Rhino v. Psyback

[jhrovii]

They will also destroy those enemy Rhinos or Razors very efficiently.

No, they won't. I already showed above that Twin-linked Heavy Bolters with Psybolt Ammunition are half as effective as 2 Psycannons on the move against Rhino chassis. Actually the Psyfleman is the best common unit for popping Rhinos (better than 16 psycannon shots). So if by "very efficiently" you mean "less efficient than nearly every other weapon option" you'd be correct.

 

Psybacks can aid psycannons, but I wonder if they can be a hindrance or waste as well.

 

Additionally, although I cannot recall the exact thread here in our now busy busy forum, it was shown that Psybolts is pretty much Always a better option in terms of damage output than 1 additional body. This needs to be weighed against survivability and transport capacity of course, but the shooting of a 5 man squad with Psybolts does more damage than the shooting of a 6 man squad.

I don't know what you're talking about here. Psybolts on what, against whom?

[Inquisitor Fox]

Additionally, although I cannot recall the exact thread here in our now busy busy forum, it was shown that Psybolts is pretty much Always a better option in terms of damage output than 1 additional body. This needs to be weighed against survivability and transport capacity of course, but the shooting of a 5 man squad with Psybolts does more damage than the shooting of a 6 man squad.

I don't know what you're talking about here. Psybolts on what, against whom?

It was in reference to this comment:

 

... remember 10 man units are the only units that should have psybolt ammo and that is a very good upgrade ...

 

Aha! Found the thread, one by Gentlemanloser! I refer you to post #11 by Calvinus where he demonstrates psybolt ammunition on a Grey Knight with stormbolter is pretty much always better for the squad than an additional Grey Knight.

 

Psybolt Ammunition - worth it's weight in gold!

 

This shows fairly conclusively, IMO, that psybolt ammunition should pretty much always be considered for every squad. If you're asking yourself whether to up the squad size by 1 or add psybolts, always go with the psybolts. This also shows that a 6 man squad with psybolts in a Razorback is probably comprable to a 9 or 10 man squad in a Rhino! If we know that a 6 man squad with psybolts shoots as well as a 8 man squad against MEQ (assuming all stormbolters), as evidenced by Calvinus's work, then the question to ask ourselves is does a twin-linked razorback contribute as much to shooting as 2 extra Grey Knights and a Rhino's stormbolter? The Razorback w/ psybolts costs as much as 2 GKSS members, and I'm pretty sure a twin-linked heavy bolter w/ psybolts is superior to two stormbolters.

 

This fundamentally changes the argument.

 

EDIT: I'm at work and have a lot to do, but I'm now very very curious as to the comparison between the following four options in shooting effectiveness:

 

Unit A - 6 GKSS, 1 psycannon, psybolt ammunition in Razorback w/ psybolt ammunition (200 points)

 

Unit B - 6 GKSS, 1 psycannon, psybolt ammunition in Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, storm bolter, psybolt ammunition (245 points)

 

Unit C - 10 GKSS, 2 psycannons in Rhino w/ default stormbolter (260 points)

 

Unit D - 10 GKSS, 2 psycannons, psybolt ammunition in Rhino w/ default stormbolter (280 points)

[breng77]

This shows fairly conclusively, IMO, that psybolt ammunition should pretty much always be considered for every squad. If you're asking yourself whether to up the squad size by 1 or add psybolts, always go with the psybolts

 

The exceptions here are

1.) The squad is worse in close combat

2.) The squad is less survivable.

3.) The is not true in the case where you only have 3 storm bolters to upgrade. So as soon as you lose one squad member (in a 5 man squad) you lose any advantage gained by the Psybolts.

4.) Is it better to have psybolts on 4 squads or 5 squads? (you gain an extra justicar and an extra psycannon.)

 

This comparison only states that for shooting Psybolts are more effective than an additional member of the squad. Assuming all storm bolters is kind of pointless as in general you are going to take a psycannon.

 

As for the razorback if you are already taking a Rhino it costs 10 additional points not 40, so comparing it to 2 strikes is a false comparison. It would only matter if you were looking at a 10 man squad in a Rhino Vs 2 x 5 guys in RBs

 

10 man with 2 psycannons, hammer in RHino runs you 270

 

5 man squad Psycannon, Hammer in RB = 170 x 2 = 340

[Inquisitor Fox]

This comparison only states that for shooting Psybolts are more effective than an additional member of the squad. Assuming all storm bolters is kind of pointless as in general you are going to take a psycannon.

