The Shredder change boggles my mind.

The Strange Dark One wrote:

For the reference, some simple mathhammer:

MEQ:
- Blasters: 1.01
- Blasters (on marines with -1 to damage): 0.92
- Shredders: 1.03

TEQ with 5++:
- Blasters: 0.92
- Blasters (on marines with -1 to damage): 0.80
- Shredders: 0.69

Gravis:
- Blasters: 1.11
- Blasters (on marines with -1 to damage): 0.96
- Shredders: 1.03

GEQ:
- Blasters: 0.55
- Shredders: 1.89

Rhino:
- Dark Lance: 2.22
- Blasters: 1.55
- Shredders: 0.33

Mind you, Shredders have Blast and do +14% damage against units with 4+ models and +70% damage against 11+.

Thanks for the info! And if we convert those findings into points per wound dealt, the shredder is the better choice against everything but vehicles. It also has a higher ceiling, which is not to be counted on, but worth considering. A blaster can kill a maximum of one model, no matter how well you roll. A perfect shredder shot could kill 2 TEQ/Gravis if the stars align.

Shredders are great, and 18" shredders are even better.

In addition to the other mathhammer:

Ravagers:
Dark Lance: 1.481
Blaster: 1.037
Shredder: 1.037

Venom/Starweaver:
Dark Lance: 1.389
Blaster: 0.972
Shredder: 0.778

Knight with 5++:
Dark Lance: 1.111
Blaster: 0.778
Shredder: 0.389

Thunderwolf with Stormshield:
Dark Lance: 1.111
Blaster: 0.778
Shredder: 0.778

Doomsday Ark:
Dark Lance: 1.111
Blaster: 0.778
Shredder: 0.583

And for completion vs MEQ:
new Splintercannon: 1
Splintercannon (-1 damage) : 0.5
Dissis if they don't get changed: 2.222
Disintegrator -1 damage: 1.111

Basically, I think Dark Lance as the main anti-vehicle weapon and shredders as anti-infantry that can also help with lighter vehicles, cavalry and bikes. And they may be the cheapest gun on the list, but they are still our second best gun vs MEQ, even without blast.

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Still not played any 9th but I hear lots of necron and tyrannid lists use 11+ units. Even without larger units the shredder looks like a solid gun.

As one who also plays tyranids; can confirm that 20+ units are pretty standard for swarms

Sarcron wrote:

As one who also plays tyranids; can confirm that 20+ units are pretty standard for swarms

Do they have anti-attrition rules or are they just durable enough that they can always get into melee and tie up other squads?

Personally, I always thought the attrition rule as it stands is decent, but should have an additional line saying something like "Attrition tests only occur once the unit has fewer than 10 models remaining. If the unit has less than 5 models remaining, reduce unit leadership score by 1". This would lead to situations where MSUs are still viable, because attrition rules favour them by default (they have fewer models to lose, and fewer models in total, so are more likely to pass the first roll and less likely to have an attrition cascade from those d6s), but would also protect hoard units. A blob of 20 orks cares not for the loss of 5 or even 10 models. Or rather, it shouldnt care. Same with guardsmen. Its easy to be brave when you are one of a nameless thousand. A lot harder when half your squad is gone, and harder still when you can count the bodies between you and the enemy on one hand.

albions-angel wrote:

Sarcron wrote:

As one who also plays tyranids; can confirm that 20+ units are pretty standard for swarms

Do they have anti-attrition rules or are they just durable enough that they can always get into melee and tie up other squads?

Tyranids have Synapse, Orks have the Mob Rule and for Necrons the Reanimation Protocols give a good reason to have big squads.
And the attrition rule makes it less reliable to destroy units with morale, I don't think Morale needs to be weakened. Before once you killed enough every additional kill was almost guaranteed to make a second model flee. Now killing more models makes it only more likely that they fail, but the average number of models fleeing gets lower with more kills.

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

I've pretty much exclusively been talking about scourges because that's where I put my shredders.

In my experience, the only obsec we have that matters are wracks. Warriors/wyches are either sitting alone so obsec doesn't matter, or they are dead so obsec doesn't matter.

The answer as which to take on warrior squads comes down to how much anti-vehicle tech you have, relative to your meta. If you feel you have enough, take shredders because they are a better value against most targets. If you don't have enough, take blasters.

sekac wrote:

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

I've pretty much exclusively been talking about scourges because that's where I put my shredders.

In my experience, the only obsec we have that matters are wracks. Warriors/wyches are either sitting alone so obsec doesn't matter, or they are dead so obsec doesn't matter.

The answer as which to take on warrior squads comes down to how much anti-vehicle tech you have, relative to your meta. If you feel you have enough, take shredders because they are a better value against most targets. If you don't have enough, take blasters.

