PDA

View Full Version : Necron Triarch Praetorians, Compleately useless or not?



Merellin
22-11-2012, 19:03
So what do you all think of these guys? They seem to be very overprices, and they dont seem to have very good equipment either.. Do anyone actualy use them and if so what do you use them for? They look cool, I like the models, They just dont seem very good..

Lord Damocles
22-11-2012, 20:09
When you can take Wraiths for 5pts less (or Acanthrites for 5pts more), they look extremely uncompetetive.

With Particle Casters and Void Blades, they could potentially make half decent light/medium vehicle hunters, but then, Wraiths with Particle casters would do that as well as/better then them for the same cost as well...

hobojebus
22-11-2012, 20:58
Used them last night against a friend's chaos army they killed a havok squad, a chosen squad and a 30 man cultist squad.

I'd like to point out you cant get wraiths back up after they die, but stick a destroyer lord in with your praetorians and give him a res orb and they will have fantastic durability.

Or use them in tandem wraiths up front to take hits and use whips, then praetorians to deliver the killing blow.

Minsc
22-11-2012, 22:04
Useless? No.

Overpriced? Yes.

A joke compared to Wraiths? Lol.

The model's and their fluff are both great (im), which is enough reason for me to use them, if I played Necrons that is.

Str10_hurts
22-11-2012, 22:27
I use them because I like the models (mine are 50% destroyer 50% praetorian). This should be the only reason to use them. I wrote a bit on the necron forum on how to make the best use of praetorians.

If you like them you should use them, but if you play only for tournaments... then looks do not matter anyway.

Xerkics
22-11-2012, 22:38
I guess you can use them to pop out of a scythe and shoot terminators with their ap 2 weapons? But then you already spent more points than those terminators so im not sure its worth it.

Archibald_TK
22-11-2012, 23:04
I guess you can use them to pop out of a scythe and shoot terminators with their ap 2 weapons? But then you already spent more points than those terminators so im not sure its worth it.
That would require them to have a dedicated transport, which alas is not the case.

Xerkics
22-11-2012, 23:06
That would require them to have a dedicated transport, which alas is not the case.

Really? Last time i checked pretty much everything could take a scythe as a transport. Pity.

hobojebus
22-11-2012, 23:45
As for being over priced i dont think they are in 6th, in 5th for sure they were not worth taking at all but in the current ed they are about right given they have a superior FnP, come with power axes and jump packs which add a free I10 str 5 attack if they get the charge and their "guns" are str5 ap2 meaning they can do nasty damage before they even swing their axes.

Xerkics
23-11-2012, 00:17
As for being over priced i dont think they are in 6th, in 5th for sure they were not worth taking at all but in the current ed they are about right given they have a superior FnP, come with power axes and jump packs which add a free I10 str 5 attack if they get the charge and their "guns" are str5 ap2 meaning they can do nasty damage before they even swing their axes.

Sorry how is being sweeped and overrun before rolls superior to FNP? Also their guns are 6" shorter than a pistol. You ll have to be lucky to bring them within 6 inches of something that doesnt want to be near them.

NerZuhl
23-11-2012, 00:27
As for being over priced i dont think they are in 6th, in 5th for sure they were not worth taking at all but in the current ed they are about right given they have a superior FnP
It isn't superior. You can't save multiple wounds with res, but you can with FnP. The unit is also very expensive meaning squad size won't be that large, which leads to squads getting wiped out before the roll.

come with power axes and jump packs which add a free I10 str 5 attack if they get the charge
The free attack is handy, unless they are in terrain. Then you have to run the risk of dangerous terrain. They only have one attack base as well. So those lovely power axes aren't so hot. And they strike nearly always last with only a 3+ save. Meaning they will rarely get their attacks off.

and their "guns" are str5 ap2 meaning they can do nasty damage before they even swing their axes.
But they are only 6 inch range. It is usually the only way they will do damage, cause even charging a tactical squad is risky with such pathetic assault capabilities.

Not sure if all of this adds up to the point price tag attached to them. It is an assault unit that has trouble with standard marines. Wraiths are all around better at what Praetorians do. The additional wound and 3++ save make up for the lack of res.

MagicHat
23-11-2012, 09:44
But they are only 6 inch range. It is usually the only way they will do damage, cause even charging a tactical squad is risky with such pathetic assault capabilities.

Not sure if all of this adds up to the point price tag attached to them. It is an assault unit that has trouble with standard marines. Wraiths are all around better at what Praetorians do. The additional wound and 3++ save make up for the lack of res.

While I am no fan of Triarch Praetorians, they do defeat tactical marines. In perfect conditions, (they reach combat with all 5 alive, shoot, HoW and no bog standard marine manage to kill one) they cause about 9 wounds. Powerfist sargeant kills one.

duffybear1988
23-11-2012, 09:48
They should have been 7-8 points cheaper to make them worth taking. As they are, they are a bit like flayed ones - you need to know what they are going to do before you choose them for the army.

Not useless, but not as good as some of the other stuff in the book.

Allornone
23-11-2012, 10:06
Sorry how is being sweeped and overrun before rolls superior to FNP?

They are Fearless, they can't be sweeped.

Merellin
23-11-2012, 10:28
I think if they had atleast 1 more attack, And had their price lowerd a bit, They might be useable. But as it is, I cant see a single thing they can do that something else in the codex cant do better..

Cheeslord
23-11-2012, 10:53
I want to use them (when I get back into Necrons ... eventually) because I quite like playing the underdog and the new codex has made this go from automatic to difficult. In ideal conditions they will beat "tactical" terminators (storm bolter/powerfist) when equipped with their anti-TEQ loadout (though of course they fail hopelessly against THSS terminators or multi-wound TEQ). If you can prevent the enemy focussing on them (for example if theres big terrain to hide them behind while still getting close to the enemy) they should be good for force concentration (kill a weaker enemy unit for little/no loss, repeat with another weak enemy unit...and by weak you could be talking about a 10 man tactical marine squad, relatively speaking)

Mark.

<edit> actually I was thinking from before the weapon change. Now with their staves being unwieldy they will about tie with normal TEQ if they get the first shot + charge, so a bit of a step down for this role...

Xerkics
23-11-2012, 10:56
Are they fearless? Well its still not as good as fnp would have been for them as they can all get wiped out and not get a save or attack even FNP would have been superior for them.

Archibald_TK
23-11-2012, 11:31
Praetorians with the Rods of Covenant are a CC unit that want to stay clear from:
- Units with Power Weapons (and decent strength, sorry Banshees, but God forbid you face GK) as they strike last and have a low save for an elite CC unit.
- Hordes as their amount of attacks is very low and they will end up tarpited.
- Units with an invulnerable save, as it counters the main advantage of a low amount of high AP attacks.

Praetorians with the Voidblades are an alternative to Pistolwraiths with the following differences:
- Better vs vehicles (entropic), worse vs infantry (less strength and attacks)
- Abysmal durability compared to Wraiths

Do their price make these drawbacks acceptable? At the price of a Terminator squad, surely not!

hobojebus
23-11-2012, 13:11
Here's the thing though you cant FnP against powerfists, you can however use res protocols as long as 1 model is left from the unit.

I've wiped out TH/SS terminators with my praetorians on multiple occasions with few casualties in return and even then they just tend to get back up.

Yes the weapons have a really short range but its a CC unit you want to be that close anyway to ensure the charge goes off, i run a destroyer lord and 7 praetorians which on the charge results in 7 str5 AP2 shots followed by 8 auto hit str5 hits, the destroyer lord lays in at I2 with 4 st7 ap2 hits then the unit delivers 14 str 6 ap2 hits.

Thats 25 ap2 attacks and 8 ap-, how can you complain about a lack of attacks?

They may not be the best choice from a WaaC stance but they are far from useless, as for losing to a tactical squad i dont know what your smoking but you should lay off it its rotting your brain.

Archibald_TK
23-11-2012, 15:14
Here's the thing though you cant FnP against powerfists, you can however use res protocols as long as 1 model is left from the unit.
Praetorian being T5 could use FnP against Powerfists if they had it. FnP is superior to RP on a CC unit as it allows them to participate in the fight but since nothing in our Codex has FnP that is a non issue.


I've wiped out TH/SS terminators with my praetorians on multiple occasions with few casualties in return and even then they just tend to get back up.
TH/SS Terminators pulverize Praetorians, unless of course...


Yes the weapons have a really short range but its a CC unit you want to be that close anyway to ensure the charge goes off, i run a destroyer lord and 7 praetorians which on the charge results in 7 str5 AP2 shots followed by 8 auto hit str5 hits, the destroyer lord lays in at I2 with 4 st7 ap2 hits then the unit delivers 14 str 6 ap2 hits.

