Is a pair enough for Heavy Support?

[minigun762]

The typical advice I hear and give out is not to use one of something, especially if its armor.

Instead take 2 and the durability of both increases significantly.

Now you would assume that the logic would continue if you took a third but is going from 2 to 3 as important as going from 1 to 2?

 

Here is the example I was thinking of:

 

I have 2 Defilers for my Heavy options, would it be silly to choose a non-armor option for my 3rd Heavy slot or would I really want to put a third armor piece down on the table to make everything live longer?

[Firedrake28]

In the case of Defilers, it's probably not worth taking a third if your only objective is to make them more survivable. Defilers have soft armor, so a Vindicator or even Land Raider would complement them fairly well, as both units have a well-deserved reputation for causing carnage and both units are a fair bit more survivable than a Defiler, especially in the case of the Land Raider.

 

All in all though, Defilers probably aren't the Heavy Support unit of choice in the Chaos Space Marine Codex. There are other units that are cheaper and more survivable (like Vindicators and Predators). Defilers also suffer from being extremely large models so it's hard to get a cover save without a Land Raider sized terrain piece to hide behind.

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

According to Lancaster's Square Law, going from 1 to 2 increases the effectiveness of both by 300%.

Going from 2 to 3 increases the effectiveness of all by 125%.

[Grey Mage]

Its not nearly as much really.

 

With just one your opponent merely has to say "well, lets hit it tell it stops being a threat" and then do so.

 

With two he has to worry about staying alive while hes doing it.

 

With three tactics tend to change again... to stopping them for a minute and hoping for a lucky pop.

[Giga]

Unless you're facing hordes (or footslogging MEQ, like necrons) on a regular basis, I'd say three defilers are overkill. They aren't such great anti-tank, and their armor 12 means they die or get immobilized easily by long-range anti-tank.

 

I'd say you should get something that will add to the target saturation, like an obliterator cult or a land raider; stuff that will drive anti-tank fire away from your defilers and serve to further divide the opponent's forces.

[minigun762]

According to Lancaster's Square Law, going from 1 to 2 increases the effectiveness of both by 300%.

Going from 2 to 3 increases the effectiveness of all by 125%.

 

How do you figure ICB?

 

I agree that the big change is from 1 to 2, but why is the change from 2 to 3 so much less significant?

[Justicar Valius]

Well as a DH player ive never thought about it as 2 raiders is a lot of points and a 3rd wouldn't be worth the points as i only have 2 grey knioght units.

 

in games my opponent is forced to pop 2 LRC on chimera and one rhino with no repair. another tank is not really neccesary for me due to the amount of armoured targets

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

According to Lancaster's Square Law, going from 1 to 2 increases the effectiveness of both by 300%.

Going from 2 to 3 increases the effectiveness of all by 125%.

 

How do you figure ICB?

 

I agree that the big change is from 1 to 2, but why is the change from 2 to 3 so much less significant?

 

The effectiveness of 1 is 1^2=1.

The effectiveness of 2 is 2^2=4.

The effectiveness of 3 is 3^2=9.

 

1 -> 4 = 300% increase.

4 -> 9 = 125% increase.

[minigun762]

Ahh that works, thanks ICB.

 

I'd say you should get something that will add to the target saturation, like an obliterator cult or a land raider; stuff that will drive anti-tank fire away from your defilers and serve to further divide the opponent's forces.

 

That makes sense but my initial thought was to field some Havocks actually, however those don't draw the same kind of weapons as the Defilers do so it really does nothing for their durability.

[Giga]

That makes sense but my initial thought was to field some Havocks actually, however those don't draw the same kind of weapons as the Defilers do so it really does nothing for their durability.

Obliterators are better, IMHO. They're more expensive, but they can be relied on to get the job done + you aren't automatically wasting a turn of shooting in dawn of war deployment. Unless you're taking them for the fluff, the havocs are just an inferior heavy support choice in the current CSM dex.

 

In addition, most guns that will be used against defilers will also be used against oblits (lascannons, melta), hence prolonging the collective lives of your defilers.

 

 

 

 

Have you considered getting a vindicator, perhaps? Its size actually allows you to put it behind your defilers to give it cover saves, and it's str 10 ap 2 pieplate will make people panic and focus lots of fire in an attempt to shoot it down. The way to make it even scarier is to give it demonic possession, at which point an opponent might focus fire most of his anti-tank on it, completely ignoring your defilers.

[minigun762]

That makes sense but my initial thought was to field some Havocks actually, however those don't draw the same kind of weapons as the Defilers do so it really does nothing for their durability.

