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.

wait wait wait...

so youre using zap guns, the average Str of which will be 7, to blow up vehicles? the most S7 shots you can get out of a zap gun is 1. why the hell arent you just using lootas, they each give you 1-3. oh thats right, because youve filled all your elite slots full of tankbustas.

zap guns dont kill vehicles. big guns generally dont do anything. dont spend your points on them, and dont spend your points on tank bustas.

tankbustas are one of the worst units in the ork codex. they are comprable to spawn in the chaos codex. do you know why? because as soon as you play an opponent that puts one rhino at the back on the table your tankbustas will do nothing. then will come the day when an SM player drops a unit of sternguard next to your tankbustas. youll really want to assault them, but you cant you have to shoot and assault the drop pod instead.

...and all the time you will wish, down to your dearest heart, that you had brought more lootas.

Da Boss:

Fair enough, I'll stick with the Greek reference. My point was that Big Gunz, particularly Zzap Gunz can be used to dispose of light vehicles that might distract Tankbustas from high value targets. The range, reliability, and cheapness of a Big Gunz battery makes it a handy unit for this task. Faced with the choice of a Drop Pod and Sternguard? Pop the Pod with another unit, and then beat seven kinds of green hell out of the Sternguard.

About the averages vs outliers, I'm not talking about relying on outliers at all. I'm talking about being prepared for all possibilities, which is rather different thing than relying on the unlikely to happen. The difference is the difference between prudence, being prepared for what will happen, and wishful thinking.

My experience with Orks is that their volume of fire should be balanced out by their BS, but the effect of getting lucky with it, especially in early turns of the game, makes it far more effective than the average expected value would lead us to think. The actual utility of a successful round of Rokkits is actually pretty high. The benefits that such a round could accrue outweigh the risk of a successful round of cover saves by the Plague Marines.

Compared to Lootas, they can move and shoot, they can fight more effectively in close combat (so they're less vulnerable to units of Terminators and other such units), and they can actually affect heavy tanks. I think they certainly compete with Lootas, Burnas, Kommandos, and both kinds of Nobz as a live Elite option.

Nurglitch wrote:Traskel: Rokkits are assault weapons. Why not shoot and then charge?

I do shoot at oblits and then charge them, but there are much, much better units to do this with than tankbustaz. Regular boyz squads if they are anywhere near the middle of the table, or Snikrot led kommandos if they're not. Can you give me any evidence that tankbustas are effective points wise at killing oblits compared to any other ork unit? There are tons of better choices.

Nurglitch wrote:
Also, knowing that your opponent is competent and that they will endeavor to disadvantage your Tankbustas, doesn't that give you the advantage of being able to sucker-punch them with other units?

That's why I suggested pairing massed Tankbustas with other anti-tank units, such as Big Gunz, so that you can not only manipulate your opponent's "competent" reactions to units of Tankbustaz, but also give them an anvil to smash them against.

In terms of you're thinking with allowing other AT units to make up for the glory hogs rule, I don't agree with you at all. My example with the falcon still holds. Zzap guns will not reliably take out the falcon, and then the tankbustas will be forced to shoot at it, still not reliably killing it, and whatever was in the waveserpent easily wipes out 250 points in the unit.

In terms of reliable shooting anti-tank, Lootas are about the only thing in the codex that would do what you're talking about, and they compete for force org slots. Any other anti-tank needs to work in the assault phase, which isn't going to help with the situation you describe.

I know this sounds stupid but Tankbustas _do_ have a 24" range. What they are good at is popping transports and Dreads so your Klaws do not have to deal with them. Good for shooty lists.

At ~150 to 200 points they are not a bad choice in 2000, a bit tight in 1850 and I would personally avoid them in 1500.

I personally take Big Shootas in Boyz squads, just because. Rokkits in Fast Attack although you can take Warbikaz too.

Squig_herder and "anung"?

If you had read squigs post you would realise we are mates in real life, so no hard feelings. Out of intrest though do you seriously think posting 1000's of comments on a forum makes you some kind of pro, anungs are mainly about 360 game's!

No hard feelings, were all mates.

I acknoledge that the number of posts doesnt equal expert but please show abit of respect for everyone from everyone.

On Topic:
i personally have found that "special" weapons in boyz mobs are a waste, unless you take shoota boyz with big shootas [but i only run slugga boyz, a true goff/snakebite lol shooting is a grots idea of war]

save tghe points on something that is designed to shoot. ^^

Nurglitch: Okay, sorry, I misunderstood your point about outliers. I was saying a similar thing about plague marines to a friend of mine not long ago (that because of their low numbers they are very vunerable to a bad turn of rolling)

On to Zzap guns versus other options.

