Is point/eff. the only thing?

A review of past Tactics by commanders during the First, Second, Third & Fourth Phase Expansion.
Tau_Warboss
Shas
Posts: 7
Contact:

Is point/eff. the only thing?

Post#1 » Mar 06 2006 08:20

A lot of debate has been going on across the boards about the configs of the XV8s. The most popular being the best config for them. My biggest opinion on the matter is that the config is environment dependant. But to go into it a little further:

Many people look at the kill per point of the suits especially when it comes to my favorite the fireknife. I think it comes down to more than just how effiecient a model is to really judge its value.

Look at the fireknife, sure it costs more than the deathrain, but it can kill light armor. It isn't as effective against +2 saves as the helios, but it still could kill 2 easily. The thing I look at is the psycological impact of the model as well.

Having that all purpose suit is imposing to the people in my area. I play in a MEQ saturated area, where only 3 out of 20 people including myself don't play MEQ as thier armies. The fact that I have a good number of fireknives bothers them because they know I could punch through thier rhinos and then rip through their armor with the same suit.
Sure other things in my army may be better at doing one or the other but can they do both as well? Fire warriors and Stealth's can beat MEQs into submission but can handle armor over 11. Deathrains are fairly powerless against power and terminator armor. About the only thing a fireknife can't kill is something a land raider and a monolith. Everything else has weaker armor on the sides or rear if you can get there.

I guess my point is, sure some suit configs do what they do better, but are they your first choice going into a blind battle? I'd rather bring in more expensive suits that could hanlde almost anything than have a couple suits then would have to specialize. There should be more judging a suit than its effiency. Pyscological factors should be a factor in judging. I know my MEQ opponents hate seing a suit that can kill almost anything they bring out with some ease.

What are your thoughts?

I know this may ahve been debated before I didn't see it on this forum though.

User avatar
kai'lore
Aun'O (Ret.)
Posts: 3480

Post#2 » Mar 06 2006 08:52

I tend to agree and Fireknives are still one of my favourite suits.

I know I won't be popular for saying/writing this but... 40k is a pretty simple, linear rule set for the most part. It's based on the humble D6 and there just aren't many modifiers at all.

Statistical analysis for 40k is popular for the simple reason that it is easy to do.

Plus it's great Forum banter. We can't all line our minis up and prove our ideas work through mere power of verbal expression, but showing something is more mathematically efficient and well, you can't beat that -in a forum :)

For me it's the Mech Kills, not the Meq kills!

kai

User avatar
onlainari
Por'Ui
Por'Ui
Posts: 304

Post#3 » Mar 06 2006 09:24

Fireknives are now more effective at shooting at marines than stealths at 18".

Missile/burst (firestorm) are even more effective again.

Plasma/burst (aurora) are even better.

3 aurora with 2 shield drones is a pretty solid unit, 8 wounds, good for scoring purposes, and 5 models, good for moral check purposes. This unit is less effective shooting at marines than stealths however.

For me, I use a BS5 fireknife shas'el and BS4 elite deathrains.
100/19/20 w/d/l
Tournament: 21/4/4 w/d/l

Tau_Warboss
Shas
Posts: 7
Contact:

Post#4 » Mar 06 2006 09:33

Well I'm glad to see the post didn't come off too bad. It was my first attempt at a serious debate topic post.

I use 2 fire knives, a fire knife commander, 3 helios wih shield drones and a Tsunami :-? (don't know name for this config: CIB, fusion Vectored, HWMT).

For me its still all about how many models you remove. Being able to deny MEQ thier saves makes me feel great. Some many of their weapons can do the same to us. Making it a more even playing field when it coms to weapons is great. Hence why I love my second army of orks to make MEQ and +2 people run away.

I haven't tried the aurora config yet simply because too much of my area is MEQ.
Last edited by Tau_Warboss on Mar 06 2006 10:32, edited 1 time in total.

Platonicpimp
Shas
Posts: 53

Post#5 » Mar 06 2006 09:43

what a lot of people are saying here is that denying armour saves isn't the only thing. It makes us feel good because when we hit, we HIT, but from a perspective of averages, more shots is better than better shots. That, of course, assumes that the strength is high enough to damage the target at all.

