|
Post by Raven on Feb 16, 2014 1:28:50 GMT
Well, T/L Devourers with BL Worms average 4.5 hits strength 6 hits against a vehicle, a stranglethorn cannon averages 1 strength 6 hit.
|
|
|
Post by Squire on Feb 16, 2014 3:18:42 GMT
When I think of it, a stranglethorn cannon and one set of devourers isn't so bad. Same price as a dakkafex and it's probably a bit better at killing infantry, or on par anyway. I do like the idea of making a big hole in an infantry unit with the STC then hitting the survivors with the devourers. The range of a STC is a nice bonus on the first turn, maybe first two turns, but it's probably offset by the times you might want to shoot a unit with only a few guys left and the large blast isn't as effective as 4.5 hits. There's some value to hitting early though
That only addresses anti infantry shooting of course, and obviously a big strength of the dakkafex is being able to kill infantry and light armour alike. A lot of our units lack versatility so two sets of devourers is good in that respect. Before deciding to go full on anti infantry with a fex I'd consider how many of our units can do the same thing with large blast templates. The harpy, warriors and biovores can all do long range large blasts and none of those units are sacrificing a better weapon to do that. Tervigons and T-fexes can take cluster spines for mid range large blasts and the exocrine can do a mid range large blast. The reason I wouldn't take a STC + devourer carnifex is the dakkafex is as good at killing infantry (at worst only slightly worse) but can tear up light armour too, which is huge.
Outside of purely competitive environments I'll often ask myself if taking the slightly worse weapon option will actually change the course of games. A weapon set could be the second best option for a unit, but if it's never going to be the difference between winning and losing I may just go ahead and take the less optimal choice if I think it looks better on the model or will be more fun to use. In the case of a STC+devourer fex vs. a dakkafex I'd have to say it very well might make a deciding difference in a battle because the ability to take out light armour is so big and often something we lack
In summary, of all the possible fex builds I don't think STC and devourers ranks too badly.
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 16, 2014 4:40:42 GMT
TLDev will get 4.5 hits against any unit.
How many units will allow for the STC to also get 4.5 hits?
Remember to factor in scatter....
How often will you get 5 models under the blast even on a 'hit'?
How often when you scatter a few inches? HOw often when you scatter a lot of inches? How often when a unit is in a line? How often when the unit is only a few models?
There are very few scenarios where a STC will do as well as a TLDev, and even fewer where it would do better. To go for the STC, you are giving up a *lot* of advantage for the rest of the game, just to take that extra shot on turn 1.
How often when the target is in a Ruin? How often when it is a vehicle?
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 16, 2014 6:52:25 GMT
There are very few scenarios where a STC will do as well as a TLDev, and even fewer where it would do better. To go for the STC, you are giving up a *lot* of advantage for the rest of the game, just to take that extra shot on turn 1. Is this theory hammering or based on experience? lol, how long you been playing now coredump ?
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 16, 2014 7:07:07 GMT
I don't actually play, I just stare at my models and make 'pew pew' and 'Om nom nom' sounds...
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 16, 2014 7:10:38 GMT
it's really funny when people point out the flaws in whatever strategy or wargear or whatever, that's the inevitable response. that, or the MATH DOESN'T WORK IN REAL LIFE response. come on guys.
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 16, 2014 7:26:15 GMT
To answer the original question.... both.
But there is a misperception that experience is better than theory hammer.
It isn't.
It is just different, and thus has different advantages and disadvantages. Experience lets you take into account things like terrain and missions, the effects of army lists, etc. But mathhammer lets you look at many different variables over and over again. You can shoot a STC at a rhino, and shoot TLDevs at a rhino... and after doing each 10-20 times, (which will take 20-30 games--at least), you will know from 'experience' which is better. Or... you can use mathhammer to make that pretty darn easy conclusion from 30 seconds of calculations.
Now, there is plenty of situations that experience helps more. Math hammer says that 30 HGaunts is better in CC than 10 stealers.** But only experience will take into account things like brood attrition, the likelihood of getting the entire brood within engagement range, the effect of synapse, etc.
So... mathhammer makes it easy to determine that the TLDevs are better: Against small units (around 7-8 or smaller) Against vehicles Against units in lines Against units in ruins Against units very spread out Against units not spread out, but the STC scatters.
Likewise, mathhammer makes it easy to determine that STC is better: Against units clumped up. Against units kind of clumped, and a 'hit' is scored When there is no target within 18"
Now, it is up to experience to determine the frequency of each of those situations. How often are you shooting at models in ruins, or in a line, or with 8 or fewer models? How often are you shooting at models clumped close together? How often is there no target within 18?
My experience makes it quite clear which situations happens more often. Shrike, on the other hand, has said that *every* game he has played involved his opponent hiding against the back line, or putting all their models in the corner... so his experience is different.
