The durability of Plague Marines

[IronWinds]

I'm not attacking Plague marines, I just want to know exactly how durable they are. We all love them... they don't die. But something has occured to me. 10CSMs normally equal 7PMs in points with the same gear. Now we know against small arms fire or ccws those plague marines will last far longer than those CSMs. But what occured to me is that those CSMs also pack a lot more punch, 3 extra bolters, 6 more attacks in hth. In a 1 on 1 breakdown the PMs will survive better, but what happens when we figure in that the CSMs kill more.... so there is less shooting/attacking back over the course of a battle? Also PMs have an even bigger weakness to low ap high str weapons because they cost more per model so there are normally 3 less wounds there. Just wondered.... and decided to run them through some mathhammer trials to really see how those 2 set backs effect them.

 

Team CSM: 10 CSMs, 8 bolters, 2 meltaguns, IoCG, champion w/ PF. 220

Team PMs: 7 PMs, 5 bolters, 2 meltaguns, champion w/ PF. 221

 

First scenario Shooting vs 30 guardsmen, no upgrades.(I'm doing all the math, but saving you the trouble of having to read it all and just showing results.)

 

CSMs total. In 4 turns killed 22.275 guardsmen. Lost 6.2 CSMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 111.4/136.4

 

PMs total. In 4 turns killed 19.068 guardsmen. Lost 1.936 PMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 95.34/61.1

 

PMs kill less but loose less than half as well. Also killed more than they lost. PMs win.

 

Second scenario Assault vs 30 guardsmen.(no one charges)

 

CSMs total. In 4 turns killed 15.99 guardsmen. Lost 4.298 CSMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 79.92/94.55

Guard were at -3/-3/-2/-2 for leadership tests. Guard should have run.

 

PMs total. In 4 turns killed 12.956 guardsmen. Lost 1.388 PMs. Relative cost killed vs lost=64.78/43.82

Guard were at -3/-2/-2/-2 for leadership tests. Guard should have run.

 

Again PMs kill less but loose a lot less as well. Also killed more than they lost. PMs win.

 

Third scenario Shooting vs 30 guardsmen w/ 3 PFs & 3 Meltaguns. 225, 7.5 per guy.

 

CSMs total. In 4 turns killed 17.89 guardsmen. Lost 10 CSMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 134.175/220

 

PMs total. In 4 turns killed 13.004 guardsmen. Lost 6.7112 PMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 97.53/211.88.

 

The PMs killed a lot less and lost almost as much, and honestly the fraction of a PM that lived wasn't going to kill 4 more guardsmen. It seems all it takes to neutralize all the advantages PMs have is 1/10 guardsmen having a meltagun. If we were working with plasma or battlecannons... it would be worse. And if units with higher BS(marines) had the meltaguns it would be less than 1/10.

 

Forth Scenario Assaulting vs 30 guardsmen w/ 3 PFs & 3 Meltaguns.

 

CSMs total. In 3 turns killed 11.27 guardsmen. Lost 10 CSMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 84.525/220

Guard were at -1/-/+1 for leadership tests, a +1 meaning the marines were negative.

 

PMs total. In 3 turns killed 7.3436 guardsmen. Lost 7PMs. Relative cost killed vs lost= 55.077/221

Guard were at -1/-/NR for leadership tests, the NR means the PMs had No retreat wounds.

 

The PMs killed a lot less again, and took the same losses. Guard can neutralize the advantages of PMs in hth by just giving all their sergeants PFs. Well guard can neutralize marines in general when they outnumber that much and have that many PFs.

 

Fifth Scenario Shooting vs each other... For fairness shooting takes place at the same time.

 

After 4 turns the PMs killed 6.757 CSMs. The CSMs killed 5.9309 PMs. Points lost total PM/CSM= 187.25/148.654. And just by looking at the numbers, if I continues it on forever... the CSMs win because by round 4 the CSMs were outnumbering the PMs and killing more per turn so it was just a matter of time.

 

Assault vs each other. This won't happen at the same time... CSMs have higher I, PFs done after everything.

