Blast Weapons and 9th edition

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.

**ClockworkZion**

Going to quote myself off of Warhammer Competetive on Reddit just to not have to repeat myself a lot as I want to share the info since it could be useful to people:

This thread is a follow up to the one I started previously about Eldar and Blast weapons ( https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/htb9qp/eldar_vs_blasts/ ).

Long story short so you don't need to read the old thread: some things were pointed out about the math which have been corrected (as was my oversight on Wyverns re-rolling wounds), and I've expanded the target units to include MSU Ork Boyz and Grots as well as both units maxed out to cover some more horde profiles so people can get a look at how this impacts units who don't live with a T3 profile.

The shooting profiles have also been expanded, plasma cannon devastators are now a whole unit to illustrate D3 weapons being employed in a more realistic manner against units of all sizes, and I've also added in 6 new shooting units: Tactical Marines with bolters, Primaris with Bolt Rifles, Guardsman. The Marines come in both MSU and 10 Astartes sized units, and the Guard will be shooting normally, and while buffed with FRFSRF (the points cost for the buffing officer being added in for the bottom chart). This is to highlight the efficeincy of regular units shooting hordes vs blasts to give a better picture of where blasts fall into the mix.

I do want to say that all math was done using an 8th edition calculator (http://40k.ghostlords.com/dice/ ) as no 9th edition ones currently exist, and I'll be honest I'm not going to spend weeks trying to make one in excel to get an idea about this topic, so all average attack numbers with D6 weapons were done manually for 6-10 man units (as well as the Basalisk due to it's "roll 2D6 and take the highest" rule for attacks), and the Dire Avengers saves are all done on the basis of the worst save to smooth things out when dealing with the mixed profile nature of the unit.

Finally the updated data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uSQOcXYIyX7xh1Bzpf2zQRZSrvpOaI2rpcG2JN6hH1o/edit?usp=sharing

So, after crunching, and re-crunching all the numbers, what do I think?

Well a couple of things: First there was only one instance of a single blast weapon wiping out half a squad on average, and it was against an MSU squad of Dire Avengers. To be fair, it was a Wyvern which averages 12 shots, so that's probably not too much of a shock.

Second, multiple blast weapons being fired at a target (such as the Devastators) was -far- more effective than any single blast weapon (or at least the ones I've seen touted more as the ones to be concerned about), and units like Marines and Guard were far more effective at dealing out wounds just by getting into rapid fire range than blast weapons against most targets. I could probably test out a no-rapid fire option for the units as well, but even if they're not as good we still have unbuffed squads doing more damage by getting close, something to be concerned about with smaller tables since that becomes far easier for them to do.

In actual game play I'd likely combine options (for example, a Whirlwind and an Intercessor squad at half range) to inflict the most casualties. Blasts to soften hordes (or even mid-sized units) first, followed by regular small arms to finish the job. This is because blasts are more effective against undamaged units, while the small arms don't care as much and can finish the job more efficiently.

As for list building, I'd have to say in most cases large units actually benefit you more. You become more resistant to any single shooting attack, and your buffs become more effective (especially important if your army doesn't rely on auras for your buffs, like Craftworlds who get most of their buffs via psychic powers and stratagems). The downside of course is debuffs are more efficient, and you give up slightly more casualties to any single blast weapon, or a whole lot more against units with multiple D3 blast weapons as they can keep getting the max number of attacks for a lot longer.

Long and short of it is that no individual blast weapon is going to break a horde, just give up slightly more casualties on average, and if your army leans into hordes get some games in with them before you decide to shelf the horde and go MSU, or even mid-sized units.

So what I didn't really dive into but have thought about after the fact is that single blast weapons aren't the thing people should be concerned about, but rather units of multiple blast weapons (like Devastators, Havoks or Heavy Weapon Teams) as they price out comparative to most vehicle mounted blast weapons (or cheaper) while being able to thin hordes far more effectively than the tanks do.

Regardless of the build, if you're planning on killing hordes with blast, use the blast to soften the target, then use small arms to finish them off. It's a better use of your points as the units that carry non-blast weapons are much cheaper, and weapons like bolters don't care how many models they shoot. Blasts are great at softening targets, but less great at finishing them off.

If you're considering MSU with horde armies, I'd take a look to the section with the red headers because that's where you're going to see things that will easily wipe smaller units. Some armies, like Orks, have saves so bad that unless they have a babysitter (such as a Painboy who is covering multiple units capping the same point) you're likely better off taking larger units instead.

But that's my take. I'm sure someone can break out some math on how I'm wrong, or how if you spend 5 CP with a Wyvern you can kill a 30 strong unit of Boyz, but I'm open to seeing other people's thoughts on this too.

**the_scotsman**

I will say that, in my own experience playing several games of 9th ed with the new points, my initial assessments of how things will go in 9th definitely definitely did change with the points.

Initially, I thought broad categories of units would be strong or not strong based on the changes to the core rules. I believe I was wrong, at least with this incarnation of the points changes, because the imbalance caused by the points changes is so colossal that "did Unit X get fethed by the points changes" is really the only relevant question at this point.

Certain units, like Night Spinners, Whirlwinds, and TFCs, gained blasts but were rendered irrelevant by points changes. Other units, like (IMO obviously) Pink Horrors, guardsmen, plaguebearers, and possibly ork boyz but I'm not sure as of yet got light enough points changes relative to a lot of dedicated anti-infantry special/heavy weapon upgrades that despite the core rule changes they'll probably will end up undercosted relative to all the weapons that are supposed to kill them.

**greyknight12**

The other factor with blast weapons is that attrition of your target will push them below the “more guaranteed shots” threshold. So it’s better to fire ALL the weapons are the same time (squad of plasma cannons) than taking separate shots (multiple leman russes, or battle cannon+plasma sponsons) so each blast weapon gets full shots.

**ClockworkZion**

Blasts are most definitely a weapon of target priority. Use them poorly and their return will be quite poor, use them well and they can help swing a game more effectively.

But a lot of them have been pointed rather harshly this edition. It feels like when they points were being assigned there was a blast premium at applied in the formula which may only see improvements once people get enough games in for GW to start seeing how to fine tune points for this new edition.