When to use what Sternguard ammo?

[thade]

When do you use something other than Hellfire rounds on a target? 30" AP4 is a nobrainer if something is over 24" away and you want to take pot-shots at them, sure. But a six or seven man squad vs a unit of (what-have-you), how do you decide, on the spot, whether to go with AP3 or Negates Cover over wounding on 2+?

 

My gut-instinct would be to always default towards save-removal, but the sheer volume of wounds that could be inflicted wounding on 2+ *regardless of toughness* is pretty appealing. So I guess right now my thoughts are...

 

If it's Sv 5 out of cover (Orks, DE), Hellfire (Wounds on 2+).

If it's Sv 5, in cover, Dragonfire (AP5, no cover).

If it's Sv 4, in or out of cover (IG), Kraken (AP4).

If it's Sv 3 (MEQ), Vengeance (AP3); I have the benefit of being a BA codex-user and I have Sanguinary priests nearby.

 

I suppose that, while there may be no significant difference between wounding on 2+ and allowing a 3+ armor save (volume of shots/expected unsaved wounds) versus wounding on 4+ and allowing no armor save, the fact that you might get really lucky on that to-wound roll and wipe the marine unit is pretty awesome. Though if the marines are in cover, well...should I even worry about that? Probably AP3 and forcing them to take the slightly suckier save is better than wounding on 2+, but...

 

Yea, I'm not sure; hence I'm here. Volume of possible wounds vs. smaller volume of unsaveable wounds. Anybody ever do the math on this? I would but I don't have time tonight =( and Ardboyz is in a few days.

[Koremu]

Actually, against Sv 4+ targets in cover (IG, Fire Warriors, Aspect Warriors) you are better off wounding on a 2+ as they have a 4+ Sv regardless.

 

Essentially, the rule of thumb with Sternguard is "If you can get rid of ALL the enemies saves, do so. Otherwise, wound on a 2+"

 

The exception is T6+, where you should always use Hellfire.

[thade]

A rule of thumb was precisely what I was looking for. Thank you, Koremu. =)

[Giga]

I use standard hellfire ammo most of the time, really. Forcing a ton of saves on monstrous creatures (especially fun when you've got null zone running and you're shooting nightbringer, or generic greater daemons) or on MEQ is the way to go.

 

The AP4 ammo is limited in its use due to cover saves, but if you ever get a chance to shoot a unit of carapace armor veterans/eldar aspect warriors/tau that is standing out of cover for some reason, then the AP4 ammo is the way to go as it hits on 3+, wounds on 3+, and denies them saves.

 

The cover-ignoring ammo is good if you're shooting things with T3 and 5+ (or worse) save. Guardsmen, dark eldar, non-upgraded banshees, guardians, etc. It's also great if there's a small unit of genestealers or ork boyz (like, 4-6 of them) in cover nearby, and you really want to prevent them from busting your crap up.

 

The AP3 rounds I don't think I've ever used in my life. They seem designed for those all-or-nothing situations when you absolutely need to wipe out that MEQ that's guarding an objective.

[bystrom]

Sternguard statistical analysis :P

[Brother Captain Josef]

Actually, against Sv 4+ targets in cover (IG, Fire Warriors, Aspect Warriors) you are better off wounding on a 2+ as they have a 4+ Sv regardless.

 

Essentially, the rule of thumb with Sternguard is "If you can get rid of ALL the enemies saves, do so. Otherwise, wound on a 2+"

 

The exception is T6+, where you should always use Hellfire.

 

This. I used Sternguard in my epic 'math hammer masterclass' and came to this conclusion.

[JamesI]

In my experience of facing sternguard, I lose more marines to 2+ to wound shots than to the 4+ to wound, no armor shots, and that's even if I don't have cover.

 

Not a math hammer answer really.

[Koremu]

In my experience of facing sternguard, I lose more marines to 2+ to wound shots than to the 4+ to wound, no armor shots, and that's even if I don't have cover.

 

Not a math hammer answer really.

The AP3 shots will always kill more MEQ. There's just a possibility that it'll be your Sternguard among them.

 

Where the AP3 shots really are worth it is vs those Aspect Warriors that do have 3+ Sv. There, the 2+ isn't worth much over the 3+ you get anywhere.

[thade]

How about Plague Marines? My gut says 2+/volume of wounds, but they get two saves effectively (Armor/FnP). The AP3 won't deny FnP, but would give them only FnP (still a not-too-shabby 4+ save)...but wounding on 5s = less saves.

[Koremu]

How about Plague Marines? My gut says 2+/volume of wounds, but they get two saves effectively (Armor/FnP). The AP3 won't deny FnP, but would give them only FnP (still a not-too-shabby 4+ save)...but wounding on 5s = less saves.

The AP3 rounds are marginally better than the 2+ to wound.

 

AP3 = 1/6th chance of kill (6/36ths)

 

2+ = 5/36ths

 

But as you can see, neither is particularly good, and the AP3 ones will lose you Sternguard.

[thade]

So, back the sternguard away from the terrible melee-tarpit that is a plague marine unit...and use my tac squads and devs to mess them up I guess. =( Considering how good a solution Sternguard are to other things, I shouldnt' be sad that the most durable infantry in the game is still a problem.

[Koremu]

The best way to mess up Plague Marines is Lightning Claws (or those funky BA swords). Rerolls to wound with Power Weapons = not very nice for PMs to face.

[thade]

The best way to mess up Plague Marines is Lightning Claws (or those funky BA swords). Rerolls to wound with Power Weapons = not very nice for PMs to face.

 

My funky-BA swords...I think you mean Glaive Encarmine? They are re-roll to hit (master-crafted power weapons). Not bad, but not as nasty as LCs. I do have Lit Claws. I don't foresee a plague marine army this weekend, but they're a hefty benchmark that I hadn't considered for Sternguard.

 

I presume Hellfire ammo that "wounds on 2+" is Str 0 vs vehicles/armor, yes? Another thing best left to other squads (or the combi-meltas my sternguard will have a few of).

[Frosty the Pyro]

here is mathhamer for you

 

 

 

hellfire multiplyer comparisons for helfire in form of Toughness/multiplier

 

2/1

3/1.25

4/1.666

5/2.5

6/5

 

for negating a save in form of sv/multiplier

6+/1.2

5+/1.5

4+/2

3+/3

2+/6

 

For reducing a save to 6+

5+/1.25

4+/1.667

3+/2.5

2+/5

 

For reducing a save to 5+

4+/1.33

3+/2

2+/4

 

For reducing a save to 4+

3+/1.5

2+/3

 

For reducing save from a 2+ to a 3+ the multiplier is 2

 

 

So if the multipier for helfire against the target is higher than the multiplier for what ever save you are negating/reducing then use helfire, if not then attempt to negate/reduce the save.

 

so against plauge marines, negating the 3+ save will be better than wounding on a 2+ (save negation of a 3+ sv has a multiplier of 3 and helfire vs T5 has a multiplier of 2.5, however if they are in cover you would only have a save redction (3+ --> 4+) with a multiplier of 1.5 which is less than helfire, so use the helfire)

[Mustalid]

When in doubt use hellfire