Thats 25 ap2 attacks and 8 ap-, how can you complain about a lack of attacks?
... you pit 200pts of Teminators vs around 450pts of Praetorians/Destroyer Lord.


They may not be the best choice from a WaaC stance but they are far from useless.
You are right they are not the best choice for WAAC, they also appear to not be the best choice for competitive either (since we are not on BoLS, people here happen to be able to tell the difference between winning fair and winning at all cost). They are not useless but highly inefficient for their price.

Stonerhino
23-11-2012, 15:27
Praetorians, are a "Guard" unit in that you just don't launch them out on their own. They should be held back and used to counter charge or target enemies that other units will have trouble with.

My main complaint about them is that they lost the ability to deny FNP like they could in 5th. There I used them to clear out units that could bog down my Wraiths. BA, Marines for example. In 6th they have filled the role that Pariah did in the old codex. They present a threat to units that need to get close to be effective, charge tough units with other units to prevent them being swept and finishing off weakened deathstar/ elite cc units.

That makes them situational which prevents them from becoming a real competative choice. Especially when Wraiths are easier to use and more durable against high S/AP weapons.

Xerkics
23-11-2012, 17:44
I wouldnt count on impact hits in this ed, every time i used jump inf this ed i had to use jump packs to move to guarantee actually gettibg to combat so i wouldnt count those in by default

hobojebus
23-11-2012, 21:03
Erm i never said i faced 5 man units of terminators, my friend has a librarian in terminator armour with storm shield and a unit of 7 terminators 6 TH/SS 1 with lightningclaws, your making baseless assumptions.

I've used them every game since i revived my necron army and in no game have they ever failed me, in several cases they've rolled up my opponents flanks to kill 3 times their points cost, they work so stop trying to bash people who like using them because you dont personally rate them.

Archibald_TK
24-11-2012, 07:39
Erm i never said i faced 5 man units of terminators, my friend has a librarian in terminator armour with storm shield and a unit of 7 terminators 6 TH/SS 1 with lightningclaws, your making baseless assumptions.

I've used them every game since i revived my necron army and in no game have they ever failed me, in several cases they've rolled up my opponents flanks to kill 3 times their points cost, they work so stop trying to bash people who like using them because you dont personally rate them.
Don't take it personally, this is a public forum and people will comment on what you say. I see the Praetorian as overpriced and full of flaws, I won't start to pretend the contrary just because some people use them successfully until I am proven wrong. I like the models, in the same way I like my Lychguards, and I paint both. But that won't make me use them. If I bring them to the table I'll use them against whoever I face today (as I consider list tailoring the embodiment of WAAC and despise it with a passion) and I know what will happen if I face GK, DE or BA (respectively lot of power attacks at initiative + lot of S5 shots, lot of fast moving poisoned shots, fast moving Vindicators and FnP that neither the Praetorians nor the Lord can ignore, and I assure you it works, that damned FnP works veeeeery well against us)

Let's no longer make assumption then. My point is that they won't do their job because they'll take a beating before being able to. They are not resilient enough for their point cost due to 3+ save and lack of invulnerable. You can alleviate the problem by increasing their number and adding a Lord to ensure you'll be able to use RP, but at the same time you become a huge point sink and keep your basic vulnerabilities to AP2/3 shooting weapons, especially blast ones (Vindicator, Leman Russ, Baleflamers) and those that are available in large numbers (Dark Lances). This also force you to rely heavily on cover, which can prevent you from taking the shortest path to your target. You are also dependent on the Lord, contrary to Wraiths that can act alone, you require its MSS and I2 attacks to ensure you'll have a maximum of Praetorian still alive to strike at I1. If you disagree with my points please feel free to tell me why.

In your example, you say that the low number of attacks is not an issue because you shoot and use HoW on the Terminators, which require you to start your movement phase within 12" from your opponent. Now I know there is a Librarian in the unit. How do you handle Psychic Shriek, a common primaris power that may miss entirely, but also have the ability to wipe out the entire unit in a single lucky roll due to lack of invulnerable save? (Especially now that I expect it to become a staple of Chaos sorcerers, and that as a result people playing other armies start using it more frequently too).
EDIT- Also wouldn't ending your previous move in a position to land both the shoot and the HoW put you in charge range of the Terminators during your opponent's turn?

Contrary to what you may believe I am starting to enjoy the conversation. But I really can't see any light of hope for them considering the range of opponents I can face in a gaming day.

madden
24-11-2012, 07:58
Why use the rod go for blades and pistols, I do and they work really well sure there not termi killers but as a fast unit able to wreck any vehicle with entropic and rending plus a s6 shot, and maybe a d lord they can't be ignored. And yes anti vehicle shouldn't be a problem for necron except most of our gauss is 24" good for transports but not for artillery and back line campers, it might just be me but I don't run crypteks for there lances and I refuse to use the death ray(to cheesy for me).

So for me praetorians work really well and my opponents focus so much fire onto them the rest of the army consolidates without taking much damage. It works in my group.

Archibald_TK
24-11-2012, 11:40
Why use the rod go for blades and pistols, I do and they work really well sure there not termi killers but as a fast unit able to wreck any vehicle with entropic and rending plus a s6 shot, and maybe a d lord they can't be ignored. And yes anti vehicle shouldn't be a problem for necron except most of our gauss is 24" good for transports but not for artillery and back line campers, it might just be me but I don't run crypteks for there lances and I refuse to use the death ray(to cheesy for me).

So for me praetorians work really well and my opponents focus so much fire onto them the rest of the army consolidates without taking much damage. It works in my group.
This is the setup I first built in 5th. The problem in 6th is that they get compared to PistolWraiths. They assume the same role but Wraiths are more efficient vs infantry (S6 more attacks) and Praetorians more efficient vs vehicles (Entropic). But since Entropic became less useful when Gauss was buffed in 6th and Wraiths are more resilient with 3++ and double the Wounds, they became kind of redundant.

The Rod on the other hand give them an unique role in the army, a S5 AP2 shot that double as a S6 AP2 Axe on a fast moving Fearless unit. Scytheguards have the AP but not the mobility nor Fearless, Wraiths have the mobility but not the AP. It kind of give them an identity. Make them feel different.

Now if you don't want to use Wraiths and want them to accompany a DLord to drop and hunt vehicles/devastators/objective campers, units that usually won't bother you with 2+ saves and low AP weapons, then yes I understand the Blades/Pistols will work better than the Rods.

Ssilmath
24-11-2012, 14:59
Praetorians suffer from the same problem that Warp Talons do, being expensive units that have a limited and specialized role. That is not to say that Praetorians are bad, just that they don't fit into some metas or playstyles. If kept behind a shooty heavy army, they gain a bit of protection from shooting and may not be targeted at all in preference of the phalanxes of Warriors and Immortals. From there, they can use their mobility to respond to melee threats that have been weakened by shooting and keep the main guns in the army shooting. Wraiths do well at the job as well, but for some people the ability to ignore armor saves consistently is better than a higher number of attacks with the chance of ignoring saves. Wraiths are certainly the better choice for all around use, or for aggressive styles of play, but I do see a good use for the Praetorians as well.

Vipoid
24-11-2012, 18:40
Triarch Praetorians are one of the worst units in the codex.

So, they're a specialised CC unit... with one attack each. This is very hard to overlook. Also, they're only WS4, so unless you're fighting guardsmen, half your attacks will miss. It's nice that they have AP2 weapons, however, with only a 3+ save and no invulnerable save, they will also gain no benefit from other races having their power weapons nerfed. This is even more troublesome when you realise that they're meant to take out heavily-armoured troops - which will generally be far better at combat than them.

Now, some of these could perhaps be overlooked... if they didn't cost 40pts per model. Just 5 of these sods is 200pts, which will buy you a wopping 5 hits in CC, and then only if they charge (and that's also with the rather dubious assumption that they don't lose a single model to overwatch or enemy attacks). They're just laughably overcosted for what they actually bring.

And no, I'm not going to talk about their alternative weapon option, because that just turns them into atrociously inefficient scarabs, but with half the attacks and almost triple the point cost.

They have nice models, but they really are a terrible unit.

Xerkics
24-11-2012, 19:15
I use mine as necron lords for court as i like them more than lychguard looks wise.

Allornone
24-11-2012, 19:21
I use mine as necron lords for court as i like them more than lychguard looks wise.

