Building a 'nid army around warriors and raveners

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Devxcil**

I'm new to the forums, so hi everybody!

In light of the new codex, I'm dusting off some old 'nids to do some remodeling. I tend to go for aesthetics first, but I also always try to be as competitive as possible within that limitation. With that in mind, I'm really liking the new ravener models and I'd love to field them together with warriors for what I think will be a great looking force.

So the base core I'd like to build around will be those two. I won't field any gants, gaunts or stealers (big limitation, I know), but it looks like it could be fun having some ripper swarms around. So, what do you guys think about this?

And I have a couple of questions about the arming the models:

- Warriors -
At first glance the venom cannon looks kinda pants for 15 pts, so I'll probably be arming the broods with barbed stranglers. The question is, what is the better back-up - devourers, deathspitters or spinefists? Deathspitters seem straightforward. Devourers are weaker, but could the -1 to pinning test be worth it together with the barbed strangler? Spinefists seem kinda pointless.

Boneswords look like fun, but does it get too expensive when you equip whole broods with them? On one hand it looks like they could use the cc punch. On the other hand, with such a low model count army it looks like I'll need every warrior I can get.

- Raveners -
Which of the shooting weapon options are worth it on such a fast assault package? Should I even consider shooting options?

Are rending claws worth it, or will the re-rolls of dual scything talons be better in general?

**idget**

For kitting out your models this is really useful http://commissar.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=hoard&action=display&thread=5394
though it only covers HQ chices. A Warrior army is incredibly expensive but fun to play with. This army wont be very competitive though but regardless it would be very fun. For the Raveners, Rending claws are always worth it. I tend to like to give them shooting stuff though this comes from my tau habits so its up to you really.

**FordPrefect**

idget wrote:For kitting out your models this is really useful http://commissar.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=hoard&action=display&thread=5394
though it only covers HQ chices. A Warrior army is incredibly expensive but fun to play with. This army wont be very competitive though but regardless it would be very fun. For the Raveners, Rending claws are always worth it. I tend to like to give them shooting stuff though this comes from my tau habits so its up to you really.

Either you link is wrong or you're unaware of the nids have a new 'dex

(lol)

Devxcil,
I personally like the idea of loads of warriors - planning of a list using flying twin talon tyrant, 'thropes & warriors.

Dropping a pod full of 9 warriors equipped with RC + Ad.glands should cause a few problems (although a large point sink).

Don't think the -1 Ld on pinning from devourers is cause to take them due to the number of fearless units / high leadership but have yet to try them out for myself.

Choice of heavy weapons depends what you're likely to come against. VC has a chance of cracking open transports; the BS great against orks / IG / other nids.
I prefer not to include the long range 'heavy' weapons myself (yes, I know both are assault weapons but are a warriors only 'heavy' option), as I prefer to concentrate on either quickly getting into range of all of my shooting or assault.

On the raveners, I agree with idget, equip with ST & RC's. With WS 5, you'll be hitting most things on 3's & able to re-roll any 1's to hit

**lindsay40k**

Just pointing out that Devourers only inflict -1Ld for morale checks, not pinning.

My feeling is that RC will be a more flexible and cheaper alternative to Boneswords, as they'll enable kills on light to medium armour (which will be a problem for a Warrior heavy army). Anything with AV10 to the back, you're going from glancing on 6's to penetrating, and you've got a chance of taking a Dread's CCW off before it gets to ID you. Boneswords look to me like a weapon for Primes. Shrikes will be handy to mob around vehicles to block access points after you Rend the thing to death and kill a Sternguard squad before they ever get to flame you.

With Warriors you are horribly vulnerable to S8 weapons, you may find Venomthropes useful when forced to cross plains.

**Nurglitch**

So equip a squadmate with a Barbed Strangler, then -1Ld and Pinning.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

If you're going heavy on the Middle Weights, you might want to consider Lictors and Deathleaper.

Lictors themselves aren't horrendously hard, but their Pheremone thingy means should the Raveners wish to Deep Strike within 6" of one, they won't be scattering at all which has uses all it's own.

Deathleaper however, is a great big gribbly pile of sneaky-stabby-death-slap, plus has all the benefits of a Lictor anyways. With knobs on.

And for the Raveners, definitely give them Deathspitters. 3 S5 shots each can mess a Tanks rear armour right up, and even do a fair bit of damage to AV11 stuff. Again, using the Lictors to make sure they arrive on target is key here!

As for the Warriors, I've gone with Deathspitters and Scything Talons, simply because that's the classic to me and they came like it. Ideally I'd like to tinker with various other outfits. But I can say double up HQ choices of Tyranid Primes, to make sure two of the units are as nuts hard as possible!

**AdeptSister**

I would add some MCs just to draw S 8+ fire away from your warriors and ravagers. Trygons would go with your theme.

Rendering Claws are almost always worth it. Being able to ignore armor saves or attack vehicles is very important.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Oh yes, and definitely Venomthropes. Nice and useful as a supporting unit, giving your Warriors a 5+ Cover Save which ought to come in handy.

