Kabalites configurations.

Until now I have always loved my Raider with splinter racks and 10 warriors with a splinter cannon for some splintery action.
My question is would 2 units of 5 in venoms be a better use of resources? I guess I could work out the mathhammer myself but i want to see it described by those with experience.

Both are useful. It's hard to compare since 2 venoms will cost more points than a raider.
I personnally tend to put my warriors in raiders. I should rather say I buy them with raiders because unless there're a lot of ignore cover shots (damn you whirlwind) I deploy them outside their raider, in area terrain to keep them alove longer. When they're in their raider they tend to die in explosion but they dishout a lot of damage at close range. In my lists, venoms belong with splinterborn and Wyches and they stay as far away as possible (unless my wyches need to assault a vehicle).

2 x [5 KW in a Venom (dual SC, NS)] --> 4 units (2 scoring units) on the table when KW have disembarked, 4 very mobile SC

1 x [10 KW + SC in a Raider (SR, NS)] --> 2 units (1 scoring unit) on the table when KW have disembarked, 1 lance, 1 less mobile SC


SR Raider, you gain reliability at 24" / 12" with racks when people are on board, but you loose it when they disembark.
Venom, you gain long range threat, multiple small units, and mobility.

The choice depends on what you want to do with them.

In my opinion, you'd better compare a 5-men Venom, with a 5-men Raider (NS) without SR.
It is almost the same cost, but not the same purpose.
With raiders, you've got additional mobile dark lances, but against infantry venoms are far better.

Pretty much agree with Daemon here. Splinterborn in a venom are just sick.

Mathwise 5 man in the venom is generally more efficient at killing infantry even with the splinter racks. But that doesn't take into account two things.

1. Generally you give your Raider a Dark Lance, which is not good at killing infantry so it skews points. When given a Disintegrator Cannon the 10 man squad becomes more efficient. I wouldn't advise putting DCs on all your raiders but this is just for comparison.

2. Hull points. Granted, our vehicles have a tendency to explode over being worn down by hull points, but if you intend to keep your warriors embarked, that's pretty critical.

And then just take a look at what you're getting for 60 points more:  you get 5 more wounds, 4 more rapid fire shots, a dark lance, and all your splinter rifles are twin-linked. You lose: 1 splinter cannon.

I field boat loads (ha) of transports. Venoms and Raiders. And a couple ravagers. My opponent literally doesn't know what to blow up first. Because it will blow up. But generally, my haywire wyches and my elites go in the venoms. And if he decides to go after my venoms, I feel confident in my raiders with warriors to be almost as deadly.

I don't see a 5 man squad as anything more than a harassing unit until 4th turn when they might become a scoring unit that's easily destroyed. If not blown up, 10 men in a raider and splinter racks will wipe out units.

But this all does definitely depend on your list.

As far as the OP's original question, the answer is...it depends.
Here's an article I wrote about choosing max units vs. small units;
http://www.thedarkcity.net/t1027-unit-size-msu-and-full-size-squads-for-de

There isn't a clear cut answer, as the answer depends on what it is you want the army to do better. I, personally, would choose the MSU build, but that's how I prefer to play. There are people out there who field larger squads and have success in their games and would argue the other way. Both sides have a valid point.

Expletive Deleted wrote:

Mathwise 5 man in the venom is generally more efficient at killing infantry even with the splinter racks.

Well, the splinter rack actually *does* edge out the Venom as long as the Raider is within 12" of the chosen target.
That said, it actually doesn't help the ratio much (the amount of points spent to get a certain number of kills)
Also, the further away the targets are, the better the Venom performs.

Here's the core maths;

5 Warriors w. Blaster in Venom w. 2x S.Cannon (125)
vs.
10 Warriors w. Blaster and S.Cannon in Raider w. FF (185)

Note: I presume movement for all of these, so the S.Cannon in the Raider gets 4 shots, not 6.

Venom

vs. GEQ 5.66 poison wounds (7.33 within 12") .55 from Blaster = .049 kills per point (.063 kills per point)
vs. MEQ 1.88 poison wounds (2.44 within 12") .55 from Blaster = .019 kills per point (.023 kills per point)

Raider

vs. GEQ 4 poison wounds (6.66 within 12") 1.11 from Darkmatter = .027 kills per point (.042 kills per point)
vs. MEQ 1.33 poison wounds (2.22 within 12") 1.11 from Darkmatter = .013 kills per point (.018 kills per point)

So, both in raw damage output, and in cost per point there is an advantage to the Venom.

Now, THAT SAID.

The Raider actually wins hands down in a point for point competition with just the Venom - remember, I did the math here having everything fire. In reality what you will most commonly do is shoot the Blasters in the Venom at a vehicle, and the Venom at infantry, and with the Raider you'll fire the lance at a vehicle and the passengers at infantry.

At that stage the Venom is better than the Raider at 24.1-36" And the Raider is better (and becomes better) the closer to your target you get.

MordredBloodyhand wrote:

Until now I have always loved my Raider with splinter racks and 10 warriors with a splinter cannon for some splintery action.
My question is would 2 units of 5 in venoms be a better use of resources? I guess I could work out the mathhammer myself but i want to see it described by those with experience.

Efficiency refers to the use of resources so as to maximize the production of goods and services murder.


Cost of Raider + Squad
Raider: $37.25
Kabalite Warriors: $29
Total: $66.25 plus Tax

Cost of Venom + Squad
Venom: $30
Kabalite Warriors: $14.5
Total: $44.5 plus Tax

A Raider gunboat is about half again the cost of MSU squad of Kabalite Warriors in a Venom (you can make two Blasters in the pack). Supposing that the Kabalites in a Raider were more effective in game, would they be worth an additional $22? As Thor so eloquently illustrated, variables such as distance greatly impact unit value in points. I could also point out that the shape of the Raider and the rules for Open Topped also greatly impact where you can apply force in relation to the vehicle. Until we monetize (pointicize?) the value of different configuration traits, we are relying more ob subjective observations than cold hard "mathhammer."

They don't sell warriors in halves so you still have to spend the $14.5 which means either wasted resources or fielding five warriors with no transport.

Expletive Deleted wrote:

They don't sell warriors in halves so you still have to spend the $14.5 which means either wasted resources or fielding five warriors with no transport.

Even if you were to leave those five Warriors lying around for some reason, you would still save $7.25. Given that money is a representation of a resource, I think that it should be given its place. Also, given that most people (OP included) would field more than 1 Venom, I think that using my numbers are not unreasonable.

Whilst I take your point about the £ (or $) cost involved, I think for the purposes of the discussion we should just stick to their effectiveness in game rather than value for money.