Deathspitters/SM vs Devourers/BLW?

[hiveelysium]

I may be an idiot but i feel like the upgrades of 6", 1S, -1AP is not worth the 3 shots you lose, especially since the board is smaller than it used to be

the reach is a big upgrade but the +1S doesn't do much for me unseal you are attacking Big Things, but i assume you want a much better AP if attacking Big Things

in summary i think Dblw is a good light and medium infantry gun, where the DSsm is a bad heavy infantry Big Things gun

please correct or affirm

[Hive Bahamut]

I always figured they were trying to make it our autocannon equivalent (in true fashion needing CP to make 2D for reasons..)

Devourers are like the Punisher, S6 being trade off for -6" range and -8shots.

I would love to see Voracious ammo return in Devourers and Brainleech. Reroll to wound but keep 0 AP.

[No One]

Yeah, deathspitters are only if you want the range, which basically only matters with fexes with HVC, where you have low mobility and want to keep as far away as possible.

[hivemind03]

you're not an idiot. Devourers have been the standard choice for ages now. Though the balance between them isn't bad, it's worth thinking about which one is the right choice given your armies needs and your meta.

[kazetanade]

Except Devs performs similar to or better than Spitters in almost all scenarios.

[hivemind03]

Sept 9, 2020 4:55:28 GMT kazetanade said:

Except Devs performs similar to or better than Spitters in almost all scenarios.

But not all.

[infornography]

Spitters are better for light vehicles. Anything T7 which is most transports for example. Also if you have a firebase with DS and VC, you can have it a little further away from the enemy and that can make a substantial difference in keeping the firebase out of melee and close to buffers.

All in all, I think devs are superior, but it isn't a foregone conclusion. There are definitely not rare edge cases where DS are the better pick.

[kazetanade]

Sept 9, 2020 5:02:20 GMT hivemind03 said:

Sept 9, 2020 4:55:28 GMT kazetanade said:

Except Devs performs similar to or better than Spitters in almost all scenarios.

But not all.

There is no scenario where DS perform better than Devs to a markedly noticeable degree, other than the one whew your opponent rolls all 3s and fails cuz of ap-1.

[infornography]

Against a T7 vehicle with a 3+ save and cover bonus from a cfex with enhanced senses
2x devs - 12 shots, 8 hits, 2.64 wounds = .44 unsaved wounds
2x DS - 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds = .66 unsaved wounds

Yeah, it isn't impressive but it is half again the result. The main advantage is the range. Again, I will almost always take devs over DS, but if you face a meta of excessive cans that need opening, there is definitely a reason to consider taking DS instead.

[No One]

T7 2+ is the only profile in the game that it performs noticeably better against (with a marginal improvement against T7 3+ and decent improvement against T6 2+), and isn't exactly good against those. And considering that vehicles can't get cover bonus from terrain...these are not exactly super relevant profiles.

infornography said:

Again, I will almost always take devs over DS, but if you face a meta of excessive cans that need opening, there is definitely a reason to consider taking DS instead.

If you face lots of vehicles, take something else: if you want a dakkafex/walkrant, take HVC (at which point DS is fine for range reasons). But don't take double DS. Because DS isn't an answer to anything.

[niiai]

Sept 9, 2020 14:33:12 GMT No One said:

T7 2+ is the only profile in the game that it performs noticeably better against (with a marginal improvement against T7 3+ and decent improvement against T6 2+), and isn't exactly good against those. And considering that vehicles can't get cover bonus from terrain...these are not exactly super relevant profiles.

infornography said:

Again, I will almost always take devs over DS, but if you face a meta of excessive cans that need opening, there is definitely a reason to consider taking DS instead.

If you face lots of vehicles, take something else: if you want a dakkafex/walkrant, take HVC (at which point DS is fine for range reasons). But don't take double DS. Because DS isn't an answer to anything.

You both argue the same point. In some corner cases they are better. Most notably when they are within range and the others are not, an the transport argument. This is established, no need to debate those two points.

[kazetanade]

The issue here is that you deal 0.66W on the best case scenario for DS. You just spent 130++ points to deal less than a wound to a rhino.

Even if this is the fringe case where DS are better, it's still a bad weapon and you shouldn't be taking it for this scenario. If your meta is excessive cans, bring more HVC with some ckaws/talons. Or bring exocrines. Or Flyrants.

[No One]

niiai said:

You both argue the same point. In some corner cases they are better. Most notably when they are within range and the others are not, an the transport argument. This is established, no need to debate those two points.

The first section was just an elaboration, with an additional point that the profiles where it is better aren't super relevant. The actual argument is the same as kaz' above i.e. that it isn't impactful in the niche where it's slightly better anyway.

[gigasnail]

yeah i had misremembered a bunch of (please do not swear) from awhile ago last time this was brought up. it's really, really hard to overcome literally double the number of shots.

[afewveiws]

Deathspitters are litterally only relavant if you need the range. Out side of that devs are better on our monsters. If you have a lost that is going to cover ground and push up then sure devs are good but when they get charged you would still wish you had given the model a melee weapon.

Options are great and all but when every choice is so marginally different then it makes you think about the minutia of whats better instead of complaining about the fact that they all suck. Not a bad codex design lmao