Why is 2 of the same tank better?

[Vanor]

Brothers, I'm looking for some details into why behind our tactical doctrine regarding tanks.

 

I have a 1500 point list that has a Vindi in it. For 1750 points I'm thinking of adding another tank, and have the points to either add another Vindi or else a combi-pred.

 

I know the conventional wisdom here seems to be that 2 Vindi's are actually 3 to 4 times more effective instead of simply twice. I know part of that is with two of them the other guy is going to have to either divide his fire between them or else focus everything on the one. I'm guessing the same goes true for Preds as well.

 

But what I don't quite get is how this is any different then having a Vindi and a combi-pred.

 

Both are to a point the same thing. Both can used for either anti-tank or anti-infantry fire. Both are major threats to transports, walkers and infantry. Both could take out other tanks...

 

So why is two Vindi or two preds a better choice then one of each?

[Koremu]

Lanchester's Square Law

[gettothegone]

Situational Target Selection

 

 

I have a Typhoon speeder. I outrange your vindicator, but your predator causes me grief because your predator is longer range. Your predator is my target because your vindicator offers me 0 threat. Bring 2 Predators, and I have to commit to one, or the other, or the odds now favor you because I need to dedicate more firepower to deal with the same unit twice.

 

I have a deep striking squad of assault marines. *I would never do this but lets say I do for giggles*. Your vindicator scares me because a well placed hit with a template will turn them into sludge. Your predator at best will cause a couple of wounds, but I'm at least allowed saves. Your vindicator is higher threat then your Predator. Again, you stack the odds in your favor.

 

I have a Land Raider, and you have a Dakka Pred / Vindicator. Your dakka predator offers no threat, and your vindicator is the only thing that can crack open the AV14. Your Vindicator has higher threat. Again, stacking the odds in your favor.

 

When you start to double up, you offer larger threats by way of redundancy and target selection. But since you can only bring a max of 3 I wouldn't use this as the ultimate example.

 

The ultimate example would be razorback / speeder spam.

 

Its not hard to kill because of what they are.

 

Its hard to kill because there's no central unit to kill, and killing 1 or 2 is not going to change what happens your next round.

 

Lanchester's Square Law

 

 

Haha cause nothing says "here's an answer" like differential equations.

[Justicar Valius]

Combi pred is taken out by the long range AT (possibly before it gets to fire) and then the vindi has a shorter range and then you focus on the vindicator with the melta. 2 vindis take out most of the melta units near you and then go about their buisness.

 

And yeh Lanchester's square law too. 2 GKLRC compared to a GKLRC and a GKLR is Amazing in my experience. You can eliminate the threats easily.

[thade]

Lanchester's Square Law

 

Haha cause nothing says "here's an answer" like differential equations.

 

It does have some application, but it's a bit inaccurate in this case, as it states "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." < Which is precisely what a Vindicator does, which means the forces ratio is skewed depending on what your opponent is fielding (worst case for this function, a non-mechanized ground-pounding/infantry only army). Ironically what is the worst case for Lanchester's work here is the best case for you :lol: but I digress.

 

There are other issues as well (as you are not only fielding vindicators, as simpler applications of the law are geared for very similar units). If you really want to learn about Lancheter's Square Law, there's a lot of literature out there. JSTOR has a lot of academic papers on it which you can get samples of if not entire papers, but you may need to be affiliated with a university to get to them. I'm on my uni network right now so I can't tell if this paper would force a log in or not.

 

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2538919?seq=1

 

"A Common Misapplication of the Lanchester Square Law" by Homer-Dixon

 

The misapplication he's referring to doesn't apply here, however in his explaining said misapplication he explained the general theory pretty clearly.

 

This is purely academic, of course. It's application to the table top probably has less to do with the psychological impact your having two Vindis on the table has on your opponent. Literal fear factor. With one, resolving this fear is easy. Focus fire. With two, well...which one is more immediately dangerous? They are both dangerous, but which one first? Split fire and hope to get lucky? Never under-estimate psychology on a table top. <3

[Frosty the Pyro]

if you have hypothetical tank "A" which will fire a shot every turn

 

The enemy has enouph anti tank to reliably knock one down every turn

so if you have one Tank A, it will fire one turn and then be wrecked.

 

If you have two, they will both fire both turn, one will be killed, then the remaining tank a will shoot and get wrecked. This gives you 3x the firepower for only 2x the cost. if you had three tanks you would get 6x the firepower at only 3x the cost. This assumes of course that you never harm his anti tank and he doesnt bring enouph AT (or gets lucky enouph with what he has) to whipe all your tanks at once.

[Koremu]

Remember that there's not just an alive/dead digital state in play here. If there are two Vindicators, and the enemy fires on one and inflicts a Shaken/Stunned result, is it better to commence fire at the other Vindicator, or to fire at the second (even if it is less threatening)?

[Jackelope King]

Other folks got to the point sooner.

 

Redundancy is King. Shoving a ton of threats down your opponent's throat is how you make the other guy lose. Help him along by confusing his target priority to boot.

