Raiders or Sulphurhounds?

[Prot]

I think I will keep holding back until I know the new point costs. I like the Sulphur Hounds a tiny bit more, but the Raiders have so many tools in their box for such a low points cost while Hounds feel a bit one- dimensional...

 

I'm definitely not going to complete the models but I will test them partially built just for line of sight purposes. (I guess I'll simply put the bodies together to the point where they could be either model type.)

 

The more test games I play of 9th with other armies, I'm getting the distinct feeling the Raiders might not work very well. The Sulphurs are now slightly shifting in the lead because of 12" flamers and speed on a platform that I believe will just about disappear once it's shot at. 

 

As a side note, new Coherency is a stinky rule. So that 12" is really good, but 5 man units might be the way to go. If that's the case, a  third box of Serberys could simply be added to the one leftover I have from the other 2 boxes, creating a 4 man squad of Raiders, which might end up being good objective grabbers, that can retreat from a charge, but not much else.

[PiñaColada]

Sulphurhounds don't have a 12" flamer, only the sterylizors do (and kastelans I guess). I'm in the midst of building and painting my guys and so far they're pretty fun to paint, way less fiddly than the pteraxii IMO. I'm planning on getting 3 boxes so I can run 5 raiders and 4 sulphurhounds (or maybe rather 3 of them but can switch between a blast carbine or no). 

 

5 man squads seem ideal as 3 wounds makes a lot of blast weapons solid against them as well and that's still a sizeable enough squad to stack buffs on if needed. The raiders are so cheap and quick that I could see running 3 squads of 3 of them if you're not competing for other FA slots, objectives is the name of the game in 9th and I like 'em in that role. That retreat from charge can be a game winner if your opponent gets greedy and tries a multicharge too.

[brother_b]

Prot: I value your input and insight, as you're getting actual games played.

 

What is wrong with the new coherency rule? I'm guessing it will make our units more blob-like than strung out. That would be a knock against the raiders, as I envisioned them moving forward and taking up a large amount of space on the table.

 

I love the cavalry sabres. I'm the type of guy that would build a specific unit because I like one aspect of the model (cavalry sabres). Yup, that may be all it takes for me to choose raiders.

 

On a more serious note, although I do love the cavalry sabres, I really thought that a group of the Raiders pushing forward would force my opponent to deal with them, allowing me to dictate the flow of battle.

 

That's the plan I had with the army; Raiders, dragoons, and a transport with stick priests moving up with the Stygies stratagem and free pre-game raiders move.

 

What's your take on that Prot?

[Prot]

Sulphurhounds don't have a 12" flamer, only the sterylizors do (and kastelans I guess). I'm in the midst of building and painting my guys and so far they're pretty fun to paint, way less fiddly than the pteraxii IMO. I'm planning on getting 3 boxes so I can run 5 raiders and 4 sulphurhounds (or maybe rather 3 of them but can switch between a blast carbine or no). 

 

5 man squads seem ideal as 3 wounds makes a lot of blast weapons solid against them as well and that's still a sizeable enough squad to stack buffs on if needed. The raiders are so cheap and quick that I could see running 3 squads of 3 of them if you're not competing for other FA slots, objectives is the name of the game in 9th and I like 'em in that role. That retreat from charge can be a game winner if your opponent gets greedy and tries a multicharge too.

 

 

Ah gees, I completely missread the Sulphur breath mixing it up with the pistols. (I have a digital copy). As far as unit types, I guess I'm looking at doing the opposite of you (5 Sulphur/4 Raiders)

 

See my take on the Raider charge defense is: 1) the table is considerably smaller. You feel it now. That gap will be closed quickly by ANY assault army even mildly competitive: Warp Time, Advance/Charge, Nids, etc ,etc.  2. The reality is these Raiders are Rangers with a mount. So if you take 5 for example, that's the equivalent of losing 15 Rangers.  That's incredibly easy to clear off because Admech inherently do not have good screens. Your opponent's entire anti horde, weak, high-volume fire power is going purely into those Raiders. 

 

 

 

Prot: I value your input and insight, as you're getting actual games played.