Not necessarily... when comparing anything besides a full 10 man squad you have the same number of Psycannons on a Strike Squad so that cancels out. This is also why I wanted to look at the four different comparisons, as the one I'm most curious about is this one:

 

Unit B - 6 GKSS, 1 psycannon, psybolt ammunition in Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, storm bolter, psybolt ammunition (245 points)

 

Unit C - 10 GKSS, 2 psycannons in Rhino w/ default stormbolter (260 points)

 

Those are both relatively common units that folks preach about (well, the Razorback squad is what I would do if I were trying to run a more elite MSU based army, Unit A is the cheap version), and I'm curious as to how they really stack up to each other.

 

Unit A - 6 GKSS, 1 psycannon, psybolt ammunition in Razorback w/ psybolt ammunition (200 points)

 

This one seems to be a pretty standard MSU configuration, and being 60 points cheaper than the 10 man in a Rhino.. well how does the Razorback really add to the shooting capabilities? Does it contribute enough to make up for the 60 points? Will the world ever know (before I get home from work and have the time to crunch numbers) ?

 

EDIT: naturally the numbers change if you're talking Purifiers as the extra psycannons make a large difference for them... but if we're just comparing regular GKSS 6 versus 8 doesn't change a lot. It's still apples to apples to look at just stormbolters.

[breng77]

I'm not sure that giving psybolts to small squads is standard MSU, and then to not give them to the large squads seems silly as you will have more extra points in an army build around 10 man squads in Rhinos than you will in Razorback lists (as for every 10 guys you save 70 points which can be used to buy psybolts for the 10 man unit.

 

Unit B - 6 GKSS, 1 psycannon, psybolt ammunition in Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, storm bolter, psybolt ammunition (245 points)

 

Kills~ 3.67 marines per turn(max shooting) or 66.74 points per kill

 

 

Unit C - 10 GKSS, 2 psycannons in Rhino w/ default stormbolter (260 points) or (280 points with psybolt ammunition as well)

 

Kills ~ 4.074 marines per turn (without psybolts, 4.67 with) or 63.81 points per kill (60 points per kill with psybolts)

 

So point for point the 10 man squad shoots better than the 5 man squad in the psy-asscan razorback. On top of which a good deal of the damage from the smaller squad is taken out when the razorback gets killed, it is much harder to drop the effectiveness of the large squad as its transport is responsible for a very small portion of the damage.

 

EDIT: naturally the numbers change if you're talking Purifiers as the extra psycannons make a large difference for them... but if we're just comparing regular GKSS 6 versus 8 doesn't change a lot. It's still apples to apples to look at just stormbolters.

 

Except I would never see the point of taking 8 man squads of Strikes. So for me I would be comparing 5 with Psybolts vs 6 without, which is the area where one loss is the difference is negated with one lost casualty. For me it would come down to do pysbolts on small squads work out better than taking another 5 man squad with a psycannon. I don't think that thinking about the game as a whole this is going to be an advantage for the reasons I stated above.

[Inquisitor Fox]

Alright, being a math geek has it's advantages I suppose... ahem...

 

Assuming we're shooting at a MEQ target and factoring in Rending (apparently I'm just that awesome):

 

TL Heavy bolter Razorback w/ psybolts kills 0.7407

TL Assault cannon Razorback w/ psybolts kills 1.3827 (no stormbolter, just the main gun)

 

stormbolter gives .2222 kills

stomrbolter with psybolt ammo gives .2963 kills

 

infantry based Psycannon stationary kills 1.0371 (on the move generates only .5186 kills)

 

So combining this gives me the following (I'll also put in a pure MSU approach of 6 man with stormbolters and psycannon with psybolt razorback) assuming stationary status!:

 

A: (180 points) 6 GKSS w/ psycannon, Razorback w/ TL heavy bolters, psybolt ammo: 1.1110 kills from the infantry + 1.0371 from the psycannon + .7407 from the razorback = 2.8888 total deaths

B: (200 points) 6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL heavy bolters, psybolt ammo: 1.4815 from the infantry + 1.0371 from the psycannon + .7407 from the razorback = 3.2593 total deaths

 

ironically, 200 points is a perfect comparison to a naked 10 man GKSS squad with no psycannons or ammo, so I'll take this moment to run the numbers there just to see how they stack up:

C: (200 points) 10 GKSS = 2.2222 deaths (note the effectiveness of the Razorback and psybolt ammunitition here, as well as the psycannon.. sometimes quality does matter more than quantity)

 

D: (235 points) 6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, psybolt ammunition: 1.4815 from the infantry + 1.0371 from the psycannon + 1.3827 from the Razorback = 3.9013 total deaths

 

E: (245 points) 6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, stormbolter, psybolt ammunition: 1.4815 from the infantry + 1.0371 from the psycannon + 1.6790 from the Razorback = 4.1976 total deaths

 

F: (260 points) 10 GKSS w/ 2 psycannons, Rhino w/ default stormbolter = 1.7776 from the infantry + 2.0742 from the psycannons + .2222 from the rhino = 4.0740 total deaths

 

G: (280 points) 10 GKSS w/ 2 psycannons, psybolt ammunition, Rhino w/ default stormbolter = 2.3704 from the infantry + 2.0742 from the psycannons + .2222 from the rhino = 4.6668 total deaths

 

I could also do a rhino w/ psycannon bolts and/or extra stormbolter but no one seems to use those :)

 

So let's label these examples, and look at a deaths per point spent comparison just because.

