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.

I always used to use the Scorpion's Claw on my SS Exarch, however, now with him being effectively "-1" attack from what he had 4th edition, is anyone considering the other options? Thanks - Mezmaron

Depends on what enemy you are building for. Against power armored opponents, I think the claw is still best. Against Orks and guard and maybe bugs, I am thinking of going with the chansabres.

Its not like he's hurting for attacks. He has a 15 points strength 6 powerfist and he recoups that attack he loses with his mandiblasters and if you are fighting orks or bugs use the chainsword he is equipped with. He has a shuriken catapult in the powerfist too. Which is another 2 shots into a horde of orks before you charge. Take the claw!

I was also thinking about the chainsabres. Biting Blade still doesn't do it for me.

For me it depends not so much on opponents, as I like to make lists without knowing who they will fight, but whether I have pf's or pf equivalents elsewhere in the list. IE, I might be more inclined to take the chainsabres if there are warithlords in the list.

The exarch's mandiblasters make it almost neglible about the lost attack from the powerfist. With his high WS, he should be guaranteed hitting on 3's against most opponents in CC, and wounding on 2's with no armor save will add much need extra kills to the squad's result for combat resolution against MEQ's. Since he can't really ever be denied attacks anymore, it's a very friendly combination to a take all comers list.

Now, for orks/hordes, assuming the Scorps charge...

9 Striking Scorpions attacking against orks:
1/2 * 1/2 * 5/6 = 0.2083333 wounds
x 36 attacks (9 scorpions with 4 attacks charging) = 7.5 dead orks (and for this exercise we will round down to 7 dead orks)

So that's 23 orks swinging back at ya if you took a powerfist Exarch, because he won't get to swing yet.

So 23 Slugga Boyz with 3 attacks
1/2 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 0.083333
x 69 attacks = 5.75 dead scorpions

For 23 shoota boyz with 2 attacks
x 43 = 3.58333 dead scorpions

So even before the exarch swings, you're winning the combat by ~1 against the slugga boyz, and ~4 against the shoota boyz. Unfortunately, since there are 23 left, even though they will fail a bunch of saves from outnumbering, they are still fearless and will have ~20 orks left to your 5-7 scorps the next turn, and you will probably be overrun. If the orks have a Nob with a powerklaw, he will probably cancel out your Exarch's Claw wounds as well, and leave you down 1-2 more scorps in the next turn.

The chainsabre's will probably help more against the orks in this case, as they will be more valuable in a longer engagement. So against squads that number more than 20 models and mass alot of attacks (Orks, Tyranids), it's probably better to take the chainsabres.

In any other case, the squad attacking back won't be able to harm you enough to make killing them faster worth more, and you could run the risk of killing the enemy on your charge, rather than finishing them off in their own turn.

I hope that makes sense....

Against Orks it is actually a little better that you figured.

Add in the 10 pistol shots 6.6 hits = 3 wounds
Exarch 5 attacks with chainsabres on charge 4 hits 3 wounds due to re-rolls.
Add the 6 wounds and maybe one is saved so 5 wounds.

7 dead orks from troops + 5 dead orks from exarch and pistols = 12 dead orks.

18 slugga boys = 49 swings, 24 hits, 12 wounds, 4 dead scorps + 1 dead from klaw = 5 dead scorps.

Orks lose combat by 7 and 6 more die to fearless test = 18 dead orks. shoota boys is even worse.

I like the Chainsabres, personally.

Are they S4? I always play them S3.

They are not as good against MEQ. But they are I6 and they are a cool new option.

I would definately take them in this age of the -1 attack power fist/claw.

The answer really depends on the meta game you are working with. If you are going to be going up against power armor, the exarch with the claw does as much damage as the rest of the squad combined. However, power armor was never a good target for scorpions, they have always been about killing lightly armored targets. So if you are sending them after the target that they are really good at killing (orcs, gaunts, ig troopers, etc.) then kitting your exarch out with chain sabers is the way to go.

@Tacobake, good catch! I have never used chainsabres so I apologize for assuming they were S:4. My bad. That new bit of info kinda sways me back to the claw. Thanks.

Darrian13 wrote:@Tacobake, good catch! I have never used chainsabres so I apologize for assuming they were S:4. My bad. That new bit of info kinda sways me back to the claw. Thanks.

... I was actually just thinking out of my b you m, I didn't really follow what you were saying. But np.

Claw. Everything else is neat, but the Claw gives you balance against marines where the other stuff doesn't.

Well, careful Phoenix. Chainsabres are better against orks because you kill more than the claw and deny more attacks back, however, charging 10 scorps into 30 sluggaz nets you 5 dead scorps, basically making them ineffective against anything else they may charge later.

Against the Green Tide, you may stop 30 orks, (or maybe only 15 if their friends charge you back) but their will be 150 of them left coming at you.

Against GEQ's, the scorps clean up by themselves whether or not the Exarch has Chainsabres or a Claw, and you probably don't want to be charging 30 sluggas or shootas blind. (or 30 hormagaunts or whatever) so I think that keeping that in mind, the Claw is much more useful in a take all comers environment, and certainly more useful against MEQ's.

So the only problem is that Scorpions cannot wipe out large units of Orks on a 1:1 basis? Why would an Eldar player ever choose those odds? Eldar should attack at a 3:1 advantage, unit-wise. Or shoot the unit to be assaulted down to a manageable size for the assault follow-up.

Um...you missed the whole thread. The discussion is about an Exarch's loadout.