 

What is wrong with the new coherency rule? I'm guessing it will make our units more blob-like than strung out. That would be a knock against the raiders, as I envisioned them moving forward and taking up a large amount of space on the table.

 

I love the cavalry sabres. I'm the type of guy that would build a specific unit because I like one aspect of the model (cavalry sabres). Yup, that may be all it takes for me to choose raiders.

 

 

 

Yes, the cool factor for the Sabers is way up there for me too. If I thought these guys had any offensive threat, I would use them instead of Sulphurs. I just don't really believe that will be the case, but I can be very wrong about that. But so far I'm I think that role is far better served on the ol' Priests (either type).

 

 

About Coherency. Okay, this is just my opinion so bare with me. I may have some of this wrong, but if it plays like I have been playing it, then Coherency is easily the ugliest mechanism of 9th edition to me (almost up there with the nerfs to Psychics).

 

So if you have 6 or more models, you can't move them illegally. That is to say they wanted to stop congo-line movement. A lot of people originally said, 'well to get around that, all you have to do is this:"

 

X                         X

    X    X    X   X

X                        X

 

 

But I have found this is incorrect. Keep in mind this is for even a 6 man squad. 

 

So every test game where I have an assault type squad, this is incredibly awkward. Like Possessed, Priests, Terminators, etc. The problem with the above is two fold: first once you take a casualty (think overwatch/shooting/psychics) IF you remove on of the branched out X models, you are out of coherency. So now depending on the phase of the game, you may lose anotther from Moral. Then you check for coherency again.... are you fully coherent with every model? If not you keep killing off models until you are compliant. 

 

I can't tell you how awkward this becomes charging through, ruins, or forests (with tree trunks) or Debris, and all the while you have to be very careful how you remove your casualties which will further penalize you after Moral (which could be more losses). The entire time you move, assault, (die?) settle Moral, you either keep that coherency in mind, or potentially start plucking models.

 

Now to add further complication: This means not as many models make assault. There's just no way around it. Don't forget the new rule is: the assaulters within 1" of enemy models are engaged, BUT the other assaulters have to be within 1/2" to those friendly models already engaged in order to participate in the battle.

 

That's a clever hidden nerf.

 

Add another layer of complexity: Keep all the above in mind, AND try to stay within 1 or 2 auras. 

 

This really is clunky to me, and having larger 'elite' units has been very counterproductive for me. In fact I see MANY people playing this wrong. I see them moving 6+ man squads all the time on Youtube, and they rarely (if ever) keep true coherency. A lot of people are doing this wrong right now, and if you watch for it, you'll see it. It's very counter intuitive (so I don't blame them).

 

At the end of this long explanation I would say you are most safe moving any such squad as a semi-circular blob. 

 

Also a 6 man squad is okay for the formation above, because as soon as you lose one, you don't need to have the coherency awkwardness in effect.

 

That being said, I've played 4 games now where this coherency rule has been a very notable detriment. And I personally will not be going above 5 men unless it is nearly a blob. 

 

But, take what I'm saying with a dash of salt. I'm just playtesting games now, but I do see 'seasoned' playtesters on Youtube doing it wrong. (Or I have it completely wrong).

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

On a more serious note, although I do love the cavalry sabres, I really thought that a group of the Raiders pushing forward would force my opponent to deal with them, allowing me to dictate the flow of battle.

 

That's the plan I had with the army; Raiders, dragoons, and a transport with stick priests moving up with the Stygies stratagem and free pre-game raiders move.

 

What's your take on that Prot?

 

 

Anything that works independently of the Admech Core is super valuable in 9th (my -personal- findings so far). I like what you're thinking of in general because what I'm finding is the secondaries are complex, and the primaries are HUGE, and as a result of all of this, a lack of table control early in the game can result in land slide victories for your opponent.

 

Case and Point: I played my Custodes Allarus list VS. Blob Orks a few days ago. I lost because I had 80+ orks with first turn, and even though I just about tabled the little buggers, he out ObSec'd me and owned the table. All the killing in the world was not going to prevent the loss. 

 

The table is smaller, and the real estate it represents is more important than 8th edition by a mile. 