**Devxcil**

Good stuff guys. I'm still pretty torn on the subject. I also run an all-terminator army, and the part of my brain that's used to that keeps screaming at me to keep the upgrades minimal

I hadn't realised that the devourer doesn't effect pinning tests (just checked the book, it lists pinning tests as leadership tests, not morale tests, bah). That's a bummer as it makes that special effect kinda pointless. I'm very tempted to just suck up the costs and load out every single Warrior with deathspitters. I wish I understood statistical math better so I could mathhammer exactly how much more effective deathspitters are then devourers. With such a small army every single advantage is going to matter.

@FordPrefect: I see why you'd leave heavy weapons behind. But I won't feel comfortable if I couldn't at least threaten something from further away then 18"

I do think I'll be taking rending claws now. The termi-army part of my mind is screaming to keep the costs down, but yeah I need to threaten vehicles and walkers especially. Deathspitter and RC Warriors are a base 40 pts, which is... an okay price I guess.

Venomthropes are a great idea. Anything that has any chance to intercept an instakill krak missile is gold, and that'll probably allow me to be a little more agressive in general. I think I'll be taking at least 2.

@Mad Dok: Lictors just don't seem worth their price to me because I don't expect them to survive the turn required until their beacon kicks in. Deathleaper does look like a lot more fun, and I think I'll try to squeeze him in from time to time.

For raveners, I'm still torn between giving them a ranged weapon and not giving them one to keep the model-count up. I plan on using their nice charge range to tie up squads with heavy weapons so they can't take shots at the approaching warriors, and I worry I may rarely get to use the weapon upgrades. It depends really on how killy deathspitters are in the field.

I indeed plan on using the Prime to lead my force. Two primes is quite tempting but it may be too much points tied up in just 2 units. I gather dual boneswords is the way to go for Primes? A Prime and his personal guard of warriors with dual boneswords would be a terrific CC threat

I agree monsterous creatures should be part of the list to take the heat off the warriors, forcing my opponents to split their fire. I'm thinking of making use of the controversial Tyrannofex and the weakened Carnifex. A Tyrannofex or two with rupture cannons can be a threat from turn one, and thus potentially soak some high strenght attacks for my warriors if my opponents panic. A bare bones Carnifex walking with the Warriors might also be a good idea I feel (and I have one laying around), as people are going to want it dead before it reaches their lines, thus soaking up those krak missiles for the Warriors. What do you guys think?

And it just ain't a proppa 'nid list without at least one MC

I won't be taking any Trygons or Mawlocs for now however because of transportation issues.

By the way, does anyone know whether any independant companies are setting out to make their own warrior bonesword "look-a-likes"?

**Ian Sturrock**

Chapterhouse Studios have said they'll be doing boneswords soon. Alternatively, there's a great tutorial here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/275833.page#1281649

I'm still torn on how to equip my raveners. I think there are several solid options. Rending claws give you the flexibility to hurt almost every vehicle in the game in CC, which is huge, but you can have Str 4 or Str 5 rending claws on genestealers for a lot fewer points. 5 pts per model for the rending on raveners is a lot, especially when they're losing a set of scytals to get them; against infantry, you would always be better off with just more raveners, and more scytal rerolls, even if the infantry are heavily armoured. So, rending claws are only worth it if you plan to hunt vehicles -- still, the flexibility to be able to do so is significant, particularly since your raveners will often be the 1st infantry to close to CC range with the enemy.

Shooting options are tricky, again. Deathspitters and spinefists both look like solid choices for raveners: they have enough CC attacks, and a low enough BS, for the spinefists to be very effective (more effective than deathspitters against T3 infantry, equally effective against T4, less effective against T5), as well as being cheap. But Deathspitters, again, give you the chance to kill vehicles, particularly if you can hit side or rear armour. And taking no shooting weapons at all is another solid option, since raveners are Fleet, but there will be times when you can easily reach your enemy without Fleeting anyway (and, of course, Onslaughted raveners could be really nasty.

So, here's my assessment of ravener weaponry & their roles:

Cheap & cheerful, no upgrades -- this gives you a very solid anti-infantry unit, perfect if you intend to start your raveners on the board and charge your enemies. You need solid antitank elsewhere in the army though -- should work well in a footslogging army that has plenty of hive guard & t-fexes.

Spinefists only -- much as above, particularly if you have at least one tervigon with Onslaught around.

Deathspitters only -- if you plan to deep-strike the raveners, so you can hit rear armour of vehicles. There's a case to be made for this working OK in a footslogging army too, in that you have the mobility to hit side armour, but that's situational -- there are lots of vehicles that have the same side armour as front armour, or that still have high enough side armour that deathspitters are ineffective. So, for me, deathspitters are the deep-strike option only.

Rending claws are something you could add to any or all of the above, just for that anti-vehicle flexibility. There are almost certainly more points-efficient anti-vehicle options in the nid codex, though, and ones that don't cut the effectiveness of your other CC ability. Basically for 5pts more than the cost of 5 rending raveners, you could have 6 dual scytal raveners. Against WS 4, the 5 rending raveners get you 14 hits, of which around 2 ignore armour; the 6 dual scytal raveners get you a little over 21 hits. Huge difference. Against 2+ armour, the renders get slightly more penetrating hits (4 vs 3.5), but if the 2+ armour targets also have invulnerable saves, the dual scytals are probably better (a 5+ invulnerable save will reduce the renders' 4 hits to 3.33, and a 3+ to 2.67). So, I reckon stick to rending claws on genestealers, where they're free, don't cut into other CC capability, and can be S5 on the charge.