 

After 4 turns the PMs killed 5.6089 CSMs. The CSMs killed 4.959874 PMs. Points lost total PM/CSM= 156.59/123.3958. And this one I actually had to run the numbers out for a while to see the victor. CSMs eventually win, but have less than 2 marines left.

 

 

Conclusion. PMs are still great. Up against small arms fire and ccws they are amazing. However if your enemy has just a few low ap/high str/pws the tables turn quickly because the PMs have less wounds to absorb the damage. Over several turns it also starts to show how they have a lack of offensive capabilities compared to CSMs, and this means more attacks coming back at them.

 

This is something I had wondered about for awhile and had dabbled with before but never went through that many scenarios. I had tried a scenario before with them against marines w/ plasma... but the PMs did so horrible it looked like I was 'trying' to make them look bad. In another scenario I put them in hth against just a few terminators... again faired horrible compared to CSMs both in how much they killed and how many losses they took. I felt guard with a few meltaguns would be a more fair comparison for the tests.

 

I used guardsmen because their weapon defines what I think of when I think of small arms fire. It was also less armor saves in my math. I could of used any type of infantry for this, the ratio of deaths for CSMs/PMs is about the same with all small arms fire. Its the low ap high str weapons that make the big difference. So against armies that can put 1 special weapon in every squad... and most of them do I don't see the PMs as the ultimate best unit. Especially when you throw in units that can take a lot of special weapons like guard vets. However against enemies where low ap weapons are more spread out(necrons... tau except for plasma crisis suits... orks) the PMs REALLY shine.. I mean spoil and blister.

 

Now I know you can't get 30 guardsmen easily in combat with 10 CSMs or 7 PMs. I continued to use 30 guardsmen because if I used 10 or 20 they just all die so it would be more of a test of killability than durability which would have been in the CSMs favor and this was about PMs not CSMs. I can put them up against other units if you wish, but not right now. Ask me and I'll do them later.

 

Part of the reason I did this is that I run 100% CSMs and I've never had a problem dealing with PMs, NMs, Bezerkers, or TSons. Normally against plague marines my bolters are useless and everything is focused on my melta and PF rolls.

 

 

Mathhammer disclaimer: Results are not guarenteed. Mathhammer is based on probabilities and statistics. They are the expected outcomes over thousands of games. Like an investment you would need to keep the same army(investment) for a long period of time to receive these predicted outcomes. Outcomes per game might be up or down. This is a focus on the long term. Not FDIC insured.(Little finance joke on my part. )

 

And the primary thing effecting both is how you play your army. Obviously a C'tan will eat through PMs faster than CSMs so you would keep the PMs away from it. But on the same note a smart opponent is going to focus his high str low ap weapons on those PMs. So that has more to do with you than the probablities, the probabilities just let you know which should fair better in that type of situation. So if you use PMs keep them away from anything low ap high str, and if all your enemies load up on those weapons you might be better off trying out some CSMs :) .

 

Thoughts? Suggestions? I hope someone finds this helpful because I don't run PMs so I'm only using it for when I fight them. That and all that math took awhile, and its more for other people's uses than my own.

 

And my final hope.... to see tourny lists with more CSMs instead of just tons of PMs... my CSMs have never let me down... well except that battle against air cav... but my demon prince and terminators saved the day so its ok . And I don't even want to imagine PMs agaisnt aircav... thats a lot of str8 and ap 1-2.

[minigun762]

Nice work Ironwind and I think it shows the difference between CSM and PM.

 

In a nutshell, PM have a situational bonus compared to CSM, who are basically the control group for the 4 Cult units.

 

What hurts PMs the most is S7+ (where T5 makes no difference vs T4) and AP2 (where you get no FnP).

 

As for overall killing power, CSMs have more but against the variety of targets your killing power is coming straight from your special weapons or Power Fist, which are the same. Its only against light/medium infantry that the CSMs really pull ahead I think.