 

Pre game  moving is fine, but again my fear with Admech is a lot of our units are paper. Don't forget you have no idea who is going first until -after- deployment now (you alternate deployment). So the order of operation is important or you can find you just fed your opponent his first kill. 

 

Sorry for the wordy response. I'm just trying to help... to convey what I'm finding so far and if it helps anyone then great!

 

 

+edit+

Enough of me being on the fence: Next game of 9th I'm pulling out my Mars list with 5 Raiders in it!

Edited July 8, 2020 by Prot

[brother_b]

No, great response, much appreciated.

 

I typed a long response basically saying the secondary missions seem born of Frontline Gaming and their tournament style mentality (FLG gets a lot of input via play test and tournament running) but just figured it would make my response look bitter. I'm not.

 

I only want to play fun games, tournament, game store, or garage. I want my games to feel like my decisions on the battlefield matter, not the most OP army or hinky interpretation of RAW vs. RAI.

 

As long as 9th makes the game experience better I really don't care.

 

On to board control. I've got 9 hounds to make. I'll probably purchase a single off Ebay and run 5 sulpher and 5 raider. That'll give me the best of both worlds, maybe, but at least I won't have to worry about the new coherency rules.

[Prot]

Thanks. I could be overreacting, but for right now it feels wonky. I like your proposed squad sizes. 

[mertbl]

One little point on engagement, for your 2nd rank to fight its models within 1/2" of models within 1/2" of enemy models get to fight. They cut down that second rank fighting dramatically.

[brother_b]

One little point on engagement, for your 2nd rank to fight its models within 1/2" of models within 1/2" of enemy models get to fight. They cut down that second rank fighting dramatically.

Sounds like we’ll get some 300 style choke point defenses then.

 

This... is... STYGIES........... eight

[mertbl]

Any updates on which build is "better"? I've got 3 on my desk that I've taken as far as both halves assembled and glued to a base. I'm leaning towards the raiders at the moment.

[SydonianDragoon404]

I think its pretty obvious at this point that the raiders are the more competitive option and the sulpherhounds are the fun option. 

[Clingy]

I had a clutch moment with the raiders the other day

 

I was on the far side of an objective and an opponent’s dreadnaught went to charge me to kill me and claim the objective. It was an 8 inch charge. I did the move in the overwatch phase trick and fellback 2” so that I was still on the objective but the near side now.

 

Dread rolled an 8 lol but failed his charge and got caught out in the open.

 

That alone was worth bringing them in the list

[BolterZorro]

This is unfortunate that I really prefer the look of the sulphurhounds then :-(

[Magos Takatus]

Tell me about it. I love the look of the Phosphor Carbine but alas it doesn't really have an efficient place in the squad. Thankfully I do still like the Raiders and 'hounds.

[Prot]

So rather than start a new thread, I thought it would be better to just revisit this conversation.

 

I've finally decided at this point in 9th, I'm going to just use both my boxes as Raiders. Partially this is because I hate proxying! I have these bases and bodies just running around being used as either build. :)

 

I think I make this decision purely for the defensive nature of the Raiders. I still don't see much use for Sulpherhounds in my lists at least.

 

These models are pretty finicky and I'd like to get them done before I inevitably lose bits and pieces.

[Magos Takatus]

I had an interesting encounter in my first game using them. I used the Raiders' stratagem on my opponent, who had forgotten what they can do. They prevented an assault from both a brood of Genestealers and a Broodlord along on flank, relieving quite a lot of pressure on that flank for a turn or so. They appear to have risen to almost the same level of ire from my opponent as Phosphor Kastalans. I am expecting them to be mauled by Devourer fire in the next game when we are allowed to mingle indoors again. The Hive Mind always learns. Honestly, I should have reminded my friend what they did before the battle but I forgot to tell him again.

 

Perhaps I can find a way to make him go out of his way to hunt Raiders in order to get him to make a mistake. That's unlikely though, I am currently playing a reactive game and struggling to figure out how to capture objectives.

[Prot]

That's funny. But yea, they are kind of a 'gotchya' unit with that strat. I definitely make my opponent aware of such stuff, but all my usual opponents are quite aware now and they do out of their way to simply ignore them. What ends up happening is they raiders feel like an 'invisible' unit that takes the odd random shot to the head. 

