Goonhammer article - Are Drukhari Too Good?

Not a lot of GTs over the weekend but I briefly looked through the results and didn’t see any won by Drukhari. A DA list won the Red River GT which had Brad Chester playing his Motor City Mayhem winning Drukhari list. GH contributor and Dallas Open top five Drukhari player James Kelling didn’t win the tournament he played in Minnesota. And anecdotally, I got stomped hard this weekend by a Dreadnought IH list with tons of Str 6/7 shooting. The Reddit mob has relentlessly mocked and ridiculed people advising patience to let the meta adapt to Drukhari. And I think this weekend was the start of those adaptations.

Any idea when the likes of Lennon and Nanavati are next playing in a GT? I think that will be the real test, firstly to see if they still play Drukhari and secondly to see if the meta has adapted to it.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Tabletop Tactics (Spider and Chef) have now put up a Faction Focus video discussing the power level of the codex:



Pretty much everything in there I agree with and indeed it matches with most of the suggestions I put in this thread a few days back (+10 points on Raiders, switch DL and DC points, drop SC by 5 points, make liquifiers 1/unit on Wracks, points bump for the Succubus and Drazhar).

The only things I disagree with are:

Not being able to put, say, Cult, units in a, say, Kabal transport. I think that's fine and really don't want to see us pigeon-holed into having to keep our three sub-factions effectively as completely separate armies.

Removing the Incubi keyword from Drazhar. This may mess with other rules interactions at some point and a more elegant solution would be to alter the Archon and Drazhar's auras to affect CORE INCUBI only. Removes the auras from Drazhar but does nothing else unintended and also means they match most other auras in the game.

I agree with almost everything you say here. I particularly think stopping one subfaction using another's transports would be a bad move. It makes no sense lore-wise and would severely hamper list construction (which is something GW clearly wanted to move away from in this new dex)

My one difference is that I'm cool with Draz being affected by his own aura, I think he should be an absolute monster in combat (as he now is).
Would be a little odd seeing draz have to wound things on a higher roll than his fellow incubi.
I do think it's silly to picture him inspiring himself but you could get round this by just baking his +1 into his kit then adding the core word to the aura (but this is a very minor complaint).

Can someone help explain to me the Dark Technomancers hate, is it that Liquifiers are better in general? the lack of penalty to hit? the increased wound/damage? It's been mentioned earlier in this thread but I can't help but feel the rule was how GW intended it to be. As I look through the codex of weapons that could actually benefit from it, I sort of arrive at the conclusion that while the rule looks pretty good, Liquifier guns are kind of the only weapon to really gain anything from the obsession without breaking even on the risk/reward. Aside from liquifiers, the only other Coven-accessible weapons are:

Hex Rifle
Heat Lance
Haywire Blaster
Spirit Syphon
Spirit Vortex
Dark Lance
Disi Cannons

Then there are the poisoned weapons that I don't see benefitting a whole lot:
Ossefactor
Splinter Cannon
Stinger Pod
Twin Splinter Rifles
Stinger Pistol (lol)

So while there are some candidates to benefit from the obsession, those benefits may not outweigh the risk since a good portion of these are on monsters or vehicles you wouldn't be able to allocate wounds elsewhere, weapons that already pretty good strength and damage wise (lances), or would be comical (stinger pistol, twin splinter rifles). To me the only real contenders that standout are the liquifiers and maybe the ossefactor since they are the only kind of mid-range strength weapon to stand the most benefit. Hex Rifle maybe for some character sniping, but it's still heavy.

If for some reason GW nerfs this by removing the LG from the acothyst (TTT video mentioned there's only 1 in a box of wracks), you'd just start seeing more hex rifles on them. Haemy's can't get even them, so the only thing I could think of is that it's an oversight that an acothyst can get one.

I don't know how GW wouldn't have seen this coming, especially since there's probably some coven heavy player out there who would have certainly playtested with lots of wracks/liquifiers. Even if they didn't have the automatic hit rule, the wound allocation is such that the unit suffers the damage and you're still going to have an insensible to pain roll so it's not like these things aren't going to do damage. Liquifier guns are after all, still D6 hits so there's still some variance on there. Just feeling like the focus on the automatically hit interaction is just sort of pretext for the fact wracks have a good weapon on a mobile platform that can ruin multi-wound units day.

