Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I really like the idea of the dire avengers, and I think they are the real Eldar basic troop. so why don't they work? What makes them "suck"?
Try and read some of the many other threads that cover this.
Many people don't think they suck, and use them exclusively for their troop choice.
They have a better save, better BS, better WS, better LD, and I. What more could you ask for?
Oh, and please do us all a favor, and don't troll.
because a dire avenger is 12 points and a gardian is 8 points. they both fill the same roll rather well. for every 2 avengers, you get 3 gardians. that extra wound and extra two shots are much better than a statline bump. gardians can take warlocks. gardians can take platforms.
avengers just don't have a place, there too expenive to do something that's allready being done by cheaper troops.
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner"
-Guns don't kill people, bullets do.-
-Support your local game store! Don't buy online or from GW stores.-
However, Guardians without a Warlock w/ conceal die to bolter fire (AP 5,no save allowed) Dire Avengers can take the save. Your not really calculating the point value fairly for a comparison. To do so you need to calucalate your total squad (add in the Warlock+weapons+ability). Below is how I rank them, again just in my opinion
Guardians: More shots, Weapon Platform
Dire Avengers: Hire BS
Guardians: More figures, potentially more attacks
Dire Avengers: Hire WS, I, LD, Armor Save, Exarch w. Dire Sword (character killer), Fearless if led by Asurman
Holding Table Quarters
Guardians: More wounds, survivable w/ conceal, platform, potential AP 3
Dire Avengers: Max 10 figures per squad, potential fearless
40K-Beakies(9-14-4),Guard(4-7-2),Orks(34-12-11). FANTASY-Dwarves(15-6-7),Beasts (14-14-1), Skaven (17-17-10) DoC (6-1-2). CYGNAR (28-15-1)
Dire avengers have way better stats, but the fact that they cannot use platforms or be joined by warlocks make them suck bigtime. If you *really* wish for a squad, that relys on the close to worthless shuriken catapult and nothing else, DA will do better than guardians. But if you wish for a squad that can actually do something, guardians are the way to go. It sucks.
Dire Avengers definitely do not suck. I use them, along with Rangers, exclusively as my troops choices. I hardly ever field Guardians.
Most Eldar players I know can't see passed the 12 points of the Dire Avenger. They figure, why not spend 4 fewer points for a unit that does the same thing? Well, Guardians don't do the same thing. They can't shoot as well, assault as well, they break faster, get pinned easier, often can't fleet of foot because they're sidled with a weapons platform, and they don't get an amped up squad leader that can really boost CC for you. I absolutely love my Dire Avengers and would never leave home without them.
Due to the increased stats that the DA's have, it means that a unit of 10 DA's will hit almost as often as a unit of 15 Guardians, which both are about equal in points. Also, DA's are far more survivable with their 4+ save. Since most guns in the game are AP 5, this allows them their save most of the time, except against special and heavy weapons such as heavy bolters. Loading up Guardian squads, meanwhile, with a Warlock increases that squad's points quite a bit.
But the main reason I don't field Guardians is because they don't maximise their fighting potential. They are either doing one thing, or the other, and never both very well. If they use a weapons platform, they try to stay out of range and probably never use their shuricats; that, and they have a measly BS of 3. If they get in range to use their shuricats, they get assaulted shortly thereafter which negates their weapons platform. That, and DA's can hold their own in CC far better. All this makes the choice painfully obvious...for me at least.
They suck, becuase our codex is not with the current edition .
we are... outdated... these troopers do not live with the current rules hah.
Houston: I am able to see past the 12 point price on the DAs, but even if they did cost as much as a guardian, I would still not use them. The heavy weapon platform is the only reason what so ever to field any non-ranger troops. Furthermore, the guardian heavy weapons are the onlt potential (I play ultwhĂ©) bs4 heavy weapon in the entire army, and that makes it a very reliable choice. As the codex are now, guradians simply serve as living armor for the heavy weapon crew. However, if I actually wanted to shoot people with the (crappy piece of sh.. X-P) shuriken catapult, DAs would be slightly better at it.