Their box is indeed golden for conversion material. I use neither Lychguard of pretorians, but I bought 3 box of them to convert in 5 lords and 10 crypteks (2 of each type), and they are fantastic for that.

hobojebus
24-11-2012, 22:44
Was at the GW HQ today in lenton to do some xmas shopping and got a few games in with my crons, first game i got slaughtered by draigo wing, army i used wasnt set up to handle so many 2 wound terminators, and the stave that gives a 2++ in combat is broken as hell.

But 2nd game was against my friends crimson fist army, and in this game my preatorians once again shone, for the cost of two models i killed 5 terminators leb by librarian, 5 scouts led by the upgrade char from c:sm which i dont own so dont know the name, and a 10 man tactical squad that included pedro cantor.

I'm telling you people used right they can easily get double their points back in a game.

Thoume
24-11-2012, 23:52
If anything, they are a decent stop-gap for some early 1,500-under games if you're starting out with necrons. While I'm expanding my force, I've got a third of my 1.5k points covered by an 8-strong unit (the other two are a converted lord and cryptek). Eventually I'll have enough other shinier stuff to phase them out of 1.5k to possibly bring them back in 2k+ or apoc. :)

The_Klobb_Maniac
25-11-2012, 00:25
I like Scarabs more than Wraiths. If I fill up my slots with Scarabs and want a (harder hitting) fast assault unit still; they seem like a logical choice. <= Bam, found a use.

That said, I still don't take them. Dmarks blow tihngs away reliably and cover weaknesses in the army, not redundancies.

NerZuhl
25-11-2012, 00:32
Was at the GW HQ today in lenton to do some xmas shopping and got a few games in with my crons, first game i got slaughtered by draigo wing, army i used wasnt set up to handle so many 2 wound terminators, and the stave that gives a 2++ in combat is broken as hell.

But 2nd game was against my friends crimson fist army, and in this game my preatorians once again shone, for the cost of two models i killed 5 terminators leb by librarian, 5 scouts led by the upgrade char from c:sm which i dont own so dont know the name, and a 10 man tactical squad that included pedro cantor.

I'm telling you people used right they can easily get double their points back in a game.

Problem is that your example of "good" performance is purely based on a specific case. That would be the same as I telling everyone that scarabs are the best anti-terminator we have because in 3 games i killed 10 terminators with them. You aren't arguing any of the points raised, and you lack important details to make your examples relevant.

Ssilmath
25-11-2012, 00:42
Problem is that your example of "good" performance is purely based on a specific case. That would be the same as I telling everyone that scarabs are the best anti-terminator we have because in 3 games i killed 10 terminators with them. You aren't arguing any of the points raised, and you lack important details to make your examples relevant.

People who do not like a unit will never be pleased with anecdotes, math or proposed tactics. No matter how well Praetorians work for some people, they will be told that Praetorians are useless and should not be fielded. Even when people describe their tactics, the general response is "That doesn't work." I mean, what do you want? 100 documented games against 5 top tier lists, with videos backed up by commentary from the top 10 posters on Warseer?

NerZuhl
25-11-2012, 01:02
People who do not like a unit will never be pleased with anecdotes, math or proposed tactics. No matter how well Praetorians work for some people, they will be told that Praetorians are useless and should not be fielded. Even when people describe their tactics, the general response is "That doesn't work." I mean, what do you want? 100 documented games against 5 top tier lists, with videos backed up by commentary from the top 10 posters on Warseer?

No, I don't require 100 pages of explanation. But for a discussion to be useful, more than anecdotes need to be used. Or if they are used, show the details of the situation or the usage that led to success. Not just a kill count.

For Example: I used Praetorians in 5th edition with mixed success. I equipped them with pistols and swords in an army with Nemesor. I would buff them with tank hunters so that they were very effect vehicle hunters. By pushing them forward I would try to force my opponent to decide between gunning for them or my heavy destroyers.

In 6th, the addition of a destroyer lord makes them stronger not only because of the orb, but also the preferred enemy buff. Making their shooting and CC more effective.

A debate over value of a unit is indeed useful. But only if people presenting arguments do so with details. Either side simply stating you should or shouldn't with out evidence doesn't contribute anything.

Vipoid
25-11-2012, 09:53
People who do not like a unit will never be pleased with anecdotes, math or proposed tactics.

Whereas people who really love a unit are always perfectly prepared to admit that it isn't good... :rolleyes:


No matter how well Praetorians work for some people, they will be told that Praetorians are useless and should not be fielded.

Depends. I wouldn't order anyone to stop fielding them (or expect said people to take the slightest notice, even if I did), but then, I might well say that if you're making a competitive list they shouldn't make the cut.

A lot of advice on whether or not a unit is good is based on very competitive games. If you don't play competitively, then the idea that one of your units is bad really shouldn't bother you - especially if, as you're so keen to tell us, it works very well for you.


Even when people describe their tactics, the general response is "That doesn't work." I mean, what do you want? 100 documented games against 5 top tier lists, with videos backed up by commentary from the top 10 posters on Warseer?

Perhaps you don't understand this - the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'fact'. Anecdotal evidence of their performance in specific games really isn't useful in this sort of argument.

However, if you want to show us some Necron tournament winners with lists that revolved around one or more squads of praetorians, then that might be useful. Don't get me wrong, it's still anecdotal evidence, but if that's what you're going for, it might at least hold a bit more sway than someone saying "I used them in some games the other day and they did awsome!!!""

Furthermore, you moan about people not being pleased with the math, but perhaps that's because you haven't shown us any math.

Ssilmath
25-11-2012, 18:47
I am referring to past discussions, when it comes to math, but I'll go ahead and put some math in here to make you happy.

It's also a strange thing that stories from people who say "I have used this unit often, and it works well for me. Here is what is has done" are given less weight than people who say "I never have and never will use the unit because it sucks."

So, math time. 5 Praetorians with Power Axes, 5 Wraiths with Particle Casters. As Wraiths do not list a CCW in their profile, I did not give them an extra attack for the pistol. If there is errata, let me know and I'll update the math.

First up, the old standby. A Tactical Squad of Marines with Flamer and Heavy Bolter. Not adding in Hammer of Wrath attacks, as those seem to be discounted by several of the above posters.
Wraiths -
Shooting - 5 Shots, 5/2 hits, 25/12 wound, 25/36 fail: .83 dead Marines
Overwatch -
13 bolter shots, 13/6 hits, 13/12 wound, 13/36 fail
2 Flamer hits, 1 wound, 1/3 failed save
3 Heavy Bolter shots, 1/2 hit, 2/3 wound, 2/9 fail: 33/36 Wraiths wounded: .92 wounds (Not dead yet)
Marines Melee - 11 attacks, 11/2 hit, 11/4 wound, 11/12 fail : .92 wounds, 1 dead
Wraiths Melee - 16 attacks, 8 hits, 40/6 wound, 8/6 rend, 32/18 fail, 56/18 dead : 3.1 Marines dead

Praetorians -
Shooting - 5 Shots, 5/2 hit, 10/6 wound, 10/6 kill : 1.7 dead
Overwatch -
11 Bolter shots, 11/6 hit, 11/18 wound, 11/54 fail
2 Flamer hit, 2/3 wound, 2/9 fail
3 Heavy Bolter, 1/2 hit, 1/4 wound, 1/12 fail: .51 dead Praetorians
Marines Melee - 10 attacks, 5 hit, 5/3 wound, 5/9 fail : 1.06 dead Praetorians
Praetorians - 8 attacks, 4 hits, 20/6 wound, 20/6 dead : 3.33 dead Marines
Reanimation stands up .35 Praetorians, for .71 dead

So, Wraiths lose .92 and kill 3.93 Tactical Marines. Praetorians lose .71 and kill 5.03 Tactical Marines. In hunting down general purpose squads, or preventing them from charging Warriors, Praetorians hold an advantage. Next, against Tactical Terminators.

Wraiths -
Shooting - 5 shots, 5/2 hit, 25/12 wound, 25/72 fail : .35 Terminators dead
Overwatch -
8 Bolters - 4/3 hits, 4/6 wound, 2/9 fail
4 Assault Cannon - 2/3 hit, 5/9 wound, 5/27 fail : 11/27, .41 wounds on wraiths
Termie Sergeant - 2 attacks, 1 hit, 1/2 wound, 1/6 fail : .56 wounds on wraiths before swinging
Wraiths - 20 attacks, 10 hits, 50/6 wound, 5/9 rend and fail, 10/9 fail saves, 15/9 : 1.7 Termies die, round to 2
2 Termies - 4 attacks, 2 hits, 10/6 wound, 5/9 fail, Instant Death to 10/9 wounds : 1.1 wounds

Praetorians -
Shooting - 5 shots, 5/2 hits, 10/6 wound, 20/18 w fail, 1.1 dead
Overwatch -
6 Bolters - 1 hit, 1/3 wound, 1/9 fail
4 Assault Cannon - 2/3 hit, 4/9 wound, 4/27 fail : 7/27 total, .26 Praetorians dead
Termie Sergeant - 2 attacks, 1 hit, 1/3 wound, 1/3 kill : .59 Praetorians before swinging. Gave wraiths full attacks, same for Praetorians
Praetorians - 10 attacks, 5 hits, 25/6 wound, 50/18 fail : 2.8 dead
Termies - 6 attacks, 3 hits, 15/6 wound, 15/6 kill : 2.5 Preatorian dead, 3.09 total
Reanimation stands up 1.03 Praetorians, so 2.06 dead

Against Tactical Terminators, Wraiths lose 1.51 wounds and kill 2.05. Praetorians lose 2.06 and kill 3.9. You lose more Praetorians, but kill more Terminators as well, and will likely finish the job on the next round of combat, freeing up 3 or 4 Praetorians for more charges.

