Breaking: Reaver Squad outshivs a Night Lord Terror Squad.

[Kais Klip]

jk.

What I'm really here for is to be illuminated in the difference between the two, specifically their approach towards outnumbering the enemy in regards to each other.

Secondly, I struggle to reconcile "A Talent For Murder" with First Claw's performance vs an Imperial champion in the Night Lords series.

The problem has been on my mind for a while now; the crunch represents the Night Lords having unparalleled team work, which works towards unraveling an outnumbered enemy, while the fluff, well:

"The truth is [Night Lords] barely work well with each other."

Their rules, from a fluff point of view, demand a combination of discipline and viciousness, which is what the Sons of Horus are known for. So how do the Night Lords approach the situation given their predilection for failing at team sports? Like most of the Legion fanbase

More importantly, who would win on a battlefield murderhunt; a Reaver Squad, or a Terror Squad?

TL:DR: A Talent for Murder > Merciless Fighters, Why?

[Memento Of Prospero]

Clickbait much?

 

You have it the otherway around about teamwork. It doesn't take teamwork to outplay an outnumbered foe... it takes good opportunism, and shiving people is just that.

 

It takes teamwork to overcome a greater numerical force.

[Aeternus]

That title...ooooh that title...

 

I'll show you a talent for murder in a minute

[helterskelter]

Terror squads are specifically designed to murder infantry, but it's situational, and wargear depending, straight up 10v10 reaver vs terror squad whoever goes first wins, the advantage the terror squads hold over reavers is preferred enemy infantry, meaning better rolls in shooting (to make sure they outnumber you) and assuming just one dude dies to shooting, the assault dice rolls are going to be better too.

However, that would be against a similarly tooled reaver squad. Once you start spending the points reavers out class terror squads. Jump packs for one don't only "double" your model count, you get HoW, then your attacks, then with the safe assumption that in 10v10 you've not been hilariously unlucky you get the extra attack at i1. On the charge that's 10 how, 41 regular attacks, and (assumed you make it in one piece) a further 10 dice. That's a lot. And there's precision strike to consider.

[Slips]

I think a better comparison would be Jump Reavers vs Raptors for CC Focus since the question is about Talent for Murder and Merciless Fighters, no?

[helterskelter]

He did say who would win on a battlefield murder front.

Though if it's down to it there's little difference between tfm and merciless, both require outnumbering, if you do, more hits, more wounds.

Terror squads run it best neatly

Reavers get more toys which enhances the results

[Kais Klip]

I wanna focus specifically on terror squads, then being the Night Lord equivalent to Reavers between the two Legions. Fluff wise, from what I gather a Night Raptor wouldn't amount to much vs a terror legionnaire without his jump pack.

 

Wolf Pack actually makes a fair point. Opportunitism actually seems a better fit for the Sons of Horus as opposed to "teamwork", given their predilection to work on the fly. In that case, what's the difference between the mindset towards opportunism present in the two Legions.

 

Thanks for the crunch breakdown Helter!

 

But wouldn't teamwork better apply to a preference to approach a battle "one piece at a time" (Legion rules from 40k)? Or do I misunderstand opportunism when applied to a battlefield context.

 

Another point; why do the Ultramarines gain a "coordination" bonus towards shooting and charging into combat, but not within combat itself.

 

To rephrase my original post; why don't the Sons of Horus and Night Lords have the same rules, within a close combat context?

[Slips]

To me, Merciless Fighters is getting a Cheapshot (or equivalent) or exploiting an opening that presents itself when the opportunity arises.

 

Talent for Murder is being really good at recreating Caesar's Assassination (or equivalent).

 

One connotes "We fight good and don't pull our punches when it comes to the nitty gritty" the other "Make sure we don't catch you alone or we will shank you with a rusty fork."

 

As for the last question: For Diversities Sake and Legion Identity so that people don't feel like "Well, NL are just SoH at night." or "SoH are NL minus the Night Stuff."

[Marshal Loss]

Part of the reason why Merciless Fighters isn't very strong is because 1) it's a relic of the Book 1 Legion rules, which were far weaker than those that came after it, and 2) Sons of Horus also get the 'Death Dealers' ranged bonus, which is utterly lethal and easily their best rule. The Sons of Horus are meant to be more flexible and their rules reflect this, they're masters of close ranged fire fights, weakening their enemies before charging in and overwhelming them with a superior number of attacks. If they had an equally good melee bonus to the VIII, what is the point of playing Night Lords? It's just simple balance. This is the only significant bonus that the Night Lords get.

 

Every Legion should have something they do better than everybody else, and what the Night Lords do it drag their enemies down through superior numbers. You can just imagine a Night Lord unit holding back until they outnumber their enemy, meaning less danger to their own lives.

[A D-B]

I totally thought this was going to be the coolest diorama ever.

[Excessus]

I totally thought this was going to be the coolest diorama ever.

 

Yeah, I think most of us were disappointed when we read the first post here for various reasons. Pure clickbait.

 

 

...reavers vs. terror squad would have been an awesome diorama though!

[Xenith]

 

The problem has been on my mind for a while now; the crunch represents the Night Lords having unparalleled team work, which works towards unraveling an outnumbered enemy, while the fluff, well: 

 

Seems like you're misinterpreting the crunch.