 

A funny sidenote: Just to show how the rules are funny sometimes. A unit of Plague Marines is survives better against a LRR's super flamer then a unit of Thousand Sons.

[Legatus]

Another stunning revelation: Shooting it out against 30 guardsmen without further upgrades, Thousand Sons are off much worse than regular Chaos Marines...

 

:)

[the jeske]

1ksons are much better then csm unit [that costs less] only if they shot at something 12" away that doesnt have inv cover or +2 save or squad size bigger then 20 models.

 

 

there is a reason why chaos armies are 2x zerker 2xpms or 2xcsm and 2x pms . as math shows it[am not a math person] pms are not a win them all unit. they really do suffer from eldar or armies like sw [lots of plasma , lots of RL , Jaws to own your i3 guys]. But then again it is a good thing , it would have been much more worse if one of our troops was vastlly superior to other choices.

[IronWinds]

1ksons are much better then csm unit [that costs less] only if they shot at something 12" away that doesnt have inv cover or +2 save or squad size bigger then 20 models.

 

And is relativly expensive. Shooting against guard CSMs will actually do better... more bolters and both ignore saves. Against marines TSons will do better because they ignore saves.

 

As for overall killing power, CSMs have more but against the variety of targets your killing power is coming straight from your special weapons or Power Fist, which are the same. Its only against light/medium infantry that the CSMs really pull ahead I think.

 

I can do a couple tanks if you want... but seeing that most tanks have high str low ap weapons I can tell you who will win. Yes the weapons are situational but with CSMs vs PMs it is the same weapon options. So against a LR for instance the CSMs will fair better, more wounds, same guns, and PMs durability advantages are almost mute.

 

Now one area PMs also shine... plasmaguns, not getting shot by but shooting them. FnP is an extra thing keeping your guy alive so they are better at using plasma than others.

 

there is a reason why chaos armies are 2x zerker 2xpms or 2xcsm and 2x pms . as math shows it[am not a math person] pms are not a win them all unit. they really do suffer from eldar or armies like sw [lots of plasma , lots of RL , Jaws to own your i3 guys]. But then again it is a good thing , it would have been much more worse if one of our troops was vastlly superior to other choices.

 

Well this topic actually has me thinking about converting a unit of IW cyborgs(my PMs) with plasma as objective campers. However the thing that surprised me is how 'few' low ap weapons it takes to offset the advantages PMs have. Just 1 melta for every 10 enemies, plasma being an even smaller number, probably 1/15. It doesn't take very much low ap to mathmatically turn the whole army back into CSMs... just with less attacks.

 

Also makes me feel more confident against plague marines knowing that my meltas and combi meltas even the playing field. I've often wondered if they were enough or if I needed some plasma, but based on this I am feeling pretty good about it.

 

And just for the crap of it... ran flamers. Flamer assuming 5 hits does half as much damage(wounds) as a melta to PMs. So my flamer squads won't be perfect for facing PMs, I'll have to make sure to have my terminators DS nearby for support.

[Massawyrm]

A few points. 1) Melta is suboptimal for PM builds. Running a unit or two for anti-tank purposes is fine, but really, most PM squads should be run with Plasma. You have a 1/36 chance of plamsacide as a PM vs 1/18 as a standard CSM. Try recrunching the numbers when applying a 7man PM squad with 2 Plasmaguns and a Plasma Pistol toting Champ vs a 10man CSM running the same. I think you'll find the numbers over sustain periods like this change substantially.

 

2) These numbers exist in a vacuum and change radically in favor of PMs when cover is factored in. I think you'll find that out in the open against uninhibited AP1/AP2 fire even Terminators don't seem to stack up point for point.

 

3) These numbers also change dramatically when you change the shooters from GEQs to substantially more common MEQs. It takes a 10 man MEQ squad at 12" 5 turns to evaporate a CSM unit with bolter fire. 7 Turns to wipe out PMs. That is of course if the unit doesn't fire back. A single unit of MEQs has a very hard time unsticking PMs unless the dice favor them.

 

4) This assumes that CSMs always make their leadership checks after shooting.