If you request, I can put the math of the next two, but for now will sum them up:
Against TH/SS Termies, lose .83 Wraith to kill 2.1 Termies. Lose 2 Praetorians to kill 2.25 Termies. Wraiths have the advantage in this case.
Against Lightning Claw Termies, lose 1.9 Wraiths to kill 1 Termie. Lose 3 Pratorians to kill 1.2 termies. Wraiths have a distinct advantage in this case.

Against small arms fire, they are about equally resilient. With Reanimation Protocols, factored in, it takes 12 Bolter hit to kill a Wraith, and 12 Bolter hits to put a Praetorian down for good.

So, in a purely math sense, Wraiths are more valuable against TH/SS termies, Praetorians are more valuable against Tactical Marines and Tactical Terminators, and both should steer clear of LC Termies. Against hordes and vehicles, Wraiths are going to be superior and as such are likely to be more valuable in a take all comers environment. But there is really not as much disparity between the two units as people have been saying. The Wraiths are the more aggressive of the two units, forging ahead and relying on their invulnerable save to deliver them. Praetorians are more defensive, holding behind a Warrior/Immortal list until enemy melee units get close, then engaging to give the Warriors more time shooting and have a good possibility of winning those combats. Different tools, different uses.

[Edit] Woops, counted Praetorians guns as one Str too high. Should not have a huge effect on the numbers, but will edit it presently.
[Edit 2] Numbers fixed. Biggest effect was killing .4 fewer Tactical Marines

Archibald_TK
25-11-2012, 23:29
It's also a strange thing that stories from people who say "I have used this unit often, and it works well for me. Here is what is has done" are given less weight than people who say "I never have and never will use the unit because it sucks."
And any amount of "Unit is poor because of A+B+C+D "will always be countered by "It works for me anyway so I don't care it must work for everyone then". That thread is a perfect example of both your case and mine.


So, in a purely math sense, Wraiths are more valuable against TH/SS termies, Praetorians are more valuable against Tactical Marines and Tactical Terminators, and both should steer clear of LC Termies. Against hordes and vehicles, Wraiths are going to be superior and as such are likely to be more valuable in a take all comers environment. But there is really not as much disparity between the two units as people have been saying.
There are large disparities, and you, an IG player, shall be perfectly aware about at least one. Units need to able able to engage in melee and thus take incoming fire. You focused on small arms now look at how these two units handle Demolishers, Leman Russ, Executionners, Basilisks, Medusas, Colossus, Vindicators, Doomsday Arks, Helldrakes. Look at large quantities of low AP weapons, DE Dark Lances/Blasters, IG Vendettas, Longfangs focusing the unit. Look at large amount of poison weapons negating T5. Keep in mind that the cost of the unit in both case is quite high if they include a DLord, making target priorities less of an issue for your opponent.
Now also look at units equipped with AP3 weapons striking at I. GK all have Force weapons and a Power increasing their strength to 5. Death Company Dreadnought with the Talons charging out of a Stormraven? MC with large amount of attacks?


The Wraiths are the more aggressive of the two units, forging ahead and relying on their invulnerable save to deliver them. Praetorians are more defensive, holding behind a Warrior/Immortal list until enemy melee units get close, then engaging to give the Warriors more time shooting and have a good possibility of winning those combats. Different tools, different uses.
Wraiths assume exactly the same defensive role as the Praetorian, they can also efficiently be deployed in front of the army instead of behind to provide cover and hinder drops. In fact using them defensively is one of the most common use. That they have the option of being used aggressively never negated their defensive role in the same way that being able to shoot my Railguns at 72 doesn't prevent me from shooting them at the target right in front of me. In fact some of the poster in that thread love using Praetorians offensively.

In the end I don't need a super unit, I need an unit that can be used both offensively and defensively, will have a resiliency in accord to its pricing and will do its job correctly against the largest amount of possible threats instead of being overspecialized. I need units that can charge effectively but also survive being charged/coutercharged. That's why I will always chose Wraiths over Praetorians. So I don't end up in a corner if I face Venom spam or double Vindicator+Leman Russ today. But as I was saying previously list tailoring offend me (and thankfully nearly every other player I face) so I can see why if someone build a list to face a specific army the Praetorians can be seen as a better specialized unit.

Ssilmath
26-11-2012, 02:31
You are correct on all points, especially about how much I would love seeing a squad of Praetorians waiting for a Basilisk shell to drop in the middle of them. You are also correct that there are any number of other units, especially Grey Knights, who laugh and butcher their way through Praetorians. I won't deny that, in fact you'll note that I had them fight LC terminators specifically to show that AP3 striking at initiative is a bad day for them. I also won't deny that Wraiths are an altogether more versatile unit. I'm just arguing against the thread title. Completely useless. Nope, they have a use. A niche one, but a use. If you are getting your butt kicked in a Marine dominated Meta, buying a unit is not a bad investment. I also wouldn't consider it list tailoring, unless you brought them out only when fighting Marines. In that case, of course it is list tailoring and should not be condoned.

Vipoid
26-11-2012, 09:17
With regard to Praetorians, I'd rate them a lot more highly if they could have meltas weapons (even 6" ones), instead of their default guns.

Whilst they'd still be overpriced with meltas, they'd at least have a purpose, since they'd be a lot more efficient at destroying things like land raiders. Since they'd do this in the shooting phase, it would also permit other units to potentially shoot the occupants of said vehicle.

You see, another problem for me is that (unless you kit them out as horribly inefficient scarabs), they only really kill infantry - something either of my troops can already accomplish, in addition to being able to hurt vehicles at range (thanks to gauss), massed fire can already bring down most infantry. And, I'd much rather trust in massed-fire from 10 models, than rely on 5 models with better AP.

MagicHat
26-11-2012, 11:06
Math!

I think you made them BS3 there?
Also, it doesn't account for efficiency in round 2, where the Praetorians lose 50% of their A, + their superior shooting, compared to the Wraiths loss of 25% of their A.
And, although rather minor versus Tactical marines/terminators and TH/SS terminators in your example, the Wraiths mostly brings Whip coils IME, which makes them quite a bit deadlier versus power weapon wielders.

kieranhoare
27-11-2012, 06:52
a squad could do some nasty stuff to terminator or tyranid monstrous creatures, use the rod of covernent, shoot then charge, = dead terminators and montrous creatures, havnt down the maths, but they work for me every time except for once,squad of 5 got killed on the over watch, just be careful with what you charge, against thunder hammers and storm shields, if you dont kill them before they strike, you'll know about it

hobojebus
27-11-2012, 21:47
You know i was just gonna walk away but i cant for two reasons:

A) I've never claimed they were the best choice i said they were not the useless piles of scrap people are claiming them to be.

2) I'm not going off mathhammer here i'm giving real world examples of personal use in actual games, i'm not claiming they work for everyone mealy that they can work for people if they choose to use them.

Some of us actually play for fun you know, crazy isnt it that people might take a unit from their codex because they like it instead of because its the best choice, and even then you can still win through skill instead of just taking whatever meta is considered best.

Vipoid
27-11-2012, 22:19
2) I'm not going off mathhammer here i'm giving real world examples of personal use in actual games, i'm not claiming they work for everyone mealy that they can work for people if they choose to use them.

But that's the problem - "I use them and they work for me." is not a solid argument, nor are details of how they won you games or made back 3 times their point cost or whatever.


Some of us actually play for fun you know, crazy isnt it that people might take a unit from their codex because they like it instead of because its the best choice, and even then you can still win through skill instead of just taking whatever meta is considered best.

So, what exactly are you arguing for? :confused:

I don't believe the purpose of this thread is to start a crusade. Even if the consensus is that Triarch Praetorians are entirely useless, I doubt that the conclusion will be "Anyone who uses them should be burnt at the stake! Let the hunt begin!"