Tau_Warboss
Shas
Posts: 7
Contact:

Post#6 » Mar 06 2006 10:35

Sure by law of averages more shots will do better than less more powerful shots, I can't deny the math there. Howver, when your opponent is on a hot streak rolling dice, not allowing saves can make a big difference.

I've had a squad of stealths cause 11 wounds and the guy make all his saves.

Platonicpimp
Shas
Posts: 53

Post#7 » Mar 06 2006 11:16

By the same token I've Fired my plasma rifle at a marine squad all game with by BS5 commander and never sucessfully wounded one.

I guess it comes down to: would you rather have less wounds on average but greater consistency, or more wounds on average but a greater variability.

I'll take better on average with greater variability any day, but that's me.

User avatar
kai'lore
Aun'O (Ret.)
Posts: 3480

Post#8 » Mar 06 2006 11:19

lol :D , that is so true.

Perhaps we should write up some articles on;

"My MathHammer, The Weird Stuff that Shouldn't, But Happens to Me!"

kai

Raul
Por
Posts: 34
Contact:

Post#9 » Mar 07 2006 12:10

I like my Helios commanders. Sure they take all game to get in some shots, but after you spend 2-3 turns of shooting at that land raider and fail pen rolls, that 2d6 independant character shot helps out a lot. Not to mention if someone wants to learn to play or has no army they tend to get my Deathwing. I have seen a terminator unit shrug off every wound from a dual FOF, so the backup AP 2-1 shots helps.

User avatar
Mephet'ran
Shas
Posts: 1510
Contact:

Post#10 » Mar 07 2006 01:54

I personally roll only Deathrain in Elite suits, and my reason for doing so has nothing to do with maths.
I used to run Fireknife as well, but recently I replaced all my Elite Fireknives with Deathrain suits and I'm more than happy. I have no idea what the statistics look like, but I just have the gut feeling that my Deathrain do way more damage and die much less often.

On my two HQ suits I have t-l plasma / fusion to make up for my lack of anti-infantry AP2 power.

I honestly don't see the point of anything but Deathrain on Elite suits in a none-Crisis orientated army. This is why: when I was running Fireknife suits I found that I was really relying on them to hit in critical situations (90% of all my opponents are meq) and then they didn't hit because of their BS.
I just can't justify putting expensive, low shot#, hard-hitting weapons on suits that only hit 50% of the time.
So now those weapons are on my HQ suits where they make mince-meat out of everything in their way and the long-range, multi-shot weapons are on my Elite suits.

And as for Deathrain doesn't hurt meqs, well, all I can say is, "have you tried it out ?". I have two units of two suits (all in all a mere 224pts) and they mow down meqs. When those 4 suits leap out from behind their hill and launch 8 missiles that hit on 3 with reroll, well, lets just say none of my opponents like it at all.

Marc
Shas
Posts: 56

Post#11 » Mar 07 2006 03:03

the problem with a lot of Math-hammer its doesnt take range, terrian or surivabilty.

all my configs have shield drones or sheilds or just lot of drones. simply for the reason that AP 1,2,3 exsite and they can be carried by fast unit or units which can deep strike . i hate melta's!

Zustiur
Shas
Posts: 50
Contact:

Post#12 » Mar 07 2006 06:26

Platonicpimp wrote:I'll take better on average with greater variability any day, but that's me.
This is not limited to Warhammer either. The same situation came up in Diablo 1 (years ago now obviously). The general consensus was that your minimum damage was far more important than your maximum damage. You might do 70 maximum... but if your minimum is 1, you might still have to hit 70 times.

Tau_Warboss
Shas
Posts: 7
Contact:

Post#13 » Mar 07 2006 08:40

I see what you guys are saying, but for me a deathrian might not do as much because its light armor roll is next to non-existent in my area. 4th edition killed the rhino rush over here and replaced it with terminators, demon princes, assault marines and other nasty units that really don't fear massed fire that much.