Make no mistake though, I a NOT a fan of guardians, I just think that DAs suck even harder, and on top of that, their model is ugly. I canÂ´t stand their helmets.
Farseer Sareld: "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Peter Griffon (oh, and some old philosopher guy...)
I use the Dire Avengers for their Shuricats. If I were to use Guardians, it would be for the same thing. They act as my core troops, and basic infantry carries the basic guns. For Assault 2, Str. 4, AP 5 weapons...you could do a lot worse. That's better than a bolter so long as you can get to 12", and so long as there is adequate cover and you use smart tactics, its not too hard. Then I follow up with assault and my DA's handle themselves adequately there. Are they excellent troops? Of course not...that's what the other, more expensive Aspect Warriors are for. But Dire Avengers are my basic troops, and in that role, they do very well.
I can't argue against how the models look...its a subjective thing. I like the Roman style brush helmets. They may be a little too tall, but overall, I think the models are good; if another Eldar player doesn't, well, nothing I can do about that.
But as far as taking Weapons platforms in Guardian squads...I find that to be a major misallocation of resources. Such a squad (around 8 Guardians plus Warlock w/ conceal + platform...I don't believe in taking the minimum 5 Guardians, which is chincy) costs around 150 points. You're basically paying all that for the single heavy weapon to fire. The shuricats should never even be within 12" if you have a heavy weapon in the squad, because within that range, you risk (nay, are asking for) assault. CC makes your 50 or so point Heavy Weapon useless. Therefore, when using a heavy weapon Guardian squad properly, the Guardians act as nothing more than ablative armour, or extra wounds for the one gun. That's really underusing your army's assets, in my opinion. I'm not using my men and women properly unless every single one gets to fire his or her weapon at some point in the game - that's my goal for all my troops, and it is only impeded if they get vaporized before being able to pull the trigger. As an Eldar commander, the prospect of ever using troops as "bullet catchers" or meat-shields disgusts me. Besides, the thing that bugs me the most about it is the BS of 3. This makes Heavy weapon guardian squads expensive as well as rather mediocre shots. I'd rather stick my heavy weapons on:
A: My Wraithlord (BS 4)
B: My Falcon (cause you gotta have a Falcon)
C: Cheaper platforms, such as Vypers (with CTM's, if you must)
D: Wave Serpents (twin-linked...need I say more?)
All I'm saying is that I think there are far better options to using Heavy Weapons Guardian squads. I use the basic troops as just that - basic, anti-infantry troops. And I stick my heavy weapons where they are either cheaper or will do more good. But like I said, I like to try to maximise the potential of every troop I have, so if they spend the majority of the game doing nothing but waiting to take a bullet for the team, that's doing them a major disservice.
Oh, and I agree with what you say about Black Guardians. The extra BS is the only thing that justifies the Weapons platform, for me anyway. I only ever field Heavy weapons squads when I'm playing with Ulthwe rules...which is rare (prefer Vanilla and Iyanden, actually).
On a slightly unrelated note, I always feel that Storm Guardians can be useful, even in a non-Ulthwe army. They can always use Fleet of foot because they don't have a platform. Plus, with a Warlock offering either Conceal or Enhanceand with the special weapons they can take, charging those bad boys (and girls) into combat is a joy.
Throwing a T3 guy with a 5+ save within 12" of the enemy = killing him. I donÂ´t llike sacrificing the lives of my eldar either, but no matter how you look at it, guardians are made to die in vast numbers, like guardsmen. Thats how things are supposed to be according to GW, for some reason I donÂ´t understand. I wish that guardians were more survivable, or that I at least had a decent alternative that was.
DAs are the better choice if you wanÂ´t to shoot people with shurikens, but I donÂ´t wanÂ´t to take that chance. Around 80-90% of the gamers around where I live play power-armored armies on regular basis, so the ap2 of a starcannon is essential if I wanÂ´t to win.