On the one hand, you seem to be attempting to argue that they're a decent unit, yet on the other you're dismissively saying that it doesn't matter since you're playing for fun.

But, if you are playing for fun, then threads like this - which discuss a given unit's viability in a highly-competitive army - really shouldn't bother you. If you freely admit that you use units regardless of how good they are, then what difference does it make to you? :eyebrows:

Ssilmath
27-11-2012, 23:54
I think this is far more a case of people valuing different things. To some people, the multiple role versatility, invulnerable save and high number of attacks makes Wraiths the ideal choice. Others see the higher toughness, reanimation and guaranteed armor cracking ability of the Praetorians to be a good pick. Both are legit viewpoints, I think, and those viewpoints can be changed by the common opponents you face and past experiences with both kind of units.

Now, something interesting from another thread I was in. When discussing another assault unit, I pointed out that their invulnerable save made them more resistant to anti MEQ fire. The reply to that was essentially "People use weight of fire to kill 3+ save models." In this thread, when I pointed out that both units are about equally resistant to small arms fire, the reply was (As I read it) "Look at all the heavy firepower that can be used against the ones without an invulnerable save." So, which one is it? Are 3+ save models killed by weight of fire, or by heavy hitting shots?

Archibald_TK
28-11-2012, 01:02
So, which one is it? Are 3+ save models killed by weight of fire, or by heavy hitting shots?
Both. Volume of fire works really well vs 3+ saves, having an invulnerable save means that the opponent will have to rely mainly on volume of fire to do the job, not having one means that using a lower number of low AP shots become an alternative, or can be used in addition to small arms to focus an unit. In the case of Praetorians for example it's important for the opponent as the more of his units on the board are able to affect them efficiently, the bigger the chances to kill all of them in a single shooting phase to prevent RP. In that case the DLord is essential as he is able to neuter both AP3 weapons (Devastators hate 2+ saves) and small arms if placed correctly, thought he can't stop everything, he is here to ensure for the longest time possible that there will be at least one survivor at the end of each phase for RP purpose.

Ssilmath
28-11-2012, 01:19
I'm aware that both are used to kill 3+ saves, I tend to point lots of flashlights at the survivors of my artillery. I was just pointing out that no matter what one person points to as an advantage, somebody else will say that it is not.

I do really like the idea of the Destroyer Lord out front, though. I still haven't adapted to the idea of characters tanking hits that came along with 6th, may have to stick my Terminator Sorcerer with a squad of Possessed or something as an escort.

IcedAnimals
28-11-2012, 03:04
I ran a "fast" necron army that used 3 units of wraiths backed up by 2 units of praetorians with destroyer lords. For troops i took large warrior squads that came out of deepstriking monoliths near objectives. This kept my troops safe for a turn or two. And when they came in they came in on the objectives they need or near targets I wanted to gauss down. A couple Solar flares gave my praetorians their invuln saves while moving forward because they were screened by the wraiths. On turn 1 I could have a possible 2+ cover save with a 4+ RP roll if you did manage to kill one. A lot of opponents would just shoot at the closer squads of wraiths. They were hitting closer targets, with lower toughness, and they didn't have to deal with RP.

The list was by no means WAAC. And i mostly played at 2k with multiple org charts so would require tweaking in anything lower (you need solar flares or you are stuck relying on the games 4+ night fight.) My favorite game was against a table talker who called out my opponent from the game before. He saw my praetorians, said they were awful and then because I managed a draw against my opponent felt the need to chime in about how bad my opponent was and how lucky I was. I tabled his GKs on turn 4.

I still think they are the worst unit in the entire codex. But if you have a plan and can stick to it (which is pretty hard I won't lie) then it works. And if they are the worst thing in our book it just goes to show how good the necron book actually is.

MagicHat
28-11-2012, 10:41
Now, something interesting from another thread I was in. When discussing another assault unit, I pointed out that their invulnerable save made them more resistant to anti MEQ fire. The reply to that was essentially "People use weight of fire to kill 3+ save models." In this thread, when I pointed out that both units are about equally resistant to small arms fire, the reply was (As I read it) "Look at all the heavy firepower that can be used against the ones without an invulnerable save." So, which one is it? Are 3+ save models killed by weight of fire, or by heavy hitting shots?

You can use both? Especially on expensive troops like Praetorians, where a plasma gun can kill either a 35 point praetorian or a 13 point warrior just as easily.
I have used plasma honourguard, vindicators and blood talon Furioso Dread to act as hammers. Any of them can obliterate Praetorians, while the Wraiths just laughs them off.

Vipoid
28-11-2012, 10:46
Now, something interesting from another thread I was in. When discussing another assault unit, I pointed out that their invulnerable save made them more resistant to anti MEQ fire. The reply to that was essentially "People use weight of fire to kill 3+ save models." In this thread, when I pointed out that both units are about equally resistant to small arms fire, the reply was (As I read it) "Look at all the heavy firepower that can be used against the ones without an invulnerable save." So, which one is it? Are 3+ save models killed by weight of fire, or by heavy hitting shots?

As others have said, the difference is that praetorians are vulnerable to both weight of fire, and low-AP attacks, whereas wraiths are only really affected by weight of fire.

Also, considering that praetorians are a very expensive squad, I doubt that many opponents will shy away from using their heavy weapons on them.

Commandojimbob
28-11-2012, 11:07
I have run them with a D Lord and found them to be quite brutal. On their own you need to pick your fights and unlike Wraiths, I dont believe you can use them aggressively . I find them to be best used to take out Walkers / Vehicles and MCs (pistol/void blades) - they can tar pit weak units (T3/4+ non specialist) and go toe to toe with non-specialist MEQ's but there are better options.

Comparison to Wraiths is natural and fundamentally I believe they are a better bang for your buck - however - I have found Praetorians to be better at dealing with specific targets such as Walkers / Vehicles and MCs (pistol/void blades).

v0iddrgn
02-12-2012, 04:13
Comparing Wraiths to Praetorians is what everyone does and honestly I don't see much difference in the units except that if you want Wraiths to be any kind of good in combat you need to give them Whip Coils, which makes them more expensive than Praetorians. Both units benefit greatly from a DLord and I wouldn't have it any other way. You can argue that 3++ and 2W is better than T5 and RP but I side with Praetorians on this one because it is better to not take the wound in the first place than to have a 3++ you have to use all the time. Fearless allows you to always Reanimate as long as there is a unit left to Reanimate. No other unit in the codex has Fearless + RP and bonus T5! Wraiths are great but AP2 Overwatch is pretty nasty for just about anyone.

Vipoid
02-12-2012, 09:46
Comparing Wraiths to Praetorians is what everyone does and honestly I don't see much difference in the units except that if you want Wraiths to be any kind of good in combat you need to give them Whip Coils, which makes them more expensive than Praetorians.

Well, it depends on what role you have in mind. But, at the very least, only a couple of models really need whip coils - that's generally enough to make most of the enemy squad strike at I1.


You can argue that 3++ and 2W is better than T5 and RP but I side with Praetorians on this one because it is better to not take the wound in the first place than to have a 3++ you have to use all the time.

:wtf:

Ok, I've got to be honest here - this is perhaps the most ludicrous argument I've ever seen.

You say that Praetorians are better than wraiths... because it's better to not take wounds at all. Ok, granted. Except, wraiths have a 3++ save, praetorians have no invulnerable save at all. So, whilst the wraiths will save 2/3 wounds, regardless of AP, the praetorians have no way of preventing any wounds from AP1-3 weapons (which is already making your argument crumble). But, even in terms of getting back up, they're still worse, because only 1/3 will get back up, as opposed to the 2/3 that will never touch the wraiths.

Asura Varuna
02-12-2012, 16:55
Redeeming feature - the rib-like structure that makes up their backpack can be used to make decent cryptek conversion.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lBP5-Q4kMT4/TtO47E-PHBI/AAAAAAAAFDE/Hl9eX6lXrcM/s1600/Cryptek2.jpg

v0iddrgn
02-12-2012, 19:28
You say that Praetorians are better than wraiths... because it's better to not take wounds at all. Ok, granted. Except, wraiths have a 3++ save, praetorians have no invulnerable save at all. So, whilst the wraiths will save 2/3 wounds, regardless of AP, the praetorians have no way of preventing any wounds from AP1-3 weapons (which is already making your argument crumble). But, even in terms of getting back up, they're still worse, because only 1/3 will get back up, as opposed to the 2/3 that will never touch the wraiths.

