Boneswords & lash whips

[ferryman]

I don't get it. Is there any reason to take only boneswords vs taking boneswords&lash whips? Same stats, same points but whip lets you strike after being killed. 

[No One]

Bonesword gives you an extra attack.

[ferryman]

Thanks, missed that.

[purestrain]

Sept 26, 2020 13:12:34 GMT ferryman said:

Thanks, missed that.

Best combo imo is a 5man squad with 3/4 bs/lw and the cannon carrier has boneswords. That way the others get to fight even if you're wiped but if at least 1 lives you fight back harder

[ferryman]

My first Warrior squad has 3 scything talons, 1 rending claws. I put boneswords on Prime. A bit mess since I bought one Warriors box and few extra bits from megabits shop to make it 4 Warriors and 1 prime. Interesting loadout that you mentioned, I'm gonna follow your advise on my next squad. Do you use devs or deathspitters?

[hivefleetkerrigan]

Sept 26, 2020 16:54:30 GMT ferryman said:

My first Warrior squad has 3 scything talons, 1 rending claws. I put boneswords on Prime. A bit mess since I bought one Warriors box and few extra bits from megabits shop to make it 4 Warriors and 1 prime. Interesting loadout that you mentioned, I'm gonna follow your advise on my next squad. Do you use devs or deathspitters?

Deathspitters all the time. Str4 AP0 at 18" vs str5 AP-1 at 24"

[infornography]

Deathspitters are what make Warriors worth considering at all. Without them, Warriors are still far too overcosted and underpowered.

I am hoping they get some 9th edition improvements. Particularly to durability, but also weapon potency/number of attacks could use some attention. Warriors have always been either too overcosted to be useful or just on the edge of being useful and relegated to niche roles. End of 8th edition saw them finally able to hold their own but only barely because they are still too easy to kill.

I have some hopes that 9th edition will finally bring them into the spotlight.

[purestrain]

Sept 28, 2020 15:10:13 GMT infornography said:

Deathspitters are what make Warriors worth considering at all. Without them, Warriors are still far too overcosted and underpowered.

I am hoping they get some 9th edition improvements. Particularly to durability, but also weapon potency/number of attacks could use some attention. Warriors have always been either too overcosted to be useful or just on the edge of being useful and relegated to niche roles. End of 8th edition saw them finally able to hold their own but only barely because they are still too easy to kill.

I have some hopes that 9th edition will finally bring them into the spotlight.

Sitting in cover with 3+ save, enhanced resistance, -1 damage stratagem and Levi or catalyst says they can take a hell of a beating

[infornography]

At that point you are counting on spending a hefty number of limited resources on making them more durable as well as keeping them as a static gunline which effectively cuts their offensive output in half. Yes, it makes them tanky, but you are expending an awful lot to get them there at the cost of buffing other units in your army. Also it is counting on a stratagem that relies on an otherwise mediocre unit being alive and nearby.

I'm not saying it isn't worth it if you are bringing warriors to buff them up to live through a few rounds, but just do so with the awareness that you are expending a lot more than points to make them worth bringing and without that investment, they could be mulched by both anti-infantry and anti-tank firepower.

They are expensive and potent, but without multiple levels of buffing they are also fragile and worthwhile targets for pretty much every type of gun. Yeah, the biggest tank slayers will probably be aimed at the monsters in your list, but everything short of that can do a significant number of your warriors.

They need to be better able to stand on their own. Able to be made BETTER by expending our limited buffs on them, sure! But they shouldn't NEED that to be feasible. They should be front liners who can dish it out in range and melee while leading smaller bugs rather than a bunch of cloistered elitists who hide in terrain and are best friends with a big bug that doesn't need their synapse and similarly does its best work on the front line.

In a perfect world I would like to see them with a statline at least closer to Gravis armor marines. Doesn't have to be quite as good, but at least better than they are. Give me 3+ BS and/or WS. Give me 5 Toughness. Maybe a 3+ save. And make boneswords at LEAST as good as a power sword. It would also be nice if Deathspitters got 2d. Yeah they would probably have to go up a bit in points but they would DEFINITELY have a place in many lists if they could dish out and survive on their own without relying on MANY other units and stratagems to make it happen.

[purestrain]

1 HQ and 1 cp aren't "many" things.

[infornography]

A psyker ability (which you can only attempt to cast once a turn across your whole army), a heavy support option (Malceptor), a strategem for that heavy support option, and a single use (dual use if you sacrifice your artifact) strategem.
Not sure what HQ you are referring to. Maybe the Malanthrope which you could, I suppose, throw in for good measure? Maybe the Prime which is a points inefficient way to improve their shooting/swinging?

The biggest cost is expending the adaptation on them. You only get one (or two) of those for your entire army.

And then there is the bunkering up in terrain and keeping another front line specialist (Malceptor) tied up with them.
Sure you CAN make them tanky but it gets expensive to do so pretty fast and not worth it ultimately. They need to be mobile and more independent especially in the current meta. Your prescribed strategy with them pretty much negates two of their strong points. Their synapse (which becomes redundant with the nearby Malceptor) and their melee capability (which will be used purely defensively, if at all, while they are bunkered up in terrain).

All that said, they are on the edge of competitive. If you play them right, with favorable terrain, and a list that benefits them, with a few buffs expended to help them survive the first round or two, they can do good things. It just takes a lot.

[dranzyl]

I think you already said it, and it has been discussed before... Its not worth it to buff something that isnt at least 'decent' or 'good' on its own. The whole list will suffer for not enough returns.

[topaxygourouni]

You don't need maleceptor and definitely not catalyst. Maybe not even prime. Enhanced resistance and the -1dmg strat every now and then is plenty.

They are obsec synapse troops that can take actions, can save half of incoming wounds most of the time and can be played cheaply enough to not get a huge bullzeye.

If you field 12-18 then sure, give them all the upgrades, they're gonna be the backbone of your army anyways. But a simple unit of 6 can be quite the performer in the midfield for sub 200 pts.