I ran a couple deathrains for awhile there and against the people out here and the lack of stopping armor save just didn't cut it. Sure I would hit with 3/4 shots, but they would shrug off 9/12 of the wounds I would inflict and 3 dead MEQ in 4 rounds of shoot wasn't effective for me.

I used to run fire-knife 6's as my elites, very expensive but worth the price. I had a tyrant with guard take 6 wounds from a sqaud of 3 in 1 round of shooting. While earlier in the game I used the missle to kill warriors from a safe distance. That kind of versatility exceeds point cost to me.

Cypher
Shas
Posts: 28
Contact:

Post#14 » Mar 07 2006 10:00

Fireknifes also have the psycological effect of scaring MEQ players. I have seen guys spend 2-3 turns keeping their terminators out of possible fire arcs of my plasma guns simply because they were plasma guns. They would let stealth teams rain fire down on them even though the liklihood of death was about the same (stealths killed the termies in CC).


This kind of area denial is very important and very difficult to quantify.

scramasax
Shas
Posts: 16

Post#15 » Mar 07 2006 03:24

Everything is not math but often what you describe as not being math related is just because you are not doing enough math.

Area denial: risk assessment that probability of losing in that area are greater than winning.

deathrain better than fireknife to kill marines: Take a sample of the number of time each gun fire into a game and use it to calculate efficiency. The number of sample needed can be calculate with statistics for the number of variable that you include.

"My MathHammer, The Weird Stuff that Shouldn't, But Happens to Me!" : Don't think average and probability are the same. by example 4 stealth suit fire at marines. In average you will have 1,33 dead marines. but 1 time on 4096 the 12 shot will hit, then 4096 time on 531441 your 12 shots will wound and the marines players will then 4096 times on 531441 succeed to keep his men alive. There is 1 times in 100 millions that it happen that your 12 shot wound and you did not kill even one marine. But when you roll the dice it migth happen and this not against the math

We take a lot of decision on experience but often those decision can be proven by probability and statistics if we take the time to do it. But who take the statistics about the number of times each model shot in a game, the number of times you had to roll armor save, which model survive at the end of the game and which die, the amount of area of ruins and forest on the board and other data that we need for a real calculation of the math that we need? We are not doing it because it would be a big task but with it we could then calculate a lot of the decision that for the moment we spent with our experience.

User avatar
Mephet'ran
Shas
Posts: 1510
Contact:

Post#16 » Mar 07 2006 03:34

exactly, that why I mostly end up by saying, "go with what works for you". I found that fireknives don't work for me, but Deathrain do. This has to do with hundred of small things ranging from my style of play to my opponents to my army build, etc.
Mephet'ran
-MTT Old School

Tirronan
Shas
Posts: 5

Point Eff

Post#17 » Mar 07 2006 04:32

I've been gaming since I was 18 years old. That was 30 years ago btw. In that time I have played everything from Miniture Navals, Napoleonics, Ship of the line, ect, ect. When the new codex finally come out for me I will complete my Tau army and play that.

The fact remains that while you will streak good and bad from time to time you have to go with the math. Just as every post here is about figuring out what you will face and what will lead your play style to victory is in fact game math. Think about how many posts are here about shockingly effective gun drones being rediscovered by players. Its just math, two 1/3 chances to hit are in fact better than one 1/2 chance to hit.

Cheers

User avatar
midnight
Shas
Posts: 229

Post#18 » Mar 07 2006 06:14

I run a unit of 2 burning eyes with shield generators and 2 units of 6 stealths.
I have a fireknife Shas'el and a Helios Shas'o with shield. Most people hate me. Looking at my list, I am extremely inefficient compared to some that are shown on here.

That said I have lost 2K battles 3 times in over 20 games now. The list is designed to take all comers and has a decided anti-Meq bend in the elites. I field plasma because of the sheer amount of terminators I see. Usually my burning eyes are busy all game killing terminators, obliterators, or carnifexes.

Efficiency isn't everything. Burning eyes are used by me because if I need a unit to do the job, I hate it when it misses 3 of 4 shots.

With the advent of markerlights not sucking, I may have to change to fireknives.

Return to “Archival Datacore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests