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.

Some aspects of a troop choice can be compared across armies, others can not. But the above math is not acceptable if people are trying to pimp tac marines as some kind of counter to guardsmen/conscripts. Yeah, marines get a few special weapons, but a flamer kills a whopping 4.67 pts of conscripts when it fires. The same flamer kills 8.42 pts of marines. Marines just run out of assets too quickly.

Martel732 wrote:
Tac marine: 2*.6666*.66666.*.666666*3 = 1.78
Conscript: 2*.33333*.33333*.333333*13 = 0.97

Your math is wrong.

CplPunishment wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Tac marine: 2*.6666*.66666.*.666666*3 = 1.78
Conscript: 2*.33333*.33333*.333333*13 = 0.97

Your math is wrong.

How so?

I'm not doing the maths but in actuality there is no way 1 conscript in rapid fire range is going to kill 1 marine. I have to throw handfuls of dice to hurt anything with a lasgun! Hitting on 5s then wounding on 5s is not going to net you .97 wounds per dude! That's crazy.

By my math it takes 10 SM bolters to kill 6 conscripts and 50 FRFSRF conscript lasguns to kill 7 marines. All this assuming 12", no cover.

 Xenomancers wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.

Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.

You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.


Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.

I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?

You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.

3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.

Martel732 wrote:

CplPunishment wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Tac marine: 2*.6666*.66666.*.666666*3 = 1.78
Conscript: 2*.33333*.33333*.333333*13 = 0.97

Your math is wrong.

How so?

You multiplied by the points cost of the target unit. That is not needed to determine how many die.

I said 0.97 points of marines.

You're reading it wrong, it's an efficiency comparison.

Ah my bad I thought it was wounds caused!

 Xenomancers wrote:
Gardsmen should be 6 points (like ork boys)

You are joking? Or not?
In case of not, there is no way that a guardsman is as much worth as an ork. Not even in shooting they can compete against orks with shootas. Veterans loose also in shooting without adding special and heavy weapons. And with increasing numbers it gets even worse, mob rule and green tide.
Ork boyz are way closer to 8 points than the humble guardsman to 5.

RogueApiary wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.

Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.

You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.


Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.

I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?

You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.

3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.

magnus has a 4++ save not 3++. This changes the math a great deal.

Back to the original question. I have won several games without either and lost two games while fielding Conscripts and a small Scion unit in the first one of those loses. The only really poor performer has been the Leman Russ. :(

Lots of regular infantry squads with Heavy Weapons included seem to cause problems for most opponents. The Heavy Weapons target vehicles and monstrous creatures while the PBIs fire on their opposite number. Even without Conscripts most opponents are over saturated with targets unless they are flamer heavy.

My two cents,

CB

Leman russ is tough, but not super killy. It's very cheap t8.

 Xenomancers wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Every troop choice the guard have access to is under-costed.

Look at Guardians, kabalites (these are the closest examples I can think of) - 2 points more expensive - basically the same same stats the only difference is a vet squad can take 4 weapon options per 10 while guardians can only take 1 (and pay more for it) and kabalites can only take 2. It's a gaking joke that vets are cheaper than these obviously worse units. A shuricat has only 12 inch range and a splinter rifle is quite literally the equal of a lasgun - it is better vs heavy infantry but worse against light vehicles - they are equal shooting at each other. Lets not kid ourselves though - the firepower from a vet unit comes from its 3 plasma guns and auto-cannon that is gets for basically the same cost that ether of these units can field a single special or heavy weapon. They have the same toughness and save too...it is quite literally a joke.

You realize cost is partly determined within the context of other options within the army and not just a direct comparison of units between armies right? Guard infantry are cheap because we don't have Magnus, or Guilliman, or crazy Eldar fliers. You make troops in the guard on par with Eldar troops pointswise, then you need to massively buff our characters and vehicles.


Edit: Wow, you're seriously proposing making basic guardsmen 6 points? You just want guard to be garbage tier again and aren't even trying at this point.

I'm making direct comparisons to existing rules. How can you say I'm not trying? Gaurd are clearly over performing and it's easy to realize why - they are too cheap. Gaurd have access to buttloads of lords of war too. A Baneblade weilding a volcano cannon could easily 1 shot magnus. They can take an Imperial knight. They can take Celestine in their army - or guiliman. You can't honestly be saying guard infantry are so cheap because they don't have access to good stuff?