Obliterators are better, IMHO. They're more expensive, but they can be relied on to get the job done + you aren't automatically wasting a turn of shooting in dawn of war deployment. Unless you're taking them for the fluff, the havocs are just an inferior heavy support choice in the current CSM dex.

 

In addition, most guns that will be used against defilers will also be used against oblits (lascannons, melta), hence prolonging the collective lives of your defilers.

 

 

 

 

Have you considered getting a vindicator, perhaps? Its size actually allows you to put it behind your defilers to give it cover saves, and it's str 10 ap 2 pieplate will make people panic and focus lots of fire in an attempt to shoot it down. The way to make it even scarier is to give it demonic possession, at which point an opponent might focus fire most of his anti-tank on it, completely ignoring your defilers.

 

Thats a very good idea.

 

It reminds me of a picture I saw for IG tank tactics, where they had a Leman Russ surrounded on 3 sides by Chimeras to give the Leman Russ a cover save from most any direction.

No reason you couldn't do the same kind of deployment with Rhinos and a Vindicator.

[Giga]

You don't even have to put it behind rhinos. If it's a 12" deployment, you can just rush the vindi 12" forward first turn and pop smoke. The opponent will focus fire tons of AT to take it down or at least to stop it from shooting (if you get demonic possession, that becomes helluva harder). It's sort of an equivalent of a droppodded dread; it totally draws all your opponent's AT fire for a turn or two.

 

In table quarters, all you gotha do is place it in cover or out of LoS, 12-18" from the middle, and it'll usually get to use its pieplate first turn.

 

The only place where you have to worry about using the rhinos to provide cover saves is in dawn of war deployment, when your vindi will usually have to wait until turn 3 until it can get in range to use it's pieplate.

[Deus de Mortalis]

The effectiveness of 1 is 1^2=1.

The effectiveness of 2 is 2^2=4.

The effectiveness of 3 is 3^2=9.

 

1 -> 4 = 300% increase.

4 -> 9 = 125% increase.

 

Nonsense. That might make sense somewhere, but it sure doesn't in 40k.

 

Obviously 3 Defilers are better than 2, but you face diminishing returns for each additional unit. You have 2 defilers and want to increase their effectiveness, so how do you go about that? Assuming you have options on the units just how you want them, all you can do is get units that can make their job easier. The only way to do this is to keep them out of danger. You can screen them with fodder to keep monstrous creatures away, you can destroy the enemy's anti-tank capability, or you can draw fire away from the defilers. Make your decision based on that. Many people do very well with a single Land Raider in their armies. It is a tough nut to crack and can protect other units inside, as cover, and as a fire magnet. I'm not saying what you should take or not, just saying what you should think about when deciding on another unit for your army.

[deepstrike]

Predator, defiler, landraider are my three heavies. I use these because of several reasons. 1) Long range tank killing most importantly anti transport so my prey cant get away. 2) assault support. defiler goes in with the berzerkers and land raider deliver a squad plus hq. 3) all three of these can be screened by rhinos while still being able to fire.

 

Not a big havoc user as they cost alot of points to do a job which a csm squad troop choice can do.

obliterators are great but I need to hit hard, early and often so no deepstrike and they are slow on foot.

A vindicator has to advance to get in range and by the time its shooting then my infantry should be mixing it up, not still waiting for the transports to be opened up.

 

I have to say that this works for my army which uses a close assault berzerker based loadout. If you use a more shooting based army than my all means go crazy a load up on the big guns.

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

The effectiveness of 1 is 1^2=1.

The effectiveness of 2 is 2^2=4.

The effectiveness of 3 is 3^2=9.

 

1 -> 4 = 300% increase.

4 -> 9 = 125% increase.

 

Nonsense. That might make sense somewhere, but it sure doesn't in 40k.

 

Obviously 3 Defilers are better than 2, but you face diminishing returns for each additional unit. You have 2 defilers and want to increase their effectiveness, so how do you go about that? Assuming you have options on the units just how you want them, all you can do is get units that can make their job easier. The only way to do this is to keep them out of danger. You can screen them with fodder to keep monstrous creatures away, you can destroy the enemy's anti-tank capability, or you can draw fire away from the defilers. Make your decision based on that. Many people do very well with a single Land Raider in their armies. It is a tough nut to crack and can protect other units inside, as cover, and as a fire magnet. I'm not saying what you should take or not, just saying what you should think about when deciding on another unit for your army.

Think before posting, please.

 

The diminishing return exists in the form of the decreasing increase of combat power. Obviously, if you have 3 Defilers, you've decided that Defilers have a greater synergistic effect with the rest of your army than other heavy support choices.