The hate comes from the fact that there is absolutely NO downside what so ever for having a weapon that does so much damage. On average, ~7 hits, S4 AP-2 2D with +1 to wound that auto-hit from 12", have assault and realistically have a 14+3.5+12 = 29.5" threat range without Aethersails or Fire and Fade shenanigans. This does not account for Raiders being gud or Wracks having Obsec. This package with 5 Wracks is 145 points base, 205 for 2x5, and is arguably one of the most cost-effective combos in the game. The applications for this are near endless, and the weapon profile is so well-rounded that it can answer everything.

Here's how they wouldn't have seen it coming: Their playtesters might have seen it, reported it, but it's ultimately up to GW to do whatever the F with the feedback provided.

It's also possible that GW just looked at DT liquifiers and thought, "eh, we'll grant them the super-liquifiers on this one". There doesn't neccessarily *have* to be a downside - you pay for it with an all-consuming obsession that disallows you from getting any other choices.

Granted, it does feel a little lopsided. If DT liquifiers are to stay untouched, I would think that they should have a points increase.. but only for DT. Or, alternately, DT liquifiers should be changed to heavy rather than assault (they're more powerful experimental versions, so they're.. um.. heavier). That would fix the whole raider advance + shoot thing.

HERO wrote:

The hate comes from the fact that there is absolutely NO downside what so ever for having a weapon that does so much damage. On average, ~7 hits, S4 AP-2 2D with +1 to wound that auto-hit from 12", have assault and realistically have a 14+3.5+12 = 29.5" threat range without Aethersails or Fire and Fade shenanigans. This does not account for Raiders being gud or Wracks having Obsec. This package with 5 Wracks is 145 points base, 205 for 2x5, and is arguably one of the most cost-effective combos in the game. The applications for this are near endless, and the weapon profile is so well-rounded that it can answer everything.

Here's how they wouldn't have seen it coming: Their playtesters might have seen it, reported it, but it's ultimately up to GW to do whatever the F with the feedback provided.

Thanks, so this to me really is about cost effectiveness of DT-wracks with liquifiers rather than the lack of downside. Yes it's an aspect of it, but this goes far beyond the lack of downside. Maybe someone else has made this point, but even if liquifiers were subject to to-hit rolls, a 5-man wrack unit that's gone unmolested by enemy fire would take a few turns for that downside to kick in. That's still a 1 followed by a failure to roll a 5+ on a model in the unit. So even under those circumstances that 5 man unit has plenty of outs before it starts losing effectiveness, a 10 man unit even more so (though I know why no one is running 10-man units).

Not sure what kind of changes would satisfy folks, everything is so intertwined you'd be screwing over non-DT wracks in the process.

Also, for science, I'll leave this quote from the 5th edition codex:

"The amount of devastation wreaked by this fearsome weapon depends on how much of its vitriolic ammunition splashes over its target. To represent this, roll for the Liquifier Gun's AP value every time it is fired"

They take MW's on a 1 to wound instead like it was in 8th, IDK why auto hitting ignores the purposed downside to it.

amishprn86 wrote:

They take MW's on a 1 to wound instead like it was in 8th, IDK why auto hitting ignores the purposed downside to it.

Hell, if they removed DT from things that auto-hit entirely, that would be acceptable to me.

KiriONE wrote:

HERO wrote:

The hate comes from the fact that there is absolutely NO downside what so ever for having a weapon that does so much damage. On average, ~7 hits, S4 AP-2 2D with +1 to wound that auto-hit from 12", have assault and realistically have a 14+3.5+12 = 29.5" threat range without Aethersails or Fire and Fade shenanigans. This does not account for Raiders being gud or Wracks having Obsec. This package with 5 Wracks is 145 points base, 205 for 2x5, and is arguably one of the most cost-effective combos in the game. The applications for this are near endless, and the weapon profile is so well-rounded that it can answer everything.

Here's how they wouldn't have seen it coming: Their playtesters might have seen it, reported it, but it's ultimately up to GW to do whatever the F with the feedback provided.

Thanks, so this to me really is about cost effectiveness of DT-wracks with liquifiers rather than the lack of downside. Yes it's an aspect of it, but this goes far beyond the lack of downside. Maybe someone else has made this point, but even if liquifiers were subject to to-hit rolls, a 5-man wrack unit that's gone unmolested by enemy fire would take a few turns for that downside to kick in. That's still a 1 followed by a failure to roll a 5+ on a model in the unit. So even under those circumstances that 5 man unit has plenty of outs before it starts losing effectiveness, a 10 man unit even more so (though I know why no one is running 10-man units).