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

Koldan wrote:

sekac wrote:

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

I've pretty much exclusively been talking about scourges because that's where I put my shredders.

In my experience, the only obsec we have that matters are wracks. Warriors/wyches are either sitting alone so obsec doesn't matter, or they are dead so obsec doesn't matter.

The answer as which to take on warrior squads comes down to how much anti-vehicle tech you have, relative to your meta. If you feel you have enough, take shredders because they are a better value against most targets. If you don't have enough, take blasters.

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

That's a very interesting proposition.

Koldan wrote:

sekac wrote:

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

I've pretty much exclusively been talking about scourges because that's where I put my shredders.

In my experience, the only obsec we have that matters are wracks. Warriors/wyches are either sitting alone so obsec doesn't matter, or they are dead so obsec doesn't matter.

The answer as which to take on warrior squads comes down to how much anti-vehicle tech you have, relative to your meta. If you feel you have enough, take shredders because they are a better value against most targets. If you don't have enough, take blasters.

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

The issue is that if you want to bring the Shredders in range of anything, that Dark Lance is going to be hitting on 4s.

Soulless Samurai wrote:

Koldan wrote:

sekac wrote:

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

albions-angel wrote:

So, shreaders are still worth in even vs MSU? I have to ask, who are these people you are facing that run 11+ model squads? My Tau friend runs MSU, my AdMech/CSM friend runs MSUs, and my Khorne friend mostly runs MSUs, and only occasionally runs his bloodletters in squads of no more than 10.

Other people have covered the armies that regularly take 11+, but even if they have 6-10, which is very common, that's still on average 14 shots with a minimum of 12. Still, much better at killing then a venom and still cheaper.

While your assesment is correct, I don't understand the point of the comparison to a Venom, unless we are talking about Shredder Scourge or footslogging. We will need obsec troops, and they will almost certainly be in either/or/and Venoms/Raiders. The question is whether Shredders are better than Blasters in those squads, the cost of some form of transport is likey to be incurred regardless.

I've pretty much exclusively been talking about scourges because that's where I put my shredders.

In my experience, the only obsec we have that matters are wracks. Warriors/wyches are either sitting alone so obsec doesn't matter, or they are dead so obsec doesn't matter.

The answer as which to take on warrior squads comes down to how much anti-vehicle tech you have, relative to your meta. If you feel you have enough, take shredders because they are a better value against most targets. If you don't have enough, take blasters.

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

The issue is that if you want to bring the Shredders in range of anything, that Dark Lance is going to be hitting on 4s.

With the new profile it still deals more damage on average than a Blaster even with -1 to hit.

Who knows, maybe kabalites with be able to count as stationary when embarked in the new dex. That'd be a really nice little change!

I honestly don't care, 1 weapon out of 5 models, meh. My kabals are either their to die, or to help Anti tank and then die. They are not tough enough to sit on objectives with 10mans and 2 heavy weapons, they don't get enough re-rolls to care about heavy weapons, and 1 shredder or blaster is basically used only if i have more points or spam 8+ kabal units.

Kabals needs some love before i take them other than ObSec/action/secondary throw away units.

Koldan wrote:

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

I'm not sure I follow. You said you're thinking about kabalites with blasters in venoms, then advocate for the opposite of that.

As with now, I doubt I'll take more than 5 warriors in a list. Maybe 15 if a play a single battalion list. But if it's 3 patrols, 5 are the tax you pay. They can share a raider with another squad of 5, or maybe footslog if there's a safe objective they can score.

sekac wrote:

Koldan wrote:

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

I'm not sure I follow. You said you're thinking about kabalites with blasters in venoms, then advocate for the opposite of that.

As with now, I doubt I'll take more than 5 warriors in a list. Maybe 15 if a play a single battalion list. But if it's 3 patrols, 5 are the tax you pay. They can share a raider with another squad of 5, or maybe footslog if there's a safe objective they can score.

I really hope that when the codex comes out we aren't talking about either Kabalites or Wyches as a "tax". If it's a continuation of the 'Coven and friends' we saw after PA, then GW can cram their book sideways as far as I'm concerned.

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

Koldan wrote:

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

I'm not sure I follow. You said you're thinking about kabalites with blasters in venoms, then advocate for the opposite of that.

As with now, I doubt I'll take more than 5 warriors in a list. Maybe 15 if a play a single battalion list. But if it's 3 patrols, 5 are the tax you pay. They can share a raider with another squad of 5, or maybe footslog if there's a safe objective they can score.

