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.

Someone was asking for help regarding killa kanz the other day and It got me thinking about how utter crap killa kanz currently are. When I mentioned the above comparison I had a few SM defenders come running in saying that aggressors are worse than killa kanz. So lets break this down.

Killa Kanz: 50pts. M6 WS5+ BS4+ S5, T5, W5, A3, LD6 3+ Save.
Comes with a single big shoota (3 S5 shots at 36' range) and a Kan Klaw which makes the Kan S8 -3AP 3dmg. Only special rule it has is DDD and +1 to attacks if the unit is 3 or more Kanz, because its a grot unit and can't benefit from 99% of ork strats nor gain a Kulture. You can put them in a special grot detachment to give them reroll 1s to hit and give it a 6+ Invuln.

Aggressor: 45pts. M5 WS3+ BS3+ S4 T5 W3 A3(4) LD7(8) 3+ Save.
Comes with 2 boltstorm gauntlets and a grenade launcher, for 6+D6 shots at 18' range a turn. In CC they get 3 (4 in first round and Sgt is 4(5) ) attacks each at S8 -3AP 2dmg and -1 to hit. They benefit from...doctrines, super doctrines, chapter bonus, stratagems etc.

In a straight up fight the Kanz have the edge at anything over 18' range because the aggressors can't shoot back, but after that its completely one sided. When it finally gets to CC...its game over for the Kanz since they will be lucky to land 1 hit

Kanz sucks but to make it more realistic comparision you should at least replace the big shoota. That is the worst weapon. A rokkit is more worth

Gitdakka wrote:
Kanz sucks but to make it more realistic comparision you should at least replace the big shoota. That is the worst weapon. A rokkit is more worth

I agree, but the Rokkit also adds another 5pts per model to the difference in price.

I have collected and painted kanz.
I will never own an aggressor.
Ergo, kanz are better.

Gitdakka wrote:
Kanz sucks but to make it more realistic comparision you should at least replace the big shoota. That is the worst weapon. A rokkit is more worth

That drops their range to 24", right?

But let's compare a Kan with a Rokkit (55 points) to an Aggressor with Bolters (45 points).

The Kan gets 1 shot and 7/12 (.58) hits at S8 AP-2 D3.
If they reroll 1s, from the Subculture, that improves to 49/72 (.68) hits.

An Aggressor gets 9.5 shots normally, 10 against 6-10 model units, and 12 against 11+ model units.
That is 19/3, 20/3, and 8 hits respectively, at S4 AP0/-1, D1.

All these will assume you're tring your darndest to make Kans work, and so they reroll 1s. The Aggressors will not have any buffs except Doctrines in the second comparison.

Against a 10-man GEQ squad...
Kan does .57 dead.
Aggressor does 2.96 or 3.7.

Against a 5-man MEQ squad...
Kan does .38 wounds and .76 damage.
Aggressor does 1.06 or 1.58 damage.

Against a Gravis or Kan squad...
Kan does .30 wounds and .91 damage.
Aggressor does .70 or 1.06 damage.

Against a T8 3+ target...
Kan does .23 wounds and .68 damage.
Aggressor does .35 or .53 damage.

So against the BEST target for a Kan versus an Aggressor (T8, no invuln) you do a little less than twice as much damage outside the Tac doctrine, and about 30% more in the Tac doctrine.

I feel like the zooka is probably the best comparison weapon. IIRC that ones also free? Maybe? IDK.

the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the zooka is probably the best comparison weapon. IIRC that ones also free? Maybe? IDK.

Grotzooka Kan is 55 points, same as the Rokkit Kan.

It gets 2d3 S6 AP0 D1 Blast shots. That's an average of 49/18 hits (no Blast), an insignificant fraction more-call it 50/18 or 25/9 (6-10 Blast), and 147/27 (11+ Blast).

So, to repeat the numbers...

10-Man GEQ
Kans: 1.54
Aggressors: 2.96 or 3.7

5-Man MEQ
Kans: .60
Aggressors: 1.06 or 1.58

Gravis/Kan
Kans: .60
Aggressors: .70 or 1.06

Leman Russ
Kans: .30
Aggressors: .35 or .53

Better against GEQ, still worse than Aggressors.
Worse against every other profile.

And in CC 1 Kan gets 3 attacks hitting on 5s for 1 hit at S8.

The Aggressor gets 4 attacks hitting on 4s for 2 hits at S8. Honestly its a bit sad that SM players even try to argue this point but it is what it is

To be fair, the Kan is D3, not D2.

That’s a plus. Not nearly enough to make them balanced against each other, but it’s there.

SemperMortis wrote:
And in CC 1 Kan gets 3 attacks hitting on 5s for 1 hit at S8.

The Aggressor gets 4 attacks hitting on 4s for 2 hits at S8. Honestly its a bit sad that SM players even try to argue this point but it is what it is

4 attacks if you have 3+ in the unit.

12 * .388 * .666 * .833 = 2.6 dead aggressors - so they're close to wiping the unit.

Aggressors -

13 * .5 * .666 * .833 * = 3.6 wounding hits which would remove one and maybe wound another.

So that’s 150+ points to kill less than that, on a relatively slow, relatively fragile unit, and who’s damage drops by a lot of the Aggressors are Iron Hands or have an Apothecary nearby.

Oh, and they’re eating your culture too-admittedly, if you LIKE Kans, you might take some in your Mek Gun detachment.

Still not good, but not unusable.

 JNAProductions wrote:
So that’s 150+ points to kill less than that, on a relatively slow, relatively fragile unit, and who’s damage drops by a lot of the Aggressors are Iron Hands or have an Apothecary nearby.

Oh, and they’re eating your culture too-admittedly, if you LIKE Kans, you might take some in your Mek Gun detachment.

Still not good, but not unusable.

I guess I don't understand how to square Kanz as relatively slow and fragile at M6 T5 W5 3+ 50 to 55 points as compared to Aggressors at M5 T5 W3 3+ 45 points.

If you really wanted you could spend 1 CP to give them +3M (and reroll advance) or -1 to be hit by ranged. They can also pick up a run and charge from the Wartrike. And a 5++ KFF or psychic them up to 2+. And they could be healed by a Big Mek.

the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the zooka is probably the best comparison weapon. IIRC that ones also free? Maybe? IDK.

Zooka is still a heavy weapon right? So it's -1 to hit when moving (with short range your not standing still to shoot) which made it's firepower comparable to the big shoota due to the accuracy difference. When I tried to field them in 8th, the only setup that seemed decent was all skorchas due to getting into melee seeming like the only decent use for the zogging things. The Kanz just seems to lose in a shootout using any other weapon loading.

Shadows of their former glory when grotzookas would rain heaps of garbage onto the enemy and drown them with crazy amounts of wounds.

 Vankraken wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I feel like the zooka is probably the best comparison weapon. IIRC that ones also free? Maybe? IDK.

Zooka is still a heavy weapon right? So it's -1 to hit when moving (with short range your not standing still to shoot) which made it's firepower comparable to the big shoota due to the accuracy difference. When I tried to field them in 8th, the only setup that seemed decent was all skorchas due to getting into melee seeming like the only decent use for the zogging things. The Kanz just seems to lose in a shootout using any other weapon loading.

Shadows of their former glory when grotzookas would rain heaps of garbage onto the enemy and drown them with crazy amounts of wounds.

No -1 as they are a vehicle (they shoot guns into combat, too). They just can't run and shoot.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So that’s 150+ points to kill less than that, on a relatively slow, relatively fragile unit, and who’s damage drops by a lot of the Aggressors are Iron Hands or have an Apothecary nearby.

Oh, and they’re eating your culture too-admittedly, if you LIKE Kans, you might take some in your Mek Gun detachment.

Still not good, but not unusable.

I guess I don't understand how to square Kanz as relatively slow and fragile at M6 T5 W5 3+ 50 to 55 points as compared to Aggressors at M5 T5 W3 3+ 45 points.

If you really wanted you could spend 1 CP to give them +3M (and reroll advance) or -1 to be hit by ranged. They can also pick up a run and charge from the Wartrike. And a 5++ KFF or psychic them up to 2+. And they could be healed by a Big Mek.

+1 to save against D1.
6+ FNP as Iron Hands or with an Apothecary.
Heal 3 wounds per turn on two units and rez one Aggressor per turn with a Chief Apothecary.
Better access to cover via Infantry.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Heal 3 wounds per turn on two units and rez one Aggressor per turn with a Chief Apothecary.

This one is kind of dubious. You generally won't find large enough units for an Apoth to keep around and have them both be in the same spot. The +1 save strat is meh. Transhuman would be more relevant.

Marines have more tools in the shed, but is also the latest and greatest in codex technology. I don't know if Orks have enough surrounding the Kanz to make the concept work, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone try.

 jeff white wrote:
I have collected and painted kanz.
I will never own an aggressor.
Ergo, kanz are better.

Agree. For me the 1st step in this question is "Wich ones are available as options in the armies I play?"
Well, I don't play Orks. And the Kans don't inspire me to either.
I do have 3 Marine forces where I might consider using Aggressors though. I don't currently own any Aggressors, or really plan to, but maybe in the future? Definitely higher odds than me fielding Kans....

