Tiger sharks vs titans

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 443

Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#1 » Feb 06 2018 07:05

I've recently done the math, and 10 tiger sharks AX-01 deal less damage (50) to a warlord titan than an equivalent points value of guardsmen with lasguns (125).

I think this is a prime example of railguns not doing their job and the design decisions that went into 8e are in the very least questionable.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#2 » Feb 06 2018 08:05

Temennigru wrote:I've recently done the math, and 10 tiger sharks AX-01 deal less damage (50) to a warlord titan than an equivalent points value of guardsmen with lasguns (125).

I think this is a prime example of railguns not doing their goddamn job and the design decisions that went into 8e are in the very least questionable.

The Tigersharks will deal massively more damage than the Guardsmen will. We will be using Markerlights on the Warlord obviously, as they're a critical part of how Tau fight. To compensate let's give all the Guard units re-rolling ones, which isn't realistic but let's face it- there are no buffs you could give Guardsmen that could ever give them equivalent firepower to a Tigershark anyway.

Guardsmen:
Let's use 1000 Guardsmen for 300 PL. Fankly, it's not possible for all of these models to be within rapid-fire range, a semicircle around the Warlord's feet going out to 12" could maybe hold 300 Guardsmen at most. So you're looking at about 1300 Lasgun shots, which will deal about 18 wounds on the Warlord, or 21 wounds with re-rolling ones.

Tigersharks:
Let's use 10 Tigersharks for 300 PL. That's 20 Heavy Rail Cannons, 20 Cyclic Ion Blasters, 20 Missile Pods, and 60 Seeker Missiles going into the Warlord. This is going to hurt. The HRCs will do 63 wounds alone, and the salvo of Seeker Missiles will strip off 19 more wounds. The Missile Pods will remove 4 wounds, and the Cyclic Ion Blasters will knock off 4 more as well. That's 90 wounds caused by the 10 Tigersharks- and that's assuming the Void Shields don't degrade, which they do. So really these Tigersharks will deal something like 110 wounds on the Titan. That's one very dead Warlord!

User avatar
CmdrCASh
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 170

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#3 » Feb 06 2018 08:06

I think there may be several other factors to look at here.

I'll avoid talking about the points sunk into the platform costs and just focus on the weapons and defences.

Taking a good look at the odds involved, the main reason for the disparity is due to the superb warlord void shield invul saves. Take that way and the average damage from the heavy rail cannons goes up to a respectable 108.89.

The mortal wounds from the rail cannons give another 3.89 damage.

Missile pods and burst cannons add about 1.5 damage.

That's 114.33 damage there, not that far from that 125 now.

And what about the range? How do you quantify a weapon which has 5 times the range of another?

What about the seekers on the AX-1-0s? Those will put a one time 28 damage on the warlord, assuming no marker support bumping up the BS.

Additionally, I suspect that this example might be pushing the limits of a D6 system, i.e. Resolution wise you can't have anything worse than a 6+, or better than a 2+. Which usually makes the worst weapon vs the best defence comparisons a bit wonky from a math standpoint.

Saying that, looking from a fluff perspective, if we take the Warhound takedown we see in IA2 as our example of how the weapons should interact, yes, the railcannon stats doesn't seem to be enough. :P
Ka'ash Sept

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#4 » Feb 06 2018 08:18

CmdrCASh wrote:I think there may be several other factors to look at here.

I'll avoid talking about the points sunk into the platform costs and just focus on the weapons and defences.

Taking a good look at the odds involved, the main reason for the disparity is due to the superb warlord void shield invul saves. Take that way and the average damage from the heavy rail cannons goes up to a respectable 108.89.

The Void Shields are pretty important, and you can't get rid of them, so I'd definitely include them in the calculations. At any rate, check out my numbers- it's no contest. The 10 Tigersharks are massively more powerful than the Guardsmen.

User avatar
CmdrCASh
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 170

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#5 » Feb 06 2018 08:35

Arka0415 wrote:The Void Shields are pretty important, and you can't get rid of them, so I'd definitely include them in the calculations. At any rate, check out my numbers- it's no contest. The 10 Tigersharks are massively more powerful than the Guardsmen.