I really hope that when the codex comes out we aren't talking about either Kabalites or Wyches as a "tax". If it's a continuation of the 'Coven and friends' we saw after PA, then GW can cram their book sideways as far as I'm concerned.

With less strong language, I agree. I joined in 4th ed. Early in 4th ed. It might have even been early 3rd ed. I painted for a long time before playing (not that 10 year old me was any good at painting! Horrid red straight from the pot, no highlights, flesh was just flesh coloured, etc). Maybe I read the book wrong, but it cemented in me the idea that DE was about Kabals, backed by Wyches, (sometimes flipped), with a small smattering, what back then, wasnt called Coven units.

I then dropped off playing. I waited for so long for the reboot of the models, and back then I didnt understand kitbashing. Then I was off to uni, and noone I knew played and I just... stopped.

I got back into it relatively recently. Ok, I bought the odd box of this and that, changed colour scheme, took more care, but it was a one or 2 models every 6 months kinda thing. Over the last 2 or 3 years though, I found a group of friends, and it turns out some of them play 40k. And that was all the spark I needed.

The thing is... I dont like how the 8th ed book is structured. I dont like the triple army thing. Its a neat concept, but it wasnt executed well. Cult, possibly my favourite of the 3, suffered. A lot. Kabal in early 8th were really strong. But as 8th went on, and then PA happened, more and more my army lists I posted, both here and on other sites, were met with "You need some Coven in there. You need at least a patrol. You need a Heami, 2 squads of wracks, a unit of taloi, and maybe a unit or 2 of Grots." And that killed me.

You see, I HATE painting flesh. And I kinda just dont like the models for coven in general. Or really their lore. But more than any of that, it really hacks me off that for me to stand a chance, even vs my casual friends (AdMech/Tau/CSM/Khorne/Thousand Sons across 3 people), I NEED to take one of the 3 factions.

If GW wanted us to mix and match patrols, then frankly, you need to be able to take mono factions and still function. Those mono factions dont need to do everything. But they DO need to be able to win games. Solo Kabals on gunships, by the end of 8th, and certainly at the start of 9th, simply couldnt compete without wracks to back them up and get obsec. At least, I couldnt get them to do that the way I played them. And Wyches were, as I was repeatedly told, useless. Reavers had a spot, as expendable fast attack, but a Succi was generally foot slogging and getting shot to bits, while 2 squads of wyches were a tax, not an asset.

I did find that Kabals are still perfectly able to cut all 5 of those armies I mentioned to pieces if I play them right. The thing is, that now loses me games.

Which brings me on to my biggest gripe.

9th is the reality I have to live with. But it will never be my favourite edition. In fact, I am going to go out on a limb and say GW will have to do something very drastic to stop it being my LEAST favourite edition EVER, past/present/future.

I find the objective scoring, and even the objectives themselves, utterly stupid. Primary objectives are solely about taking points on a map, standing a squad on them that is hard to remove, and waiting out the game. Frankly, because of WHEN the points are scored (though I know they just changed that for one round), its not even about shooting the enemy off them, its simply about securing them first. And then I see a lot of people saying Drukhari can win 9th games by going only after secondaries, which is true, but look at what secondaries those are. They are, once again, about map control. "get all 4 corners", "get both deployment zones", "stand here and do this thing - which is basically adding a new primary for a turn". Drukhari started winning 9th games with 3 models left on the table. They won by IGNORING the enemy.

Meanwhile, if you take the secondaries that are about killing the enemy... they simply dont match up points wise. I have, vs my friends, actually tabled them in turn 4. Completely. Not a single model left. But they went first, and I could never score the primaries, and despite similar numbers of models... Attrition, Bring it Down, ect, the never add up. Its pocket money. Its tie breaker amounts.

Frankly, I dont want to play those games. I dont want to NEED coven to stand a chance at holding primaries, and I dont want to have to ignore the enemy to win with secondaries. I want to use the fact that I can mix and match to run the Kabal/Cult army of my dreams. Because I like those models. And I can paint those models.

Luckily for me, my friends hate the scoring too. Oh, they all win vs me, but they lose vs each other, often with the same result. Whoever goes first has the advantage. Whoever has the best obsec units generally wins regardless of what else happens. Dice dont decide the games. Tactics dont decide the games. Rushing the point, and then camping it, does. Just like Risk after the first few turns.

We are strongly considering (when we can move freely again) switching to narrative play - generally in some form of siege or ambush setup. We will still use points over power level, but it will be a more general "we just decide the winner based on what we see". Because rolling 30 dice and watching nearly the same number of enemy models get removed is the fun part for us. We are also considering sticking with matched play, but changing scoring to the opposite end of the phase, and maybe even bringing in AoS turn order flipping (turn 1 is player A then player B, turn 2 is player B then player A, etc). Why those are not already in 40k when they work SO well in AoS, we dont understand.

Sorry for the long post... again. I just, why should I NEED to use one faction when they pretend to give us the illusion of "Oh, its a mix and match army like no other". Its not mix and match if the option is "Patrol of coven and then 2 more patrols, either coven or kabal".

Excellent post. I couldn't agree more, and certainly much more measured and eloquent than mine.

harlokin wrote:

sekac wrote:

Koldan wrote:

Actually, I am thinking right now about Kabalites with Blasters in Venoms. As Shredders seem to be a better anti-infantry weapon than a splinter cannon, and a dark lance seems to be a better anti-tank weapon than a blaster, I have the feeling that a Dark Lance Raider and a Kabalite Squad with 2 Shredders and a Dark Lance will have a higher damage output and be cheaper than 2 Venoms and 2 Kabalite Squads with a Blaster each. Sure we don't know all yet, but right now I think the Raider will be our default transport for Kabalites.

I'm not sure I follow. You said you're thinking about kabalites with blasters in venoms, then advocate for the opposite of that.

As with now, I doubt I'll take more than 5 warriors in a list. Maybe 15 if a play a single battalion list. But if it's 3 patrols, 5 are the tax you pay. They can share a raider with another squad of 5, or maybe footslog if there's a safe objective they can score.

I really hope that when the codex comes out we aren't talking about either Kabalites or Wyches as a "tax". If it's a continuation of the 'Coven and friends' we saw after PA, then GW can cram their book sideways as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, I'm one of those people who likes the meat of my armies to be made up of actual troops (I know - what a concept!). I really hope the new book doesn't lean us towards taking minimum troops as a tax and then spamming Ravagers, Razorwings or whatever.

At the very least, it concerns me that only our heavy weapons seem to have improved, whilst virtually all our troop weapons (with the arguable exception of the Shredder) - splinter rifles, splinter pistols, blasters, blast pistols etc. - have garnered no improvements.

I also play casual with some friends, and lately we decided to ignore completely the Secondary Objectives, and instead, we purchased the Mission Pack: Open War.
I gotta say that the fun factor has risen drastically by doing so, with more gambling elements and feeling more like a real Warhammer game, you know, where you indeed KILL some stuff, not just running around and evading everything that you see.
We did not do a LOT of game cause of the global situation, but just this little pack of cards indeed raised or faith in the game

Kabalite warriors have never impressed me since I started with DE in 5th (I played other armies going back to 3rd).

I've very rarely taken more than 5. Not until 8th, where maxing out battalions was the name of the game, did I include more. DE are an army of specialists and kabalite warriors are not. They are pretty much just a single special weapon delivery system, and are otherwise just a tax.

If I was interested in running a bunch of T3 guys with ineffective guns, I'd play imperial guard. That's just not what we do.

The only times I've enjoyed taking more than the minimum possible number of troops were when wyches had haywire grenades in 5th, and now that wracks can be taken in blobs of 20. But those are more specific roles than anything kabs have ever had to offer.

I liked Kabalites in 5th.

They weren't amazing but they were pretty decent for their cost, and this was the edition when poison shooting was at its height. What's more, their vehicles were pretty durable and had some nice upgrades. Splinter Racks giving rerolls to hit from Raiders give them some quite nasty firepower against a lot of units.

Sure, it's not impressive these days, but this was in 5th edition - before the massive escalation in wounds, saves, firepower, movement etc. At the time it was pretty damn solid.

IMO Warriors dropped off significantly in 6th and 7th. This was due to a number of factors, though perhaps one of the most noteworthy was how vulnerable open-topped transports became. 7th in particular made Venoms and Raiders into easy-bake-ovens for enemy flamers to light.

In 8th, the wound escalation was not accounted for in either the weaponry or special rules of Kabalites. However, I think they made up for it to some extent simply by measure of how cheap they were. Even accounting for their transports, you could field a significant number of them at a pretty reasonable cost. It probably wasn't the best strategy but I won a lot of games in 8th with armies that had significant quantities of Kabalites at their core.

I think they were only really hit in early 9th - when their cost was increased with no benefit and at the same time, other armies saw even their basic their infantry double in wounds.

I'm hoping that the new book will remedy this, though I'm a little concerned that what's been improved thus far is their save and attacks. I'm far more concerned with their shooting output than their armour or melee ability.

Yeah "unimpressed" was the wrong choice. Uninspired is better. I saw the value in boats of kabs with splinter racks in 5th, I just never saw the appeal. There were too many cool things and I wanted to take a little bit of everything. I ran a WWP jack in the box army, never venom or splinterboat spam.