[IronWinds]

1) I reran the final scenario w/ plasma, 7PMs w/ plasma vs 10CSMs w/ plasma. Didn't do the plasma pistols because I would never risk killing my champion like that.

 

Totals: CSMs killed 7PMs, PMs killed 8.03CSMs. CSMs killed all the PMs in 3 turns. Much shorter fight then when both had meltas. PMs killed more than last time and didn't sustain as much damage from their own plasmaguns as the CSMs but it also shows the PMs greatest weakness.... plasma. Now you see why I left plasma out of my scenarios, PMs die really fast to plasma. CSMs wounds to gethot= .66666 PMs wounds to gethot=.33333. Yes plasma is an optimal build for PMs. But I left that out of the scenarios because it is also the optimal build for killing PMs. In tournament play PMs will field more plasma, but so will more of their enemies.

 

2) Correct. Does getting a cover save actually allow you to make a FnP save when you otherwise couldn't(ap2)? I honestly don't know, I've never run into that situation. Because if it does not then the PM is treated exaclty the same as a CSM(who would also get the cover save) when shot by plasma or battlecannons. Yes he will survive better in cover... but no better than a CSM would... in which the CSM squad still has more wounds and we revert right back to the same results. The CSMs will live longer because they have more wounds to soak up the low ap weapons when they fail those cover saves.

 

3) With bolters.... I could run that, it would have very similar results to the 30 guardsmen in shooting. They may last longer or shorter, but in the end the PMs still fair much better because T5 and FnP matter against bolters. However how many tournament players field MEQs with just bolters? It is far more likely any squad of MEQs will have at least one plasmagun or meltagun for shooting and a PF or PW for assault and as the numbers show... thats all it takes to turn the odds against the PMs.

 

4) I could of used CSMs with a mark that made them more powerful and pushed things in their favor, or no mark and used the points on a combi melta/or plasma pushing things in their favor. I did not. I used the points to buy Icon of Chaos Glory, and I have been using IoCG and its father the MoCU for a very long time. My chaos marines do not run unless they are at a VERY large negative leadership modifier and no where in this situation were they in such a situation. I bought IoCG because of this very thing, it insured they would pass any Ld checks they needed to make during the trials balancing them with the PMs being fearless.

 

 

I think you'll find that out in the open against uninhibited AP1/AP2 fire even Terminators don't seem to stack up point for point.

 

Of course they don't. Plasma is designed to kill them, and plasmaguns will earn their points back a lot faster killing Terminators than most other units. Plasma is at its weakest against things that are cheap... like guardsmen. 200pts of CSMs will last a lot longer against plasma than 200pts of terminators will.

Against 3 plasmaguns. 10 CSMs last 3-4 turns(its very close). 5terminators last 2.25 turns. 5 TH/SS terminators will last 5 turns. Which is why I prefer flamers for them but that is another subject.

 

 

EDIT: Ran some quickie numbers. Cover actually does help the PMs a little over extended firefights. They and the CSMs take the same damage vs low ap weapons, but it makes both squads last longer, and that means they also take more hits from the low str high ap weapons that hurt the CSMs more. So if they get hit by a battlecannon the PMs do worse than the CSMs... more pts per guy lost. But if they were getting shot by a bunch of guard with a couple melta or plasmaguns and mostly lasguns the PMs would fair slightly better because both squads will live longer thanks to cover and the PMs will do better against the attacks that they don't need cover saves against. I'll run the numbers exactly another time, I'm sleepy. But again... only helps in a few cases, your long range weapons you traditionaly want a cover save against are still going to hurt the PMs more.

[Ashe Darke]

2) They don't get FNP in cover so AP1 and 2 weapons make them the same as normal CSM, just to fill in the blank.

 

My Raider Rush build has more flamers than meltas, although that is very hard to math hammer due to the number of people you can fit under the template. This is just the same as having more bolters though.

[minigun762]

I'm honestly surprised that more people don't mix CSM into their Cult armies more.

