that CWE got it and we dont? Does the WS help CWE win GTs? Is the alleged wekness of raiders really the issue? I dont really think so.

And all the guys inside.... its not 25% 700pts is over 25%, its 35% (fast math). That means he had his full army shooting me, now i only have 2/3 of mine able to shoot.

And no thats not normal, same guy vs his same list against my Harlequins (I stopped playing DE for Quins b.c they are more fun/better to me), He was only able only killed 208pts for 2 games in a row (2 voidweavers).

After playing DE for many games games and Harlequins for again many games. DE is insanely glass compare to the others.

I also play SOB (tho only 6 game with them in 8th, but i'm practicing for adepticon atm with them, a friend wanted me to play with them with him since he only plays Imperial) and again, they are leaps and bounds more survivable, when playing 7 Repressors (open top rhinos basically) its a huge problem for everyone i fight against.


Ok now listen to me again, i dont want them more survivable, i like that they are much more glassy than all my other vehicles, BUT they are to costly, they need to be cheaper OR get some upgrades for the guys inside to make a bigger impact on the game. There is a reason Ravagers and Flyers are the most pick units out of vehicles.

DE is the only army i play that i'm genuinely scared get alpha strike on.

Edit: Also its not about Lascannons, there are bolters, assault cannons, melta guns, missiles etc... You need to stop thinking that they will only fire AT guns at a T5 vehicle....

Okay. That never happened to me. Neither against Guiliman and friends, nor against shooty alphastrike CHSM, not against Renegade Knights and Magnus, rly never. I have seen other armies lose much more than I did. And losing 2 Voidweavers to all that shooting... that does not sound statistically right either. Not even with the new 3++ stratagem. But okay.