**Grundz**

Heavy weapons are worth it, if only for wound allocation shananagins, figure its 15 points for a slightly better gun, and can let your unit take 2 more wounds before you start losing models.

I suggest max alpha warriors w/ regen as well, stick them to your hive guard/zoans/ect. at first and then attach to warriors when he can't soak any more wounds for the more expensive units.

venomthropes may be a good idea, arrange your units like a p with the venomthrope near the end of the tail of each unit, only one model needs to be in range to give the cover bonus.

You are going to need some trigons, mawlocs, or lictors to kill heavy weapon teams and shake vehicles, game is going to hinge upon disrupting or panicing heavy weapons into firing at something besides warriors until they get in CC/shooting, there really isn't much that can survive alpha warrior'd up bug shooting and then assaults.

**Devxcil**

Real solid analysis Ian

As is, I'm getting the feeling that running multiple differently kitted ravener squads will be neccesary to cover all bases. One squad with dual scything talons, perhaps with spinefists as a purely anti-infantry squad. One squad with deathspitters to deepstrike and hit rear armour and one squad with rending claws as an all round support solution. The upside is that there's a squad for anything while keeping points down, the downside is that one or more squads can be ineffective at any given time (say vs lots of mech). But kitting them out to be able to handle anything drives up the costs a lot.

That's a great link by the way. Best looking conversion I've seen sofar. I'll have to drop by my LGS and see whether I can pick up some plasticard tomorrow.

Grundz, wouldn't regen be wasted on an alpha? With only 3 wounds I feel he'll probably be dead before I ever roll a 6.

I agree lots of distraction/disruption is going to be needed. The thing I'm most worried about is that the army can barely pose a threat at turn 1, which lets the opposition pick targets at his leisure. The tyrannofex seems like a remedy by providing something that's dangerous from 48 inches away, but it's costs so much I'm just having too much trouble justifying it in the list that desperately needs bodies

Venomthropes are going in the list, probably going to go with a squad of 2 for myself. Deathleaper too, just as a way to irritate my opponent in his own play zone. Hiveguard look like they'll be a must-have too. Zoanthropes I'm not sure about, they seem like they'll potentially kill one target and then die horribly.

So I bought one of the new Warrior boxes today, and upon opening it, I'm feeling dissappointed. The basic options are nice, but there's only one set of rending claws and only one set of large scything talons. That'll mean I need to buy three boxes just to get a minimal unit of rending claw warriors

That's not nice of GW, considering the options are of the "the whole brood may exchange" type. In light of this I'm leaning towards boneswords more as there are enough spinefists in the kit to convert dual boneswords for everybody.

Has anyone run the numbers on devourers vs deathspitters for warriors?

**Myth**

Devxcil wrote:Grundz, wouldn't regen be wasted on an alpha? With only 3 wounds I feel he'll probably be dead before I ever roll a 6.

I think the logic is that it is relatively cheap, and that he can be soaking up ID wounds for the rest of the unit he is attached with. So you assign wounds to him until he has 1 or 2, than wait for him to regen them back.

I suspect one can use the points better elsewhere, but it isn't a completely useless tactic - and the sort of thing that, when it pays off, definitely feels really nice.

**CatPeeler**

Oddly enough, I am also crunching the numbers to start a warrior / ravener army.

My "core" will be 4-6 units of 3 warriors (2 spitters, one VC) and 2 units of 6 raveners w/rending claws.

Heavies will be a pair of Mawlocs and a T-fex. 1-2 lash/sword primes to round out the bill to around 2k points.

Swap the 2nd prime for the parasite and some shrikes for funsies, and it's about done.

**Devxcil**

CatPeeler wrote:Oddly enough, I am also crunching the numbers to start a warrior / ravener army.

My "core" will be 4-6 units of 3 warriors (2 spitters, one VC) and 2 units of 6 raveners w/rending claws.

Good to hear, I was just about to ask whether anyone else was considering an army like this

Any particular reason for the VC over the BS? I'm still trying to figure out which one is more effective for its costs.

Myth wrote:
Devxcil wrote:Grundz, wouldn't regen be wasted on an alpha? With only 3 wounds I feel he'll probably be dead before I ever roll a 6.

I think the logic is that it is relatively cheap, and that he can be soaking up ID wounds for the rest of the unit he is attached with. So you assign wounds to him until he has 1 or 2, than wait for him to regen them back.

I suspect one can use the points better elsewhere, but it isn't a completely useless tactic - and the sort of thing that, when it pays off, definitely feels really nice.

You make a good point. I guess it's a good place for those leftover points to be used once the base list is drawn up. I'll keep it in mind

**Grundz**

Devxcil wrote:Real solid analysis Ian
Grundz, wouldn't regen be wasted on an alpha? With only 3 wounds I feel he'll probably be dead before I ever roll a 6.

Off the top of my head I thought he had 4, but either way, yes, every wound he soaks is 1 less zoany or warrior or venomthrope that isn't eating a lascannon and dying, sometimes it might not go off, but in the games ive run him, he soaks his wounds worth in the first turn (sometimes 2), then detach to a warrior squad, on turn 3ish when the warriors are starting to rip things apart in cc he should be up to 2 or so again in the unlikely scenario a power fister survives the first round of combat and gets his swings off.

If you are going all warriors and raveners and such you are going to have a few points left over for biomorphs so go nuts.

**Clang**

Fluffwise, I like the idea of a mid-Nid army, it will at least be different from all the swarm and nidzilla armies

Have you considered mycetic spores for deployment, especially for some of those warriors? Although you'd run the risk of bad reserve rolls delaying their appearance, at least they'd finally appear somewhere useful instead of needing to march right across the table.

**Black Blow Fly**

I still wonder if it was an oversight that Raveners don't have access to adrenal glands & toxin sacs. While I'm not in particular a big fan of toxin sacs it would have been very nice to kit Raveners with furious charge. To me this one upgrade would have made them well worth the points but without it they are kind of very meh in my opinion. They are very fast but just seem a bit lacking in close combat due to being only S4. They also have a low Ld which detracts from their speed since they'll need to stay closeby a synaspse creature. I really did the new plastics though and the thorax mounted bioweapons look uber hot.

G

**Devxcil**

Clang wrote:
Have you considered mycetic spores for deployment, especially for some of those warriors? Although you'd run the risk of bad reserve rolls delaying their appearance, at least they'd finally appear somewhere useful instead of needing to march right across the table.

I have, but with so few bodies on the table I worry more about them coming in piecemeal, shooting one target and then dieing horribly. Especially when facing melta heavy armies. While footslogging they could provide cover for each other, cover for some MC's and get some extra cover from a brood of venomthropes and do some damage before we close to melta range.

@Grundz: You're right on that, I'll definatly keep it in mind for leftover points.

@ Green Blow Fly: I don't really mind the lack of adrenals on raveners. If they're too killy, they destroy what they hit and be left stranded in the open in your opponents turn. For hitting rear armour there's still always rending claws. I do agree it's strange that they do not have acces at all, it does look like an oversight. The low Ld isn't so bad imo. They move as fast as any other footslogger when not charging so they can stay in synapse until they charge. And when deepstriking out of synapse, well they have the Feed behavior, so with creative positioning they'll still do their job of cc-ing something. This does restrict thorax ranged weapons to raveners acting as counterchargers within your own lines.

**Ian Sturrock**

I'm going to be including a unit of 3 basic raveners in my footslogging army, I think. For 90 pts, they're good insurance against Tau battlesuits & similarly mobile non-vehicle shooty stuff (Ravenwing bikes, etc.), as well as being able to at least glance Speeders. If I didn't plan on squeezing in at least a couple of genestealer units too, I'd probably give them rending claws. But, yeah, adrenal glands would be nice.

**lindsay40k**

Devxcil wrote:I agree lots of distraction/disruption is going to be needed. The thing I'm most worried about is that the army can barely pose a threat at turn 1, which lets the opposition pick targets at his leisure. The tyrannofex seems like a remedy by providing something that's dangerous from 48 inches away, but it's costs so much I'm just having too much trouble justifying it in the list that desperately needs bodies

Venomthropes are going in the list, probably going to go with a squad of 2 for myself. Deathleaper too, just as a way to irritate my opponent in his own play zone. Hiveguard look like they'll be a must-have too. Zoanthropes I'm not sure about, they seem like they'll potentially kill one target and then die horribly.

Sadly, our choices for dealing with Land Raiders are suicidal Carnifexes, suicidal Zoanthropes, or Tyrannofexes. In an army in which these are the three only options for dealing with AV14, I guess the laws of supply and demand allow our quartermasters to charge what they like for our only anti-tank that won't get banhammered immediately after doing it's job

Devxcil wrote:So I bought one of the new Warrior boxes today, and upon opening it, I'm feeling dissappointed. The basic options are nice, but there's only one set of rending claws and only one set of large scything talons. That'll mean I need to buy three boxes just to get a minimal unit of rending claw warriors That's not nice of GW, considering the options are of the "the whole brood may exchange" type. In light of this I'm leaning towards boneswords more as there are enough spinefists in the kit to convert dual boneswords for everybody.

Aesthetically, I like the design of the Warriors, but in practical terms they are appalling. Redundant Flesh Hooks*, no Lash Whips or Boneswords, token Claws that come from an old Carnifex and look completely out of proportion on the Warriors (seriously, you try and make those gorilla arms look natural), no wings for making Shrikes, and one of the heads is so badly moulded that you need to use green stuff to make the mouth piece fit straight. I fully expect a properly armed Warrior/Shrikes set to be amongst second wave releases, because these are just awful for anything other than talon/deathspitter broods. If you want Rending Claws, forget the set you get in the box and use Genestealer ones - they're far better proportioned. (If Stealers aren't your bag, see if you can buy or trade from another player.) The larger RC's can be a good foundation for a Prime's boneswords.

* Thankyou GW, whereas everyone else is packing melta or plasma or flamers in every damn squad, giving Warriors a couple of short range S6 AP- attacks to keep frag grenades by letting us have a biomorph Warriors have always had access to since 2E and almost always have had WYSIWYG'd on models for a decade would break the whole game, can't have Tyranids being good at CC can we, no let's have them get PF'd to death as they charge.

Oh, and my own little mathhammer on the Regenerating Prime: assuming 95pts for a Boneswords/Spitter Prime, each of its three wounds is just over 30pts of model, and if it lives for two turns after first getting wounded by S8/9 to save an ID'd Warrior, you've got a 1/3 chance of regenerating that first lost wound, which is a likely payback of a little over 10pts for a 10pt biomorph. Outside of mathhammer, that successful regeneration is also another stress factor on your opponent, adding to its value in a way we can't easily count

On a similar note, a Rupture T-fex at 265pts has 6 wounds worth a little over 44pts each, buying Regen at 25pts. With such a large wounds pool, I think it's a price worth paying as it's more than likely to either massively increase the beast's distraction value by demanding a one turn kill, or return on the investment by regenerating a wound or two.

**CatPeeler**

Devxcil wrote:Good to hear, I was just about to ask whether anyone else was considering an army like this

Any particular reason for the VC over the BS? I'm still trying to figure out which one is more effective for its costs.

The range, mostly, with the S6 coming in a close second. Deathspitter range isn't all that great, so I like the extended threat range of the VC.

I also like the shots against light armor. True, you're not going to kill much with the -1 to the chart, but keeping light vehicles shaken or stunned makes 'em that much easier for the raveners to rend. Both varieties of eldar should hate these guys...

**Devxcil**

Mellon has done some great stuff calculating the probabilities on our weapons. I'll quote his material here for anyone else interested in mid-heavy armies.

Mellon wrote:
Devxcil wrote:Thanks for the math Mellon, that is very helpfull. [edited rest, that'll teach me to stop posting in haste]

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Great, just noticed a critical error in my last post. I meant to ask for the math on warrior shootting with support from the Prime. Sorry about the confusion

It would be interesting to know how much the prime's bonus adds.

You are welcome. I'm happy for any excuse to calculate simple probabilities :-)

OK, warrior shooting with support from the Prime:
Generally speaking, a warrior unit will do 33% more damage if they have the prime bonus (goes from hitting on 4+ to hitting on 3+). Also, the prime can shoot things.

So lets make two shooty squads: I'll calculate hits done per point invested.
First Squad: 9 Tyranid Warriors with Deathspitters. This unit costs 315 points.
Second Squad: 6 Tyranid warriors with Deathspitters and a Tyranid Prime with Deathspitter. This unit costs 295p Only a bit less than the nine above.
Third squad, maxing things out: 9 Tyranid Warriors with Deathspitters and a Tyranid Prime with Deathspitter. Cost: 400p

First squad gets 27 shots = 13.5 hits. Each hit costs you 23p
Second squad gets 21 shots = 14 hits. Each hit costs you 21p
Third Squad gets 30 shots = 20 hit. Each hit costs you 20p

No real difference in hits done per point of cost. So it mostly comes down to keeping the Prime there to make the unit scary in close combat, and once in a while place a s8 or s9 hit on him to keep away an ID. If you have a HQ slot to spare, it is a good thing to use it for this.

So what will one Deathspitter hit do then? I'll calculate what effect 12 hits would have:
GEQ: 10W, 10 kills
MEQ: 8W, ~3 kills
TEQ: 8W, ~1 kill
ORK: 8W, 8 kills

Was that something like what you were looking for?

Mellon wrote:
Devxcil wrote:

Can I request one more set of calculations from you, a bit of a harder one? I first dismissed Venom Cannons and thought I'd go purely with cheaper Barbed Stranglers as heavies. I've been reconsidering that since yesterday, but I still can't wrap my head properly around how useful each will be.

Ignoring that the Venom Cannon can glance av12, how do the two weapons compare on hitting and killing various infantry types?

Allrighty, this one is a bit trickier, because the effectiveness on blast templates depends on how your targets are spread out. So I'll make a small tutorial on how blast marker effectivity works. If you really want to understand this, and get a feeling for how it works, go grab a handful of 25mm-based miniatures and the small and large blastmarker and set up the descriptions I do below. Then place the blast marker and roll the scatter, to see what happens. Repeat about 20-50 times for each setup. Maybe even write down your statistics. If you want to, you can repeat this excercise with different sizes of bases. Just to see how much difference a bit base does. In this math all scatters that I talk about are the ones you get AFTER reduction for BS. I will make a table below to let you see how much difference BS makes (hint: not that much)

For reference: the small blastmarker is 3" across = 1,5" from center to edge. The large one is 5" across =2,5" from center to edge.

First setup, maximum spread, singe line: Set up a squad in a single line with exactly 2" between base edges. If you have expensive models in small units (warriors etc) this is the way to set them up.
Attacking wiht a small blast: On a scatter-HIT you will hit exactly one model. If you have a lucky scatter along the line you might hit two models, but most scatters larger than 1" will just make you miss.
With the large blast you will hit eactly three models on a scatter-HIT. Most scatters will reduce this numbers. Scatters along the line and/or shorter than 2" will still grant you at least one hit.

Second setup, base to base, single line: Set up a squad in a single straight line, with base to base contact. If your models have a lot of parts sticking out outside the base, like many tyranids do, it can be tricky to put them this close.
Attacking with a small blast: On a scatter-HIT you will hit three models. If you claim to be able to hit more, you are cheating. The small blast marker is supposed to be exactly over the middle of the target model, and from there to the edge of its neighbours the distance is exactly 1,5". Most scattters will seriously reduce the number of hits. There is however one lucky scatter where you deviate at a slight angle to the line and just a few inches, that might let you cover 4 models. But that chance is mostly academical.
Attacking with a large blast. On a scatter hit you will hit five models. Most scatters will seriously reduce the number of hits. Same as above, there is a "golden scatter" that is very unlikely to happen that might let you hit six models.