Not sure what kind of changes would satisfy folks, everything is so intertwined you'd be screwing over non-DT wracks in the process.

Also, for science, I'll leave this quote from the 5th edition codex:

"The amount of devastation wreaked by this fearsome weapon depends on how much of its vitriolic ammunition splashes over its target. To represent this, roll for the Liquifier Gun's AP value every time it is fired"

I forgot who mentioned this, but there's only 1 liquidifer in the sprue from the Wracks box. Taking 1 Liquidfier away entirely might be an acceptable fix.

Count Adhemar wrote:

Any idea when the likes of Lennon and Nanavati are next playing in a GT? I think that will be the real test, firstly to see if they still play Drukhari and secondly to see if the meta has adapted to it.

Nanavatti and Nayden are both playing in the Maryland Open this weekend. It’s a huge event with a lot of very good east coast players so I think it’ll be very telling about how the meta has adjusted to DE.

sweetbacon wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

Any idea when the likes of Lennon and Nanavati are next playing in a GT? I think that will be the real test, firstly to see if they still play Drukhari and secondly to see if the meta has adapted to it.

Nanavatti and Nayden are both playing in the Maryland Open this weekend.  It’s a huge event with a lot of very good east coast players so I think it’ll be very telling about how the meta has adjusted to DE.  

I spoke with them earlier this week, they're not going. Will still monitor the results though..

HERO wrote:

KiriONE wrote:

HERO wrote:

The hate comes from the fact that there is absolutely NO downside what so ever for having a weapon that does so much damage. On average, ~7 hits, S4 AP-2 2D with +1 to wound that auto-hit from 12", have assault and realistically have a 14+3.5+12 = 29.5" threat range without Aethersails or Fire and Fade shenanigans. This does not account for Raiders being gud or Wracks having Obsec. This package with 5 Wracks is 145 points base, 205 for 2x5, and is arguably one of the most cost-effective combos in the game. The applications for this are near endless, and the weapon profile is so well-rounded that it can answer everything.

Here's how they wouldn't have seen it coming: Their playtesters might have seen it, reported it, but it's ultimately up to GW to do whatever the F with the feedback provided.

Thanks, so this to me really is about cost effectiveness of DT-wracks with liquifiers rather than the lack of downside. Yes it's an aspect of it, but this goes far beyond the lack of downside. Maybe someone else has made this point, but even if liquifiers were subject to to-hit rolls, a 5-man wrack unit that's gone unmolested by enemy fire would take a few turns for that downside to kick in. That's still a 1 followed by a failure to roll a 5+ on a model in the unit. So even under those circumstances that 5 man unit has plenty of outs before it starts losing effectiveness, a 10 man unit even more so (though I know why no one is running 10-man units).

Not sure what kind of changes would satisfy folks, everything is so intertwined you'd be screwing over non-DT wracks in the process.

Also, for science, I'll leave this quote from the 5th edition codex:

"The amount of devastation wreaked by this fearsome weapon depends on how much of its vitriolic ammunition splashes over its target. To represent this, roll for the Liquifier Gun's AP value every time it is fired"

I forgot who mentioned this, but there's only 1 liquidifer in the sprue from the Wracks box. Taking 1 Liquidfier away entirely might be an acceptable fix.

This.

I would let DT precisely as it is now, but I will rip off the Liquegun entry for the Acothyst. It makes no sense at all. There's is (nearly) no sergeant-like model in this game that can carry the special/heavy weapon of the unit.
Devastators, Scourges, nor Wyches or Kabals.
The Acothyst can take melee weapons limited to him, the Hexrifle which is a special gun for him (unallowed to Wracks), he cannot take Ossefactor which IS a weapon for Wracks only.
But they manage to have a Liquefator. Which is not for characters/sergeant (even the Haemi lost it!) but a special weapon for Wracks. Wtf?

The broken thing of DT is 2 Liquefators on 5 men's size Wracks unit. Just 60 points. If you should pick 10 Wracks for 2 liquefiers DT will not be busted like it is now.
Do you want liquefator spam? Then you have to list Talos or Grotesques. But Grots are 45 points each, with no OS, no mandatory Troop slot filled, max 2 units in a Patrol. I'm pretty fine with that.