Praetorians can get a cover save against low AP weapons so that isn't the end all be all statement right there. Fearless allows you to ALWAYS take your 4+ RP thus nullifying wounds taken whereas when a Wraith fails his Uber-Power-Armour save that's it, heaven help you if you fail your save against a Str8+ weapons.

Vipoid
02-12-2012, 19:54
Praetorians can get a cover save against low AP weapons so that isn't the end all be all statement right there.

Cover is not guaranteed. Especially when you're an assault unit.


Fearless allows you to ALWAYS take your 4+ RP thus nullifying wounds taken whereas when a Wraith fails his Uber-Power-Armour save that's it, heaven help you if you fail your save against a Str8+ weapons.

Firstly, it's a 5+ RP, not a 4+. Second, fearless won't help you one bit if your entire squad has been wiped out by plasmaguns or the like.

Arijharn
03-12-2012, 00:35
But that's the problem - "I use them and they work for me." is not a solid argument, nor are details of how they won you games or made back 3 times their point cost or whatever.


Yes it is, sooner or later experience will have to provide support to people's arguments. Whether you think it is 'solid' is really neither here nor there. Really think about what it is you're saying here, to me it sounds like what you're saying is: "I don't believe you until I try it out, and I'm not going to try it out because I don't believe you." Why is it impossible for you to think that maybe something is useful, it might not be 'best value' but you seem unwilling to explore different options because you seem to think that it's unverifiable.

Your denial makes no sense imo.

Kuja
03-12-2012, 03:19
So, in a purely math sense, Wraiths are more valuable against TH/SS termies, Praetorians are more valuable against Tactical Marines and Tactical Terminators, and both should steer clear of LC Termies. Against hordes and vehicles, Wraiths are going to be superior and as such are likely to be more valuable in a take all comers environment. But there is really not as much disparity between the two units as people have been saying. The Wraiths are the more aggressive of the two units, forging ahead and relying on their invulnerable save to deliver them. Praetorians are more defensive, holding behind a Warrior/Immortal list until enemy melee units get close, then engaging to give the Warriors more time shooting and have a good possibility of winning those combats. Different tools, different uses.

This.

I always thought that people loves variety in their armies and having lots of options (some of them very redundant) just for fun, for different themes, for different playstyles or just for specialisation against a certain army (probably the one that you fight the most). Warhammer is not only about tournaments and competition, it's about fun too; sadly, that is something that some people tend to forget... :(

rocdocta
03-12-2012, 03:27
where i play there is alot of plasma and lascannon. if the unit is wiped out then no RP for them. its not unusual to cop 5 S7+ AP2 hits per turn. 5 Praets generally fall over with no RP where my wraiths may cop a wound or an ID. it would be unusual to see them last 2 turns of focused fire. One thing that tipped me in favour of wraiths was ignore terrain for moving. if anyone can reliably get praets to work, more power to you. But for a guarranteed threat, wraiths are my go to every time.

Archibald_TK
03-12-2012, 06:58
I am now convinced that people read threads like this one up until they find a post that go the same way they do then proceed to disregard everything else. It's obvious this thread is turning into a blind repetition of the same previous arguments which will lead to exactly the same previous couter-arguments ad nauseum. Actually I'm sure you can answer to the people who posted recently just by quoting something that is already on a previous page. It did not take long for that thread to go into full circle mode.

Vipoid
03-12-2012, 09:46
Yes it is, sooner or later experience will have to provide support to people's arguments. Whether you think it is 'solid' is really neither here nor there. Really think about what it is you're saying here, to me it sounds like what you're saying is: "I don't believe you until I try it out, and I'm not going to try it out because I don't believe you." Why is it impossible for you to think that maybe something is useful, it might not be 'best value' but you seem unwilling to explore different options because you seem to think that it's unverifiable.

Your denial makes no sense imo.

My "denial" is completely logical.

When myself and others have spoken badly of praetorians, we've provided comparisons with other units, and/or math regarding their performance in certain situations. With that, anyone opposing our arguments has something solid to argue against. If we've made a mistake in our calculations, they can call us out. If we've made an unfair juxtaposition, they can call us out.

The problem with your argument is that it gives us nothing to debate. You basically just say "I use them and they work for me" and expect everyone to say "Oh, fine. Well, that contradicts all the maths and the many flaws people have pointed out with this unit. But, they work for you, obviously they must be great." Debates do not work that way.

As a general idea:
- We have no idea how skilled you or your opponent are (and if you were evenly matched).
- We have no idea if competitive lists were used.
- We have no idea if terrain was set out appropriately.
- We have no idea if important rules were skipped (accidentally or otherwise).
- In the same way as it isn't possible to measure car crashes that didn't happen, it's not possible for us to know how well other units would have performed, if you'd used them instead of the praetorians.
- We only have your word that you won and that the Praetorians did well. Sorry to say this, but for all we know, you could be lying through your teeth about the victories, because you can't think of a solid argument for them. And, because there's no proof either way, we can't contradict you or call your out.

To put it another way:

Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit

or the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges

Essentially, you've laid a claim - praetorians are good. However, the only evidence you can provide is from claimed victories, which we have only your word ever happened. You seem to think that it's now out job to somehow dispute those victories. You are, of course, wrong. The burden of proof still lies with you. It is your job to find a way to substantiate your claimed victories on this forum. If you can't, then understand that unsubstantiated claims have no place in a debate.


Saying that though, I shall repeat my earlier request - show me lists from tournament winners, who used praetorians in their lists. It's still not perfect, but the person's win should at least be documented, and it will demonstrate that a list can include praetorians and still do well in a reasonably-competitive environment.

RobPro
03-12-2012, 19:14
I bet GW thought fearless on T5 guys with RP would be way good, but they didn't want it to end up being auto-include too good. That's all I can come up with if I think about it a bunch.

hobojebus
03-12-2012, 20:49
When myself and others have spoken badly of praetorians, we've provided comparisons with other units, and/or math regarding their performance in certain situations. With that, anyone opposing our arguments has something solid to argue against. If we've made a mistake in our calculations, they can call us out. If we've made an unfair juxtaposition, they can call us out.

Your using math hammer against real world experience, maths is fine but probability does not always apply you can have a 2+ save against 3 wounds and still roll three 1's, i'm talking from experience your going from theory.


The problem with your argument is that it gives us nothing to debate. You basically just say "I use them and they work for me" and expect everyone to say "Oh, fine. Well, that contradicts all the maths and the many flaws people have pointed out with this unit. But, they work for you, obviously they must be great." Debates do not work that way.

No i'm not and never have you keep making this claim but people only have to go through my posts to see i'm saying they are viable but not the automatic pick, if you like them you should use them but i've not once claimed they are the best or suggested everyone should use them, i do they work well for me and from my games which allow me to talk from a level of authority you can not get by just doing the math.



- We have no idea how skilled you or your opponent are (and if you were evenly matched).
All my friends have the same experience in the hobby and have been playing over a decade.

- We have no idea if competitive lists were used.
Already said we play for fun not in a tournament setting.

- We have no idea if terrain was set out appropriately.
We play on 3 2x4 boards with loose terrain we set out according to the rules and its never the same layout.

- We have no idea if important rules were skipped (accidentally or otherwise).
No rules are ever skipped a rule book is always to hand and we are both well versed in 6th.

- We only have your word that you won and that the Praetorians did well. Sorry to say this, but for all we know, you could be lying through your teeth about the victories, because you can't think of a solid argument for them. And, because there's no proof either way, we can't contradict you or call your out.
So you say we are in a debate but break one of the mayor rules of debating your are using an AD HOMINEM by claiming i'm a liar, i've at no point called you a liar or even called your maths into doubt but because you cant actually counter a real world account with theoretical maths you instead try to bring me not my argument into question.


Essentially, you've laid a claim - praetorians are good. However, the only evidence you can provide is from claimed victories, which we have only your word ever happened. You seem to think that it's now out job to somehow dispute those victories. You are, of course, wrong. The burden of proof still lies with you. It is your job to find a way to substantiate your claimed victories on this forum. If you can't, then understand that unsubstantiated claims have no place in a debate.

Oh i can easily have two of my friends back me up on this both are on warseer and post in various threads, but i dont suppose even a secondary and Tertiary account will satisfy you because you are taking a stance that wont let you back down.



Saying that though, I shall repeat my earlier request - show me lists from tournament winners, who used praetorians in their lists. It's still not perfect, but the person's win should at least be documented, and it will demonstrate that a list can include praetorians and still do well in a reasonably-competitive environment.

Again I DONT PLAY IN TOURNAMENTS, I've never claimed i do i've never said they were good in a tournament setting, this thread isnt about only tournaments you are flogging a dead horse and adding conditions that will satisfy you that have no relevance to the discourse.