 

Instead of 2x2 Berzerkers/Plague Marines what about 1x2x1 Berzerker/CSM/Plague Marine. In this way the CSMs help support the specialists where they need to.

[infyrana]

minigun, some like playing pure DG / PM's for the fluff, that's where I plan to be once my army is built. I may build a squad of each CSM's and Zerkers' for fun, but from a fluff stand point - I can't see a group of CSM's sat on the Terminus Est without succombing to the flies of Typhus or the other various forms of Nurgle's decay ;)

 

IronWinds : are you planning to create a summary with all your maths hammering going on ? I would be extremely interested in seeing a chart to detail anything like PM's with dual Melta or Flamer or Plasma, versus XYZ weaponry or squads, whether standing, in CC or in cover. A heck of a chart it would be, but you'd get a greater understanding by seeing what tactical situations a certain unit work well in, and finding what other units work better where they don't.

 

Great stuff though, keep it going :)

[Drudge Dreadnought]

I'm honestly surprised that more people don't mix CSM into their Cult armies more.

 

Instead of 2x2 Berzerkers/Plague Marines what about 1x2x1 Berzerker/CSM/Plague Marine. In this way the CSMs help support the specialists where they need to.

 

Its because of the things not taken into account in this comparison. Fearless, no risk of losing the icon, and blight grenades. Also room to fit an IC inside a rhino with them.

[minigun762]

I'm honestly surprised that more people don't mix CSM into their Cult armies more.

 

Instead of 2x2 Berzerkers/Plague Marines what about 1x2x1 Berzerker/CSM/Plague Marine. In this way the CSMs help support the specialists where they need to.

 

Its because of the things not taken into account in this comparison. Fearless, no risk of losing the icon, and blight grenades. Also room to fit an IC inside a rhino with them.

 

True but you can work around most all of those.

Fearless and LD10 + IoCG is equivalent in my book

Icon is a risk but with only 10 points its not a huge one

Blight Grenades are awesome but then against so is I4 and 3 more bodies.

 

Just saying that on paper, a 1:2:1 combo seems to give you the most coverage

Berzerkers for pure anti-infantry

CSMs go with 2x Melta/Fists for anti-tank/MC

PM go with 2x Plasma for objective camping

[Ashe Darke]

Fearless and Ld10 + IoCG might be the approximately the same for certain things but against certain psychic stuff it isn't. The Divine Pronouncement + Weaken Resolve combo won't work on PMs. Some of the new Nid psychic stuff they're immune to. I know these are niche things but not having your guys run away is never good.

[Dan The Deamon]

I run 8 Zerks, 7 plagues, and two 10 man glory squads in every game i play. I play all comers lists and find the flexibility of the tac squads much nicer than 2 zerk 2 plague. I don't really run a cult army...but then again not many people who run 2/2 do either.

 

I've been temped to expand my plague (counts as) to ten men and use them as normal CSM's from reading this. I normally play 2 plas 1 fist in a 7 man squad and their job is to stay midfield and get the 12" rapid fire while my DP, and Tac squads keep them out of combat. I like the FNP with plasmas though. I could probably get more wounds and bolters from a CSM squad but then the plasma guns have an increased chance of failing their own saves, and i need them in the fight.

[DemetriiTZ]

As many people may have noticed, MathHammer simply generates numbers in a vacuum -- The whole point of the game is knowing the odds well enough to know which situations to avoid, and which situations to aim for. The odds of being caught in the open as a Plague Marine squad and mowed down by anti-tank weapons is very low, as is charging into a 30 man Guard squad with 8 million powerfists and meltas -- no one in their right mind would kit out Guardsmen with close combat weapons -- It's like giving a power sword to a Tau commander. The reason why Plague Marines shine is simple: There are less anti-tank weapons in an army than there are standard rank and file weapons, and we are more durable than Terminators when it comes to the rank and file guns. For the guns we're not as durable against, we avoid 'em, or we hide in cover, or we lock in combat. This study doesn't take into account the fact that multiple Plague Marine squads, running around in Rhinos, flanked by Daemon Princes and Obliterators, all playing Hell with a foe's target priority, all contribute to overall army durability in a way which pulls ahead of CSM in a big way. Feel No Pain, negation of charge bonuses, and T5 also drastically reduce the impact of charging enemies, reduce swings from powerfists, and ensure most power weapons wound on 5's or 6's. Plague Marines do not demolish -- they survive, while dealing good damage to a wide variety of enemies. Sure, a 10 man CSM squad can fight through a pile of Guardsmen sliiiiightly faster, but that doesn't really mean anything at all -- we're not playing Combat Patrol anymore. We're playing 40k, where armies are composed of supporting elements, and CSM squads and PM squads do different jobs.