 

Oh, and no one uses a single Raider competetively; there's too much stuff that can kill a Raider and everyone has meta to counter Raider Rush.

 

And reviewing Lancaster's Square Law might help you understand the "nonsense". It doesn't hold perfectly true, but it's good enough.

[minigun762]

I think the idea of "diminishing returns" is the easiest way to think about it for most people.

 

2 of something seems to be the magic crossroads where you're getting the most bang for your buck and since we're limited to 3 spots in most very FOC slot, you always need to balance the point cost and FOC slots with what you're trying to achieve on the battlefield.

 

Speaking from the example from above, I might decide that 2 Defilers is sufficient to achieve the objective I want to give them on the battlefield, so instead of taking a 3rd, I fill that slot with a Vindicator which gives me a different capability (in this case AP2 and S10).

 

Another way would be to consider the role that the unit has and what weapons will be directed at it. This way you don't have to use exactly the same unit if you can use an equivalent unit.

Example:

1 Vindicator, 1 Defiler, 1 Combi-Predator.

All 3 are different choices, however there is enough overlap in their capability, intended targets and intended counters to consider them roughly the same.

All 3 of these choices will be sucking up S7+ long range weapons or Melta death squads.

The Vindicator and Defiler provide aoe killing with their blast weapons.

The Vindicator and Predator provide 2+ save killing with their Demolishers and LasCannons (and AutoCannnons help too).

And the Defiler and Predator provide long range high S firepower.

 

Such a build might not be optimal, but it does give you some important advantages. 1) you should always have a counter to whatever the opponent is going to be using as you have a variety of units and some redundancy in those units and 2) you don't have to be bored buying/painting and playing with the exact same models! :P

[Deus de Mortalis]

Think before posting, please.

 

The diminishing return exists in the form of the decreasing increase of combat power. Obviously, if you have 3 Defilers, you've decided that Defilers have a greater synergistic effect with the rest of your army than other heavy support choices.

 

Oh, and no one uses a single Raider competetively; there's too much stuff that can kill a Raider and everyone has meta to counter Raider Rush.

 

And reviewing Lancaster's Square Law might help you understand the "nonsense". It doesn't hold perfectly true, but it's good enough.

 

Wow, I just did read up on "Lanchester's Square Law" and now know without a doubt that it is totally irrelevant to 40k and that your use of it is absolutely wrong.

 

Lanchester's Square Law's assumptions are that each unit is identical, there are no tactics or maneuvering involved, each unit can engage any enemy unit at the same time, and that the only attributes are quantity and kill power. This paragraph sums up some other limitations pretty well:

 

"More precisely, the law specifies the casualties a firing force will inflict over a period of time, relative to those inflicted by the opposing force. In its basic form, the law is only useful to predict outcomes and casualties by attrition. It does not apply to whole armies, where tactical deployment means not all troops will be engaged all the time. It only works where each man (or ship, unit or whatever) can kill only one equivalent enemy at a time (so it does not apply to machine guns, artillery or, an extreme case, nuclear weapons). The law requires an assumption that casualties build up over time: it does not work in situations in which opposing troops kill each other instantly, either by firing simultaneously or by one side getting off the first shot and inflicting multiple casualties."

 

Also, in your example, you have 1, 2, and 3 defilers and say that 1^1 < 2^2 < 3^3. According to Lanchester's Square Law, all you are saying is that if they are shooting at each other from static, unprotected positions, 3 defilers kills 1 defiler quicker and with less loss than 2 defilers kills 1 defiler. From that standpoint you would be right, but what does that have to do with 40k?

 

Take your own advice and "think before posting, please."

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

+ SELF EDITED FOR FLAMING +

[Frosty the Pyro]

to be fair the square law doesnt quite fit.

 

it would me more acurate to use a formula akin to n,n-1,n-2,...n-(n-1)

 

this is because although 2 will bring twice the firepower, and last twice as long, the wont BOTH last twice as long. so lets say t is the amount of turns it takes to kill a defiler. and d is the amount of damage done by a defiler per turn. so damage delt by defilers is D= n*d*(ta) with ta being time the defiler is alive. so if you have two defilers, in the time it takes to kill one defiler you will have delt 2*d*t. But now you only have one defiler left, in the time it takes to kill the remaining one you will deal another d*t damage to the enemy. This ends with 3*d*t if you have 2 defilers, it will work to 6*d*t if you have 3, and 10 at four.

 

This is of course becouse people tend to focus fire till something dies, if enemy fire is perfectly divided the square rule will apply.

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

I agree, Frosty.

 

Which is why I wrote:

 

It doesn't hold perfectly true, but it's good enough.