Frankly When you have never used praetorians and your arguing against someone who has used them you are arguing from the point of ignorance, and trying to come off as the authority wont work.

Kuja
03-12-2012, 21:19
I am now convinced that people read threads like this one up until they find a post that go the same way they do then proceed to disregard everything else. It's obvious this thread is turning into a blind repetition of the same previous arguments which will lead to exactly the same previous couter-arguments ad nauseum. Actually I'm sure you can answer to the people who posted recently just by quoting something that is already on a previous page. It did not take long for that thread to go into full circle mode.

Well, in my case, you are complety wrong. The first time I read this thread (and I read the full thread wich is very short), I posted, mostly because I really like mathammer but also, I really like the fact that same people still remembers that it is not the only important thing on this hobby, and so, I quoted what Ssilmath said. Also, I found this thread a bit pointless, mostly because I don't understand what is the terrible problem with Praetorians beign inferior in an all corner lists than wraiths, that is nothing new, that kind of things happens (logically) in a lot of codexes (and army books) after you have covered most of the options. I don't see the problem. Don't use them in tournaments, but use them (if you want) to try different things against certain opponents sometimes for fun or for whatever other reason you could have. That is all.

Vipoid
03-12-2012, 22:36
Your using math hammer against real world experience, maths is fine but probability does not always apply you can have a 2+ save against 3 wounds and still roll three 1's, i'm talking from experience your going from theory.

Yes, real world experience does not always fit mathhammer. However, that doesn't mean you can just ignore mathhammer. The 3 1s you speak of aren't exactly likely. Yes, sometimes they'll happen - but most of the time they won't.

This is an equally good reason for why you shouldn't base arguments around personal anecdotes of a unit's performance - the inherent randomness can often skew the results for a particular unit.

With mathhammer, you might not know the result with certainty, but at least you know what the most likely result will be.



So you say we are in a debate but break one of the mayor rules of debating your are using an AD HOMINEM by claiming i'm a liar, i've at no point called you a liar or even called your maths into doubt but because you cant actually counter a real world account with theoretical maths you instead try to bring me not my argument into question.


I haven't committed ad hominem.

Please re-read my post, because I have at no point called you a liar. What I said was that you *could* be a liar - we don't know. I was trying to illustrate the problem of an argument that relies on word-of-mouth alone, since your only evidence relies on your being honest, and we have no proof either way.



[I][I]
Oh i can easily have two of my friends back me up on this both are on warseer and post in various threads, but i dont suppose even a secondary and Tertiary account will satisfy you because you are taking a stance that wont let you back down.

You can have them back you up if you want. It couldn't hurt your case.



Again I DONT PLAY IN TOURNAMENTS, I've never claimed i do i've never said they were good in a tournament setting, this thread isnt about only tournaments you are flogging a dead horse and adding conditions that will satisfy you that have no relevance to the discourse.

When did I say that it needed to be your tournament list? I asked for a winning tournament list that included praetorians, I didn't say that it had to be you that used the list. It was just a general request.



Frankly When you have never used praetorians and your arguing against someone who has used them you are arguing from the point of ignorance, and trying to come off as the authority wont work.

Ignorance would imply that myself and others know nothing about the models, and that's simply not true. There are plenty of ways in which a model can be analysed without ever fielding it. You accuse us of ignorance, yet you seem just as willing to ignore any maths that implies other units would be better choices on the field.

Furthermore, as I said in my previous post, the problem with relying entirely on their performance on the table is that there is no way to measure how well other units would have performed in their stead.


As an aside, I should say that my last post was not aimed just at you personally, Hobojebus, but rather as a general argument as to why "I use it and it works for me." is not a sufficient argument in a debate of this kind. I say this because you seem to have interpreted my previous post as a personal attack against you - which was never my intention.

Ssilmath
03-12-2012, 23:27
Hold on, the maths show that Praetorians are just fine when it comes to trashing other elite units and usually take few casualties in response. Wraiths are less efficient at it, but are more efficient at dealing with hordes and vehicles or absorbing things like Plasma. They're different tools for different jobs, and for people who value versatility the Wraiths are always going to be superior. For people who value reliable heavy hitting, Praetorians are more valuable. I also don't think anyone is arguing that Praetorians are the best units in the codex, or amazing, or anything like that.

As for tournaments, that is really not the best measuring stick of how good or bad a unit is. Most tournament lists seem to focus on what units are the most likely to cause a win when spammed, and I'd hazard the guess that Necron lists that place high in tournaments are not awash in Wraiths either. There's also the fact that it is players who win tournies, not sheer list efficiency. A very good Necron player may think Praetorians are decent units, but it does not support the strategy he wants to focus on. Tournament lists and results are just one of many ways to measure a unit or codex when it comes to power or usefulness.

Didn't an all foot Sisters of Battle army take 2nd place at the first Australian tournament of 6th ed? That would seem to indicate that Sisters are not the trash that people like to say. So either internet wisdom is wrong and Sisters are good, or Sisters are terrible and tournament results are not a viable measurement. Or more likely, Sisters are a low to mid tier army that one person was able to use successfully as it best supported the strategy he thought would win games at a major tournament.

Gaargod
04-12-2012, 03:00
First off, for reference purposes, the actual OP:
So what do you all think of these guys? They seem to be very overprices, and they dont seem to have very good equipment either.. Do anyone actualy use them and if so what do you use them for? They look cool, I like the models, They just dont seem very good..


Hold on, the maths show that Praetorians are just fine when it comes to trashing other elite units and usually take few casualties in response. Wraiths are less efficient at it, but are more efficient at dealing with hordes and vehicles or absorbing things like Plasma. They're different tools for different jobs, and for people who value versatility the Wraiths are always going to be superior. For people who value reliable heavy hitting, Praetorians are more valuable. I also don't think anyone is arguing that Praetorians are the best units in the codex, or amazing, or anything like that.

That's not quite what the maths shows. Praetorians, in an ideal situation, aren't bad at trashing elites, indeed - in some cases, they're better than elites. The problem is the fact it's an ideal situation.

Let's take a unit which is genuinely liking to come up: 9 grey hunters with plasma gun, Wolf guard with combi-plasma and power fist. We'll assume for the sake of argument no Wulfen and no Wolf Standard, as they're rather optional. We'll also assume the Wolf Guard doesn't waste his combi-plasma on overwatch. (188pts)
Versus them let's take (to keep it roughly equal) 5 Praetorians and 5 Wraiths with 3 coils between them (200 to 205pts, not unfair).
No Hammer of Wrath hits, as that's difficult to get reliably.

Wraiths first. This version has no shooting.

With overwatch, the puppies get from bolters 3 hits, 1.5 wounds, 0.5 wounds after saves. Another 1/3 plasma hits, 5/18 wounds, 5/54 after saves. Total = 0.593.

With the coils, the wraiths really should have all the marines at I1. So they're going first, generating some 10 hits, 20/3 non-rending wounds which go to 20/18 after saves, in addition to 10/6 rending wounds. Total of 2.778. Let's let the WG live.

Now, if the puppies get Counter Attack off: 9 hits, 4.5 wounds, 1.5 after saves (1.75 if only 2 marines die), plus 0.417 wounds from the WG. Total of 1.917 (or 2.167), killing a whole wraith off.
Without counter attack (1/6 of the time), it's at 1 (or 1.167) normal and 0.278 power fist = 1.278 wounds. With the overwatch shooting, that's still probably a whole wraith dead.

Wraiths win combat, but it's hardly impressive at 2.778 total to 1.871 total.

Praetorians:

Obviously, with a 6" range gun, they might well not be in range. For the sake of argument, they will be:

10/3 hits, 50/18 wounds = 2.778 dead marines out of cover (let's assume 3 dead for sake of argument).
Overwatch back = 0.222 normal and 0.278 plasma wounds (at which stage, I think the WG probably would have used combi-plasma, but I digress).

The basic puppies go first. With Counter Attack = 1 normal wound. We're now at 1.5 dead.
Without counter attack, only 0.667 dead.

Assuming only 1 died, the Praetorians get 3.333 dead. If 2 died, only 2.5.
WG gets 1.25 wounds by himself with counter attack, 0.833 without.

Total has praetorians either 6.111 wounds or 5.278 (note, only 3 or 2 wounds in combat itself likely). Puppies get either 2.778 or 2 wounds total (1 or 2 via combat).

Praetorians win, with a much higher kill count but only actually win combat by maybe 2.

[Worst case scenario with WG using combi-plasma, counter attack working and praetorians being out of range means they take 2.352 wounds before they even attack in combat, then the 3 left generate 2.5 wounds, before the WG hits back with another 1.25. The Puppies have actually statistically won combat, 2.75 to 2.5, and have probably reduced the Praetorians down to 1. These guys really need their shooting!]