 

You can't compare apples to socket wrenches, and you can't prove one squad is better than another by using Rock'em Sock'em robots as an example: People don't sit around in the open shooting each other. There's actually a Movement phase in this game that can't really be number-crunched.

 

The only use I see for this set of numbers is proving that Plague Marines don't like lascannons to the face, but don't mind bolter shells. I'm pretty sure we already knew that, though. :lol:

[Ashe Darke]

You can't compare apples to socket wrenches, and you can't prove one squad is better than another by using Rock'em Sock'em robots as an example: People don't sit around in the open shooting each other. There's actually a Movement phase in this game that can't really be number-crunched.

This is why I only number crunch combat, range, cover and all other factors that effect shooting aren't involved.

[minigun762]

As many people may have noticed, MathHammer simply generates numbers in a vacuum -- The whole point of the game is knowing the odds well enough to know which situations to avoid, and which situations to aim for. The only use I see for this set of numbers is proving that Plague Marines don't like lascannons to the face, but don't mind bolter shells. I'm pretty sure we already knew that, though. :(

 

I think most people will agree with what you're saying but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't do this kind of math.

The information itself is neither good nor bad, just like anything else its what you do with it.

 

Sometimes interesting tidbits of information come out in these exercises. I still like knowing that against Marines, 3 Flamers hits = 1 Plasma shot for example.

Other times it just reinforces what we already know, as might be the case with Plague Marines.

 

And sometimes we're just bored at work and instead of working on our projects, we calculate the odds of various match ups and post it here. :)

[IronWinds]

As many people may have noticed, MathHammer simply generates numbers in a vacuum -- The whole point of the game is knowing the odds well enough to know which situations to avoid, and which situations to aim for. The odds of being caught in the open as a Plague Marine squad and mowed down by anti-tank weapons is very low

 

What does mathhammer give us? Odds... what do we do with them? Use them to know what situations to avoid and take advantage of. How do you know which situations to avoid and to aim for? With the odds, well mathhammer gives you those odds. Knowing the odds before you charge something is normally a good idea IMO. There are 2 ways to get those odds. Simulate it on the table 1000 times, or run the numbers. In 3.5 did you know obliterators were better off firing their autocannons at enemy tanks(any armor below 14) using smoke than their lascannons... I didn't, till mathhammer showed me. Did you know that flamers are better against TH/SS terminators than plasma as long as you hit at least 4-5 guys, and thats not considering plasma kills your own guys? I didn't, till mathhammer showed me. Do you know how many meltas it takes to reliably kill a Land Raider? Answer would be helpful in a lot of battles. Did you know a plasmagun is as likely to kill the marine holding it than the rhino your shooting? Yup. It is in a vaccum, but you are using it to answer questions about things that actually happen on the battlefield.

 

30 man Guard squad with 8 million powerfists and meltas -- no one in their right mind would kit out Guardsmen with close combat weapons

 

Guard were just the control group... would you rather they fight a standard kit CSM squad with a PF. I did that scenario, the PMs lost. And in my experience any guard squad is going to have at least either a missile launcher, lascannon, plasmagun, melta, or 2 of the 4. Saying you'll never go up against anti tank fire when fighting guard is laughable. Most guard vet squads I see in air cav armies have either 3 plasma or 3 meltas. PMs are not going to stand up to that. And those tend to drop down nearby and pump shots into you at point blank, there is no cover.