Third setup, maximum spread, hexagon grid: Set up a squad, preferrably 20+ models, in a hexagon grid. Start with placing one model in the middle, then place 6 other models in a circle around this center one. All distances should be exactly 2" from base edge to the nearest base edge. Then place more models around, so that all distances are kept at 2" and you get as dense a cluster as possible. This will be a hexagon grid (if I managed to explain the setup properly, it looks a bit like the honey-comb of a bee-hive...). Theoretically speaking, if you want to minimize your losses from blast and template weapons this is the way you want to deploy your gaunts and similar models that comes in large units. In practice they become very unvieldy when placed this way, so most games keep a tighter formation. Anyhow, I find it useful to have a small piece of card that is exactly 2" along one edge, and use it to space up my units when I have a lot of room (and time) to move them about.
Attacking with a small blast: On a scatter HIT, you will hit exactly one model. Most short scatters actually have a good chance of increasing this to 2 hits. Short scatters are any scatters that lets the balst marker stay within the "borders" of the unit. Long scatters will give you no hits.
Attacking with a large blast: On a scatter HIT you will hit 7 models (the one under the template and the 6 in the circle around) Any short scatters will just reduce this a little. A long scatter will give you no hits.

Fourth setup, minimum spread, hexagon grid: This is how models will stand when they have arrived into play by use of the Deep Strike rules. Make a large squad again. One model in the middle, then make a full circle around it, as close as possible. If your models have very few parts that stick out outside of their bases, you will get 6 models in this circle. If you have a lot of things in the way, you can get seven (or maybe even more) models in this circle. Then keep stacking models as close as possible. This is the best possible target for blast markers (and templates...)
Attacking with a small blast: On a scatter-HIT, you will hit the model in the middle, and everyone in the inner circle. Usually this means 7 or 8 models. How bad a deviation is depends entirely on how big the unit is. A short deviation will give you just as many hits, but most of the time a short scatter is only 1-2", since the unit is so compact. Any longer scatters will give you much fever hits.
Atacking with a large blast: On a scatter-HIT you will hit the model in the middle, everyone in the first circle and everyone in the second circle. This can be a lot lof models, depending on how tight you placed them. Around 15 hits is not a problem. Unless the unit is huge (30+), almost any scatter over 1" will reduce the number of hits.

Fifth setup, less than 1" spread, random grid: Place a big unit just about as you would place it during a battle. A sort of unshapely blob with a bit more than 1" between models is what I usually expect. It makes a huge difference for the small blast marker if the distance between models is less than 1" or more than 1". So always try to place your models more than 1" apart. Start with a setup with less than 1" between models:
Attack this with a small blast: If you move the marker around a bit, you will probably find one or more target model that lets you hit a total of three or four models, if you roll a hit on the scatter. Short scatters will probably reduce this number of hits by one, or not at all.
Attacks with a large blast: Move the marker around a bit, you will probably find one or more targets models that lets you hit roughly eight models, if you roll a hit. Short scatters will probably reduce this by one, or not at all. Please note that as long as the spread between bases is less than 1", the large and the small blast will do roughly as many hits.

Sixth setup, more than 1" spread, random grid: Place as in fifth, but make sure the distance between models is roughtly 1,5". Mostly since the small blast marker will extend exactly one inch out from the target models base.
Attacks with a small blast: On a scatter hit you will hit exactly one model. On a short scatter this can increase to two models. This setup makes frag missiles just as effective as a bolter shot against your gaunts. That's a good thing :-)
Attacks with a large blast: On a scatter hit you will hit roughly 6 to eight models. For the large blast the difference between less than 1" spread and more than 1" spread is not huge.

That's about it for setups. I'm out of time now, so I'll do some statistics on scatter distances later tonight. I hope this helped a bit.

Mellon wrote:Thank you S&R. I'm glad you like it. I'm aware it can be considered pretty overdone, but I'm something of a statistics geek, I like doing math :-)

So the statistics of the scatter distance:
First of all, you do always have a 1/3 chance to roll a HIT on your scatter die. This effect is a sort of equalizer between units with high and low BS.

As for distance rolled. Here is a list of the different possible results of rolling 2D6, and the chance of them happening, given both as chance on 36 and as a shortened possibility. All percentages are approximations.

2 - 1/36 - 1/36 - 2.8%
3 - 2/36 - 1/18 - 5.6%
4 - 3/36 - 1/12 - 8.3%
5 - 4/36 - 1/9 - 11.2%
6 - 5/36 - ~1/7 - 13.9%
7 - 6/36 - 1/6 - 16.7%
8 - 5/36 - ~1/7 - 13.9%
9 - 4/36 - 1/9 - 11.2%
10 - 3/36 - 1/12 - 8.3%
11 - 2/36 - 1/18 - 5.6%
12 - 1/36 - 1/36 - 2.8%

When rollig for scatter distance you want to roll as low as possible. What we are interested in here is the chance of rolling equal to or less than a target number. This target number is usually the firing models BS. Many times it is quite allright to get 1" or 2" of deviation, without loosing a significant numebr of hits, in that case the target number is BS+1 or BS+2. To find the chance of rolling equal to or less than a number, all you have to do is add upp the probabilities up to and including that number. I'll make a table here. Once again. All percentages are approximations, I've done most of them in my head so don't trust all the small digits. As a bonus: This list can be used to see the likelihood of passing a Ld test.