Unfortunately, then the 2nd round probably happens. The Wraiths get another 1.750 wounds (so probably 5 marines dead now). The marines hit back with 0.945 wounds. Given how this would play out, the marines get wiped out in another few turns, having killed 3-4 wraiths.

Reanimation protocols are a pain to mathhammer. But if we assume there are 4 left after everything, which is very generous, they get 1.333 wounds. As there's only maybe 3-4 marines left now, we're talking somewhere around the 1.167 wounds back. The Praetorians might maybe win, but I'm not sure about that as it's the WG who's doing the damage at 0.833 wounds a turn. If they do live, there's probably only about one of the guys left.
If we're less generous, and there's only 3 left after the first turn, they'll most likely lose (with basically no marines left). If they don't get their shooting in, they're screwed.



So. a) They both do surprisingly crap. I was really surprised actually, those puppies did bloody well considering.
b) The wraiths are just objectively better versus the marines. They're a lot less dependent on ideal situations.
c) This doesn't include prior shooting. For example, if the unit had fired their plasma guns at the praetorians in the open, they'd have killed 2 of the buggers and another one with bolters, before we even start. In 4+ cover, only 2 would die, but that still massively hurts your combat capabilities to the point you'd almost certainly lose combat. By comparison the wraiths care not about cover, and will only lose 1 wraith at a likely worst. Of course, the marines haven't been shot either, to be fair.


Versus 5++ terminators, the numbers are slightly more in favour of the praetorians (Note that neither of the options like TH/SS termies!). Versus lightning claw/power sword termies, they lose horrifically.




However, the above is basically pointless. Sorry if that's unhelpful - that's an ideal situation! The real reason people like wraiths is that they're extremely easy to use and reliable due to that 3++. Praetorians simply implode to some shooting, thus they need to be more careful.
Incidentally, I'm not actually sure which work better with a Destroyer Lord. Wraiths get a 2+ armour dude (who can use LoS to bounce Ap2 shots onto the wraiths), whereas the Praetorians also benefit from him with Ap3 attacks and can get a resurrection orb (and MSS!) too, though that unit now really, really hates Ap2. Obviously, both are keen on the preferred enemy and warscythe wielding dude.

zendral
04-12-2012, 05:19
Mathhammer and preferences vs. wraiths aside...why take praetorians? Because my fast attack choices are full....

Bartali
04-12-2012, 15:02
Your using math hammer against real world experience

Real world experience when playing random opponents at a GW is mostly a wash. Whenever I've played at a GW, it's mostly young kids who just run everything into the middle of the table while shouting "Waaaggh!" I'm sure Praetorians (and anything else come to that) are absoluetely fine in that setting.

Necrontyr
04-12-2012, 15:19
Mathhammer and preferences vs. wraiths aside...why take praetorians? Because my fast attack choices are full....

TRUTH


(and letters to make up the requirement)

IcedCrow
04-12-2012, 15:52
Before you can answer this question, you must ask the pretense of the question.

Are they useless in tournament powergaming lists? Or are they useless in for fun games that have more casual games?

In tournament lists - using them is very difficult, because they up against powergamer spam, and praetorians are very ill equipped to deal with powergamer spam.

In for fun lists, they can be useful depending on the situation. This makes them a gamble to take compared with powergamer spam elements, which are mostly found to be reliable in nearly all situations (and why they are spammed).

So if you are asking if you will win the warhammer 40k championship of the world using praetorians, the odds are stacked against you and it will be difficult. Otherwise, its situational and have fun with them, they will do good in scenarios that you roll that favor them and poorly against powergamed lists and scenarios where they aren't easily able to bring their power to bear.

d6juggernaut
04-12-2012, 18:15
Mathhammer and preferences vs. wraiths aside...why take praetorians? Because my fast attack choices are full....

Full of Wraiths

Vipoid
05-12-2012, 09:47
So (correct me if I'm wrong), but I believe that the maths says that praetorians are better against standard terminators, whilst wraiths are better against both kinds of assault terminators.

Ok, here's my next question - why would you want to include an assault unit to engage either of those?

We're Necrons - our basic troops can have S5 guns, and we're probably the most resilient army against shooting. So, surely the most logical thing to do would be to concentrate fire on a terminator squad until it's either dead or seriously depleted. I mean, basic terminators really aren't much of a threat to us at range - "oh no! 40pt storm-bolters. The Horror!" I know they can have a missile launcher (or 2 if it's a huge squad), but even so, they're not going to win any shooting matches. And, the assault terminators don't even have guns.

Where terminators are strong is in melee, where they have 2 attacks each, and power fists, thunder hammers or lightning claws. So, my question remains - why would you want to put a squad in your army that can only engage them where they're strongest. Surely it would be better to consider things like Destruction Crypteks, to mass AP2 fire, or annihilation barges, to simply pour a lot of high-strength fire into the unit (and, lets face it, there are plenty of other reasons to include the barges).

warlordbob
06-12-2012, 10:03
Wow this thread had a breakdown fast. I'm one of Hobojebus's regular opponents, and posting our lists would be pointless as they are constantly evolving and adapting. His Preatorians are a regular thorn in our groups sides, mainly due to the destroyer lord with res orb they bodyguard, which makes the otherwise average at most unit a real pain to deal with. This is not to say they always survive, i've slaughtered the squad in games with my sternguard or vindicator, but the issue is always the res orbs with necrons, unless you can get enough focussed fire on them they will keep on getting back up, which due to HJ's good use of terrain they can often do without to much harassment.
He does win often with his 'crons, and it is not through poor opponents, we are all around the same skillset, and all have been in the hobbie for a long time. So please' stop the childishness, accept someone else has a different opinion to you, and that by using the battlefield and other units to support them, they can make a unit you have no faith in reasonably affective.

Vipoid
06-12-2012, 10:16
the issue is always the res orbs with necrons, unless you can get enough focussed fire on them they will keep on getting back up

Well, 50% of them will.



So please' stop the childishness, accept someone else has a different opinion to you

Well done on missing the point entirely.

I can accept that people have different opinions.

However, in a debate of this kind, the idea is to use evidence to convince people one way or the other. An opinion is not evidence.

hobojebus
06-12-2012, 14:20
Real world experience when playing random opponents at a GW is mostly a wash. Whenever I've played at a GW, it's mostly young kids who just run everything into the middle of the table while shouting "Waaaggh!" I'm sure Praetorians (and anything else come to that) are absoluetely fine in that setting.

I haven't played in a GW store in over 7 years i play friends that know in advance what my list contains, all have played for more than 10 years and never just run out into the open, they are all experienced players with a range of different armies.

I dont play little kids i play veterans like me who've played aslong or in some cases longer than myself.

Inquisitor Shego
12-12-2012, 16:50
I also know Warlord Bob and Hobojebus. Praetorians work *points to dead Emperor's Children*

Notanoob
13-12-2012, 03:18
I think it's worth pointing out that something 'working' does not automatically mean that it is particularly good, or the best option.

hobojebus
13-12-2012, 09:23
I think it's worth pointing out that something 'working' does not automatically mean that it is particularly good, or the best option.

Except no one is saying that they are the best option, just that if used properly they can cause some pain.

Notanoob
14-12-2012, 02:44
I understand, Hobojebus. I was just stating a useful qualifier, I guess. In the long paragraphs posted about a generally sub-optimal unit, that qualifier becomes hard to find, and the tone of the argument always seems to end up with one end calling the thing worse than Pyrovores while the other holds them up as the next TH/SS Terminators. The people don't actually believe that or outright state that, but one comes away with this impression. It's like what's happening in politics-small differences are discussed and people somehow end up pushing their arguments to farther extremes than they ever meant to.

Cheeslord
14-12-2012, 07:42
Well, the original question was whether they are completely useless or not. I think its fairly clear from the arguments presented here that they are not useless. They are inferior to other choices (usually wraiths) for most roles, and are probably not a suitable choice if you are trying to build the most powerful army possible, but in general you can say that about most units from most codices.

Among their (admittedly minor / circumstantial) uses:
- they occupy an Elite slot, freeing up the useful Fast Attack slots for other roles (they could be considered a hybrid elite/fast attack unit I guess)
- With resurrection orb support they are more resilient to small arms fire (as long as they don't get completely wiped out) than wraiths.
- Under the right circumstances (i.e. if they get to shoot then charge, and the enemy can't kill too many of them before they swing) they can hit harder in assault against MEQ and TEQ than wraiths (or in fact than anything except Lychguard)

Mark.