 

A: 0.0160 deaths per point spent

B: 0.0163 deaths per point spent

C: 0.0111 deaths per point spent

D: 0.0166 deaths per point spent

E: 0.0171 deaths per point spent

F: 0.0157 deaths per point spent

G: 0.0167 deaths per point spent

 

Which makes our efficiency winner case E... which is.... drum roll please...

 

6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, stormbolter, psybolt ammunition

 

per point spent beats out all other tested combinations, including 10 GKSS w/ 2 stationary psycannons and psybolt ammunition with plain jane rhino and default stormbolter.

 

Though granted it's pretty close... 0.0004 deaths per point spent :)

 

So the answer to the original posters question? It doesn't really matter, go with whatever you want :D

 

EDIT: alright, I had to do it... ahem

H: 10 GKSS w/ 2 psycannons, psybolt ammunition + rhino w/ 2 stormbolters, psybolt ammunition = 2.3704 from the infantry + 2.0742 from the psycannons + .5926 from the rhino = 5.0372 total deaths with 295 points spent, which is an efficiency of 0.0171 kills per point. Note, this is an exact tie with the uber buffed MSU version, meaning MSU versus full squads makes not an ounce of difference in efficiency per point spent! Ironic, eh?

 

EDIT 2: I should add that this MSU versus full squad comparison holds when you look at case A (standard nekkid MSU squad) with case F (standard mechanized full squad). 0.0160 versus 0.0157. No discernable difference in terms of raw efficiency between MSU and full squads. It changes a little with comparing case A to case G though, which is adding psybolts to one squad but not the other. Likewise if you compare case D to case G there's no discerable difference (which is giving the razorback a psycannon to account for the extra infantry psycannon), so I think the math supports the "Who cares, everybody polka!" approach.

[breng77]

Just a quick note in your lower calculations you used the wrong Value for your Heavy Bolter RBs.

 

In addition this analysis is misleading since your Razorback is running you 95 points. Which means 1 shot can negate quite a lot of the damage from that squad. SO while that squad has a minimally higher damage per point output, it has much lower durablitity than some of the other squads.

[Inquisitor Fox]

Just a quick note in your lower calculations you used the wrong Value for your Heavy Bolter RBs.

DOH! I see what you mean... Stupid transposing... I'll fix the original post, thankfully it doesn't change any results. Thank you and my apologies for the mixup.

 

In addition this analysis is misleading since your Razorback is running you 95 points. Which means 1 shot can negate quite a lot of the damage from that squad. SO while that squad has a minimally higher damage per point output, it has much lower durablitity than some of the other squads.

In addition I also didn't account for the fact the Razorback equpped squads have a greater damage output on the move as I assumed everyone was stationary, so there are advantages to either approach.

 

In the end, everybody polka :D

 

EDIT 2: on the move refers to walking the squad along with it's transport. Even when considering fire points, you have two unlinked psycannons versus one TL psycannon (edge to the razorback), and then the difference of a stormbolter which is less than the kills between a TL psycannon and two infantry psycannons. So if you want mobile firepower, you're better off with the Razorback unit, mounted and unmounted.

[jhrovii]

Nicole, is this a mathhammer challenge?

 

If so, I accept... (Investigating Psybolt Ammunition seems like good fun)

 

P.S. Personally I like Razorbacks and here's what I'm thinking right now: On the one hand, they're a relatively big points increase on a fragile APC; On the other hand, we pay 40 pts more for the Psyfleman (merely AV12) than a Psaultback. Is the Psaultback (Psybolt Assault Cannon Razorback) more comparable to a shorter-range, cheap Psyfleman than a Rhino? I mean, it's only better against AV14 and Mech in sheer output... But it's more points efficient. I feel a colored table on the way...

[breng77]

In addition I also didn't account for the fact the Razorback equpped squads have a greater damage output on the move as I assumed everyone was stationary, so there are advantages to either approach.

 

Greater Damage output when moving 6", Moving 12" and disembarking the squad the Large squad has a decided advantage as the RB cannot shoot at all. Each option has its own advantages, I just wanted to provide the counter point so people don't assume that the advantage of the RB squad is always the way to go.