Heh, I was just taking them away to show that invul saves are a big reducer of effectiveness for low rate of fire high AP weapons since it invalidates the points that went into having armour penetration capabilities. :smile:

My own experiences with Heavy Rail cannon vs Warlord were quite positive. Have used them both on the Ta'unar and also the AX-1-0. Together with other supporting attacks, especially at the start to lower that nasty void shield save, they did very well, in both cases doing the killing blow on the titan. :evil:

With every edition, the strategy to take down a titan changes somewhat. In the days of 5th it was stripping the void shields with missile pods before hitting it with the railguns. Then of course in the era of D weapons it was a bit crazy (rolls of 6 on the damage chart!). Now it requires a lot more supporting effort to burn through defences.
Ka'ash Sept

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#6 » Feb 06 2018 08:43

CmdrCASh wrote:Heh, I was just taking them away to show that invul saves are a big reducer of effectiveness for low rate of fire high AP weapons since it invalidates the points that went into having armour penetration capabilities.

Gotcha, that makes sense- Void Shields are definitely a huge part of what makes Titans so durable!

CmdrCASh wrote:With every edition, the strategy to take down a titan changes somewhat. In the days of 5th it was stripping the void shields with missile pods before hitting it with the railguns. Then of course in the era of D weapons it was a bit crazy (rolls of 6 on the damage chart!). Now it requires a lot more supporting effort to burn through defences.

I think for the time being you want to start with weak weapons, preferable S9+ guns with AP-1. Chip the Void Shield down to 4+, then smash it with your biggest weapons that can take more advantage of higher AP values.

Or just use melee. Strong melee weapons absolutely ruin Titans.

User avatar
MNGamer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 142

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#7 » Feb 06 2018 08:47

Also, it’s 1,000 guardsmen!!!! That’s just unrealistic. So is 10 tiger sharks, but how would you be able to fit that many guardsmen even on the table?
Even when broken, a sword may still cut~Aun'ko'vash

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 443

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#8 » Feb 06 2018 09:01

Arka0415 wrote:
Temennigru wrote:I've recently done the math, and 10 tiger sharks AX-01 deal less damage (50) to a warlord titan than an equivalent points value of guardsmen with lasguns (125).

I think this is a prime example of railguns not doing their goddamn job and the design decisions that went into 8e are in the very least questionable.

The Tigersharks will deal massively more damage than the Guardsmen will. We will be using Markerlights on the Warlord obviously, as they're a critical part of how Tau fight. To compensate let's give all the Guard units re-rolling ones, which isn't realistic but let's face it- there are no buffs you could give Guardsmen that could ever give them equivalent firepower to a Tigershark anyway.

Guardsmen:
Let's use 1000 Guardsmen for 300 PL. Fankly, it's not possible for all of these models to be within rapid-fire range, a semicircle around the Warlord's feet going out to 12" could maybe hold 300 Guardsmen at most. So you're looking at about 1300 Lasgun shots, which will deal about 18 wounds on the Warlord, or 21 wounds with re-rolling ones.

Tigersharks:
Let's use 10 Tigersharks for 300 PL. That's 20 Heavy Rail Cannons, 20 Cyclic Ion Blasters, 20 Missile Pods, and 60 Seeker Missiles going into the Warlord. This is going to hurt. The HRCs will do 63 wounds alone, and the salvo of Seeker Missiles will strip off 19 more wounds. The Missile Pods will remove 4 wounds, and the Cyclic Ion Blasters will knock off 4 more as well. That's 90 wounds caused by the 10 Tigersharks- and that's assuming the Void Shields don't degrade, which they do. So really these Tigersharks will deal something like 110 wounds on the Titan. That's one very dead Warlord!

I was using orders and officers for astra, which makes the lasguns rapid fire 2 and gives them rerolls.
Many guns with good support in this edition is definitely superior to single fire, single weapon, especially if they are dealing this low amount of damage.
The tiger sharks and railguns in general definitely need some sort of bypass void shields/invuln saves thing. It shouldn't take more than 5 tiger sharks to take down a titan. It's what they were made for, for crying out loud. The vox recording in the taros campaign shows clearly a SINGLE tiger shark taking down a smaller titan.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#9 » Feb 06 2018 09:13

Temennigru wrote:I was using orders and officers for astra, which makes the lasguns rapid fire 2 and gives them rerolls.
Many guns with good support in this edition is definitely superior to single fire, single weapon, especially if they are dealing this low amount of damage.

Orders are good, but that's not even legal, a unit may only be affected by one order per turn. If we just use FRFSRF we would need 50 Company Commanders to do that, adding 150PL and bringing us to 450PL total. Now we get 15 Tigersharks. Let's run the numbers again.

