Guest Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Seems like GW purposely nerfed this guy witht he release of the wraith knight. I might be wrong, so I'm asking if he's viable? As I see it, he's got half as many wounds as the wraithknight, less than half the firepower or damage output, and not even access to an invulnerable save. Oh, and he costs half as much. Am I missing something here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 They could've worked if they had a points adjustment or could be taken 1-3 per slot (maybe?). As it stands, if you're looking for an MC for Eldar, why settle for anything other than a wraithknight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 They could've worked if they had a points adjustment or could be taken 1-3 per slot (maybe?). As it stands, if you're looking for an MC for Eldar, why settle for anything other than a wraithknight? Darn, was hoping I was wrong. The model is pretty. I am curious, if not using the FOC (unbound), does this change the value of the wraith lord any? As I see it, no, as most weapons that can easily wound T8 won't be impaired by having to shoot at two targets instead of one because most are mounted on multiple models. Example, lascannons, even 4 in a dev squad, are unlikely to get more than 3 wounds on either a wraith knight or lord in a single round of shooting. So if your solution is two or three units of lascannon devs, their tactics aren't grossly impaired when you shoot at two wraiths instead of 1. Might matter if the opponent has ID weapons that can wound T8, but those really aren't too common, at least in the non-eldar domain. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Basically, there is no competitive reason to ever bring a wraithlord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonVilkee Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Reason is monetary as in you already own wraith lords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 29, 2014 Report Share Posted October 29, 2014 Which I do... But I use a d-cannon battery and war walkers instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 The Wraithlord is almost good enough to use, but the drastically slower movement speed combined with weird stat discrepancies (why is it I4 when the Wraithknight is I5?) make it end up a fair bit less functional. As a shooting platform it can be superior- mounting two Bright Lances and two Flamers is no small thing- but the Wraithknight's superior speed just makes it too much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 The Wraithlord is almost good enough to use, but the drastically slower movement speed combined with weird stat discrepancies (why is it I4 when the Wraithknight is I5?) make it end up a fair bit less functional. As a shooting platform it can be superior- mounting two Bright Lances and two Flamers is no small thing- but the Wraithknight's superior speed just makes it too much better. There's a minor difference in assault, as the knights have 6 attacks on the charge, while lords have 4 each. The lords have 2 points lower strength, but when that means they have S8, its not a huge issue. If getting into assault isn't the issue, I think dual wraith lords are probably better than singular wraith knights. But this one goes back and forth, as a knight at half health has the same attacks, while a lord dead and one alive has half as many attacks. I do think if the lords were a unit of 1-3, they'd be very easy to justify. I suppose one could argue that the wraith lords are more able to be hidden via cover, which does have some merit as that knight is hard to get cover with. On another point, I suppose it would be fair to consider a wraith lord with dual starcannons/lances as a equilvelent to a devastator squad with lascannons and a power fist. Pretty similar cost. devs can't move and fire, plus strike last in assault with the fist, but get two more shots and more range. Hmmm... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 If there's any "Area Terrain" around, it's ridiculously easy for the Knight to get Cover. Just needs a sliver of the Base inside a Forest or Ruin or whatever and it's good. It also bugs me that a "knight" is ranked higher than a "lord" :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 If there's any "Area Terrain" around, it's ridiculously easy for the Knight to get Cover. Just needs a sliver of the Base inside a Forest or Ruin or whatever and it's good. It also bugs me that a "knight" is ranked higher than a "lord" :P Been wondering why people still use area terrain. Seems like the rules really don't balance too well with area terrain, rather than TLOS based cover saves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torg Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I had a WK and a WL in my OFCC list ... I had the WL kitted out to run and chop with his sword ... He was ok for the task - body guard for the Wraithseer and there to lend a CC hand for the wraith guard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I'll be honest. I still play wraithlords. Why one might ask? Since they're slower than a Wraithknight, and have less initiative? They don't cost an arm and a leg, that's why. I can get two wraithlords which, if played well, are twice as hard to kill as a wraithknight. I usually run one wraithknight as well. But the Wraithknight is actually severely over-costed for what it does. If you get the base one, he's tolerable, but the moment you upgrade him to a troop killing machine, then he's a lot more, and doesn't have great survivability options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I think you're in the minority on that opinion, dash. Which is fine. I remember being one of the few tournament Empire players that hated archer detachments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 I'll be honest. I still play wraithlords. Why one might ask? Since they're slower than a Wraithknight, and have less initiative? They don't cost an arm and a leg, that's why. I can get two wraithlords which, if played well, are twice as hard to kill as a wraithknight. I usually run one wraithknight as well. But the Wraithknight is actually severely over-costed for what it does. If you get the base one, he's tolerable, but the moment you upgrade him to a troop killing machine, then he's a lot more, and doesn't have great survivability options. Can you give me an example loadout of a wraith lord that doesn't cost and arm and a leg, while remaining viable to your army? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 Wraithlord with a star cannon/missile launcher, or starcannon/brightlance. It gives me good anti-infantry and light anti armor options, and then if I must, I'll get them engaged somewhere, especially if I can charge a tank or something here and there. If I wanted to go truly less points, I think you could go two scatter lasers and a sword. They're more expensive than they used to be, sure, although they tend to draw a lot of fire. They're not great answers to everything, because a squad of deamonettes will make short work of them, but you have to understand what they're used for and what they can and can't do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashneeb Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I think you're in the minority on that opinion, dash. Which is fine. I remember being one of the few tournament Empire players that hated archer detachments. It's true, however, first off, I don't have more than one Wraithknight, and I could get them with little effort. However, spending 300 points on something that can be taken down relatively easily in this day and age so that I can have a fast moving, incredibly large target, that is hard to get cover for and has to rely on it's piddly 5+ save just seems odd, when for that 300 points and a touch more, I can have two, slightly less fast, guys who fill a better role because they can shoot two different things, have an easier time finding cover, and can scamper around for targets of opportunity. It's not that the wraithknight is bad... no, far from it. And it's not like the wraithlord is a great thing with it's cost. However, I can say that if you really want bang for your buck, a squad of 3 warwalkers with a farseer with guide is the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 However, I can say that if you really want bang for your buck, a squad of 3 warwalkers with a farseer with guide is the way to go. Which is what I do... :D 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swan-of-War Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 What are you guys arming your War Walkers with then? Scatter Lasers would replace the need for a Farseer... I'm easing back into 40K, so be gentle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted October 31, 2014 Report Share Posted October 31, 2014 I go dual star cannons on 3. They are super great at messing up anything that isn't AV13+. S6 AP2 with 2 shots at that range and BS is no joke. Guide 'em and they can even go after most flyers. They put an average of 7 wounds on non invisible Centurions before saves. So even with a 4++ save, they could look at losing 2. That's pretty solid damage output. They put a hurting on lots of units, and their outflanking ability is great as well. Battle focus is a great ability to get needed range or else play old-school shoot and scoot tactics with 'em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted November 1, 2014 Report Share Posted November 1, 2014 Scatter Lasers don't twin-link themselves, so there's that to consider. However, I still consider them generally the "right" option for Walkers, since they give you the best volume of fire (which is generally what you want from them.) If you're desperate for AP2 Starcannons aren't terrible or anything, but I prefer the flexibility of the Scatter Laser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PourSpelur Posted November 1, 2014 Report Share Posted November 1, 2014 Outflanking War Walkers have taken my lunch money so many times that they have to ride those little Bandit scooters at the grocery store. True Story 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.