 

As for Razorback vs Psyfleman, that is a bad match up, the S8 + 48" range + av 12 is a big deal. AV 12 is considerably more durable than AV11 (only damaged 50% of the time (33% pen) from S 8 Vs 66% damage (50% pen) for AV 11) in addition being at 24" means that you are within range to get hit by 24" range weapons, or 12" range weapons coming out of a unit that can move 12". Which means that you are in range to get hit by melta weapons, and plasma guns, both of which can hurt a RB.

[Inquisitor Fox]

At 6" that's definitely true ;) Which is why were I the one running the Razorback I'd move 5.5 to 5.9" and then disembark :)

 

Honestly I suppose I'm not trying to say one is better than the other, in that they're both essentially equivalent, so it's more a question of personal perference and tactical application. Maybe our Codex is just wired that way over the standard SM Codex, but I like that.

 

Razorbacks vs Psyfleman is an interesting thing, because while the Psyfleman has the range, technically the Razorback would handle armor better at higher values if it can get into range. They're complimentary but different critters. Really I know I always prefer the "psycannon" option over heavy bolters though, to me the extra points is well worth it, but there are many who disagree ;) I find the two compliment each other nicely... the Psyfleman providing covering fire while the Razorback and it's squad close then unleash hell.

 

@jhrovii: I'd love to see any other applications of "mathhammer" that present it or look at it from a different angle than I did. My data seems to show that it's all a much of a muchness with no clear winner, which while not being necessarily a desirable result, is certainly useful to know!

[boreas]

So, basically, G (10 GKSS w/ 2 psycannons, psybolt ammunition, Rhino w/ default stormbolter ) is 2.4% less effective than E (6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, stormbolter, psybolt ammunition).

 

But Squad E has 40% less wounds (T4 AS3+ wounds, which is pretty good) and it can't combat squad (which can be a pretty big deal in objective games). It also fares worst in CC (I know , GKSS shouldn't be in CC, but, life happens ^_^ ).

 

On the upside for squad E, that 35pts can be incredibly useful elsewhere. For example, I'd probably cut a 10 men "G" squad to a 6 men "E" squad if I needed that Heavy Incinerator on my DK

 

It still come down to the player's tactics (agressive players vs defensive players), the local terrain (heavy terrain vs light terrain), the local metagame (MEQ heavy vs IG heavy)....

 

I for one favor squad G (10 models), as I always find those 2-3 models hiding near an objective, in cover, on turn 5-6 to be highly useful.

 

Phil

[Inquisitor Fox]

@Boreas: Correct ^_^ A more fair comparison would be squad "D" (6 GKSS w/ psycannon, psybolt ammunition, Razorback w/ TL assault cannon, psybolt ammunition) and squad "G" with a point difference of 45 points. Then we're effectively dealing with two shooting effectiveness identical critters, with some definite advantages to squad "G", though the point savings for squad "D" adds up quickly, particularly if we're dealing with say, 2 or 3 troops choices worth of each. Basic MSU theory here.

 

3 choices of "D" is only 705 points, whereas 3 choices of "G" is 840 points, which is the difference of say, a psyfleman. Which is better, 3 units of "D" and one psyfleman, or 3 units of "G" ? Depends on the player in question and the "non-tangible" variables like you listed.

[jhrovii]

The problem of only counting the psycannons as heavies instead of assaulting is for smaller squads their value is skewed in their favor. 4 s7 shots are more impactful in the smaller squad than the larger.

[Inquisitor Fox]

I felt that was balanced by the inclusion of the weapons on the transports. The TL "psycannon" on the Razorback could also fire in the turn the squad assaults, maintaining a shot output of 6 shots (4 twinlinked) instead of 8, whereas if the larger squad assaults their special weapon fire drops to 4 shots instead of 8.

 

As pure killing efficiency in terms of death per point invested versus MEQ seems the common unit of measurement, it's what I went with.

 

I kept everything "stationary" as the argument that GKSS are at their most efficient when stationary shooting at something seems fairly valid. Since it's not really an assault unit, I didn't compare things on the assault. That'd be a nice exercise though, and actually can be gotten from my data pretty quickly by just dividing the infantry psycannon kills in half then comparing them ^_^

[Inquisitor Fox]

Alright... let's go ahead and look at shooting output before assaulting in reference to jhrovii's point.

 

(180p, MSU) Squad A: 2.3702 deaths pre-combat, 0.0132 deaths per point

(200p, MSU) Squad B: 2.7407 deaths pre-combat, 0.0137 deaths per point

(200p, full) Squad C: 2.2222 deaths pre-combat, 0.0111 deaths per point (note, no change as no psycannons)

(235p, MSU) Squad D: 3.3827 deaths pre-combat, 0.0144 deaths per point

(245p, MSU) Squad E: 3.6790 deaths pre-combat, 0.0150 deaths per point

(260p, full) Squad F: 3.0369 deaths pre-combat, 0.0117 deaths per point

(280p, full) Squad G: 3.6297 deaths pre-combat, 0.0130 deaths per point

(295p, full) Squad H: 4.0001 deaths pre-combat, 0.0136 deaths per point

 

Counting the psycannons as an assault weapon actually skews the odds in favor of the MSU units as the vehicle mounted weapon can still fire before combat at full effectiveness! However, the MSU unit is much more likely to fair worse in the ensuing combat due to approximately half the outgoing melee attacks. They rely more on their shooting to whittle the enemy numbers down before the combat starts.

 

In short, melee combat isn't a great place for a Strike Squad, and even more so for an MSU Strike Squad in Razorback.. it should be avoided ^_^

[jhrovii]

First of all, points spent per kill is much more easily grasped than kills per point spent where you’re dealing with hundredths of a percent

 

Second, it's not true in the case of Purifiers that the MSU unit performs worse in combat compared to full strike squads.

 

Alright... let's go ahead and look at shooting output before assaulting in reference to jhrovii's point.

 

(180p, MSU) Squad A: 2.3702 deaths pre-combat, 0.0132 deaths per point

(200p, MSU) Squad B: 2.7407 deaths pre-combat, 0.0137 deaths per point

(200p, full) Squad C: 2.2222 deaths pre-combat, 0.0111 deaths per point (note, no change as no psycannons)

(235p, MSU) Squad D: 3.3827 deaths pre-combat, 0.0144 deaths per point

(245p, MSU) Squad E: 3.6790 deaths pre-combat, 0.0150 deaths per point

(260p, full) Squad F: 3.0369 deaths pre-combat, 0.0117 deaths per point

(280p, full) Squad G: 3.6297 deaths pre-combat, 0.0130 deaths per point

(295p, full) Squad H: 4.0001 deaths pre-combat, 0.0136 deaths per point

 

Counting the psycannons as an assault weapon actually skews the odds in favor of the MSU units as the vehicle mounted weapon can still fire before combat at full effectiveness! However, the MSU unit is much more likely to fair worse in the ensuing combat due to approximately half the outgoing melee attacks. They rely more on their shooting to whittle the enemy numbers down before the combat starts.

 

In short, melee combat isn't a great place for a Strike Squad, and even more so for an MSU Strike Squad in Razorback.. it should be avoided ;)

Counting Psycannons as Assault 2 is always worse for MSUs when compared to like full squads, that was the point. Conversly, counting them as Heavy 4 is always beneficial to MSUs and will inflate their efficiency compared to full squads. Let's look at a basic example:

 

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/3206/ex1f.png

 

Here we see that comparing that the difference between moving and not for the bigger squad has less of an decrease of efficiency (only 35.69%) compare to the MSUs loss of efficiency (59.73%). Not only that, but the decrease in unsaved wounds allocated is by 35.69% compared to 59.73% respectively. Here you see that no matter the point cost, the fact is an EQUAL AMOUNT of Psycannon shots means more in smaller squads. But let's look at when the MSU is gifted with a Psyback:

 

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/5678/ex2b.png

 

Here we see again that MSU squads benefit more from being given Heavy 4 Psycannons, and do not retain advantage despite having a Psyback as you claim. The MSU suffers a 41.26% loss in efficiency and wounds, while the full squad merely suffers 35.69%.

 

The point is that when weighing a units effectiveness and efficiency, its movement status is critically important.

 

Your math was wrong for determining Psycannon effectiveness among squad sizes because you used MSUs with less PC and a Psyback. You threw in the extra variable and although it is correct that full squads lose more efficiency with Assault 2 because of it, you're not comparing Psycannon to Psycannon fairly. If would remove the variable of the transport and compare 2 PC in a full Strike Squad to 1 PC in a MSU, you'd over double the decrease in deficiency of the big squad. That was the basic premise of my point; Proportionally Psycannons will always matter more in smaller squads. This fact won't matter when comparing unlike strike squads, but for comparing Pures to Strikes it does. Essentially, Heavy 4 does not give the complete picture because your conclusion can unduly degrade Full Strikes. Psycannons matter, all things being equal, and things are equal between full strikes and MSU Pures. Discounting that bonus of more Psycannon shots in smaller squads misrepresents the awesomesauce of Purifier MSUs... Which are still awesome, but it's a small matter of perspective in weighing the merits of a Rhino + 2 PCs.

 

 

 

 

Anyway with regards to Psybolt Ammunition for a squad's stormbolters, what is at issue is not that s5 is more effective than s4 (or that multiple 1/6 extra assigned wounds for each shot is somehow worse than 2 extra s4 shots), but that even for large squads efficiency suffers. Let's assume PCs are Heavy 4 between 2 full Strike Squads with 2 PC each. This means PA has less of an effect on the squad, but I'm using old math and I wanted to talk about this now (I'll come back to it).

 

For 20 points, you glance 1.777 more Rhinos per turn, but you're still penning 1.74 a turn with your Psycannons. For 20 points, you kill 1.186 more MEQs per turn, but you're already killing 3.951 a turn; So what, you'll be the anethma to Tac Squads the world over. :) You'll do an extra third of a wound to a Deathknight. My conclusion is PA is overkill, uneccesary, and makes your squad needlessly inefficient in every other application.

 

So I should return or make a thread with efficiency tables for Psybolt Ammunition, considering moving and not, small squads and not, and accompanying transport turrets and not. I should also make a thread applying the so-called "Crowe Tax" equally among Purifiers to measure their efficiency, I've been meaning to do that.

[BrotherWasted]

*screw it. not interested in debating something so far detached from reality as mathhammer*

[jhrovii]

Leave the mathhammer at home, for Christ's sake. It doesn't represent reality.

Math and probability do represent reality, and we make no illusions the conditions we're assuming. I'm not sure how I can go about proving to you that one-third of 9 is 3 but I assure you, that's true. We attempt to measure potential while accounting for varying conditions- it is why we consider basic rhinos.

 

 

If your Psybacks cannot damage enemy transports, you should just not play at all. No, they will not destroy them as efficiently as a Psyflemen - i never said they did. But they work well enough

No, they don't.

 

and let your squads direct fire elsewhere. What they DO give is the ability to control which guns you want to fire. You say that every shot counts, yet you advocate letting your squads sit inside the transport instead of being proactive and firing every gun you can.

Fair point. Maybe one would want to get out of the transport. Still, you can get out of a Rhino and let the whole squad fire if you needed to can you not? Rhinos do not necessitate you stay in the transport, nor are they useless once left. The point is not that Razorbacks are not more useful, it's that both can have a high chance of dying. If you rush 12" pop smoke and die, that's 10 points wasted. If it lives it's what, one half more MEQ kills a turn? A 44% chance you'll pen a Rhino? Maybe you could do better. The usefulness of mathhammer is situational, but that's what we're doing- comparing situations.

 

 

2 5-man Strike Squads and their Razors are much scarier to face than 10 Knights in a rhino firing outside of a Rhino.

Well they cost 50 more points so I can understand why. It's one of the possible premises of MSU lists that you want more turret weapons. But in this case you'd be paying 50 points for 3 TL s6 shots I mean... Do you think you could do better?

 

Of course a five man squad doesn't want to get into combat. Thats why 5 plus 5 equals 10.

5-man Purifiers want in combat as much as full strike squads do. BTW, 5 + 5 doesn't equal 10! What if you're out of range!?!??!?!?!?!?!11

 

I swear, somewhere along the line you people forgot 5 knights put out the same firepower as 10 marines from any other codex.

Maybe, maybe not. You're not exactly representing reality here. :lol:

 

*screw it. not interested in debating something so far detached from reality as mathhammer*

Fine I'll do it for you.

 

jhrovii, you're not taking the most common situations into consideration when weighing the effectiveness of different units. You consider some, but not all, and therefore your mathhammer conclusions are lacking. Though I understand you use probability, you are not a good enough general to see the creative interactions between units.

...Of course I would ask for examples, and I might modify my points some to fit them if I could.

[BrotherWasted]

Math and probability do represent reality, and we make no illusions the conditions we're assuming. I'm not sure how I can go about proving to you that one-third of 9 is 3 but I assure you, that's true. We attempt to measure potential while accounting for varying conditions- it is why we consider basic rhinos.

 

No, it really doesn't.

 

No, they don't.

 

And you base this off of what? The fact that there are stronger guns in the Codex? It's easier to penetrate a Rhino with a S6 Twin-Linked Heavy Bolter than it is to penetrate a Land Raider with a Heavy 4 Psycannon.

 

Fair point. Maybe one would want to get out of the transport. Still, you can get out of a Rhino and let the whole squad fire if you needed to can you not? Rhinos do not necessitate you stay in the transport, nor are they useless once left. The point is not that Razorbacks are not more useful, it's that both can have a high chance of dying. If you rush 12" pop smoke and die, that's 10 points wasted. If it lives it's what, one half more MEQ kills a turn? A 44% chance you'll pen a Rhino? Maybe you could do better. The usefulness of mathhammer is situational, but that's what we're doing- comparing situations.

 

You can get out of the Rhino, sure. Now your entire squad has to fire at the one target. My Razor can pop or immobilise your Rhino, and depending on what is inside, I can fire somewhere else, potentially destroying another target. A Rhino has much less usefulness than a Razorback.

 

Well they cost 50 more points so I can understand why. It's one of the possible premises of MSU lists that you want more turret weapons. But in this case you'd be paying 50 points for 3 TL s6 shots I mean... Do you think you could do better?

 

No, really what I'm doing is paying 60 points for 6 S6 Shots - this is your biggest misconeption. 10 Knights and a Rhino = 240. 2 5 Man Strikes and 2 Psybacks = 300. Now I'm paying 10 points for a 36" Krak Grenade, more or less.

 

5-man Purifiers want in combat as much as full strike squads do. BTW, 5 + 5 doesn't equal 10! What if you're out of range!?!??!?!?!?!?!11

Nope. Pretty sure 5 and 5 equals 10. You're taking two smaller squads, and then complain that they don't want to get into combat? like you said, no PAGK squad of any size wants to get into combat, unless they are CC-oriented Purifiers. 5 or 10 man, you always want to avoid combat.

 

Maybe, maybe not. You're not exactly representing reality here. :lol:

Not actually sure what I was trying to say there, fair call.

 

Fine I'll do it for you.

Not even my point. Mathhammer is simply theory. It does not represent the accuracy of what happens on the battlefield. Nor does anecdotal evidence, to be honest.

[jhrovii]

They will also destroy those enemy Rhinos or Razors very efficiently.

No, they won't. I already showed above that Twin-linked Heavy Bolters with Psybolt Ammunition are half as effective as 2 Psycannons on the move against Rhino chassis. Actually the Psyfleman is the best common unit for popping Rhinos (better than 16 psycannon shots). So if by "very efficiently" you mean "less efficient than nearly every other weapon option" you'd be correct.

 

Of course they aren't as effective as Psycannons. I never said they were. They are indeed less effective than a Heavy 4 Psycannon, or the 4 shots from a Rifleman. However, running your 10man squad in a Rhino forces you to commit to a single target each turn.

No it doesn't, have you forgotten your pintle-mounted Storm Bolter?

 

Razorbacks allow you to split your fire if needed.

Rhinos do as well.

 

They get the job done. They are inexpensive, and can put out more shots for their points than 3 Psyflemen (about 6 Psybacks for the same cost, 18 S6 Shots compared to 12 S8).

12 Twin-linked s8, meaning an average of 10.666 hits. 18 shots might give you 12. So on average you won't get a shot and a half extra. Sorry, too much stupid mathhammer again. I'd go into detail while their output per points are 40 times worse than Psyflemen but you don't want to hear it.

 

 

They're a transport, not a battle tank.

EXACLTY! That's what we've been saying! :lol:

[Crynn]

*screw it. not interested in debating something so far detached from reality as mathhammer*

 

 

While I disagree that psybacks aren't a good unit, I personally think they are great, I do agree with the OP in that Mathammer is a very useful tool and represents reality better then any other means of analysis we have. Nothing can ever account for all situations but math is the best place to start.

 

Let me be very clear about something because I am so sick to death of people claiming the uselessness of Mathammer. I will use an example first to make it simple to understand.

 

At a recent tournament I went to I was the only general to go 5 games straight, there were some very good generals at that tournament who understand battlefield stratergy, cover, movement and all in game tactics very well. While these things are and can be more important at times than mathhammer, most of the tactics they use were so situational that you could never count on them as a basic stratergy plan. When having to include specific terrain and your opponents army, fire arcs etc etc, these plans could not be tried in the list building stage of the game. What could be done is math hammer, and using it as an imperfect tool setting units on a blank board and comparing their raw effeciency.

 

The second level of Math hammer is where I had an edge on 4 of my 5 opponents. 3 opponents who I played said I rolled well, which was absolute bull crap, I wen't along with it because it's easier to just smile and nod and they were nice guys. One guy shot missiles into my ven dread from his deathwing, 3 rounds of 2-3 cyclones and achieved nothing, apparently I rolled well. No what actually happened is that each missile he fired only had a 1.2% chance of destroying my ven dread in cover (I bet none of you would have even considered the number to be that low, and in a tight game that can be the difference in winning or loosing). So when his total of 17 -18 missiles achieved nothing that is because he only had about a 20% chance in total to kill my ven dread with what he shot at it, the guy couldn't do the math on the fly, I could so I left my ven dread there to soak up missile fire. I hear people say "but it can be destroyed by one lucky missile", to those people who use that theory just stop playing competitive 40k, it isn't a game of luck it is a game of averages and reliability, you can always get good/bad rolls but that can happen with anything in the game.

The reason I manage to get a good ratio of victories against good opponents is because I can MATH HAMMER ther crap out of a situation on the fly, I can get the probability of something going my way in a second because I am good with arithmetic. The opposing general may be just as good a player as I am, he might be better, but if he miss calculates or can't calculate the odds of a complex situation going his way and it forces him to do something not in his favour then I am gaining from my ability to mathhammer where my opponent can't.

 

So put bluntly. Math hammer can be an exceedingly effective tool when used correctly, and if you don't believe in it or don't use it it is like playing 40k and giving yourself a handycap by loosing a specific set of skills. It is no different from having the ability to estimate ranges accurately in your head, it is a very real, very usefull skill.

 

Regards,

Crynn

[BrotherWasted]

No it doesn't, have you forgotten your pintle-mounted Storm Bolter?

 

No, I didn't forget it. A single storm bolter is a useless weapon that almost never scores a kill.

 

Rhinos do as well.

 

That single storm bolter might as well be non-existant. While technically you can shoot the storm bolter at one target, then fire at another with the squad, the Rhino might as well be sitting there doing nothing.

 

12 Twin-linked s8, meaning an average of 10.666 hits. 18 shots might give you 12. So on average you won't get a shot and a half extra. Sorry, too much stupid mathhammer again. I'd go into detail while their output per points are 40 times worse than Psyflemen but you don't want to hear it.

 

You're forgetting that the Heavy Bolters are twin-linked. I already know that 12 S8 shots is more deadly overall than 18 S6 Shots. They're not meant to replace Psyflemen, but to support them and give you more guns on the table to work with. BTW, 18 Twinlinked S6 shots will score an average of 16 hits, as dirty as it makes me feel to use mathhammer.

 

EXACLTY! That's what we've been saying! :lol:

No, you haven't. You've been downplaying the ability of a Razorback to threaten light vehicles as if the turret is non-existant.

[Inquisitor Fox]

Alright, Mod hat on.. everyone cool it. That is enough personal sniping. This discussion can be done in a civil manner or I'll just can it :D

 

Now... Mod hat off...

 

First of all, points spent per kill is much more easily grasped than kills per point spent where you’re dealing with hundredths of a percent

From my statistician/economist brain.. potato, tomato.. those are the same thing. x = (1/y) is the same statement as xy = 1 :yes: I view Warhammer efficiency as question as to where to invest my points.. the limiting factor is the number of points in my army list, not the number of kills. Therefore in a cost/benefit analysis I look at where I am investing the limiting factor. It works for me, but to each their own...

 

Counting Psycannons as Assault 2 is always worse for MSUs when compared to like full squads, that was the point. Conversly, counting them as Heavy 4 is always beneficial to MSUs and will inflate their efficiency compared to full squads.

I counter with your examples not being like squads. You are comparing a GKSS to a Purifier squad and saying they're the same because they carry the same number of heavy weapons. You're comparing two totally different units and then using that analysis to say MSU is more/less efficient than full sized squads. You must compare a full sized squad of GKSS versus a MSU squad of GKSS, then a full sized squad of Purifiers to a MSU squad of Purifiers to make an accurate comparison.

 

I find that sort of methodology to be a true comparison, whereas what your tables are showing is a case of apples and oranges, IMO.

 

In short, because of you comparing two different units and trying to argue they're the same, I can't really digest your numbers and make a meaningful conclusion from them. I'd rather see tables comparing the full sized GKSS and the MSU GKSS, then a second table with a full sized Purifiers versus a MSU Purifiers and then make conclusions on the data of efficiency. You can't argue that the efficiency of a full sized GKSS is meaningful to the efficiency of a MSU Purifier squad.

[yperihitikos]

From my statistician/economist brain.. potato, tomato.. those are the same thing. x = (1/y) is the same statement as xy = 1 :cuss I view Warhammer efficiency as question as to where to invest my points.. the limiting factor is the number of points in my army list, not the number of kills. Therefore in a cost/benefit analysis I look at where I am investing the limiting factor. It works for me, but to each their own...

 

Having to compare values such as 67.5, 80, 15.6 etc is far easier and readable than having to compare 0.0148, 0.0125, 0.0641. Imagine having a table with over 100 values to compare every time.

The brain is used to read absolute numbers.

 

 

The aim when you math-build a list is to spend as less points as you can. A simple example:

You want to manage a kill and you have 1500/1750/1850/2000 or more points to spent. You take the cheapest unit. Than you do it over and over again until you have spent all your points. It's similar to building a list from the codex.