Chance to roll target number or lower.
2 - 1/36 - 2.8%
3 - 3/36 - 8.4%
4 - 6/36 - 16.7%
5 - 10/36 - 27.8%
6 - 15/36 - 41.7%
7 - 21/36 - 58.3%
8 - 26/36 - 72.2%
9 - 30/36 - 83.3%
10 - 33/36 - 91.6%
11 - 35/36 - 97.2%
12 - 36/36 - 100%

Now I'll do some behind the scenes math, because it's so much faster than explaining. I'll make a table give the total chance of hitting your intended target, expressed as a list dependent on your Target number. This chance will include the 33% chance to roll a hit on the scatter die. As stated above, this target number will most likely be your BS, maybe +1 or +2 depending on how large the unit you are aiming for is. Just measure the distance in inches that the blast can scatter without having some part of it outside the target unit. If the unit is not circular or you are not aiming for a model in the middle, just take the shortest distance.

2 - 35.2%
3 - 39.0%
4 - 44.4%
5 - 51.8%
6 - 61.2%
7 - 72,1%
8 - 81.5%
9 - 88.9%
10 - 94.3%
11 - 98,1%
12 - 100%

So, as you can see, the difference in chance to place the blast marker exactly right between BS3 and BS4 is roughly 5%. That is not a huge difference at all. Feel free to copy these statistics out to a note and bring to your games. Or at least think about it when you create your armies.

Anyhow, the original question was "what about the Venom Cannon?" And I'll try to make a valuation of that as well. This I'll do as a "percentage of models hit that will die". Then you can use that knowledge together with the above statistics to make an informed guess as to if you will be able to hit enough models to make the ugrade worth the investment in points. However, at this time, I'm at a friends house and didn't bring my codex. So I'll get back to you on that subject, maybe later tonight.

Mellon wrote:OK, here goes some math on the big tyranid blast weapons. I have chosen these weapons since they are common "heavy" weapons in the Tyranid army, and there has been a lot of discussions about them on the boards.
Venom Cannon, 36", S6, AP4, Assault 1, blast
Heavy Venom Cannon, 36", S9, AP4, Assault 1, blast
Barbed Strangler, 36", S4, AP5, Assault 1, Large blast, pinning
Stranglethorn Cannon, 36", S6, AP5, Assault 1, Large blast, pinning

I will do this by calculating the number of effective wounds that will result from 100 hits with each weapon. Combine that number with the above models for number of hits per shot if you want to know the effectivity of each weapon.
Each weapon will be applied to a few targets: A guardsman, a marine, a terminator, an ork, a tyranid warrior, a SM bike/thunderwolf (T5, 3+), a carnifex (T6, 3+) and a wraithlord (T8, 3+). I will not discuss damage against targets with an armor value. Some rounding has not been done exactly.

Venom cannon. 100 hits gives:
GEQ: 83w, 83 ew, will cause instant death.
MEQ: 83w, 28 ew
TEQ: 83w, 14 ew
ORK: 83w, 83 ew
TYW: 83w, 83 ew
TWC: 67w, 22 ew
FEX: 50w, 17ew
WRL: 17w, 6ew

Heavy Venom Cannon. 100 hits gives:
GEQ: 83w, 83ew, ID
MEQ: 83w, 28ew, ID
TEQ: 83w, 14ew, ID
ORK: 83w, 83ew, ID
TYW: 83w, 83ew, ID will make this into 249ew if you shoot at unharmed TYWs
TWC: 83w, 28ew
FEX: 83w, 28ew
WRL:67w, 22ew

Barbed Strangler. 100 hits gives:
GEQ: 67w, 67ew
MEQ: 50w, 17ew
TEQ: 50w, 9ew
ORK: 50w, 50ew
TYW: 50w, 25ew
TWC: 33w, 11ew
FEX: 17w, 3ew
WRL: 0w, 0ew

Stranglethorn Cannon. 100 hits gives:
GEQ: 83w, 83ew, ID
MEQ: 83w, 28ew
TEQ: 83w, 14ew
ORK: 83w, 83ew
TYW: 83w, 42ew
TWC: 67w, 22ew
FEX: 50w, 17ew
WRL: 17w, 6ew

So, to the question: is a venom cannon worth the points?
Lets see how many hits we need to do with each shot from a venom cannon to make it just as good as a Deathspitter. Now it does cost a bit more, so it should in all honesty work a bit better than a deathspitter, but we will start with calculating the break even point. I'll start by calculating the efectivity of a single deathspitter. I will then dividing the resultant number of wounds with the effectivity of the venom cannon against this type of target. For example, I start with a BS3 Deathspitter shooting at a guardsman. This causes 1.25 wounds. I know that a VC has an effectivity of 83% against GEQ, so to make just as many wounds a VC-shot would have to hit 1.25/0.83=1.5 guardsmen on average. If you feel you can do that (based once again on our discussion about blasts a few posts up) then the VC is of equal value to the deathspitter for the given target. I'll also add the matching number of Barbed Strangler hits. With BS4, then just multiply the number of VC or BS hits needed to even out with 1.33.