[Madao]

Raiders seem to be the best AdMech screening unit (if they survive shooting phase). Imagine the situation:
- they stand in between the enemy hard hitting (in melee) unit (e.g. smash captain) and your heavy shooter (e.g. imperial knight/unit of dakkabots).

- to charge the heavy shooter, the opponent has to charge around the Raiders and, given their bases are quite large and he has to move 1" away of them, it will likely fail

- if he decides to charge your raiders (or declare the charge on both them and your heavy shooter) then for 2 CP you can run 12", making the charge (nearly) impossible to perform

So the heavy hitter looses his fighting turn AND stays outside of the combat, so can be blown up in your next shooting phase.

 

It can be of course countered by taking Raiders down in the shooting phase or using second unit to charge them and lock in combat (so they can either save them and leave heavy shooter to be eaten by enemy hard hitter or not run away at all). But the second option still gives you at least one more turn before enemy hard hitters (and helper unit) get to 'real' close combat for the cost of a quite cheap unit (~45pts). And to add to the shooting them down - taking 3x3W T3 4+/6++ unit in shooting phase is not that easy task for melee armies (Tyranids, Orks).

 

So, to sum up - I think, that Raiders are decent defensive unit, with some nasty shooting capabilities (e.g. for taking down enemy psykers, which can be a pain in the AdMech ass). I think, that I might choose Sulphurhound instead if I were running Rad Saturated forgeworld, but in the any other scenario I would rather take Raiders. And if I were running IK with AdMech support, then I would definitely take some Raiders.

[Magos Takatus]

I'd love to run Sulphurhounds with the Rad Sat rules but my army is already pretty big, getting another unit would be nice but I wouldn't know where to store them.

[Gaz1858]

Most people are aware of the Raiders strat now and try to plan around it. Both units are fantastic screens but perform different roles outside of that. I have 2 units of both in my 2000. 2x5 Raiders and 2 x 4 Sulphurhounds

 

Both can get onto Objective and Engage On All Fronts really well. Putting the pressure on your opponent to take them off the Objectives or forcing their hand in movement. Where they differ is in their offensive output. The Raiders dont get many shots so youll want to either target already reduced units to try and plink some wounds off or just target characters to see what you can do.

 

The Sulphurhounds are actually a lot more killy and against certain armies (anything with T3, including T4 when inc ombat and a save of 3+ or worse) as they have a lot of firepower. Keeping a CP back to allow for some overwatch can also ruin someones day. I run them as Stygies for a possible 27" move on turn 1 and then shoot. This can take you right up a flank and onto an opponents objective turn 1. Then you can flame the holding unit into oblivion.

 

By using these units correctly your then forcing your opponent to decide upon hitting these objective holding/flanking units or the rest of your army (in my case cawl 3 bots, 2 Skorpius, Fulgurites etc) which are decimating your army or moving into strong positions. 

 

I am actually considering putting the 2 x 4 into a single 8 man unit for CP reasons and to be a big pain for anyone wanting to charge them. A 24 wound unit with flamers and pistols that has just moved 27" right into your lines or are basically lined up and disallowing you movement forward is great!

 

Things to Watch Out For

Dont Move the Raiders straight forward because you can. You may be giving the opponent an easy charge. Also limit them to being able to charge a single Raiders unit so that youre not using the strat on one and sacrificing the other

 

Beware of units that can heroically intervene as using the units as move blockers will end badly if youre not careful. 

 

Dont sacrifice game points to keep these units alive. Theyre expendable units only there to get you some Engage and to annoy the opponent. Just make sure youve used them well and then let them die.

Edited December 16, 2020 by Gaz1858

[Prot]

Some really good points Gaz.

 

- So you have 18 of these models up and running? Wow. That is some serious coin, these are really expensive kits.

 

- I'd like to add to your warning about Heroic Intervention being played against the Raiders; the new Blood Angels are going to have a hay day against such units. (Even the Sulphur hounds). I have some BA players in my area that I honestly think have changed my base lists simply by their existence.

 

- The models are extremely fine and a bit finicky. (I guess that goes for Sterylizors too). 