[Wildfire]

Situational Target Selection

 

 

I have a Typhoon speeder. I outrange your vindicator, but your predator causes me grief because your predator is longer range. Your predator is my target because your vindicator offers me 0 threat. Bring 2 Predators, and I have to commit to one, or the other, or the odds now favor you because I need to dedicate more firepower to deal with the same unit twice.

 

I have a deep striking squad of assault marines. *I would never do this but lets say I do for giggles*. Your vindicator scares me because a well placed hit with a template will turn them into sludge. Your predator at best will cause a couple of wounds, but I'm at least allowed saves. Your vindicator is higher threat then your Predator. Again, you stack the odds in your favor.

 

I have a Land Raider, and you have a Dakka Pred / Vindicator. Your dakka predator offers no threat, and your vindicator is the only thing that can crack open the AV14. Your Vindicator has higher threat. Again, stacking the odds in your favor.

 

Exactly.

[Vanor]

Situational Target Selection

 

Thank you, this is exactly what I was wondering... You and brother Valius, gave me a great case for the why 2 of the same is better then 1 of each, and I see what you mean.

 

Having both with the same targeting targeting parameters is what makes the difference. One Vindi + one Pred means one of those two can be viewed as the larger threat over all. Two Vindi means both are roughly equal in threat value and that becomes a harder decision to make.

 

Haha cause nothing says "here's an answer" like differential equations.

 

I've read that and more or less get the point. But I didn't think it really applied in this case.

 

Again thanks to everyone for the answers it helped make my choice... That and last night having my first chance to actually play with a Vindi I saw just how effective it is when I took out a whole squad with one pie plate. :

[gettothegone]

That and last night having my first chance to actually play with a Vindi I saw just how effective it is when I took out a whole squad with one pie plate. :

 

 

I've taken 3 in a single game. They cause large amounts of grief, but faster armies tend to take them apart in short order :P

 

On the otherhand, if you play someone who's walking his army across the table. Enjoy your kill count :)

[Velkairiwyth]

Benefits I can see:

 

1) Enemy had less focused fire.

2) Better area denial (One vindi = an area he has to be careful to avoid, until its taken care of - or if his army is manouverable he can simply ignore it. Two or three = larget area denial - he has to deal with at least one to allow him to move freely.)

3) Redundancy (If one goes down, you still have the other - also if they both have the same target - its gonna die - unless its a MC, cos MC's suck! :( )

4) More deployment options. (Also supports area denial. When you have one vindi you focus down a flank or down the middle. If you go on a flank, he has the rest of the board to play with and can ignore you. If you go middle - your flanks are exposed to range shots. With two vindies you only leave a flank or the middle open - and can pincer if he spearheads down the middle.)

 

Umm... thats about all I can think of for now.

 

Disadvantages: Less variety. A Pred is going to have more success at taking that group of enemies out thats spread out to limit template effects, it can inflict more wounds per turn against multi-wound targets (e.g I wouldnt fear a vindi with Calgar, in fact I would position him to taunt the shot because of Eternal Warrior = 1 wound max per turn - but that predator - 2s7 and 6s5 shots, thats potentially 8 armour saves... )

 

Two predators seem to work well... Ive taken to using two combi predators (thats Autocannon and las-sponsons for 120 points each) - 4 shots that wound whatever they hit relatively easily - and is also a threat against any armour. Ive effectively had two of them pick off a Trygon with just the killing blow needed from another unit whereas a vindi would need to get within 24 and then could only do 1W each...

 

I guess it all comesdown to your army makeup and what you like. If you dont like predators (sometimes I love one or the other, other times i hate one or the other :P)

 

My 2c B)

[Vanor]

sometimes I love one or the other, other times i hate one or the other ;))

 

This isn't a Pred vs Vindi thing, I like both, it's just that I already have a vindi. :tu:

[Koremu]

Again thanks to everyone for the answers it helped make my choice... That and last night having my first chance to actually play with a Vindi I saw just how effective it is when I took out a whole squad with one pie plate. :

Vindicators aren't that effective if you are in Cover. If you get hit by a pie plate, go to ground for a 3++ save anyway (haha nuts to your AP2), then fail the resulting break test (you'll probably lose 3 to a pie plate), reform in your turn and go plant Krak Grenades all over the Vindicator.

[GuruD]

if you have hypothetical tank "A" which will fire a shot every turn

 

The enemy has enouph anti tank to reliably knock one down every turn

so if you have one Tank A, it will fire one turn and then be wrecked.

 

If you have two, they will both fire both turn, one will be killed, then the remaining tank a will shoot and get wrecked. This gives you 3x the firepower for only 2x the cost. if you had three tanks you would get 6x the firepower at only 3x the cost. This assumes of course that you never harm his anti tank and he doesnt bring enouph AT (or gets lucky enouph with what he has) to whipe all your tanks at once.

 

This might be overly simple but I wholeheartedly agree.