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.

You're also more likely to get first blood as well. In my particular case, I've been running lascannon spam for the last several games, and I've almost always gotten first blood. Everything just focuses on the flimsiest vehicle, and I usually get an explosion turn 1.

Also, to reiterate, the time problem. On the actual table, there are often a LOT of uncontrolled variables that you have to deal with. Perhaps you brought enough autocannons to kill a chimera, but because of the way that terrain is placed, you don't have a clear shot on the same vehicle with all the guns. In this case, you may wind up spreading glances around, rather than killing one vehicle at a time. In this case, you're talking about taking down a few vehicles over several turns, rather than taking down one vehicle per turn over several turns, the latter of which can be substantially better.

Likewise, some times you'll want to use that randomness. If you're faced with too many threats in one place at one time, throwing an insufficient number of glances around isn't always preferable to taking the chance of killing something outright. If you can't think of a situation where possibly doing nothing and possibly doing a lot is better than consistently doing a little bit, you lack imagination.

Plus, we've all been in a situation where we just need something dead, now, and haven't been in the best position to make that happen. Your opponent was too mobile, or got too much stuff ensnared in close combat, or presented too big of a threat somewhere else, or any of a million reasons that your opponent has done things so that you can't just do whatever you want. In these cases where units sort of wind up on their own, firepower-wise, then you probably don't have the survivability to be able to glance it to death over a couple of turns.

And that's not counting other things like force concentration, or carrier costs, or the price in money of buying more crap or in time to unpack it all, etc.

In any case, if you only ever want to glance things to death, that's fine. The chart will be useless to you. It wasn't intended to be otherwise. For those of us that can see the value of wrecking vehicles out right, the point was to point out what can do that relative to other things.

 Happygrunt wrote:
If that is how you judge effectiveness, why not make your own chart instead of attacking Ailaros for his?

Because my own personal approximations I use in army building aren't the subject here. I can still point out the flaws in the ones other people make even if I don't produce my own tables.

 Ailaros wrote:
You're also more likely to get first blood as well. In my particular case, I've been running lascannon spam for the last several games, and I've almost always gotten first blood. Everything just focuses on the flimsiest vehicle, and I usually get an explosion turn 1.

And if you focus everything on the flimsiest vehicle you'll remove all of its hull points on turn 1. And since autocannons are the best weapon for removing flimsy vehicles the HP removal strategy is better for this purpose.

Also, to reiterate, the time problem. On the actual table, there are often a LOT of uncontrolled variables that you have to deal with. Perhaps you brought enough autocannons to kill a chimera, but because of the way that terrain is placed, you don't have a clear shot on the same vehicle with all the guns. In this case, you may wind up spreading glances around, rather than killing one vehicle at a time. In this case, you're talking about taking down a few vehicles over several turns, rather than taking down one vehicle per turn over several turns, the latter of which can be substantially better.

Or you could have invested all of your points in melta stormtroopers and Medusas and have the stormtroopers mishap and die while the Medusa can't get a clear shot. This is why you started from the premise that every unit gets to shoot, remember?

Plus, we've all been in a situation where we just need something dead, now, and haven't been in the best position to make that happen. Your opponent was too mobile, or got too much stuff ensnared in close combat, or presented too big of a threat somewhere else, or any of a million reasons that your opponent has done things so that you can't just do whatever you want. In these cases where units sort of wind up on their own, firepower-wise, then you probably don't have the survivability to be able to glance it to death over a couple of turns.

If my units are unable to focus fire the game is over and I've already lost. Maybe foot gunlines have this problem, but my mech lists rarely have trouble getting focused fire on priority targets as long as I still have a functioning army on the table.

And that's not counting other things like force concentration, or carrier costs, or the price in money of buying more crap or in time to unpack it all, etc.

So now we move beyond giving up on the assumption that all units get to shoot (which was your starting premise of this whole thing), and into arguments about which option costs less money? If you have to resort to arguing about the money costs it's a concession that you've lost on tactics.