 

- I am actually very impressed with the model from an appearance stand point, and I underestimated how difficult they are to paint. Although I'm doing the riders separate from the mounts, the horses themselves are really intricate with detailed tracer on the armour, and head, and lots of tubing/wires. Quite challenging.

 

- Considering how expensive this  set is, and the very slow pace at which I'm personally taking to paint them, I doubt I will buy more so I'm going to do these 6 up and use them all as raiders (either 2x3 or 1x6). Not sure what's best yet.

 

- Although I committed to the Raiders, I do agree the Sulphurs are extremely valuable, but I decide to avoid buying/making more of the kits, I would use Sterylizors for this role. Although they don't have the 'flame-pistol' they do have the added range of a traditional flamer, combined with deep striking ability for a nice combo at a reasonable cost. I still don't know if I'll use them this way, but since I'm leaning Sterylizor, it is a bit of an overlap on the Sulphur design.

 

- I still -really- think that at their current points the Serbery units should be T4. I still find they disappear just so quickly. But I agree (even if T4) these are cagey units. Best to contest something, force a 'fail charge' on your opponent, or skirt the boundaries of the board, trying to force bad decisions from your opponent.

 

- The last time I played my Raiders, it was against a knowledgeable opponent who had seen me use the retreat strat more than once. So I reminded him of that and he simply ignored them. (He was playing Orks) And this was his best play. The Raiders are so inconsequential in shooting and melee that he simply strung out these long veins of Boyz squads, and trickled through the board trying to tie up my more valuable units. 

 

I found that tactic to be really good against the Raiders. Since I would be unable to 'taunt' or try to get a bad charge from him, he made most of them. Now so many armies add to their charges and the board is smaller it really does make me think this unit is on a limited time frame until a new codex comes out. When properly played against, the Raiders typically last longer, but become relegated to 'annoyance' mode... which is fine as long as you don't put too many points into them. 

[Clingy]

Then they act as a reliable engage or linebreaker or domination scorer if ignored?

[Prot]

Then they act as a reliable engage or linebreaker or domination scorer if ignored?

 

Basically, yea. Honestly in most cases when ignored the Raiders do lose value (They don't do any appreciable damage). So after their job is done 'blocking' out charges, and they are being ignored, I typically do what you're saying and my favorite is to tie up shooty units if possible.

 

I sure hope for our new 'dex they remain very cheap. The rest of the game keeps getting killier, and more killier. Comparitively speaking this unit went from shooting paint balls to spit balls. 

[Gaz1858]

Yeh in that Situation Prot the best use is to sit on an objective with them and force the issue. They need to get you off the objective and you can run away and then just move back again next turn. Leaving their Orks just standing about getting gunned down (ideally)

[Deffrekka]

Some really good points Gaz.

 

- So you have 18 of these models up and running? Wow. That is some serious coin, these are really expensive kits.

 

- I'd like to add to your warning about Heroic Intervention being played against the Raiders; the new Blood Angels are going to have a hay day against such units. (Even the Sulphur hounds). I have some BA players in my area that I honestly think have changed my base lists simply by their existence.

 

- The models are extremely fine and a bit finicky. (I guess that goes for Sterylizors too). 

 

- I am actually very impressed with the model from an appearance stand point, and I underestimated how difficult they are to paint. Although I'm doing the riders separate from the mounts, the horses themselves are really intricate with detailed tracer on the armour, and head, and lots of tubing/wires. Quite challenging.

 

- Considering how expensive this  set is, and the very slow pace at which I'm personally taking to paint them, I doubt I will buy more so I'm going to do these 6 up and use them all as raiders (either 2x3 or 1x6). Not sure what's best yet.

 

- Although I committed to the Raiders, I do agree the Sulphurs are extremely valuable, but I decide to avoid buying/making more of the kits, I would use Sterylizors for this role. Although they don't have the 'flame-pistol' they do have the added range of a traditional flamer, combined with deep striking ability for a nice combo at a reasonable cost. I still don't know if I'll use them this way, but since I'm leaning Sterylizor, it is a bit of an overlap on the Sulphur design.

 

- I still -really- think that at their current points the Serbery units should be T4. I still find they disappear just so quickly. But I agree (even if T4) these are cagey units. Best to contest something, force a 'fail charge' on your opponent, or skirt the boundaries of the board, trying to force bad decisions from your opponent.