You're joking, right? You mean a 36% chance of doing a whopping average of 7 (of his EIGHTEEN) wounds to magnus is now the definition of 'easily one shot'? With such an inflated view of Guard capabilities no wonder you can't shut up about how op guard are.

3.5 (avg shot number on 1D6) * .5 (yay Guard Ballistic skill) *.84 (finally, but no reroll because somehow Magnus isn't titanic despite being almost as large as a Knight) *.21 (3++ rerollings 1's is so much fun to shoot at) = .3 so I can expect to do 2d6 damage once every 3 rounds. SO GOOD. Oh and since Chaos almost certainly got the first turn, those numbers probably are even worse because they very likely knocked it down a wound profile.

magnus has a 4++ save not 3++. This changes the math a great deal.

Weaver of Fates gives +1 to invuln saves. Also, even with no invuln save, a volcano cannon will average 1.47 wounds before damage. It would still take two turns of unmolested shooting to kill Magnus on average without any save at all. Which is still a far cry from your original claim of 'easily one shot'. But please, do keep making stuff up.

Firefox1 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Gardsmen should be 6 points (like ork boys)

You are joking? Or not?
In case of not, there is no way that a guardsman is as much worth as an ork. Not even in shooting they can compete against orks with shootas. Veterans loose also in shooting without adding special and heavy weapons. And with increasing numbers it gets even worse, mob rule and green tide.
Ork boyz are way closer to 8 points than the humble guardsman to 5.

They have 6+ saves dude...your dudes have 5+ saves - they are also in cover because there is 0 reason for them not to be - so they are rolling 4+ saves. The vets win. Oh yeah - they do have 3 plasma guns and an auto-cannon too...because thats what you give them. Ork boys are fish-food running across the field getting blasted.

So now we're just in the subject of melee focused armies vs shooty ones?

And it's very difficult to get entire units in cover this edition. Especially since most LoS blocking terrain doesn't usually provide actual cover for models. Mostly hills and such these days. So my units are rarely in cover.


And Martel, now I don't even have to read your posts because every one is just going to say how awesome X imperial guard unit is haha. The Russ is a waste of points, it's not very cheap. I don't take units because they are tough. I tried to like a combined arms force at the beginning of 8th. Truly. I took Chimeras, Valkyries, LRs. I found it best to just not take any vehicles at all given the amount of AT which abounds in my local meta. Now they have no targets for their AT and I find it very amusing.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
So now we're just in the subject of melee focused armies vs shooty ones?

And it's very difficult to get entire units in cover this edition. Especially since most LoS blocking terrain doesn't usually provide actual cover for models. Mostly hills and such these days. So my units are rarely in cover.


And Martel, now I don't even have to read your posts because every one is just going to say how awesome X imperial guard unit is haha. The Russ is a waste of points. I don't take units because they are tough. I tried to like a combined arms force at the beginning of 8th. Truly. I took Chimeras, Valkyries, LRs. I found it best to just not take any vehicles at all given the amount of AT which abounds in my local meta. Now they have no targets for their AT and I find it very amusing.

I didn't say it was awesome. I said it was cheap T8. That's not good enough by itself. Quit reading in and finding things I'm not saying. Just like you jumped my math without even taking time to understand what I was saying. I'm sure there are many crappy IG units. People just don't use them. Surprise, surprise. Those units should be better, I assume.

Conscript 2*0.33333333*0.3333333*0.333333333=0.074 dead tacs or 0.062 dead iron hands so ignoring buffs 100 conscripts kill 7.4 tacs at 300 pts

Tacs 2*0.666666*0.666666666*0.666666666=0.593 dead conscripts better maths

I don't care about number of models. I care about points taken off the table. Your math is not better.

CplPunishment wrote:
By my math it takes 10 SM bolters to kill 6 conscripts and 50 FRFSRF conscript lasguns to kill 7 marines. All this assuming 12", no cover.

Something like that.
100 shots hitting at 5+: 33.333 hits, wounding on 5+: 11.111 wounds, saving on 3+: 3.704 unsaved wounds. Double this with FRFSRF, and it becomes just over seven marines.

