Jump to content

Pask as warlord data analysis


curt1893

Recommended Posts

So, with the new codex and changes to Pask, I sat down and considered how to field him. I always enjoyed using him in the Heavy Support slot, but since he's found a new home in HQ's, it becomes a greater decision. I started crunching some numbers and wanted to share the results. I ran a sample of 3000 separate simulations to get the best distribution. 

 

The situation:

Pask with Punisher gatling cannon (no other weapons were considered, so they would be a plus)

Warlord trait: Old Grudge (assumed to the vehicle you are firing at)

 

The data shows the chance that you would wreck an enemy vehicle shooting at the corresponding Armor Value facing. The calculations take into account him only re-rolling 1's to hit (since I read preferred enemy as to not work with armor pens), the addition of rending to the armor pen (1d3) on an armor pen of 6, standard cover saves. For the flyers, I just assumed they would be taking a 5+ jink save.

 

 

wreck table

 

It seems anything AV10 would get smoked regardless of cover. The high percentages come from the high volume of glances and pens.

 

If you can catch AV13's out in the open, they don't stand much of a chance either.

 

All of this makes it hard for me not to take Pask as my warlord, even if I have to pay almost 300 points for him and his sister tank (which wasn't even included in this calculation.)

 

The simulation was done using a Python script, which I would make available to anyone who wanted it. Any comments or suggestion? Sorry if the image isn't showing or is too small. This is my first post.

Link to comment
https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/289805-pask-as-warlord-data-analysis/
Share on other sites

thats.... a lot of dakka.

 

You say % wrecked.  Is that from 3 HP to 0? or just the chance to pen?

 

Both sort of. In the simulation, if a hit caused a pen, then rolled a 5 or 6, it was considered a wreck. If it got pens but less than 5 on the table, it still counted as a glance and then when those reached 3 it was considered a wreck.

that's why you make them command tanks for 30 pts, however pask is an additional 50 points on top of that.

so you end up paying  50 pts for a fixed warlord trait instead of a 1/3 chance of old grudges (not that the other warlord traits are very interesting too!), for a reroll on the armour penetration and a reroll to hit if you're putting him in a vanquisher (which is in my opinion the most viable command tank, due to you wanting to keep your tank out of harms way, cosidering it's a juicy target and gives up a slay the warlord

The rending seems more interesting than rerolls to hit since everyone and their dog can cast prescience now. The survivability is a valid concern, but in a group of three I'm not sure how easy it will be to take out av 13/14. I dunno, have to play test it to see how he really fits in outside of the vacuum of a simulation.

sure, a group of 3 increases it's survivability, but it also hinders you as it means those two other tanks (about 300 pts) will have to fire at the same target (although the "kill on sight" order lessens this to some effect, if you manage the order to come through) and be in the same area the wole time. I prefer my armour to be able to flank my opponent and attack him from multiple sides if possible, thus prefering single tanks. maybe players experiences with them will make me change my opinion though

Is Pask's "Tank Hunter"-ability added in the calculation, or is it just Preferred Enemy and Rending?

 

I no longer see any reference to Tank Hunter under Pask's abilities. Crack shot allows him to re-roll failed pens, but that's all I saw. Am I not looking in the right place?

 

Is Pask's "Tank Hunter"-ability added in the calculation, or is it just Preferred Enemy and Rending?

 

I no longer see any reference to Tank Hunter under Pask's abilities. Crack shot allows him to re-roll failed pens, but that's all I saw. Am I not looking in the right place?

 

Well, that is essentially Tank Hunter. :)

I'm rolling with pask in a vanquisher. misses 1/9 of the time, and two chances at AP, with 15 for the average roll? and AP2? Anything that basically autopens land raiders from across the table is...Godlike!!! Did I mention that he autopens those land raiders for significantly less than the 250 points that those land raiders cost?

Who else is doing a Pask model for the ETL? :lol: Perhaps our next question should be which tank suits him best, relative to certain roles of course?

 

The Rending Punisher seems only held back by the range, but the Vanquisher is almost a guarantee of some serious damage to a vehicle...

a tank commander is never a bad idea as it frees up a heasy support slot and can use it as your warlord. I guess the only way to find out is to try it out and see how it works for you. even though it now has "gets hot" the executioner is still a very dangerous and potent weapon, able to annihilate entire 2+ save units in a single volley

I personally think taking Pask carries risks too. So you've got a Vanquisher who can basically autopen a Land Raider. Great. Guess what the other guy wants to take out first? wink.png

Anyway, I'm probably never going to take a Vanquisher. My group seems to prefer MC's. Flying ones at that! cry.gif So Punishers are where it's at!

But. I think we can all agree that Tank Commanders are awesome, if only for letting us take Lemans as HQ. And Pask is a beast. That's your go to guy when you need to turn it up to eleven!

I'm feeling the killing power of a Leman Russ elite HQ choice, but it feels like you're potentially making it so your Warlord VP is tied to the one unit an opponent has to kill to win a game instead of being wiped off the board.

 

It's kinda like a Guard Deathstar.

 

Do we have any experience of the pros and cons here from our learned commanders?

I'm feeling the killing power of a Leman Russ elite HQ choice, but it feels like you're potentially making it so your Warlord VP is tied to the one unit an opponent has to kill to win a game instead of being wiped off the board.

 

It's kinda like a Guard Deathstar.

 

Do we have any experience of the pros and cons here from our learned commanders?

Yes, and no. in general the leman russ command tank is always tougher that the T3 commander model. However it's harder to hide, especially if you wish to use any other variant than the vanquisher tank(which can stay in the back, hiding behind cover, sniping down juicy targets).

 

As an armoured battalion player i prefered the armoured battalion to be the allies because this ment i could take a cheap command squad as my warlord and keep in in reserves for most of the game, denying an easy slay the warlord while my "actuall" commander in chief wrecked mayhem on the fields of battle. However this also had to do with the armoured battalion warlord traits not being that special.

 

in the new guard dex things have changed however! not alone did the command squad that would be placed in reserves go up, but the command tank also became a lot more survivable! giving it camo netting is an auto-include, due to always having (at the very least) a 6+ cover save, and you can now take a (cheap) leman russ bodyguard tank that will soak up damage for your warlord (2 seems a bit overkil and too many eggs in 1 basket).

In addition making the tank command your warlord also limits the warlord traits (which is a good thing here!) from 6 up to 3. on a 1 you will get to outflank D3 units (imo the best trait), on a 2 you get prefered enemy, and on a 3 the blobs guarding your commander won't run away from recieving shooting cassualties.

I think these far outweigh the risk of making the warlord a juicy target, considering it will already be a juicy target even without being the command tank.

I plan on including a command vanquisher warlord and armoured sentinel team combo in most of my lists. the armoured sentinels can either outflank when getting the right warlord trait (giving a good chance to getting linebreaker!), or help in covering the warlord due to their mass.

The only downside is you will only be able to give commands up to junior officer level, but that's in my opinion a trade off worth it.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.