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.

Which race overall has the capability of being most resiliant, as in ability to shrug off the most damage? This includes for all selections the army list from troops choices down (or up). Also factor in any special rules the race might have.

It's hard not to say generic SM or BA. Their most vanilla troops are pretty sturdy and they have multiple special rules, like blood chalices and iron halos, that can make them moreso. Add to that they can have very hearty vehicles like the crazy LR.

I think GW intended Necron to be really tough, but they don't really seem to work out like that. I don't know Tyranids at all, but I heard they can be strong.

Curious as to everyone elses' opinions.

it depends exactly what you mean.

Deathwing are very sturdy on an individual-model basis because they all get a 5+ invulnerable save. Meanwhile guard players can just shrug off incoming fire because while they are effected by it (it kills stuff), the relative amount of damage is low (they can pack over 150 models in a single troops choice).

If anything, I'd say that SM are on the low end of the durability scale overall. While their models are individually more durable than most other army's individual models, the numbers they field are generally rather low. This means that a single battlecannon killing 10 marines is going to weaken their army much more seriously than a battlecannon killing 10 guardsmen or boyz in a single shot (a battlecannon being equally effective against both, regardless of the individual marine's stat line).

Specifically meant individually sturdiest. Orks and IG can field a trillion infantry, but for the purpose of this question I consider them both about the lowest because their Troops choices are so flimsy.

Well then it's a pretty stupid question. Nob Bikers are the answer; they are tougher than any other Troop unit on an individual model basis but they cost an arm and a leg.

DukeRustfield wrote:Specifically meant individually sturdiest. Orks and IG can field a trillion infantry, but for the purpose of this question I consider them both about the lowest because their Troops choices are so flimsy.

Im laughing at the Ork boyz being called flimsy. Sure, one on one an Ork boy will die easy, but you have to go point by point. 1 SM is worth almost 3 boyz. So in that instance, they would kill the SM. Infact, Ork boyz are arguably one of the BEST troop choices in the game right now.




Also Id like to add SS/TH terminators. Those guys are tough as nails, and can take on pretty much everything. Nob bikers are tough yes, BUT they can and WILL be insta killed by alot of weapons. A simple krak missile will make a nob biker go bye bye

There is no answer to this question, as it stands.

Nob Bikers and Termies will shrug small arms fire, but be torn to shreds by many other weapons/tactics.

I dunno... Necrons ARE tough as nails; they come back to freaking life after being melted. T1000 anyone? I actually consider playing against a Res.Orb Necron force, to be nothing more than a round of craps. No real tactics, no real gameplay, all odds, and completely void of literal enjoyment for me. It's funny because Necrons when built the right way, will provide some of the most mind-numbingly boring games ever played.

I think as an entire race the orks are up there because you can wpe them from a planet and if you haven't virus bombed it ork spores will start growing new orks eventually. Given time a huge band of orks can be rampaging through the planet again.

Demons take the title though as they don't die, they simply return to the warp and await their chance to burst back through into the material plane.

KingCracker wrote: Im laughing at the Ork boyz being called flimsy. Sure, one on one an Ork boy will die easy, but you have to go point by point. 1 SM is worth almost 3 boyz. So in that instance, they would kill the SM. Infact, Ork boyz are arguably one of the BEST troop choices in the game right now.

Uh, did you even read the OP's posts? He said toughest individual models. The fact that Orks can have large numbers is irrelevant.

KingCracker wrote:Also Id like to add SS/TH terminators. Those guys are tough as nails, and can take on pretty much everything. Nob bikers are tough yes, BUT they can and WILL be insta killed by alot of weapons. A simple krak missile will make a nob biker go bye bye

Again, reading comprehension. He was talking about Troops on an individual models basis. Tell me a Troops choice that is tougher than Nob Bikers. And no, krak missiles will not take out Nob Bikers easily because those wounds will be put on the Warboss, and they will have a 3+ cover save from turbo-boosting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guys remember this is 40k tactics, not fluff. The fluff is irrelevant.