Give the marines a basic cover save:
100 shots hitting at 5+: 33.333 hits, wounding on 5+: 11.111 wounds, saving on 2+: 1.852 unsaved wounds. Double this with FRFSRF, and it becomes just over three marines.

10 SM bolters, unassisted by HQ buffs
20 shots, hitting at 3+: 13.333 hits, wounding on 3+: 8.889 wounds, saving on 5+: 5.929 unsaved wounds.

So yes, your math is definitely better than Martel's, which isn't really a surprise given his history of bad math and flawed assumptions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
So now we're just in the subject of melee focused armies vs shooty ones?

Nah, it's just an extension of the generic whines about conscripts and how they wish a single five-man tactical squad could eliminate them in one turn consistently every time.

It should be noted that to get your 7 marines your investing 300 pts of conscripts and at least a company commander at 30+ depending on armament and I'm assuming a commissar at amother 30+ which is almost triple your SM investment pts wise. (Considering if you count storm bolter they come in 6''s at 67pts.)

I never said anything about 7 marines. In fact, that's why I did the analysis the way I did.

" how they wish a single five-man tactical squad could eliminate them in one turn consistently every time."

I don't think anyone is saying that. Stop misrepresenting people.

" his history of bad math and flawed assumptions."

Another person who didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Here are the normalized figures, assuming the 2x50 conscripts + company commander + commissar setup vs regular tac marines:

Tac marine shooting at conscripts within rapid fire range, pts removed per pt used to fire: 0,164

Conscripts shooting at space marines with FRFSRF without rapid fire range, pts removed per pt used to fire: 0,267

This is simply showing the pts damage inflicted by each party upon the other with regular shooting. Not wounds.

And that doesn't even figure in the morale phase, which will net an average of 3-4 more, which means a total of 9-10 dead conscripts.

To operate more efficiently, a 50 man conscript squad (150pts) needs at minimum a barebones platoon commander (20pts) and a Commissar (31pts) for a total of 201pts. This means the average 6 dead conscripts will require 1 execution per turn to keep them in line.

3 5-man tactical squads, with each Sergeant bearing a stormbolter runs at 201 pts.

So now instead of 20 bolter shots at 12", a more likely and equitable (points-wise) matchup would result in 36 bolter rounds (assuming the SM player goes first!) 36*.66666*.66666*.66666=10.7 dead conscripts (+1 casualty in the morale phase). That's close to 12 dead conscripts, leaving the opponent with 38 to shoot back with.
38 * 4 due to FRFSRF= 152 shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 5.6 Dead Marines. An entire combat squad. That's painful.
The retaliation will result in 24 shots *.6666*.6666*.6666= 7.1 (8 after an execution) leaving us with 30 conscripts. 120 lasgun shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 4.4 dead marines. Rounding down, that leaves a Sergeant standing. Marines retaliate with 16 bolter rounds *.6666*.6666*.6666= 4.7 leaving 25 conscripts (and a morale check they statistically will *barely* fail BLAM 24). Good thing for those conscripts that they can handily take out 3.6 marines. Now we are down to the 2 sergeants, and I think I can stop here.

If Conscripts go first, they will easily wipe out an entire combat squad if they focus their fire. We can infer from the result of the SM go first scenario how this one will turn out... conscripts win.

MAJOR CAVEAT: This scenario involves two forces that magically appear within rapid fire range. It is more likely that they will shoot at each other once or twice from over 12" range. This favors the marines, as it is more likely that all of them can get within 24" of one conscript than all conscripts getting within 24" of one marine. Also, it will be easier for MSUs to make use of cover--another advantage to the Marine player. This is another layer of math that I simply don't want to do, but if the Marine player goes first, this matchup *might* be a close fight.

If I am being an honest IG player though, the favor is clearly on the side of the conscripts, and it would take smart use of flanking and cover for the marines to have a chance to win.

Also, marines are likely to have more gear than this. It's actually a super complex problem. I freely admit that if I could tailor for horde lists, it would help a LOT. Alas, I can't really do that.