 

- The last time I played my Raiders, it was against a knowledgeable opponent who had seen me use the retreat strat more than once. So I reminded him of that and he simply ignored them. (He was playing Orks) And this was his best play. The Raiders are so inconsequential in shooting and melee that he simply strung out these long veins of Boyz squads, and trickled through the board trying to tie up my more valuable units. 

 

I found that tactic to be really good against the Raiders. Since I would be unable to 'taunt' or try to get a bad charge from him, he made most of them. Now so many armies add to their charges and the board is smaller it really does make me think this unit is on a limited time frame until a new codex comes out. When properly played against, the Raiders typically last longer, but become relegated to 'annoyance' mode... which is fine as long as you don't put too many points into them. 

Having played Raiders quite extensively throughout 9th, I value them so much more than the Hounds by quite a large margin. Skirmishing Line is great defensively and offensively, you can bait opponents into overloading a flank then popping 12" away behind some Obscuring terrain or further into the centre. Even using them just to have a toe on an objective at the start of the game forcing you opponent to come out to claim it back. Theyre shooting is pretty negligible but I think the same of the Hounds too due to how close you have to get that youre practically throwing them away + the Str4 AP1 shooting isnt something to write home about.

 

You take Raiders to perform a niche role Admech dont really have; cheap, fast moving bodies that deny the opponent potential VPs, key charges and keeping any weak support characters honest. Tactica Obliqua can be used more than just denying a charge, its 12" in any direction. You can use that to line yourself to achieve further secondaries, zone out deepstrikes even more for the following turn and nab poorly held primaries when the opportunities present themselves. They can also use the strat to blunt the charge, preventing them from extending further into your lines and tagging more in combat. Id sacrifice 5 Raiders to be 1" away from the unit charging to ensure that they only ever move 1-3" instead of 7-9" before pile ins and consolidates.

 

I find 20ppm quite expensive for the Hounds, they are kind of in the same group as Sterylizors who kind of do the same job but better when being a fast chaff clearing harrassment unit that can be where ever it wants and fire its flamer from Deepstrike whilst also having pretty great combat potential vs the units it wants to hunt.

 

I think Raiders will start to be even more of a neccessity as Codexes drop. Against Deathguard they could be amazing if they have no way to modify charge distances. They are already a famously slow army unless mounted up in Rhinos or taking the Noxious Blightbringer (who you dont see as much these days unless hes carrying the relic bell which will probably disappear come the new book) and denyng them a charge/forcing them to go backwards (or a direction that isnt any closer to your more crucial units) could sign the fate of the game. A lot of 9th is decided by the Movement and Charge phase. Restricting the enemies movement whilst giving yourself the board is one of the keys to victory.

 

You could have the best melee unit in the game, but if they fail the charge, go the opposite direction or waste a turn killing something thats already done its job providing little to no value to remove could make a massive swing in the Admech's favour. Leave the anti-infantry killing to our mass Heavy Stubbers and Heavy Phosphor Blasters.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Deffrekka

[Deffrekka]

I think whats more to ponder about is what happens when we receive a new Codex (I assume we will get one with the new Campaign book as DG and DE will have one for it and Admech are the second oldest Codex in the game right now, just behind Grey Knights). Its been a trend that things written in a PA has been taken out when the Codex comes (apart from new units). We have seen this with SM, BA and SW, then DG and DA we either confirm this trend or throw it out the window. Strats have been taken away, same with relics and to some extent warlord traits, so we could loose strats that are tied to Engine War or our units just get reworked.

 

My guess is that Admech and the campaign book will be out February / March time as long as we dont have another delay like what happened with DG. And it makes me pretty hesitant to buy anything and even paint stuff because the whole army could just shift. Stuff like Kastellans loosing double fire, Tactica Obliqua and Pattern Iiteration Identified going the way of the Dodo, Holy Order warlord traits being changed or flat out being written out, Canticles being changed from the ground up.

 

If we knew even a rough time the campaign book / Codex would be out it would be better to plan an army around it but now I just dont wanna get anything until I see datasheets and rules.