**Note: I made up the numbers for this comparison... I have not done the math to verify the 30>10 assertion.
|
|
|
Post by shrike on Feb 16, 2014 10:39:02 GMT
Is this theory hammering or based on experience? lol, how long you been playing now coredump ? Oops my bad. I didn't mean to question your experience in playing. What I meant to ask was if you've had a chance to put the STC fex to the test yet, and to share your experience with it if you have.
|
|
|
Post by shrike on Feb 16, 2014 10:55:33 GMT
To answer the original question.... both. But there is a misperception that experience is better than theory hammer. It isn't. It is just different, and thus has different advantages and disadvantages. Experience lets you take into account things like terrain and missions, the effects of army lists, etc. But mathhammer lets you look at many different variables over and over again. You can shoot a STC at a rhino, and shoot TLDevs at a rhino... and after doing each 10-20 times, (which will take 20-30 games--at least), you will know from 'experience' which is better. Or... you can use mathhammer to make that pretty darn easy conclusion from 30 seconds of calculations. Now, there is plenty of situations that experience helps more. Math hammer says that 30 HGaunts is better in CC than 10 stealers.** But only experience will take into account things like brood attrition, the likelihood of getting the entire brood within engagement range, the effect of synapse, etc. So... mathhammer makes it easy to determine that the TLDevs are better: Against small units (around 7-8 or smaller) Against vehicles Against units in lines Against units in ruins Against units very spread out Against units not spread out, but the STC scatters. Likewise, mathhammer makes it easy to determine that STC is better: Against units clumped up. Against units kind of clumped, and a 'hit' is scored When there is no target within 18" Now, it is up to experience to determine the frequency of each of those situations. How often are you shooting at models in ruins, or in a line, or with 8 or fewer models? How often are you shooting at models clumped close together? How often is there no target within 18? My experience makes it quite clear which situations happens more often. Shrike, on the other hand, has said that *every* game he has played involved his opponent hiding against the back line, or putting all their models in the corner... so his experience is different. **Note: I made up the numbers for this comparison... I have not done the math to verify the 30>10 assertion. I agree with most of core's sentiments. I believe that the math is a very helpful tool to pick between two options in most cases but math will never be fully be able to account for ALl the variables out there. Math is there to simplify, but in real life, even math does not provide the answer to everything. Case in point is this game where there's just so many variables involved. I agree with you a hundred percent with your breakdown of what STC and Devourers are good against respectively. As we can see from the points people have brought up, STC has its uses. In my experience, my gaming groups know just how deadly my fexes can be at 18" and that's why they simply choose to avoid it with their mobility. Not that they always do of course, but I wish sometimes I could just have the ability to stop em in their tracks when I want to and not have them running circles around me haha Dakkafexes are still my go to choice. But to answer the OP's question, STC/dev fexes are a good alternative. (At least in theory)
|
|
|
Post by vampiremonkey on Feb 16, 2014 11:12:44 GMT
I have outfitted my carnifexs for close combat and tank killing . Bioplasma is not all bad , it certainly gives space marines a bad day when it hits . The stranglethorn cannon is interesting though , if with the right target and its pinning effect you could negate the initiative penalty for charging through cover . It could assist hormagaunts and genestealers in the assault if it hits and pins the target unit in shooting phase , not something to rely on i suspect.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 16, 2014 11:14:02 GMT
there's really not all that many variables involved in 40k. its' not rocket science. when we get new units thrown in, or rules changed between editions then yeah we have to look at things again.
nothing of substance has changed with the venom/strangler family of weapons. they lost the -1 on the vehicle table this edition (new, and not really important, just makes the choice less awful), and blasts in general are more accurate vs. vehicles. (not really new anymore, 6th has been out over a year and a half). there aren't any new units an STC is suddenly going to be great against.
dev/STC isn't a horrible choice, it's ok. there's just a better choice in X2 devourers. these are going to be your most well-rounded choice for an all-comers environment, for the multitude of reasons we've gone over.
if you are having trouble catching fast movers, this is what flyrants, crones, harpies, and biovores excell at erasing. these are already solid choices, and don't require you to take 2nd best choices.
well, maybe harpy. i'd not take one unless as my 5th FMC. core likes them though.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 16, 2014 11:15:22 GMT
I have outfitted my carnifexs for close combat and tank killing . Bioplasma is not all bad , it certainly gives space marines a bad day when it hits . The stranglethorn cannon is interesting though , if with the right target and its pinning effect you could negate the initiative penalty for charging through cover . It could assist hormagaunts and genestealers in the assault if it hits and pins the target unit in shooting phase , not something to rely on i suspect. if you're shooting an STC from a fex into a unit that you're about to assault with gants gargs or stealers, be aware you're as likely to hit your own guys as you are your target.
|
|
|
Post by shrike on Feb 16, 2014 11:21:41 GMT
there's really not all that many variables involved in 40k. its' not rocket science. when we get new units thrown in, or rules changed between editions then yeah we have to look at things again. . For real? Cuz I think there's so much variables that math can't account for here. There's the meta you gotta look at, how your opponent plays you or if he's familiar with dealing with lists similar to whatever you're using, etc. I trust a lot of the more experienced members' advice here simply because my math will not triumph alone.
|
|
|
Post by vampiremonkey on Feb 16, 2014 11:22:27 GMT
True but you would have to have really bad luck for that to happen regularly . But is the risk worth the reward ? I would take the risk with most of those units bar Genestealers because they are not as expendable , especially against light to medium infantry units like guard
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 16, 2014 11:28:02 GMT
these things don't change on a moment to moment basis. you're going to generally know what's in your meta. these are knowns, or there wouldn't be terms like metagame or TAC lists in the first place. it does change more often now, with the faster pace of codex releases. but it's not something you can't react to, and past the first couple of weeks after a codex release there aren't going to be a whole lot of surprises (there are exceptions, daemons surprised me because no one here plays them and while i own the book, i didn't go over it or learn it well until months after the release. that's my own fault though).
one thing you mentioned you can't account for: opponent derp. my stepson LOVES to play R.I.S.K. he's also very terrible at it. however, he's actually annoying to beat because you just never know what he's going to do. he's very random (he's 10) and hard to predict. new 40k players are often the same, and go OOOHHH SHINY and chase after squirrels.
|
|