I suppose Zzap guns can do what you are talking about, and so can tankbustas. But I would personally choose other units for the same roles (probably boyz mobs for tankbustas and either lootas or deffkoptas for the big gunz idea, though boyz mobs could fill that role again, but at that point you are stretching them a bit thin)

Traskel:

My point isn't that Tankbustas are the best anti-Terminator unit in the Ork Codex point for point, my point is that Tankbustas aren't just handy against heavy vehicles, but that they're also handy against heavy infantry. Certainly Plague Marines moreso than Obliterators, but those failed saves to S8,9,10 weapons (Rokkits, Power Klaws, Tankhammers) are more effective than massed attacks that don't cause Instant Death.

Speaking of using Zzap Gunz to manipulate the Glory Hogs rule, I think both Zzap Gunz and Tankbustas will reliably take out Falcons and Wave Serpents. The Zzap Gunz can have ammo runts, and always shake on glancing or penetrating hits. On average they'll have S7. Below average S6-, and above average up to S12. That means they'll be S7-12 most of the time. There's not many other Ork weapons that will reliably penetrate AV12. Massed Rokkits can do it, so can massed Power Klaws.

Of course, maybe you'd like to show me numbers that prove Lootas to be the most reliable weapon against vehicles.

Lootas aren't super reliable unless you take a lot of them, after which they become too expensive to take anything fun.
I've dropped them from most of my lists. They were handy as a distraction in my KOS list, or to sit in a back quarter in 4th, but in 5th I think you're better putting your points elsewhere unless you want to focus on them.

Nurglitch: nothing in the ork list is "reliable" against vehicles. A unit of lootas merely provides the most dice of any one unit that orks can field for targetting light/medium vehicles.

Whether you're taking lootas, tankbustas, or big gunz depends on the flavor of the ork list. Personally I like lootas, buggies and KKs for shooting stuff. Generally cheaper then tankbustas, more accurate, longer lived, and with the exception of lootas are generally not perceived as much as a threat as other elements of the army.

Nurglitch wrote:Traskel:

ZZap gunz...On average they'll have S7. Below average S6-, and above average up to S12. That means they'll be S7-12 most of the time.

Uh.... what? That dog don't hunt.

sourclams:

2D6 Results
r2...~3%
r3...~6%
r4...~8%
r5...~11%
r6...~14%
r7...~17%
r8...~14%
r9...~11%
r10...~8%
r11...~6%
r12...~3%

r7 + r8 + r9 + r10 + r11 + r12 = ~59%

r2 + r3 + r4 + r5 + r6 = ~42%

59 > 42

Therefore they'll be S7-12 most of the time.

Yeah, but it's also Strength 2-7 most of the time. That dog still don't hunt.

sourclams:

Wrong as usual. The relevant numbers we're looking at are S7-12, since those are the Strength values that would allow a Zzap Gun to penetrate a Falcon or a Wave Serpent. They'll be S7-12 most of the time, S6-12 is you want to include glancing hits, which means that most of the time they'll be able to take out a Falcon or a Wave Serpent.

Claiming that a Zzap Gun is also S2-7 most of the time is disingenous, and a downright stupid claim. At S2-5 the Zzap Gun cannot harm AV12, and at S6-7 the Zzap Gun can harm AV12. Given that I'm pointing out that most of the time a Zzap Gun will be a threat to a Falcon, pointing out that it is also the case that most of the time a Zzap Gun either will or won't be a threat to a Falcon is stupid. It's disingenuous because you're not a stupid person and hence it would be bizarre for you to offer this counter-argument with any degree of sincerity.

Any weapon Strength 5 or lower is absolutely useless against AV12.

Any weapon Strength 8 or lower is going to be worthless against AV12 most of the time unless it can fire a massive barrage of shots, like a Loota squad. Glances are not vehicle killers. Shakers, stunners, and potentially immobilizers, but not killers. S6 versus AV12 is an act of desperation, and little more.

Since a Zzap gun is not a many shot weapon and spends most of its existence at S8 and lower, no, it's really not much of a threat at all to AV12. Against AV14, it's almost laughable.

That's why the dog don't hunt.