Why the Acothyst should be able to carry a Liquefator?

Honestly, we live in a meta full of -1 damage (Dark Angels banner, all of Death Guard). DT isnt broken, unless you are going up against an 8th edition codex. Than it could be said any 9th edition codex is OP for numerous reasons.

I am honestly surprised we are still talking about this...

fisheyes wrote:

Honestly, we live in a meta full of -1 damage (Dark Angels banner, all of Death Guard). DT isnt broken, unless you are going up against an 8th edition codex. Than it could be said any 9th edition codex is OP for numerous reasons.

I am honestly surprised we are still talking about this...

DT is not broken per sè. 3x5 (or more) units of Wracks with double liquefator each 5, embarked in stupidly undercosted transports, are.

It's not that you see a lot of Talos/Cronos with DT, or even Grots spam (usually just 1x3 or 2x3 at maximum, for the WWSWF only).
But DT Wracks+Raider? That's even embarassing. They're extremely solid, mobile, tough, high damage (no, only DG counter them for their -1D over all the army, and it's not because of 1 army that they became "fine". Every other relic/gadget doesn't counter the overall effectiveness of Wracks, which can be everywhere), multiple threats, OS units, stupidly good overwatch etc.

This combination need to take a nerf. And yes, we have again our beloved Raider in this equation...

Cerve wrote:

This combination need to take a nerf. And yes, we have again our beloved Raider in this equation...

Asking for a nerf before seeing what other armies get with their new codices is short sighted.
After the Sisters and Ad Mech drop, you may very well be right back here begging for this exact combo back so you can compete.

the FAQ is out. It is working as intended.
The Chardon FAQ should fix the Razorflail issue.
The next Chapter Approved will fix Raider points issue IF it even needs to be fixed, which I think it does not.

Anyone right now begging for a nerf is as much of a knee-jerk reaction as mine was saying Drukhari would suck from the previews we got. Give it time, it will even out.

Don't Panic, and always carry a towel.

Cerve wrote:

fisheyes wrote:

Honestly, we live in a meta full of -1 damage (Dark Angels banner, all of Death Guard). DT isnt broken, unless you are going up against an 8th edition codex. Than it could be said any 9th edition codex is OP for numerous reasons.

I am honestly surprised we are still talking about this...

DT is not broken per sè. 3x5 (or more) units of Wracks with double liquefator each 5, embarked in stupidly undercosted transports, are.

It's not that you see a lot of Talos/Cronos with DT, or even Grots spam (usually just 1x3 or 2x3 at maximum, for the WWSWF only).
But DT Wracks+Raider? That's even embarassing. They're extremely solid, mobile, tough, high damage (no, only DG counter them for their -1D over all the army, and it's not because of 1 army that they became "fine". Every other relic/gadget doesn't counter the overall effectiveness of Wracks, which can be everywhere), multiple threats, OS units, stupidly good overwatch etc.

This combination need to take a nerf. And yes, we have again our beloved Raider in this equation...

I fully disagree, DT is the problem if you had nothing to shoot out of a raider no one would say its under costed, its actually been this same price (up and down 5pts here and there) for 4yrs now and not a single person has complained.

When the unit inside has to get out to do msot of their damage a transport is working well, but when a unit can stay inside to do 99% of its damage, well that unit is the problem. Unless you are Harlequins b.c they have been doing Starweavers FP bombs for a very long time but I guess its ok when they do it? You know 5-6 shots that are Str 8 -4 for D6 and they have 4-6 of those at times too... but w/e.

The problem is now players feel like they have to kill them and they can and they do, they are just mad it takes 2-3 turns to kill all 6, but isn't that fine? It would be a much bigger problem if they could kill all 6 in 2 turns b.c then no one would like them and think they are too weak.

A second problem is players playing with WAY too much Obscuring terrain so you can hide 6 raiders turn 1, wtf is that about? GW didn't say play with 6-10 pieces of obscuring only, yeah when you can't even shoot them turn one they feel like a problem.

Finally almost all other transport are just terrible, you don't see Impulsors, Chimeras, Trukks, Land Raiders, Razorbacks, Taurox, Primes, and many others (you'll see some Rhinos in sisters or a Dunerider in Admech, but not much) When 99% of all transports are 20-50pts over costed yeah a adequate priced one feels too cheap.

What needs to happen is, Nerf DT and lower the cost of all other transports by 20-50pts, if the Impulsor was 85pts base I bet marines would take it and no one would cry its too cheap, heck I bet you still have people saying its still too costly.

amishprn86 wrote:

Cerve wrote:

fisheyes wrote:

Honestly, we live in a meta full of -1 damage (Dark Angels banner, all of Death Guard). DT isnt broken, unless you are going up against an 8th edition codex. Than it could be said any 9th edition codex is OP for numerous reasons.

I am honestly surprised we are still talking about this...

DT is not broken per sè. 3x5 (or more) units of Wracks with double liquefator each 5, embarked in stupidly undercosted transports, are.

It's not that you see a lot of Talos/Cronos with DT, or even Grots spam (usually just 1x3 or 2x3 at maximum, for the WWSWF only).
But DT Wracks+Raider? That's even embarassing. They're extremely solid, mobile, tough, high damage (no, only DG counter them for their -1D over all the army, and it's not because of 1 army that they became "fine". Every other relic/gadget doesn't counter the overall effectiveness of Wracks, which can be everywhere), multiple threats, OS units, stupidly good overwatch etc.

This combination need to take a nerf. And yes, we have again our beloved Raider in this equation...

I fully disagree, DT is the problem if you had nothing to shoot out of a raider no one would say its under costed, its actually been this same price (up and down 5pts here and there) for 4yrs now and not a single person has complained.

.

Did you miss the change between T5/T6, the 11 carry potential and that 9th is all about an objective/movement edition? That's no one were complain for 4years...

T6 alone changed everything. Just do the math.

And btw, saying that everything else is overcosted it's like the one that drive in the wrong direction and complain about everyone.
Just push up the Raider and everything will be fine.


PPS: that's not completely true. Trukks, Rhinos, Chimera, there are some transports that are actually usefull and good.

Cerve wrote:

DT is not broken per sè. 3x5 (or more) units of Wracks with double liquefator each 5, embarked in stupidly undercosted transports, are.

Out of curiosity, what is your Meta like? Do you play Compeitively, or more friendly/garage type games? And are you generally playing 9th edition codicies, or generally newer stuff?

In my competitive meta, were honestly not OP. But Im regularly going up against 1-2 Forgeworld Dreads, LoWs, etc.

If your more of a fluffy player, and feeling bad about beating people, it may be better to just adjust your list to compensate.

In competitive environments, there is a lot of cheese, and its not all spikey DE cheese

Cerve wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

Cerve wrote:

fisheyes wrote:

Honestly, we live in a meta full of -1 damage (Dark Angels banner, all of Death Guard). DT isnt broken, unless you are going up against an 8th edition codex. Than it could be said any 9th edition codex is OP for numerous reasons.

I am honestly surprised we are still talking about this...

DT is not broken per sè. 3x5 (or more) units of Wracks with double liquefator each 5, embarked in stupidly undercosted transports, are.

It's not that you see a lot of Talos/Cronos with DT, or even Grots spam (usually just 1x3 or 2x3 at maximum, for the WWSWF only).
But DT Wracks+Raider? That's even embarassing. They're extremely solid, mobile, tough, high damage (no, only DG counter them for their -1D over all the army, and it's not because of 1 army that they became "fine". Every other relic/gadget doesn't counter the overall effectiveness of Wracks, which can be everywhere), multiple threats, OS units, stupidly good overwatch etc.

This combination need to take a nerf. And yes, we have again our beloved Raider in this equation...

I fully disagree, DT is the problem if you had nothing to shoot out of a raider no one would say its under costed, its actually been this same price (up and down 5pts here and there) for 4yrs now and not a single person has complained.

.

Did you miss the change between T5/T6, the 11 carry potential and that 9th is all about an objective/movement edition? That's no one were complain for 4years...

T6 alone changed everything. Just do the math.

And btw, saying that everything else is overcosted it's like the one that drive in the wrong direction and complain about everyone.
Just push up the Raider and everything will be fine.


PPS: that's not completely true. Trukks, Rhinos, Chimera, there are some transports that are actually usefull and good.

T5 to T6 is minor when before most players had a 6+++ or the fact that old DT (Coven in general) HAD T6 ALREADY. Also the 6th/11th slot doesn't mean anything for survivability.

So going from T5 to T6 isn't a buff.

PS; some other transports has 6 slots (Skyweaver, Razorback, Impulsor, Falcon) and some has 11 or more (Wave Serpent, Battle wagon) so it is not out of the ordinary to have enough for a character or 2. Also I would rather have had HQ's with a bike, wings, skyboard, etc... but that requires GW to actually give us new units, you know how LITERALLY EVERY OTHER NEW ARMY GOT IN 9TH. Its only been 11yrs for us, w/e.

amishprn86 wrote:

So going from T5 to T6 isn't a buff.

I've read this several times, but I still dont understand. Its like your words just dont make any sense.

Zenotaph wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

So going from T5 to T6 isn't a buff.

I've read this several times, but I still dont understand. Its like your words just dont make any sense.

In 8th we could already have T6 vehicles with Coven, DT was already really strong and the meta from PA release, not only could we get T6 Raiders but also T6 Venoms if we wanted too. My tournament list was full of T6 Raiders (10 actually) so going from T6 to.... T6 is not different.

Also you could instead go BH and get a FnP of 6+++ on them which is equal to +1T for the most part (better vs higher and lower str but worst vs equal) Against Str 4 and 7+ the FnP is actually better. Overall BH vehicles got less survivable and Coven are equal.

amishprn86 wrote:

Zenotaph wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

So going from T5 to T6 isn't a buff.

I've read this several times, but I still dont understand. Its like your words just dont make any sense.

In 8th we could already have T6 vehicles with Coven, DT was already really strong and the meta from PA release, not only could we get T6 Raiders but also T6 Venoms if we wanted too. My tournament list was full of T6 Raiders (10 actually) so going from T6 to.... T6 is not different.

Also you could instead go BH and get a FnP of 6+++ on them which is equal to +1T for the most part (better vs higher and lower str but worst vs equal) Against Str 4 and 7+ the FnP is actually better. Overall BH vehicles got less survivable and Coven are equal.

Dude, that worked only within an Haemi, there's all the difference of the world here.

And if you don't get that 11 carrier potential IS a value of toughness overall that means you don't have a full view of the strongness of this Codex in this edition. You give T6 and 10 ablative wounds to THREE units instead of two, and we are a talking about a package that you can fit in list like 6-8x times. It's not like you have to kill a single Raider, is that with T6 ALWAYS, on every boat you deploy, with 14"+ movement with fly...well, that's another story for real.

The change between 10 and 11 IS a value of tougness, because where you usually have to pay 1 Trasport for 1 unit, or max 2 of them, Drukhari can field 3 blender-units, all of three super good, at the cost of a single undercosted transport. Can you see the math in there? That means you have MORE transport tougness and capability/blender potential together than every other Codex in this game. We have usually between 3 and 4 characters, and we have a lot of 5 mensquad size, everyone of these guys are a massive blenders. Drazhar, Succubi, kitted Archons, Incubi, Wracks, and only after that here there comes the 10x units: Wyches, and Trueborns.
The change between 10 and 11 means literally that you can fit MORE transports and powerful guys in the same 2000 pts limit than every other Codex in this game. Where you had to buy a Transport alone just for the HQ.

And, are you really make a comparison between a cluster of transports all around a fielded Haemonculus, with 7"+D6 maximum movement, with no fly, in 8 edition where you can stay and fire and bring games at home...to the T6 built-in characteristic, with fully 14"+D6(+stratagems) movement, all around the board, in an edition of movements and melee, objective conquers? Seriously?
It's like comparing Chess with Chessex. Two completely different universes.

I hate to sound "that guy", but jeez there's an huge luck un comprehension about this game. It seems all about dice, hit rolls and wound rolls here, which is like the 35% of the game maybe. English is not my main so maybe I sound more harsh that I am. Sorry if that happens, it still a game of plastic soldiers, nothing to rant about. But still, it's a deep game. For me, considering just the math is just a partial view of it.

Personally I played only AoF Raiders with -1 D and T6 within a Haemy aura and that was much more survivable in the late 8th. Now our boats got other benefits, but they alone are not undercosted.
The antitank potential of the meta today is just weak bc there are not too many proper targets across the lists.
If people bring their meltas and d3+3 cannons back, you will find out that your "undercosted" raider is made of paper and the passengers are dead on the ground.

If the passengers of a raider are easy targets then you have positioned your raider poorly. Always park near terrain so the squad can be protected if forced to disembark.