The chainsabres kill more, but if you attack 3:1, you don't need the extra advantage from the chainsabre because you are in a position to win decisively anyway.

So the Claw is more useful in more situations, and the Chainsabre is only useful against GEQ's (which the regular scorps can handle just fine) or Hordes of Orks or Tyranids (which you don't want to attack on a 1:1 basis anyway).

No, I addressed the greater strategic picture.

As you say, Chainsabres have greater casualty potential, while the Scorpion's Claw increases the likelihood of casualties that it could cause. Therefore the Chainsabres are more useful to an Eldar player using a higher proportion of assault troops and the Scorpion's Claw is more useful to an Eldar player with fewer assault units.

Nurglitch wrote:No, I addressed the greater strategic picture.

As you say, Chainsabres have greater casualty potential, while the Scorpion's Claw increases the likelihood of casualties that it could cause. Therefore the Chainsabres are more useful to an Eldar player using a higher proportion of assault troops and the Scorpion's Claw is more useful to an Eldar player with fewer assault units.

You addressed nothing that wasn't already stated, and are attempting to veer the entire conversation off course since we originally were only talking about Exarchs, not small unit tactics.

And your other analysis is wrong as well. The Chainsabres have greater casaulty potential ONLY against GEQ's/HORDES. And your next statement doesn't follow logically at all. The weapon you are taking depends on the opponents you wish to be facing with the Scorps. And again, incidentally, if you are attempting a take all comers list, the power claw is a better choice.

Aren't all lists supposed to be take-all-comers lists?

I musta missed something somewhere.

Stelek wrote:Aren't all lists supposed to be take-all-comers lists?

I musta missed something somewhere.

Some groups like to change things up against their regular opponents. Other groups like strictly take all comers lists. There is no right or wrong way to play.

whitedragon:

Where in the thread was the composition of the Eldar army discussed as a important consideration in the decision to arm a Striking Scorpion Exarch?

To raise this point is hardly drawing the thread off topic, as the relative merits of the equipment one might choose to use depends on the tactics by which it will employed.

Obviously I'm not trying to draw the thread off-topic, and trying to add to the discussion this important consideration of the conditions under which the Striking Scorpion Exarch's options may be considered preferable.

To say that Chainsabres have a greater potential for casualties is definitely true where more attacks means a greater number of potential wounds. You should not confuse a greater potential for casualties with a greater likelihood of causing those casualties. While the relative expected value of the options differs depending on whether they are used on Guardsmen or Marines, the maximum numbr of possible casualties remains a constant.

Hence my next statement follows trivially: if you are maximizing the potential at the expense of risk, then you should only do so where you can ameliorate the risk via tactics: using the risky (but potentially more effective) option where you can minimize the risk, and using the reliable (but potentially less effective) option where you can maximize the effect.

As Stelek points out, you should be building a list that can take on all comers. Partly that's because designing a list to counter specific enemy armies will hamstring you against armies you didn't expect, but more importantly that's because planning for a specific foe costs you the initiative by reacting rather than dictating play.

If you plan to defeat an army, you might as well hand the game to your opponent. If you plan to defeat your opponent, then you have a fighting chance.

An Eldar army should always because able to dictate when and where the battle is resolved. Since the enemy is an unknown variable, in arming your Scorpion Exarchs you must concentrate on what you know (your army) and how you plan to co-ordinate its parts to defeat your opponent.

Wouldn't be best to use a Specialized unit as it was intended? I understand being well-rounded, but would it not be best to have the unit be betterat its original purpose?

Chainsabres improve on the natural ability and purpose of striking scorpions, lower the attacks being aimed at the unit (by killing at Int 6) and are cheaper. While they are less effective against MEQs, isn't the Metagame lowering the chances that you will face them?

Good Against:
Most Daemons
Orks
Gaunts and Genestealers
Tau
IG
Eldar (Harlies Especially)

Bad Against:
SM
CSM
Necrons

Since Orks, Eldar and Tyranids will and are starting to be more common, if you are taking Scorps will not chainsabres be a better deal?

It all depends on the use of the unit. If you have the scorpions operating alone, trying to out flank, then the claw is better because you can hurt a wider assortment of units.

If you are using scorpions to support, then chain sabers are better because you can focus the squad on low save enemies and prep with an initial volley. Then you can eliminate the enemy before they strike back.

I've been trying out the biting blade, as it works best against the AV10 rear armor of most stationary Russes and chimera, but chain blades and the claw are better against infantry.

I think you can equip both the Biting Blade and the Scorpion's Claw.

I had a revelation about this today.

There's no reason not to bring both the Biting Blade and the Scorpions Claw.

Claw is a fist, gain nothing from another weapon.

Biting Blade, is a two-handed weapon...lose nothing by taking it. For 5 points striking at I6 with str bonuses is still a good thing, after all. Even if it isn't a PW, you'll still do damage.

Man, Phil Kelly is a genius. Way to make Scorpions work.

Nurglitch you get a gold star. *

You can take both. I've actually dropped a Defiler by getting to attack first with the Biting Blade and hitting every time. S8 attack that went at initiative.

Against hordes, I'd still use the Biting Blade. I'd want to get as many attacks in as possible before the masses get to attack.

MEQ's-get to choose what will be the best option for the situation.

For 5 points, it's worth taking.

Biting Blade doesn't just hit one target, right?

So it's each hit +1 Str, and then toss out the wounds on 2+ versus GEQ's?

Correct.

Stelek I tip my hat to you and Nur. I never though about the scorpie exarch that way. You two openend my eyes now next time I play my friends will hate me.

M.