Nurglitch wrote:Traskel:Of course, maybe you'd like to show me numbers that prove Lootas to be the most reliable weapon against vehicles.

Here's the number crunching. I was actually surprised at how close Tankbustas are compared to equivalent points of Lootas, at least in a single shooting phase, but Lootas more than make up for it in destruction through cumulative damage results. This would suggest that more Lootas are better than fewer Lootas.

The method: I took a unit of 15 Lootas, a unit of 12 Tankbustas with a Nob, PK, and 2 Tankhammers, and 2 units of 3 Zzap gun batteries (with 3 AR a piece) - all of these should come out very close to 225 points. That seems like the tankbusta configuration you're promoting, but without bomb squigs. I could add them in, but they cost 2/3 of a tankbusta, so it's more of a wash. With each of these units, I calculated the number of turns (shooting phases) required to destroy an a12 vehicle. I also assumed the vehicle had 2 weapons, for the purposes of cumulative weapon destroyed and immobilized results leading to vehicle destruction. All the damage results were always counted between subsequent turns. I simulated 100,000 destroyed vehicles (so you can say I blew up 300,000 imaginary dreadnoughts).

What I found interesting was how close Lootas and Tankbustas are from the onset. They both have approximately 15% chance to destroy and a12 vehicle in a single turn. It's also somewhat obvious that Zzap guns are a pretty poor choice for shooting at vehicles. I think the best thing to use as a measure of reliability would be to sum up the % of times that vehicles were destroyed over the span of 6 turns (around average game length). Lootas destroyed the vehicle in 6 turns 81.06% of the time, tankbustas 60.79% of the time, and Zzap guns 42.73% of the time.

I apologize for the weird overlap in the histograms, but hopefully between the two images the distribution should be clear. Also, to pre-empt the argument that Tankbustas can assault and I'm not taking that into consideration, it should be clear that Lootas are getting the most immobilized/weapon destroyed results (the only explanation for the distribution increasing from turn one to turn two). I'm fairly confident it's more efficient to have another unit of boyz with the claw hit a vehicle that's immobilized, or to have another unit of Lootas finish it off.

I found it amusing that sometimes it took the tankbustas as many as 72 turns to shoot down an armor 12 vehicle (apparently I'm pretty bad at rolling imaginary dice).

Note: y-axis is percentage of total results (n=100,000)

72 Turns, so saying that it takes 3 hours to play 6 turns, that's a 36 hour imaginary game. That's dedication

Traskel:

I wasn't suggesting Zzap Gunz compete with either Tankbustas or Lootas for anti-tank capability, I was arguing that an army including Zzap Gunz needn't be restricted by the Glory Hogs rule to complement my argument that the Glory Hogs rule can be used to game a competent opponent.

Regarding reliability, why should we consider it as the number of turns required to destroy an AV12 vehicle rather than the likelihood of doing so in a singe turn? Given that games don't last beyond 7 turns, why bother extending your model beyond 7 turns?

Considering that a tank that is not destroyed or neutralized (stunned, weapons destroyed, immobilized, etc) in a single turn can act in the next turn to affect whatever attacked it, I think considering reliability as something beyond the single turn likelihood of destroying/neutralizing a tank is a poor model of reliability in games of 40k.

Also, how does showing that the Lootas get more immobilized/weapon destroyed results pre-empt questions about whether you've modeled the Tankbustas' ability to assault as well as shoot? Have you shown what would happen if we consider situations in which the Tankbustas can both shoot and assault a vehicle, since they must try to assault it if they can?

I suspect you might have left it out because you'd need to build two different models, one where you consider the possibility of being able to assault, and one where you don't. Likewise a consideration of range would have complicated a simple statistical model with game theoretic considerations of how prospective targets would interact under a complex of conditions.

Finally, now that you have provided the numbers for AV12 vehicles, how about drumming up some histograms of Lootas and Tankbustas vs AV11, 13, and 14.

Another mark against Tankbustas is their relatively short range that exposes them to rapid-fire weapons/Dire Avengers/etc. Lootas can threaten a large area and probably make better use of cover than Tankbustas. Being able to outrange anything that less than an autocannon is a good defense, especially with enough Boyz or battlewagons in between them and the enemy.

Not such a great defense against Deep Strike troops, particularly those with template weapons, those drop troops that can assault on the turn they land, Scouts and Infiltrators, indirect fire weapons like Whirlwind Missile Launchers, and even longer ranged weapons like Prism Cannons, Railguns, and Battle Cannons.

On a board that has breaks in its lines of sight, enemy jump infantry tend to have the jump on them.

The reason I think it's better to look at what happens within 6 turns is because that is what the unit is capable of doing in the course of the game.

What looking over 6 turns does is sum up all of the extra weapon destroyed/immobilized results that the Lootas get in a single turn and make that more apparent in this model. There isn't any reason to show the distribution for more than 6 turns, but I had it modeled and I was being lazy about plotting it.

If you want I could change it to a single turn, and just show the % of weapon destroyed and immobilized results, but it would show the exact same story - Lootas will more effectively destroy vehicles over the course of a game. If a vehicle happens to already have damage done to it (maybe its missing a weapon or is already immobilized) then the Lootas are going to be able to take advantage of this more. Tankbustas are relying on penetrating and getting actual destroyed results, where lootas are not relying on this as much.

I already have the exact same simulation running assuming Tankbustas can assault the same vehicle after they shoot. They're much more likely to destroy the vehicle than Lootas this way. It never took more than 9 turns to completely destroy the vehicle. I think the sum over 6 turns was around 87%. This was, though, assuming rear armor of 10. Essentially, once you immobilize a vehicle, it's very easy to pop it open.

You're correct in that it's extremely difficult to model the ability of Tankbustas to assault a vehicle. Given that they are only infantry models, and that fleeting with them during a waaagh sacrifices a lot of shooting, it seems like they would either be assaulting something that has already been stunned or immobilized, and this gets way too arbitrary to model in a simple manner.

One thing that these models don't show is the actual survivability of the units - and this is where I feel like the Lootas also have a clear advantage, as they can set up in cover and at range, while the Tankbustas need to get close to the enemy.

Ran the numbers for AV13:

Over six turns Lootas destroyed an a13 vehicle 1% of the time, and Tankbustas destroyed an a13 vehicle 24% of the time.

Tanksbustas end up destroying an a13 vehicle 4% of the time on the first turn, so the weapon destroyed and immobilized results aren't frequent enough to make an impact.

Essentially, neither options are reliable at busting heavy armor. I don't think it's worth looking at a14 (hey smaller numbers, amazing).

Nurglitch wrote:Not such a great defense against Deep Strike troops, particularly those with template weapons, those drop troops that can assault on the turn they land, Scouts and Infiltrators, indirect fire weapons like Whirlwind Missile Launchers, and even longer ranged weapons like Prism Cannons, Railguns, and Battle Cannons.

On a board that has breaks in its lines of sight, enemy jump infantry tend to have the jump on them.

Yes, but Lootas are no more vulnerable to those things than Tankbustas, except perhaps outflankers. If anything they are less vulnerable, due to cover or not having to shoot at a stupid drop pod. The point is that the enemy has to devote scarce heavy, long-ranged weapons to take out Lootas or drop troops instead of taking out equally threatening units like battlewagons full of pain, Nob bikers, walls of Boyz, walls of Kans, etc.

Nurglitch wrote:Traskel:

My point isn't that Tankbustas are the best anti-Terminator unit in the Ork Codex point for point, my point is that Tankbustas aren't just handy against heavy vehicles, but that they're also handy against heavy infantry. Certainly Plague Marines moreso than Obliterators, but those failed saves to S8,9,10 weapons (Rokkits, Power Klaws, Tankhammers) are more effective than massed attacks that don't cause Instant Death.

15 AP3 rokkits wont kill terminators. they will do an average of 0.7 unsaved wounds to a terminator. for 225pts id expect something better. like lootas who on average will deal 1.4 unsaved wounds to a terminator. also notice how lootas and tankbustas are identical when killing oblits over a number of turns. the difference is you wont be able to get close enough to oblits to use your rokkits, and lootas are better at killing eveything thing else.

Nurglitch wrote:sourclams:

Wrong as usual. The relevant numbers we're looking at are S7-12, since those are the Strength values that would allow a Zzap Gun to penetrate a Falcon or a Wave Serpent. They'll be S7-12 most of the time, S6-12 is you want to include glancing hits, which means that most of the time they'll be able to take out a Falcon or a Wave Serpent.