1000 Guardsmen backed up by 100 Company Commanders, somehow all miraculously within 12" range of the Warlord (and all stationary), will deal 64 wounds to the Titan.

15 Tigersharks will fire a mind-numbingly powerful 30 Heavy Rail Cannon shots, 90 Seeker Missiles, 60 Missile Pod shots, and 60 Cyclic Ion Blasters shots. This would deal more than 150 wounds on a Warlord Titan, enough to bring down two.

The Tigershark AX-0-1 is really powerful. Not only are the Tigersharks a much better investment, the much weaker Guardsmen are relying on physically impossible placement and tactically unlikely synergies.

User avatar
shasocastris
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 1038
Contact:

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#10 » Feb 07 2018 10:09

Honestly, if one is trying to compare the Tigershark, I'm more interested in a more direct equivalent, the Shadowsword (a Baneblade variant). It has a Heavy 3D3 gun for 2D6 damage each, hits a Titan on a re-rolled 4+ while wounding Titans slightly worse (and has 4 lascannons). All for four PL less than the AX-1-0.

If we look at averages, it gets (vs Warhound Scout Titan):
6 * 3/4 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 7 = 21/2 = 11.5 avg damage from the Volcano Cannon firing.
4 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 3.5 = 1.75 avg damage from the 4 lascannons

vs

Tigershark AX-1-0
2 * 5/6 * 5/6 * 1/2 * 14 = 9.72 avg damage from the two railguns
6 * 2/3 * 1/2 = 2 avg damage ONCE from the 6 seeker missiles

So not only does the AX-1-0 do less damage, it is far less *consistent*, given that it gets the seekers only once and command re-rolls can make the void shields much more effective against the railguns (only two things that need to be blocked with a 4+) vs the more even spread of the Shadowsword.

The main difference is that the Shadowsword has hit its limit of offensive support (unless it has some IMPERIUM friend that can let it reroll to-wound rolls or give it +1 to hit). Otherwise, the Tigershark can get three markerlights to reroll ones to hit and let the Seekers hit without the penalty for moving and firing, becoming:
2 * 35/36 * 5/6 * 1/2 * 14 = 11.34 avg damage from the two railguns
6 * 35/36 * 1/2 = 2.92 avg damage ONCE from the 6 seeker missiles

Which is still, interestingly enough, less than the Shadowsword.

Cheers!

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#11 » Feb 07 2018 10:20

shasocastris wrote:Tigershark AX-1-0
2 * 5/6 * 5/6 * 1/2 * 14 = 9.72 avg damage from the two railguns
6 * 2/3 * 1/2 = 2 avg damage ONCE from the 6 seeker missiles

So not only does the AX-1-0 do less damage, it is far less *consistent*, given that it gets the seekers only once and command re-rolls can make the void shields much more effective against the railguns (only two things that need to be blocked with a 4+) vs the more even spread of the Shadowsword.

The main difference is that the Shadowsword has hit its limit of offensive support (unless it has some IMPERIUM friend that can let it reroll to-wound rolls or give it +1 to hit). Otherwise, the Tigershark can get three markerlights to reroll ones to hit and let the Seekers hit without the penalty for moving and firing, becoming:
2 * 35/36 * 5/6 * 1/2 * 14 = 11.34 avg damage from the two railguns
6 * 35/36 * 1/2 = 2.92 avg damage ONCE from the 6 seeker missiles

Remember that Seekers hit on 6s unless they have Markerlight support, in which case they basically auto-hit (2+ re-rolling). So a Tigershark will never fire its Seekers without its HRCs also re-rolling ones, etc.

Also, it just occurred to me, in an Apocalypse game Titans are basically invincible as long as the controlling player has enough CPs, seeing as you can use Command Re-Rolls as often as you like!

User avatar
MNGamer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 142

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#12 » Feb 07 2018 10:40

How about 10-15 skyrays? With ML support they would be basically auto hitting and would deal 60-90 mortal wounds. They would be basically useless after, but would negate the advantage of a void shield.
Even when broken, a sword may still cut~Aun'ko'vash

User avatar
shasocastris
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 1038
Contact:

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#13 » Feb 07 2018 10:54

Arka0415 wrote:Remember that Seekers hit on 6s unless they have Markerlight support, in which case they basically auto-hit (2+ re-rolling). So a Tigershark will never fire its Seekers without its HRCs also re-rolling ones, etc.

