venoms vs. raiders

i have been going through the army lists section and it seems like there are not very many people useing raiders. Is it mainly to create more targets that venoms seem to be more common.

Using lots of Venoms is pretty common because they put out a good amount of firepower at long range for cheap and because we're seeing more infantry this edition.

Honestly... it's kinda hard to make a case against using as many of them as possible.

I'm a new player but from what I've seen, Venoms are easier to hide , create more targets and in a way are cheaper than a Raider. I have seen couple of army lists where people stick ten warriors in a raider and destroy massive amounts of infantry but for some reason people go crazy for Venoms.

that is what i thought but i think i will keep running at least 1 raider with warriors because the guys i play against run FMCs but then again i could take ADL with Quad gun

kingc1313 wrote:

that is what i thought but i think i will keep running at least 1 raider with warriors because the guys i play against run FMCs but then again i could take ADL with Quad gun

Tyranids? If yes then the warriors and the raider will take care of the little bugs while you take care of those FMCs.

Even though its snapshots, it doesnt mean you can't take it down. Try shooting at it with the raider and warriors and give it splinter cannons = 21 shots in total (9 warriors 1 with splinter cannon + 1 splinter cannon from raider = 21). im sure he'll die.

I'd think that do well against flying monstrous critters because of Splinter Racks making all those rifles twin-linked.

Counting the re-rolls you effectively fire 27 shots if rapidfiring with 10 guys with splinter rifles at a normal target. Against an FMC, that's 3 or so hits, followed by 17 rerolls, so almost another 3 hits.

EDIT: Generally, Raiders do a better job at transporting credible melee threats or units that are stronger at holding an objective. Some people also take them if they're running low on anti-tank firepower, but I also always end up turboing mine when exposed to any real threat.

Raiders transport and venoms shoot. I Raiders for my wyches and venoms for Kabalites. Both have their benefits and I use a mix of both. I might try all venom but not all raider list.

Like Vasara said the raider is a transport first, gunship second. The venom is a gunship first, transport second.

Raiders rock, bigger model for blocking line of sight and blocking movement, more transport capacity so your warriors can take a splinter cannon, 36" range lance (turn 1 AT is invaluable). One of the biggest advantages of the raider other then that is that an empty raider is very low on your opponents target priority list, so chances are it will still be around to give you some mobility late game.

I tend to use my raiders to get my warriors into a decent position and then they just fly around empty blocking line of site to units, providing cover, and firing their dark lance until the pen-ultimate turn where they grab some warriors and catapult them 50"+ away to capture or contest an objective that my opponent thought I couldn't reach (Turn 4: warriors move out of cover and embark on a raider that was 3-4" away, raider moves 12", then flat outs 18"/ Turn 5: raider moves 6", warriors disembark 6" and then run d6" onto an objective in cover).

They are also great at working with venoms, blocking line of site to them (the venoms) or using the venoms to give the raiders cover on the first turn.

Mushkilla wrote:

Like Vasara said the raider is a transport first, gunship second. The venom is a gunship first, transport second.

Raiders rock, bigger model for blocking line of sight and blocking movement, more transport capacity so your warriors can take a splinter cannon, 36" range lance (turn 1 AT is invaluable). One of the biggest advantages of the raider other then that is that an empty raider is very low on your opponents target priority list, so chances are it will still be around to give you some mobility late game.

I tend to use my raiders to get my warriors into a decent position and then they just fly around empty blocking line of site to units, providing cover, and firing their dark lance until the pen-ultimate turn where they grab some warriors and catapult them 50"+ away to capture or contest an objective that my opponent thought I couldn't reach (Turn 4: warriors move out of cover and embark on a raider that was 3-4" away, raider moves 12", then flat outs 18"/ Turn 5: raider moves 6", warriors disembark 6" and then run d6" onto an objective in cover).

They are also great at working with venoms, blocking line of site to them (the venoms) or using the venoms to give the raiders cover on the first turn.

This seems like a great tactic. I'm now curious though. What is the best unit to put in a raider? I don't see large Wych units as that competitive in this edition so I'm ruling those out. I need to try more games with the large warrior squad but I don't like a raider popping out of the sky and killing a bunch of the warriors inside. Do you generally disembark the warriors into cover in the early turns?

Aside from warriors and grots, who else is well suited for a Raider. Most other large squads are too much of a point sink to justify. The other alternative is taking a Raider and only filling it half full so it is just transporting 5 wyches or 5 warriors etc. Is this worth it for the benefits you mentioned mush?

I use 5 Wyches with haywire. They gat more safer ride in a raider than venom. And Raider being longer allows longer charges.

Vasara is right
because it's longer and O-T you can come out in front of it and be really close to the enemy for a charge

I use raiders for my grots and wyches, venoms for everything else.

i see a lot of really good ideas here i think i am going to try the tactic of dropping off the warriors after they shoot down FMC i find in most of my lists i end up putting trueborne in venoms end everything else in raiders

How many raider/ravager chassis is too many?

I know this is somewhat subjective and terrain dependent, but I ask because of their sizable footprint. I am really just looking for individual input... at what point do you start to feel crowded with the bigger skimmers?

I am looking at running 3/3 at 1850 pts but now im reconsidering the 3rd raider even though this change would cost me a full sized unit option.

One of the reasons I dont like fodder armies or hordes (besides being a fan of MSU and elite armies) is due to their inherent deployment and movement restrictions, so I dont want to accidentally build myself something that is similarly restrictive.

Brom wrote:

I know this is somewhat subjective and terrain dependent, but I ask because of their sizable footprint. I am really just looking for individual input... at what point do you start to feel crowded with the bigger skimmers?

Crowded you say?



I dunno...hasn't felt crowded yet.

I think local meta can matter (more big templates at high strength starts to suggest you need more spread out room, natch. But outside of that (or a table so blessedly choked with terrain I have trouble fitting them in...a miracle I have never encountered) I've never felt too cramped due to number of Raider/Ravagers on the table.

Quote :

Crowded you say?

Holy... ya that puts it in perspective haha! I should be ok with 6 large boats then haha.

Thor665 wrote:

Crowded you say?
.

But you can't/shouldn't do this if you're facing blast weapons. Particularly Manticores.