Claiming that a Zzap Gun is also S2-7 most of the time is disingenous, and a downright stupid claim. At S2-5 the Zzap Gun cannot harm AV12, and at S6-7 the Zzap Gun can harm AV12. Given that I'm pointing out that most of the time a Zzap Gun will be a threat to a Falcon, pointing out that it is also the case that most of the time a Zzap Gun either will or won't be a threat to a Falcon is stupid. It's disingenuous because you're not a stupid person and hence it would be bizarre for you to offer this counter-argument with any degree of sincerity.

so wait, youre spending 30pts on a gun that 42% of the time will do NOTHING? wow thats the best thing since sliced bread. hey guys come and look at thing gun that doesnt do anything 42% of the time. thats a great deal. much worse than those 2 guys each carrying a gun that will do something 100% of the time (lootas suck!).

golly i dont knw why nobody thought of this before! guns that only work occationally! i should suggest this to millitary organisations aroound the globe. im sure theyed be thrilled to have their soldiers no nothing 42% of the time.

what a genius you are

Edit: Sorry, was momentarily confused with the wierdboy power called Zzap.

Zzap gun S caps at 10 just so you know. 11-12 rolls are actually terrible because they kill your crew.
Your T2, Ld5 crew.

Da Boss wrote:Zzap guns are also melta I feel I should point out.

They are? Page 51 of the codex doesn't say melta.

Nurglitch wrote:Traskel:
Regarding reliability, why should we consider it as the number of turns required to destroy an AV12 vehicle rather than the likelihood of doing so in a singe turn? Given that games don't last beyond 7 turns, why bother extending your model beyond 7 turns?

Reliability is a commonly used term in the field of engineering.

The IEEE definition is something along the lines of:

"The probability that an item will perform a required function under stated conditions for a stated period of time."

This is more or less explicitly what Traskel was showing.

Spif:

Sure, but the relevant periods of time are 1 turn and 7 turns. His graphs show periods of time far in excess of those, and he doesn't graph the relevant period of time (a single turn) in which the shooting of Tankbustas is nearly equivalent to the shooting of Lootas, or the shooting vs AV11, 13, and 14 vehicles.

So far all we can draw from his data is that, from a pure shooting standpoint, a mob of 15 Lootas is marginally better against an AV12 vehicle in a single round of shooting than a mob of 12 Tankbustas including a Nob, Power Klaw, and Tankhammers, and significantly better over the course of six rounds of shooting. This seems exactly right to me because the Tankbustas do not gain any benefit to shooting from the Nob, Power Klaw, and Tank Hammers, despite spending extra points on them.

Indeed, a mob of Tankbustas loses three Rokkits for the Power Klaw, and Tankhammers. Since the benefit it gains from this wargear is ignored, and the wargear impacts the Tankbustas ability to shoot, it would be strange to see the Tankbustas compete in shooting against the same number of purely dedicated Lootas.

I'd still like to see the histograms amended to show what would happen over one turn and seven turns, if the Tankbustas were able to assault, the various results against the range of vehicle armour values, and perhaps considering a configuration where the Nob takes three Bomb-Squigs instead of trading up his Rokkit Launcha for a Power Klaw. After all, he still has Tankbusta Bombz, or a configuration consisting purely of 15 Tankbustas.

Nurglitch wrote:Spif:

Sure, but the relevant periods of time are 1 turn and 7 turns. His graphs show periods of time far in excess of those, and he doesn't graph the relevant period of time (a single turn) in which the shooting of Tankbustas is nearly equivalent to the shooting of Lootas, or the shooting vs AV11, 13, and 14 vehicles.

The first bin on the graph shows one turn. The first 7 bins show the first 7 turns. I don't know why you think that isn't shown. Just because I show extra data doesn't mean everything you need isn't right there. Do you not understand what the graph shows?

I gave you values for the sum over 6 turns, and it's marginally different on the 7th turn. Simple addition on the values from the graph would give you the sum over 7 turns.

I can show the other graphs if you really want, but it's only going to show what people already know. The lootas are better at busting armor 11, and the Tankbustas are better at busting armor 13 and above - despite the fact that neither units are actually effective at destroying armor 13 vehicles (as I've noted in a previous post).

I'll look into the swapping out the klaw for bomb squigs, but it will just increase their turn 1 value.

Traskel:

Yes, thank you, I understand what the graph shows. I'd also like to thank you for taking the time to make the graph. That said, it would be clearer had you left the extraneous information off the graph.

The other graphs would be nice, particularly the one showing the odds for the Tankbustas when they can assault as well as shoot.

Increasing the turn 1 value is important. As they say, shooting first is often more important than shooting best. It might be something just to graph 15 Tankbustas vs 15 Lootas; keep things simple.