 

Plague Marines shine is simple: There are less anti-tank weapons in an army than there are standard rank and file weapons, and we are more durable than Terminators when it comes to the rank and file guns.

 

Yup, there are more rank and file guns. What the study shows is that it only takes 1/10 of you enemies having a special weapon to make up for the differences in plague marines being more resilent but also more costly. No one said the guard would have 8 million meltaguns. Out of 30 guard 3 had meltaguns. Normally 30 guard will have 3 lascannons/missiles and 3 special weapons, or they are in a transport with more specials. That is not including the weapons on tanks. Looking at the air cav I fought recently there are 42 lasguns, 1 prymaris psyker, 3 hot shot lasguns/laspistols, 2 plasma, 18 meltas, 9 TL lascannons, 3 lascannons, 2 rocket pods, 8 big template str 8 missiles(each can only fire once so we will say 4). So lasguns+psyker+hotshot+rocket pods= 48, everything else = 36. Thats 4/3. And we said all an army needed to neutralize PMs and make them basically the same as CSMs was 10/1. Air cav is not a Death Guard armie's friend. Now air cav is an extreme, but I'll bet money if you look at your average guard army, even infantry heavy there are a lot of anti-tank weapons. In tournaments it will only get worse. Even marine armies will have a plasma or melta or PF in every squad. If they don't its a flamer, missile launcher, and a PW. Still more than 1/10.

 

This study doesn't take into account the fact that multiple Plague Marine squads, running around in Rhinos, flanked by Daemon Princes and Obliterators, all playing Hell with a foe's target priority, all contribute to overall army durability in a way which pulls ahead of CSM in a big way.

 

This study was also comparing them with CSMs who would also be in rhinos, flanked by demon princes and obliterators, etc. CSMs and PMs find themselves in the same situations 90% of the time, and are used very similar. The only thing PMs find themselves doing more than CSMs is objective camping... where they are even more likely to get hit with anti-tank weapons. They also get used more for tying units up. They do different things, which is why I fully support a mix of the two, but many armies are all CSMs or all PMs and in those cases they will be doing the same things because there is nothing else to do the other jobs. Ex. CSMs will be tying up units, PMs will be tank hunting.

 

People don't sit around in the open shooting each other. There's actually a Movement phase in this game that can't really be number-crunched.

 

I could of had them move, fire some, get into hth. Actually that would have been a whole lot easier. But if I did that there would be no way of knowing what turned a battle in either's favor, the hth, or the shooting. so each was done seperate.

 

 

DemetriiTZ: I'm sorry if you thought this was an attack on PMs. I thought I was pretty clear that it was not. I also made it pretty clear that mathhammer is not perfect. All it does is give us a better understanding of the 'odds.' This particular exercise was to see if PMs lack of offense and higher cost had a great negative effect on their durability compared to CSMs. Since the two units are used fairly similar I thought it was a good question to ask and worth looking into. Obviously comparing bezerkers and PMs in close combat would be pointless, we know the outcome. But this was a question where we were not 100% sure on the outcome, at least I wasn't, and I was surprised by how little high str low ap weapons it took to negate a PMs extra durability. Sure they could be in cover, sure they could be in a rhino, sure they could X... but 90% of the time a CSM squad would also be in a rhino, in cover, doing X. CSMs and PMs often do the exact same things, I do see them as two different types of apples because they accomplish a lot of the same goals but in slightly different ways. The key differences are that the PMs have more defense and less offense and I don't think it is a bad thing to know 'exactly' how much less offense and how much more defense they have and how different weapons and situations effect those differences ;) .

 

Redoing the guard with meltas. Both CSMs and PMs are in cover, guard are not. Hope you enjoy. I'll do more requests later, busy day in the morning.

 

CSMs totals. Killed 20.307 guardsmen. Lost 7.9513 Marines. Killed 152.3pts, lost 174.92pts. .8706/1.

 

PMs totals. Killed 14.655 guardsmen. Lost 4.9819 PMs. Killed 109.91pts. Lost 157.28ots. Ratio .6988/1.