I think kanz are pretty bad, while aggressors are very good, IMHO among the most underrated units in 40k.

Ranged damage output is not even remotely comparable between the two units. Kanz are also <VEHICLE> and Heavy Support (extremely crowded slot for orks), which are another couple of downsides. Melee, points costs and durability are basically on par.

Too bad since I have 9 kanz and no aggressors (or any other primaris model actually).

 Blackie wrote:
I think kanz are pretty bad, while aggressors are very good, IMHO among the most underrated units in 40k.

Ranged damage output is not even remotely comparable between the two units. Kanz are also <VEHICLE> and Heavy Support (extremely crowded slot for orks), which are another couple of downsides. Melee, points costs and durability are basically on par.

Too bad since I have 9 kanz and no aggressors (or any other primaris model actually).

*shrug*

I don't think they have to be on par on all fronts. I doubt shooting into combat would play into it much, either, but if I was deadset on running Kanz I might try the Blood Axe unlimited range go last spell and forfeit the RR1s subculture. Kick them +3" move and support with a Wartrike. Then they'll be charging infiltrating marines on turn 1 without much trouble (usually).

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
I think kanz are pretty bad, while aggressors are very good, IMHO among the most underrated units in 40k.

Ranged damage output is not even remotely comparable between the two units. Kanz are also <VEHICLE> and Heavy Support (extremely crowded slot for orks), which are another couple of downsides. Melee, points costs and durability are basically on par.

Too bad since I have 9 kanz and no aggressors (or any other primaris model actually).

*shrug*

I don't think they have to be on par on all fronts. I doubt shooting into combat would play into it much, either, but if I was deadset on running Kanz I might try the Blood Axe unlimited range go last spell and forfeit the RR1s subculture. Kick them +3" move and support with a Wartrike. Then they'll be charging infiltrating marines on turn 1 without much trouble (usually).

And they'll kill, assuming a 6-man squad with 24 attacks...

24 attacks
8 hits
40/6 or 20/3 wounds
100/18 or 50/9 wounds

A min-sized squad on average. You just spent 425 points to kill 120 points. Minimum Infiltrator squad.
Unless they're 10 points more expensive with a Helix Gauntlet, in which case you fail to kill the squad, since they ignore the first wound.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
And in CC 1 Kan gets 3 attacks hitting on 5s for 1 hit at S8.

The Aggressor gets 4 attacks hitting on 4s for 2 hits at S8. Honestly its a bit sad that SM players even try to argue this point but it is what it is

4 attacks if you have 3+ in the unit.

12 * .388 * .666 * .833 = 2.6 dead aggressors - so they're close to wiping the unit.

Aggressors -

13 * .5 * .666 * .833 * = 3.6 wounding hits which would remove one and maybe wound another.

I'm pretty sure you were just in another thread a couple days ago pointing out how it's sort of silly to compare units by having them fight each other. Yeah, the Aggressors are a good target for the Kans, but the Kans are not a good target for the Aggressors. Let's be consistent please.

I have played a full narrative campaing in TTS with a grot revolushion and I played in all of my games 1-3 units of 6-9 kanz with all sort of buffs and kustom jobs and... I love them but they were never actually good.

Aggressors are a phenomenal unit even AFTER removing their hability to advance and shoot without penalty and double shooting. That says a ton about them. They only seem "meh" when compared with the other busted SM units.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
And in CC 1 Kan gets 3 attacks hitting on 5s for 1 hit at S8.

The Aggressor gets 4 attacks hitting on 4s for 2 hits at S8. Honestly its a bit sad that SM players even try to argue this point but it is what it is

4 attacks if you have 3+ in the unit.

12 * .388 * .666 * .833 = 2.6 dead aggressors - so they're close to wiping the unit.

Aggressors -

13 * .5 * .666 * .833 * = 3.6 wounding hits which would remove one and maybe wound another.

I'm pretty sure you were just in another thread a couple days ago pointing out how it's sort of silly to compare units by having them fight each other. Yeah, the Aggressors are a good target for the Kans, but the Kans are not a good target for the Aggressors. Let's be consistent please.

Then you should read my other comments, too.

This one is kind of dubious. You generally won't find large enough units for an Apoth to keep around and have them both be in the same spot. The +1 save strat is meh. Transhuman would be more relevant.

Marines have more tools in the shed, but is also the latest and greatest in codex technology. I don't know if Orks have enough surrounding the Kanz to make the concept work, but I wouldn't mind seeing someone try.