Also, isn't the whole point of your efficiency stat to account for carrier costs? You weren't just considering the costs of the guns, and neither was I.

In any case, if you only ever want to glance things to death, that's fine. The chart will be useless to you. It wasn't intended to be otherwise. For those of us that can see the value of wrecking vehicles out right, the point was to point out what can do that relative to other things.

It's not about only glancing things to death as some kind of dogma (especially since volume of fire also rolls on the damage table), it's that "wrecking vehicles outright" consists of two simultaneously occurring events: the reduction of hull points to zero, and the potential "explodes" result from penetrating hits. Your example only considers one of these two potential routes to killing outright and therefore values units you're already biased in favor of (like your melta stormtroopers).

If you want to consider "wrecking outright" in the relevant sense of "KILL IT NOW", then you have to consider both HP removal AND damage table results, not just a dogmatic assumption that only the damage table counts.

And of course you know what the really funny part here is? You reject the 4x melta CCS, which is the most reliable and efficient method of killing a vehicle outright, and it's full of nice AP 1 weapons with a high chance of getting that "explodes" result (of course it often does so after it's already removed all of the target's hull points at the same time).

I like the table, but I would really lower the STs chances. Make an assumption about how many % they have to land to the melta range after DS, it would be better than to calculate with 100%. I would estimate they have around 60-70%.

Interesting chart, Ailaros, thanks for putting it together.

My faith in lascannon HWS is somewhat validated here. The numbers look a lot better when you consider the high effective range and ability to be on the table on turn one - something Vends have lost now that they fly. Very viable alpha strike option to my mind, especially when orders work out.

To those that use deepstriking stormtroopers, would you consider it a good idea to give a plasma pistol to the sergeant? For 10 more points, you get a str 7 shot with a chance of cooking yourself.

Ignoring the massive assumption that we're ignoring the scatter for meltas (which will absolutely skew the numbers very strongly toward suicide meltastormies, ignoring the big random factor about them), and the entire issue that Peregrine rightfully raised that the original post's statement ignores hull points entirely, although I'm willing to say that Ailaros just trusted his iffy wording "kill outright" to carry the specific meaning of "Cause "Explodes" results"...

I have one question.

How come the sentinels and vendettas have different ratios between different AV values despite having a consistent difference of vendetta having +0.75 hits and -20 point cost? Is it because "kill outright" means "one or more explodes results"?

If so, that's another one of those things that might be good to make clear when putting up a table.

I think a lot of the confusion regarding this table is that stating "Kill outright" and then putting up a table without clarifying exactly what one means by "Kill outright" is at best unintentionally misleading for everyone who does not make 100% identical assumptions to you regarding the statement "Kill outright". At worst, it's intentionally misleading.

loner wrote:
To those that use deepstriking stormtroopers, would you consider it a good idea to give a plasma pistol to the sergeant? For 10 more points, you get a str 7 shot with a chance of cooking yourself.

I would give him PP only if other STs also have Plasmas. 125 points for 5 plasma shots in rapid range. Well, it can be used, but nothing special.

 Lothar wrote:

loner wrote:
To those that use deepstriking stormtroopers, would you consider it a good idea to give a plasma pistol to the sergeant? For 10 more points, you get a str 7 shot with a chance of cooking yourself.

I would give him PP only if other STs also have Plasmas. 125 points for 5 plasma shots in rapid range. Well, it can be used, but nothing special.

It's special against a squad of Terminators. Very special indeed.

 htj wrote:

 Lothar wrote:

loner wrote:
To those that use deepstriking stormtroopers, would you consider it a good idea to give a plasma pistol to the sergeant? For 10 more points, you get a str 7 shot with a chance of cooking yourself.

I would give him PP only if other STs also have Plasmas. 125 points for 5 plasma shots in rapid range. Well, it can be used, but nothing special.

It's special against a squad of Terminators. Very special indeed.

Point taken.

I'm sad about the exclusion of things like the Leman Russ Annihilator and Vanquisher with BS4 and a co-ax. Without them, then this table is useless to me.