One BS3 Deathspitter: 3 shots, 1.5 hits.
GEQ: 1.25w, 1.25ew = 1.5 VC hits = 1.87 BS hits
MEQ: 1w, 0.33ew = 1.18 VC hits = 1.94 BS hits
TEQ: 1w, 0.17ew = 1.18 VC hits = 1.84 BS hits
ORK: 1w, 1ew = 1.2 VC hits = 2 BS hits
TYW: 1w, 0.5ew = 0,6 VC hits = 2 BS hits
TWC: 0.75w, 0.25ew = 1,14 VC hits = 2.27 BS hits
FEX: 0.5w, 0.17ew = 1 VC hit = 5.7 BS hits
WRL: 0.25w, 0.08ew = 1.33 VC hits = can not be harmed by a BS

From the above list we can see that a VC is useful over a Deathspitter in a few distinct situations:
*If I know I'll be shooting at things with a 4+ save. This means: Tau, a few kinds of eldar, SPM scouts, tyranid warriors etc.
*If I can reliably place around 2 hits per shot with it. Looking at our theories for hitting with blasts a bit above, this is rarely the case.
*If I want to shoot at things between 18" and 36" away. This happens quite often.
*If I want to be able to hurt AV12 vehicles. This means Tau, eldar and some guard vehicles. The odds are not favourable though. Especially not since the VC is punished by an extra -1 on the damage chart on all non-open-top targets. I need 12 hits to likely cause one effective damage, that's around 20-30 VC shots, depending on how large the vehicle is and my BS. Not worth it!
*If I want to be able to hurt T9 targets. 12-18 shots needed per wound inflicted, before armor saves.

We can also see that the BS is useful over a Deathspitter in a few distinct situations.
*If I can reliably place around 3 hits per shot with it. Looking at our models above, this is likely to happen if I use this unit mostly against infantry. Especially likely against armies that regularly run large units.
*If I want to shoot at things between 18" and 36" away. This happens quite often.
*If I want to pin things. I often want to pin units that I am about to assault, because it negates the effect of assaulting through cover.
*If I will not shoot at things with T8 or AV 11. Deathspitters are pretty meh against those targets anyhow, so no worries there.

My summary is: The VC is only worth it if you know you will fight lots of units with 4+ saves, or if you know your opponents will be clumped up a lot due to restricting terrain, huge units, lots of deepstrikes etc etc.
The BS is generally a good upgrade, unless you are specifically going to use the warrior unit to hunt single targets, for example by Spodding behind enemy tanks etc.

Allright, that turned out to be quite a lot of text and some really useful information. It was good to get these things sorted for myself. Maybe I should even make this into a dakka article to spred it further... I hope you enjoyed the article. Further questions are welcome.

This is definitely going to help with my army composition and how I'll move them in the field.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a reference to Mellon's article building thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/277369.page

I know it's on the main page too

, but I figure any more attention drawn to it is a good thing

**Devxcil**

So, I'm still busy fiddling around with my armylist.

How are you guys arranging your warrior squads? How would You run them with two Primes?

**Ian Sturrock**

I did some more maths on 2 x scything talons vs scything talons + rending claws, on raveners. I already showed above that in most cases, scything talons are more effective than rending claws, even against heavy/elite infantry. How about against vehicles? Well, against anything with rear armour 11-13, you can't hurt it without rending, anyway. Against armour 10, though -- which I think is the only thing raveners should really be going up against (chasing down skimmers & fast vehicles, generally):

For 210 pts, you can have either 6 rending raveners (hereafter renderers), or 7 standard raveners (herafter taloners). This assumes no shooting. On the charge, that's 30 attacks for renderers, or 35 for taloners.

Needing 4s to hit: Renderers get 15 hits, then reroll 5 1s for another 2.5 = 17.5 hits of which 2.92 penetrate. Taloners get 17.5 hits then reroll 17.5 dice for another 8.75 = 26.25 hits of which 4.38 glance.

Needing 6s to hit: Renderers get 5 hits, then reroll 5 1s for another 0.83 = 5.83 hits of which 0.97 penetrates. Taloners get 5.83 hits then another 4.86 on the reroll = 10.69 hits of which 1.78 glance.

I'm convinced enough by that to glue my scything talons in place, I reckon, particularly given their increased effectiveness against infantry too. I don't really mind that they can only glance AV10 vehicles, because I see their main advantage over genestealers being their speed -- as long as they can stop an AV10 vehicle moving for long enough for my stealers to catch up with it and rend it, that's fine.

**Ian Sturrock**

Alrighty, after some testing, I changed my mind... just played a game in which the only viable target for my Raveners was a Killa Kan squad, or else I'd have been Burna fodder the next turn, if I wasn't in CC. Fortunately I hadn't, in fact, glued the scytals in place, and was testing out a rending claw version... they do add so much versatility as to be worthwhile. Raveners still didn't do much other than kill one Kan, lose one of their own number, lose combat, run, and get flamed next round anyway, but that was a whole lot better than nothing. Practice beats theory again!