Also, it just occurred to me, in an Apocalypse game Titans are basically invincible as long as the controlling player has enough CPs, seeing as you can use Command Re-Rolls as often as you like!


Ha, whoops, you are right. I never use the tigershark without markerlight support and I forgot that part.

As for always re-rolling, remember, they can't re-roll a re-roll, so while it does make the void shields much better against the tigershark, they aren't invincible.

Cheers!

Nitrogue
Shas
Posts: 101

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#14 » Feb 07 2018 11:16

Arka0415 wrote:15 Tigersharks will fire a mind-numbingly powerful 30 Heavy Rail Cannon shots, 90 Seeker Missiles, 60 Missile Pod shots, and 60 Cyclic Ion Blasters shots. This would deal more than 150 wounds on a Warlord Titan, enough to bring down two.

Sorry, tad off topic, but this sounds like a weird version of the 12 days of Christmas song. :biggrin:

R.D.
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 569

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#15 » Feb 07 2018 02:49

Arka0415 wrote:
Temennigru wrote:I was using orders and officers for astra, which makes the lasguns rapid fire 2 and gives them rerolls.
Many guns with good support in this edition is definitely superior to single fire, single weapon, especially if they are dealing this low amount of damage.

Orders are good, but that's not even legal, a unit may only be affected by one order per turn. If we just use FRFSRF we would need 50 Company Commanders to do that, adding 150PL and bringing us to 450PL total. Now we get 15 Tigersharks. Let's run the numbers again.

1000 Guardsmen backed up by 100 Company Commanders, somehow all miraculously within 12" range of the Warlord (and all stationary), will deal 64 wounds to the Titan.

15 Tigersharks will fire a mind-numbingly powerful 30 Heavy Rail Cannon shots, 90 Seeker Missiles, 60 Missile Pod shots, and 60 Cyclic Ion Blasters shots. This would deal more than 150 wounds on a Warlord Titan, enough to bring down two.

The Tigershark AX-0-1 is really powerful. Not only are the Tigersharks a much better investment, the much weaker Guardsmen are relying on physically impossible placement and tactically unlikely synergies.


Unless you're a millionaire, how are you even going to afford or store 15 Tigersharks? :p

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 443

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#16 » Feb 07 2018 02:54

R.D. wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:
Temennigru wrote:I was using orders and officers for astra, which makes the lasguns rapid fire 2 and gives them rerolls.
Many guns with good support in this edition is definitely superior to single fire, single weapon, especially if they are dealing this low amount of damage.

Orders are good, but that's not even legal, a unit may only be affected by one order per turn. If we just use FRFSRF we would need 50 Company Commanders to do that, adding 150PL and bringing us to 450PL total. Now we get 15 Tigersharks. Let's run the numbers again.

1000 Guardsmen backed up by 100 Company Commanders, somehow all miraculously within 12" range of the Warlord (and all stationary), will deal 64 wounds to the Titan.

15 Tigersharks will fire a mind-numbingly powerful 30 Heavy Rail Cannon shots, 90 Seeker Missiles, 60 Missile Pod shots, and 60 Cyclic Ion Blasters shots. This would deal more than 150 wounds on a Warlord Titan, enough to bring down two.

The Tigershark AX-0-1 is really powerful. Not only are the Tigersharks a much better investment, the much weaker Guardsmen are relying on physically impossible placement and tactically unlikely synergies.


Unless you're a millionaire, how are you even going to afford or store 15 Tigersharks? :p

It's not hard. I have 6 already. Not that they're built or anything. I have an entire shed of unbuilt miniatures. I need help.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3283

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#17 » Feb 07 2018 06:01

Temennigru wrote:It's not hard. I have 6 already. Not that they're built or anything. I have an entire shed of unbuilt miniatures. I need help.

And you're the guy who's been asking GW to put out new Tau modes? :eek:

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 443

Re: Tiger sharks vs titans

Post#18 » Feb 07 2018 06:27

Arka0415 wrote:
Temennigru wrote:It's not hard. I have 6 already. Not that they're built or anything. I have an entire shed of unbuilt miniatures. I need help.

And you're the guy who's been asking GW to put out new Tau modes? :eek:

Now that I own at least one of each tau model, I'd like to have other things to collect. And I also enjoy seeing the lore advance.
And I have a rule that I've been following. Each new model that I buy I have to build at least 2 first.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Darthi and 4 guests