I'd do the calculations myself, but I don't quite get his math here.

So you factor scatter into ordnance, but not into deep striking?
That's really the problem with meltaguns.

Yes, if you always land right on target, 2 BS4 melta gun shots are awesome.
But the odds of the meltagun landing in the sweet spot (1" away to less than 6" away) is harder than landing a 5"/3" blast on target.
Enemy models stop the melta drop.
Enemy models are free kills with the blasts.

The 10 man melta storms do have an advantage. You get 1 more inch of placement of meltagun from the point of deep strike. It helps you get within range on a deep strike. It also works against you, you're a bigger blob that has the thread the needle of enemy models to be placed on the table.

-Matt


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lothar wrote:

loner wrote:
To those that use deepstriking stormtroopers, would you consider it a good idea to give a plasma pistol to the sergeant? For 10 more points, you get a str 7 shot with a chance of cooking yourself.

I would give him PP only if other STs also have Plasmas. 125 points for 5 plasma shots in rapid range. Well, it can be used, but nothing special.

No, it's 135 points, because he takes 2 plasma pistols.
That's 6 shots at S7 AP2.

That may out-perform meltas at 6"+ to 12" range.

-Matt

I would also like to see the chances of stripping HPs off in one turn factored in. It is a way of killing something dead, albeit with more shots. Although it would mess with the cost analyses a little due to certain things requiring more than one unit, I still think it's a valid and common way of destroying a vehicle in one round of shooting.

Ignoring scattering on storm troopers is valid. You just have to take it into consideration when looking at the chart. On this issue, I'd like to see the chance and more importantly the cost effectiveness for being outside melta-range as a separate entry.

Sorry for requesting more math, but I'm pretty prone to errors when I do it myself and all the info in one place would be awesome.

Quick and dirty scatter math hammer.

5/9th on target with storm trooper reroll

Scatter die split into 8 directions, to make posting it simple I'll go with map directions N,S,E,W,NW,NE,SW,SE with the storm troopers aiming south of their target.

N=Mishap. Target is <6" away. Scatter of 5" or more=within an inch=mishap. Average roll is 7". Yes there are some slim odds of rolling a 4 or less, but this is also being done in a vacuum with no other enemy units around to cause a mishap. To be a bit conservative we're going to round North up to a mishap and a 1/8 or 2/16th chance of mishap.

NE & NW= landing within 6" with a small chance of going outside of 6" or mishap, round it out to landing within 6" for a 2/8 chance or 1/4 chance of a within 6" shot.

E & W=landing outside 6". Once again there is a small chance of landing within 6" but round it off to landing outside 6" for a 2/8 or 4/16th chance of landing outside 6"

SW, S, & SE=50/50 of landing outside 6". Average roll is a 7. Once again it's a conservative round off to make up for us doing this in a vacuum with no other enemy units around. That leaves a 3/16th chance of being over 6 and under 12 and a 3/16th chance of being out of range.

Final numbers.
Out of range or mishap=2/16+3/16=5/16
In 6"=1/4
Over 6" under 12"=3/16+4/16=7/16

Final numbers
On target under 6"=5/9 + (4/9*1/4)=6/9=66%
Out of range or mishap 4/9*5/16=13.9%
In 12" over 6"=4/9 * 7/16=19.4%

Suggestion for the OP
Reduce the effectiveness of the stormicide to 2/3 of what it is now, then add 20% of the effectiveness of a pair of bs4 meltaguns fired outside of 6"

 Griddlelol wrote:
I would also like to see the chances of stripping HPs off in one turn factored in. It is a way of killing something dead, albeit with more shots. Although it would mess with the cost analyses a little due to certain things requiring more than one unit, I still think it's a valid and common way of destroying a vehicle in one round of shooting.
Ignoring scattering on storm troopers is valid. You just have to take it into consideration when looking at the chart. On this issue, I'd like to see the chance and more importantly the cost effectiveness for being outside melta-range as a separate entry.
Sorry for requesting more math, but I'm pretty prone to errors when I do it myself and all the info in one place would be awesome.

Ignoring the scatter for deep strike makes as much sense as ignoring the scatter for ordnance. Since ordnance scatter was taken into account, deep strike scatter should be as well.
If Storm troopers had relentless and multimeltas I wouldn't care as landing within 12" is pretty easy. But that's not the case. You've got a very narrow window of more than 1" and less than 7" (since you can position the meltas within 6" if the first guy drops within 7")

You really can't compare things on the chart when some scatter and some ignore that fact that they scatter.

-Matt

 Peregrine wrote:
If you want to consider "wrecking outright" in the relevant sense of "KILL IT NOW", then you have to consider both HP removal AND damage table results, not just a dogmatic assumption that only the damage table counts.

And of course you know what the really funny part here is? You reject the 4x melta CCS, which is the most reliable and efficient method of killing a vehicle outright, and it's full of nice AP 1 weapons with a high chance of getting that "explodes" result (of course it often does so after it's already removed all of the target's hull points at the same time).

Do you understand how much more math it requires to calculate something like this? Not to mention it wouldn't work in a compact table because he'd need things like "AV10 HP2, AV12 HP 2, AV12 HP 3, AV13 HP3, AV14 HP3, AV14 HP4

and some of the calculations would either be so basic or so variable that it would just become clutter.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Ignoring the scatter for deep strike makes as much sense as ignoring the scatter for ordnance.

Well that's just not true. An ordnance blast hits or misses. It's completely binary in that respect.

The storm troopers could scatter out of LoS (variable 1), could scatter so 1 melta gun is in melta range and another is not (variable 2), so both meltas are out of melta range (3), so 1 melta is in non-melta range but one isn't (4), so they are completely out of range (5), so they land in terrain and have to take terrain tests that may cause a melta-gunner to die (6), so they mishap (7). This isn't even including the obvious nature that the terrain is in one direction, but not in literally infinite other directions.

There are probably more variables than this, but I think I went a little overboard with them already. As you can see, it's no where near binary like the ordnance blast hitting or missing, especially as direction matters unlike the ordnance blast.

One thing to consider with STs is how much they die to quad gun fire. I love using STs but I am dreading the time someone remembers that interceptor works on more than just fliers. People just don't seem to use it against STs.

 Trickstick wrote:
One thing to consider with STs is how much they die to quad gun fire. I love using STs but I am dreading the time someone remembers that interceptor works on more than just fliers. People just don't seem to use it against STs.

This. My Marbo has been torn to shreds by Quad qun last game. The same can and will happen to stormies if enemy use quad.

 Lothar wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
One thing to consider with STs is how much they die to quad gun fire. I love using STs but I am dreading the time someone remembers that interceptor works on more than just fliers. People just don't seem to use it against STs.

This. My Marbo has been torn to shreds by Quad qun last game. The same can and will happen to stormies if enemy use quad.

In that case, can't you just kill off four hellgun guys and keep your meltaguns safe?

 Happygrunt wrote:

 Lothar wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
One thing to consider with STs is how much they die to quad gun fire. I love using STs but I am dreading the time someone remembers that interceptor works on more than just fliers. People just don't seem to use it against STs.

This. My Marbo has been torn to shreds by Quad qun last game. The same can and will happen to stormies if enemy use quad.

In that case, can't you just kill off four hellgun guys and keep your meltaguns safe?

If your 5-men squad is reduced by 4 men, you will be left with one meltagun who is probably going to run away (leadership 7 - so much for elites )...

I've posted the graphs for other things again, found at http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/490608.page#5008421

I could make the one that factors in carrier cost, but ACs outperform LCs still.

I wonder what the math would be on Lascannon w/HK MIssle and ML w/HK Missle S.Sentinels<(costs the same as an Armoured Sentinel with ML).

For that matter what's the math on HK MIssles when on all the vehicles you possess, say 6. I've got a list that has 17. I think for 170 points there isn't an option out there with that much S8 AP3. The LRBT is close at 150, but isn't first strike damage, and can't be lost due to it either.