And you can't make an army out of TH/SS termies. Besides, TH/SS termies are not as tough as Nob Bikers. Yes they will beat them in HTH, but in the context of facing the current codices, an individual Nob Biker is tougher than an individual Termie.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:

KingCracker wrote:Also Id like to add SS/TH terminators. Those guys are tough as nails, and can take on pretty much everything. Nob bikers are tough yes, BUT they can and WILL be insta killed by alot of weapons. A simple krak missile will make a nob biker go bye bye

Again, reading comprehension. He was talking about Troops on an individual models basis. Tell me a Troops choice that is tougher than Nob Bikers. And no, krak missiles will not take out Nob Bikers easily because those wounds will be put on the Warboss, and they will have a 3+ cover save from turbo-boosting.

don't forget the regular 4+ Cover save for the Ork Bikes dust cloud

otherwise, it's gotta be Commissar Yarrick, with enemies having to reroll successful wounds and to get back up from death on 3+ he (and any squad he's leading) can hold back any foe. the Power Klaw helps to

and with Necrons it all about the Lords, I would know, I keep winning because he won't stay down, ha!

I probably didn't make it really clear. In fact I'm sure I didn't.

But I mean the toughest race, by individuals, based on HQ/Troops/Elite/Fast Attack/Heavy. Like the turtle-iest race. Like Plague Marines being a perfect example of super-resiliant Troop choices. And Terminators obviously being super resliant Elites. But combining them all, and presumably having a non-horrible army, which is most resiliant? I.e., it can sit around under a dozen orbital bombardments and plasma cannons and assault cannon and monster pounding on their heads while they sit around and check their Facebook pages?

Given the narrow confines of the thought experiment, the Sisters of Battle must be near the top.

With the will to do it and a smidgen of luck 3+ Invulnerable saves on any unit in the army are hard to beat. Characters and Independant Characters can have 2+ Invulnerable saves.

So far as I know, the only other army that can claim a 2++ save is Dark Eldar. I don't know of another army that can boast a (potential) 3++ save in every section of the FoC.

Of course, it is a narrowly defined thought experiment, and irrelevant to the real world where Orks and IG are by their very nature, the kings of the Resiliency hill.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:Uh, did you even read the OP's posts? He said toughest individual models. The fact that Orks can have large numbers is irrelevant.

Which race overall has the capability of being most resiliant, as in ability to shrug off the most damage? This includes for all selections the army list from troops choices down (or up). Also factor in any special rules the race might have.

What?

Point out what you mean, because you seem to be completely wrong...

DukeRustfield wrote:I probably didn't make it really clear. In fact I'm sure I didn't.

But I mean the toughest race, by individuals, based on HQ/Troops/Elite/Fast Attack/Heavy. Like the turtle-iest race. Like Plague Marines being a perfect example of super-resiliant Troop choices. And Terminators obviously being super resliant Elites. But combining them all, and presumably having a non-horrible army, which is most resiliant? I.e., it can sit around under a dozen orbital bombardments and plasma cannons and assault cannon and monster pounding on their heads while they sit around and check their Facebook pages?

There is literally only one answer to your question, and that would be Orks. Their stat line is very, very limited. All Orks are stat line A.), with various options for weaponry/transport (so you would really be talking about their upgrades overall). All Nobs are stat line B.), with various options to add on. Taking every option into account, would involve so much math it is mind-boggling.

Eldar/Tau are flimsy in general, but not explicitly so. Orks/Meq are tough in general, but not explicitly. Your question is vague, because 'tough', is a completely abstract concept, unless you are actually talking about toughness-value.

I will suggest that you narrow your questioning, to a specific scenario. I.E. (I am facing a lot of high strength template weaponry, specifically plasma, vindicators, and heavy flamers). Toughness doesn't mean anything overall, because I can counter it with an appropriate meta-list, and/or devastating tactics/formations. I play WH40k, because I can actually play in my head with a certainty I cannot find elsewhere. Developing very specific scenarios is key to understanding how the game 'works'.

I can have units A.), B.), and C.), but all you need is D.), and I am completely screwed. Meta-gaming just to beat one list, is also a great way to fail against concept armies that are not within your common gaming groups though. Strategy concerned, pick one style, and stick with it.

Orks (footslogging KFF Kan list): Walks, talks, and runs tough. Very slow to gain momentum, and has little ability to switch tactics.

Eldar (mech DA/FD list): Flies, shoots, and dies fast. Relatively tough, given use of effective tactics. Very flexible in comparison to many standard armies.

Generally, footslogging is tough, but mech can be just as tough, in different ways.

Wrexasaur wrote:There is literally only one answer to your question, and that would be Orks.

Now you're not getting it. If an army can field only 4/5/6 saves as their best, they ain't it. Think of a turtle. One turtle. In real life. What is a turtle's defense in nature? Not its power klaws. Not its speed. Not it's threatening size and roar. Nor agility. Not it's low point-per-unit cost (mosquitoes might get that honor). Turtles exist because of their ability to not be hurt by just about anything that comes across it other than a car. "Turtling" in game lingo generally defines a defensive-minded stance, often with corresponding weak offense to balance it out.

Orks have a defense of being really cheap and plentiful and can win by attrition. But attrition != turtle. It's "zerging" at least in common game parlance.

If all that's required is to be able to laugh off orbital bombardments and the like, an apocalypse tyranid army made entirely of spore mines I think tops the pile.

I guess the question is what's the point? I mean, what is the point of having individually tough models? The most resilient armies overall are those with the easiest to kill models, while those with lots of models with good statlines are really expensive, making them less resilient overall, regardless of their stat lines.

I mean, sure, a list that contined 2x TH/SS terminators in 2 LR's would be the hardest to kill on a by-unit basis, but those 800+ points could be wiped with 2 meltaguns and 2 squads of rough riders coming in at a whopping 200 points.

Sure, SM's have high durability per-model, but guard and orks always get the last laugh, so why bother?

DukeRustfield wrote:Now you're not getting it. If an army can field only 4/5/6 saves as their best, they ain't it. Think of a turtle. One turtle. In real life.

That makes absolutely no sense, and I am going to call you on it. Turtles have no save at all, so I guess turtles aren't turtles.

What is a turtle's defense in nature? Not its power klaws. Not its speed. Not it's threatening size and roar. Nor agility. Not it's low point-per-unit cost (mosquitoes might get that honor). Turtles exist because of their ability to not be hurt by just about anything that comes across it other than a car. "Turtling" in game lingo generally defines a defensive-minded stance, often with corresponding weak offense to balance it out.

I get the lingo, I have gamed for a long time. The lingo is insufficient to pose a question with. Do you want to play defensively, or do you want to call an army, 'turtle'?

Orks have a defense of being really cheap and plentiful and can win by attrition. But attrition != turtle. It's "zerging" at least in common game parlance.

Zerging means rushing, it's what speedlings do best... problem is, we are not playing starcraft, so it doesn't really mean anything. Rushing is a completely different game mechanic in WH40k.

You want my opinion? Orks are the tough nails in WH40k, period. They are not the best by default, but they can be, given the right circumstances. A squad of 30 Ork boys with cover, are just as tough as a Tac marine individually, against AP4 weaponry. If that AP4 weaponry also breaks cover, then Meq will fair better. Again, you need a specific scenario to apply math and tactics to, in order to understand which army can provide the 'toughest' units to deal with that situation.

3 cover saves are better than one. Simple.

So the basic premise is if I was to take a general 1850 army and have it eat, say, 6 orbital bombardments and then 200 lasrifle shots which army would still be standing firmest at the end?

That's still a very complicated question, but I'd probably consider the following as my top 3;

1. Necrons - 3+ saves or better on all of their units plus the ability to WBB plus the Res Orb plus the Monolith teleport trick has to make this army a solid contender (even though they're probably the weakest army at the moment, go figure).

2. CSM - Good armor, sturdy vehicles, Monstrous Creatures, and the presence of the Nurgle units makes the stand out in my mind as, on average, harder to kill then the other Marine flavors.

3. I dunno, when I first started writing this up I was actually going to make an arguement for Eldar as between the Jetlocks, the various Wraith units, and their vehicles they can be a shockingly durable army. That said, I've been tossing over the thought of whomever brought up SoB and he had some very solid arguments as well as the Sisters can be darn durable. Eh, let's call it a tie between them though frankly I think by this point lots of stuff becomes debatable.

I'd have to disagree with the Ork comments. Orks are good due to sheer numbers of ablative wounds and the durability of specific small units (Nobs in various iterations). Overall their vehicles are much easier to destroy then most, their armor saves are paper, and their toughness is average. Lots of armies can absorb equal amounts of shooting with less casualties (I will concede relative points lost is another matter entirely, but I feel that's not the question on the field at the moment)

@ Wrexasaur: The OP is asking for the toughest race by individual models. I don't know how this can be spelled out any clearer. So it's basically "what army can field the toughest individual models". The answer, of course, is a pure Nob Biker army.

Standard 40K, not apoc. I'm interested in the question, which is why I asked.

There's a million threads on what's the most shootiest race and which race does this best or that best. That's just things those posters were curious about. And yes, this is a pretty specific question.

If you're not interested in answering, or you think the question is pointless, then I'd advise not wasting your time

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:@ Wrexasaur: The OP is asking for the toughest race by individual models. I don't know how this can be spelled out any clearer. So it's basically "what army can field the toughest individual models". The answer, of course, is a Nob Biker army.

Yeah, but if the arguement is individual model then the real correct answer is going to be like Ghaz or a Bloodthirster or some other IC/Monstrous thing - not a unit such as Nob Bikers.

I think the question is army in general - like say you threw down one unit of every option in the Codex and unloaded a bunch of firepower and/or assaulted it - which army would be most likely to survive?

Thor665 wrote:I'd have to disagree with the Ork comments. Orks are good due to sheer numbers of ablative wounds and the durability of specific small units (Nobs in various iterations).

Cover saves are awesome, that is all.

Overall their vehicles are much easier to destroy then most, their armor saves are paper, and their toughness is average.

AV 14/12/10 is not easier to destroy, as compared to many vehicles (BW). Trukks are paper transports, but they can hide, and they can move 18" in one turn. I don't consider trukks to be the end all be all, to Ork mobility. Average toughness compared to what? MCs? I don't understand what you mean. A 6 point unit at T4 is freaking awesome when used effectively.

Lots of armies can absorb equal amounts of shooting with less casualties (I will concede relative points lost is another matter entirely, but I feel that's not the question on the field at the moment)

The question doesn't have any real answer. The question is vague, but not entirely without reason. OP needs to narrow his query to gain anything of use.

So the basic premise is if I was to take a general 1850 army and have it eat, say, 6 orbital bombardments and then 200 lasrifle shots which army would still be standing firmest at the end?

I think that's a good way of phrasing it. Except change it to 3 OBs that hit every piece of your army. Which is why Orks aren't it, because if everyone is under 3 OBs, they do poorly in relation to some other races. Which is why IG likely aren't it, because their entire HQ and all their Troops are probably gone.

Wrexasaur wrote:

Thor665 wrote:I'd have to disagree with the Ork comments. Orks are good due to sheer numbers of ablative wounds and the durability of specific small units (Nobs in various iterations).

Cover saves are awesome, that is all.

You're going with the KFF as a defense? (regular cover saves being as available to any army as to Orks). I'll certainly agree that the KFF is very nice to have. I just think Necrons could deal with the firepower even better considering they would get their armor save, plus generally two seperate chances to stand back up whether they were killed or not.

AV 14/12/10 is not easier to destroy, as compared to many vehicles (BW). Trukks are paper transports, but they can hide, and they can move 18" in one turn. I don't consider trukks to be the end all be all, to Ork mobility. Average toughness compared to what? MCs? I don't understand what you mean. A 6 point unit at T4 is freaking awesome when used effectively.

Average toughness of infantry - 4. I don't consider MCs to represent average toughness. I also do not disagree that Orks have a point advantage when it comes to other races - but that is just feeding back into the ablative wounds as toughness idea. I decided that wasn't what the OP was going for - if we are going with ablative wounds as "resilient" then I agree Orks would score much better in my rankings.

Ork vehicles are quite vulnerable compared to legitimately tough vehicles like Land Raiders (blessed, possessed and regular) Monoliths, and assorted Eldar options. I don't sweat killing Ork vehicles, I sweat the others.

If we're going to bring speed and avoidance up as a defense of Ork trukks I think we're getting away from "resilient" and edging into a discussion of general in game survivability. I think Orks do have that in spades, oft times via their aforementioned ability to put down more units then their foes in equal points. But by that logic wouldn't Eldar and DE suddenly be much more "resilient". I'm basing my listing on the idea the enemy was able to unload a certain pile of ordinance into the army - so I'm ruling out a lot of stuff by that stated belief.

Orks remove handfuls of models when they are shot - Marines remove 1-2. Ergo, Marines are more resilient since they are more likely to survive being shot (though Orks can still easily win because they have more guys - that's where we're talking at cross concepts.)

Thor665 wrote:

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:@ Wrexasaur: The OP is asking for the toughest race by individual models. I don't know how this can be spelled out any clearer. So it's basically "what army can field the toughest individual models". The answer, of course, is a Nob Biker army.

Yeah, but if the arguement is individual model then the real correct answer is going to be like Ghaz or a Bloodthirster or some other IC/Monstrous thing - not a unit such as Nob Bikers.

I think the question is army in general - like say you threw down one unit of every option in the Codex and unloaded a bunch of firepower and/or assaulted it - which army would be most likely to survive?

You can't make an army out of Ghazzes or Bloodthirsters.

If I'm not mistaken the OP is asking for which army can you build to have the strongest individual models on average. The army has to be legal so Nob Bikers is the answer. Tell me a troop choice that's tougher than them.

Thor665 wrote:You're going with the KFF as a defense? (regular cover saves being as available to any army as to Orks). I'll certainly agree that the KFF is very nice to have. I just think Necrons could deal with the firepower even better considering they would get their armor save, plus generally two seperate chances to stand back up whether they were killed or not.

I know that Necrons can be some of the most annoying armies to play against, but they suck tactically when forced to rely on that strategy. Orks will beat Necrons, because Orks will deal more damage, even if the Necrons excel at being generally annoying/boring.

Average toughness of infantry - 4. I don't consider MCs to represent average toughness. I also do not disagree that Orks have a point advantage when it comes to other races - but that is just feeding back into the ablative wounds as toughness idea. I decided that wasn't what the OP was going for - if we are going with ablative wounds as "resilient" then I agree Orks would score much better in my rankings.

Ablative what? Explain what you mean please. It doesn't have any solid meaning in the context of wargaming, for me... even if I hear a lot of people throw the term around. In the case of nob bikers, I assume you are referring to the ability to spread wounds over multi-wound units, preserving the squad as a whole. That technique doesn't mean anything in the case of a 30-strong mob of Ork boys. 30 wounds would just be 30 wounds; as in the ability to avoid taking wounds on ICs within that squad, simply because there is just too large an obstacle to actually do so.

Ork vehicles are quite vulnerable compared to legitimately tough vehicles like Land Raiders (blessed, possessed and regular) Monoliths, and assorted Eldar options. I don't sweat killing Ork vehicles, I sweat the others.

Landraiders are twice the price of a BW, and WS are weaker to ranged firepower. 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. There is no supreme vehicle, only those in the right place at the right time.

If we're going to bring speed and avoidance up as a defense of Ork trukks I think we're getting away from "resilient" and edging into a discussion of general in game survivability. I think Orks do have that in spades, oft times via their aforementioned ability to put down more units then their foes in equal points. But by that logic wouldn't Eldar and DE suddenly be much more "resilient". I'm basing my listing on the idea the enemy was able to unload a certain pile of ordinance into the army - so I'm ruling out a lot of stuff by that stated belief.

Resilient and survivable can mean much the same thing... and often do.

Orks remove handfuls of models when they are shot - Marines remove 1-2. Ergo, Marines are more resilient since they are more likely to survive being shot (though Orks can still easily win because they have more guys - that's where we're talking at cross concepts.)

1 marine = 3 Ork boys...

We are not talking across concepts, because this topic has no stable concept.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:If I'm not mistaken the OP is asking for which army can you build to have the strongest individual models on average. The army has to be legal so Nob Bikers is the answer. Tell me a troop choice that's tougher than them.

Wraithlord... or clarify your definition of toughness, beyond the literal meaning in WH40k. Nobs are not so tough against heavy flamers, or power weapons... or wraith-cannons... or large blasts that manage to break their cover...

I guess WL are not troops though... hmm... Deff Dread, question answered, just make it a troop choice.

We are not talking across concepts, because this topic has no stable concept.

This.

/thread

Wrexasaur wrote:

Orks remove handfuls of models when they are shot - Marines remove 1-2. Ergo, Marines are more resilient since they are more likely to survive being shot (though Orks can still easily win because they have more guys - that's where we're talking at cross concepts.)

1 marine = 3 Ork boys...

We are not talking across concepts, because this topic has no stable concept.

I explained my concept and how I had reached my conclusions. I agree with your concept if based within the parameters you are setting which are different from those I stated for my list.

I'm gonna have to vote for Necrons here. No other army can shrug off mortal wounds....get back up after they die...

Eldar, those tanks never seem to go down!

Energy fields
Holo-Fields
Fortune

Tzeentch daemons with fateweaver nearby.

dancingcricket wrote:Tzeentch daemons with fateweaver nearby.

Null zone!