CplPunishment wrote:
And that doesn't even figure in the morale phase, which will net an average of 3-4 more, which means a total of 9-10 marines.

To operate more efficiently, a 50 man conscript squad (150pts) needs at minimum a barebones platoon commander (20pts) and a Commissar (31pts) for a total of 201pts. This means the average 6 dead conscripts will require 1 execution per turn to keep them in line.

3 5-man tactical squads, with each Sergeant bearing a stormbolter runs at 201 pts.

So now instead of 20 bolter shots at 12", a more likely and equitable (points-wise) matchup would result in 36 bolter rounds (assuming the SM player goes first!) 36*.66666*.66666*.66666=10.7 dead conscripts (+1 casualty in the morale phase). That's close to 12 dead conscripts, leaving the opponent with 38 to shoot back with.
38 * 4 due to FRFSRF= 152 shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 5.6 Dead Marines. An entire combat squad. That's painful.
The retaliation will result in 24 shots *.6666*.6666*.6666= 7.1 (8 after an execution) leaving us with 30 conscripts. 120 lasgun shots*.3333*.3333*.3333= 4.4 dead marines. Rounding down, that leaves a Sergeant standing. Marines retaliate with 16 bolter rounds *.6666*.6666*.6666= 4.7 leaving 25 conscripts (and a morale check they statistically will *barely* fail BLAM 24). Good thing for those conscripts that they can handily take out 3.6 marines. Now we are down to the 2 sergeants, and I think I can stop here.

If Conscripts go first, they will easily wipe out an entire combat squad if they focus their fire. We can infer from the result of the SM go first scenario how this one will turn out... conscripts win.

MAJOR CAVEAT: This scenario involves two forces that magically appear within rapid fire range. It is more likely that they will shoot at each other once or twice from over 12" range. This favors the marines, as it is more likely that all of them can get within 24" of one conscript than all conscripts getting within 24" of one marine. Also, it will be easier for MSUs to make use of cover--another advantage to the Marine player. This is another layer of math that I simply don't want to do, but if the Marine player goes first, this matchup *might* be a close fight.

If I am being an honest IG player though, the favor is clearly on the side of the conscripts, and it would take smart use of flanking and cover for the marines to have a chance to win.

I think the real problem here is that EVERYONE is comparing the troops choices in a vacuum and not accounting for all the extras in each codex. Guard troops are their bread and butter and the majority of the army builds off of how their troops perform (lots of them with crummy firepower to be precise), whereas Marines have tons of goodies to compensate and deal with very specific circumstances, (i.e. Vanguard, Sterngaurd, Aggressors, devastators, etc) and a stable of powerful aircraft and support characters to maximize their "middling" troop choices to their fullest potential as well as to deal powerful alpha strikes.

As far as I am concerned guard win and lose on their troop choices, something that few if any codex has had to deal with for a very very long time. Pre-6th troops were considered a "Tax," ....unless you played guard. Firewarriors are not what make Tau what they are, its the suits, Guardians do not define Eldar, its their psykers and Aspects, and CSM do not win games for chaos, its their HQs. Once we wrap our heads around where the center of the army is you can then figure out how it should be balanced.

Most marine goodies actually aren't good. Especially since their stats are based off the terrible tac marine.

Martel732 wrote:
Also, marines are likely to have more gear than this. It's actually a super complex problem. I freely admit that if I could tailor for horde lists, it would help a LOT. Alas, I can't really do that.

Properly equipped aggressors and reivers can make short work of guardsman, pretty much if you can tie them up they are going to be toast, even assault marines with jump packs will do the job and as a bonus your unit can't be shot at by the guards heavier firepower. If they are falling back the next turn that means that the unit is going to be NOT doing anything that turn or they will have to waste an order to get them shooting again.

I don't know about rievers, but aggressors are thoroughly unimpressive. I guess I like reivers better, because they have better options for getting to the battle. Aggressors seem like points you are just throwing away without a Repulsor.

Typically, the damage from conscripts is just icing on the cake. Most guard players i know will happily just march the survivors out of combat just a bit so the rest of the list can light up your assault elements. 100 bodies plus support is consuming around 400 pts. That's another 1600 pts to wail on your assault elements. Even with no scions, that's a lot of dakka.