 

PMs killed less, and lost less, but they didn't kill anywhere near what they lost while CSMs were close. I'm giving this one to the CSMs. Even with cover, 1/10 enemies having special weapons the PMs loose their advantages. Now if I continued this out the PMs might have made it a turn longer than the CSMs, but it would be extremely close... fractions of marines.

[Ashe Darke]

What does mathhammer give us? Odds... what do we do with them? Use them to know what situations to avoid and take advantage of. How do you know which situations to avoid and to aim for? With the odds, well mathhammer gives you those odds. Knowing the odds before you charge something is normally a good idea IMO. There are 2 ways to get those odds. Simulate it on the table 1000 times, or run the numbers. In 3.5 did you know obliterators were better off firing their autocannons at enemy tanks(any armor below 14) using smoke than their lascannons... I didn't, till mathhammer showed me. Did you know that flamers are better against TH/SS terminators than plasma as long as you hit at least 4-5 guys, and thats not considering plasma kills your own guys? I didn't, till mathhammer showed me. Do you know how many meltas it takes to reliably kill a Land Raider? Answer would be helpful in a lot of battles. Did you know a plasmagun is as likely to kill the marine holding it than the rhino your shooting? Yup. It is in a vaccum, but you are using it to answer questions about things that actually happen on the battlefield.

In those situations there aren't many factors to consider so those are easy to do. But to compare two units in gaming terms is far more complex than that and invites more factors than I'd like to think about if I'm going to have to quantify them.

 

I agree that math hammering is good, but only to a certain extent and when there are not many things to factor in. When it becomes more complex, that's when you're best off running with experience.

[Capt. Lysander]

I enjoy reading these topics, especially because the person who posted them was/is very well researched ;)

 

This clears things for me, thanks.

[minigun762]

I enjoy reading these topics, especially because the person who posted them was/is very well researched ;)

 

This clears things for me, thanks.

 

Who let the followers of the Corpse god in there?

[IronWinds]

I enjoy reading these topics, especially because the person who posted them was/is very well researched

 

Thanks. Its good to know people appreciate the hard work :tu: .

[snapplekid50]

I enjoy reading these topics, especially because the person who posted them was/is very well researched :)

 

This clears things for me, thanks.

 

Who let the followers of the Corpse god in there?

lol!!!

Well i for one love math hammer, it lets me quantify the prob of what will happen, which lets me make better decisions, but hey thats just me

 

anyways love the analysis

[infyrana]

Indeed, the maths-hammer stuff is great for what it tries to achieve and how you can make most use of it.

 

Personally I do like a little bit of summarising, a collation of all the findings in easy to read format. Walls of text and sums are great for the prep work and the whole story, but searching each and every thread through all of the hard work that people go through (well done and thanks IronWinds!), can be a chore to find a single answer;

 

For example, are 7x man PM squads with dual plasma's and PF cost effect versus CSM 10x man with plasma/fist etc when objective holding versus an average IG army... or versus Plasma heavy SM army, or if your opponent is flamer heavy, or melta heavy .. etc. (yes, lots and lots of number crunching I know, much is already answered above I believe :) ).

 

Great stuff though, I am finding it an interesting read. I'm sticking to my PM's for a pure Nurgle / DG army list, but it's great to find out where my PM's should and shouldn't be in any given list of combat scenarios depending on how heavily or variably armed my opponents are.

[DemetriiTZ]

I'm just having a hard time seeing why a few more bodies will be much help if you're caught in a situation where you A ) have no cover save and are nailed with a squad's anti-tank weapons, or B ) have a cover save, and are nailed with a squad's anti-tank weapons. Either way, if you're stranded like that, an extra body or two is probably not going to help much -- chances are, a good fraction of an army's firepower is about to be leveled on you.

 

I can tell a lot of work went into the numbers -- I hope someone does find it useful. I appreciate the hard work, and didn't think it was an 'attack' on Plague Marines.. It's just old news to me.