 

They're dirty fighters, and will stab a distracted foe in the back, while other legions will prefer an 'honourable' 1 on 1 fight. It's not teamwork, it's ganging up on weaker prey.

[Legatus]

What I'm really here for is to be illuminated in the difference between the two, specifically their approach towards outnumbering the enemy in regards to each other.

I think their Legion descriptions explain the idea behind their respective special rules rather well.

Sons of Horus

"In case of the Sons of Horus, the combat doctrines of this most aggressive Legion were those of the application of overwhelming force directed to where the foe was weakest. These shattering blows were used to utterly destroy enemy command cadres, vital strategic support structures and wreak terrible slaugter on the pride of an enemy's forces, often turning the tide of an entire conflict with a single, well-placed and savage attack. Even on a personal level the Sons of Horus took this merciless doctrine to heart and like the wolves they were once named for, were swift to exploit a foe's weakness, surrounding and brutally tearing apart an outnumbered or exposed enemy before they could recover from the shock of an assault."

- HH1: Betrayal, p. 244

Night Lords

"Even before the Istvaan V Dropsite Massacre, the Night Lords Legion were renegade in all but name, having entirely devoted themselves to the arts of terror and murder. The Legion's Primarch Konrad Curze is the master of the unheralded strike from the least anticipated quarter, an attack delivered with such brutality and wanton cruelty entire planetary populations were brought to their knees in abject surrender. Never given to mercy, few who oppose the Night Lords ever live to tell the tale, unless they are allowed by design to escape in order to sow the seeds of dread still further. Given the dark demeanour of the Legion, it takes an equally ruthless leader to rein in its prospensity to atrocity, at least until such time as it is called for."

- HH2: Massacre, p. 238

I.e. the Sons of Horus try to identify a weak link in the enemy formation and then strike with maximum effort at that point. So when a Sons of Horus unit is stronger than the unit they are fighting against at the end of combat (Initiative step 1) they note that they almost got them, and put in that little extra effort to utterly demolish them. Like "we almost got them, just a little more, guys!"

The Night Lords on the other hand are the "dirty fighters" of the Legiones Astartes. They prefer to attack the enemy when he isn't looking. Even in their older Index Astartes material they were described as favouring to raid weak and defenseless worlds, and trying to avoid strong opposition. And what better opportunity to get in a cheap shot than when the enemy is distracted and preoccupied with another opponent? So when there are more Night Lords than there are opponents, the excess Night Lords are "free" to attack the engaged enemies from a blind angle.

This is represented in the rules by a improved chance to wound, though a more "direct" translation might have been to give the Night Lords unit a number of additional attacks based on how many more models they have than the enemy.

Secondly, I struggle to reconcile "A Talent For Murder" with First Claw's performance vs an Imperial champion in the Night Lords series.

The problem has been on my mind for a while now; the crunch represents the Night Lords having unparalleled team work, which works towards unraveling an outnumbered enemy, while the fluff, well:

"The truth is [Night Lords] barely work well with each other."

Their rules, from a fluff point of view, demand a combination of discipline and viciousness, which is what the Sons of Horus are known for. So how do the Night Lords approach the situation given their predilection for failing at team sports? Like most of the Legion fanbase

It is not about teamwork. Forget about teamwork. The Night Lords are among the least loyal toward their own. They would stab each other in the back or abandon one another if they thought it was in their interest, which is sort of represented in their 'Seeds of Dissent' rule, where some units might abandon the battlefield if the leader that had held the army together is slain. But similarly they have a talent for abusing a weaker enemy.

More importantly, who would win on a battlefield murderhunt; a Reaver Squad, or a Terror Squad?

On a technical level, 'A Talent for Murder' improves all of the attacks of a model, it's effectiveness varying on the toughness of the opponent. Against a T4 opponent it would improve the damage output of the fighter by 33% (wounding on 3+ instead of 4+). Against a T3 opponent it would merely improve the damage by 20% (wounding on 2+ instead of 3+). Ironically, the rule is most beneficial against tougher opponents, improving the damage outpout against T5 and T6 opponents by 50% and 100% respectively.

Models with more attacks benefit more from this rule than models with a low number of attacks (33% of 1 is 0.3, but 33% of 4 is 1.3).

'Merciless Fighters' on the other hand grants a "flat" additional attack to each model, no matter how many attacks it already has, or the toughness of the opponent. So no matter what kind of unit is fighting, if it has X number of models at Initiative step 1 (and outnumbering the enemy) then it will get X additional attacks, whether it was a unit of tactical support Marines or a veteran assault squad.

So technically all units get the exact same bonus out of this, but this bonus represents a varying improvement over the unit's usual performance. I.e. a 3 Attack unit gaining an additional attack would thereby gain 33% more damage, a 2 Attack unit would gain 50% more damage, a 1 Attack unit 100% more damage.

In numbers:

A unit of 10, fighting against an outnumbered enemy (let's say Marines, WS 4 and T4).

Tactical squad (1 Attack)

Regular Tactical squad

10 Attacks --> 5 hits --> 2.5 wounds

Sons of Horus Tactical squad

20 attacks --> 10 hits --> 5 wounds (+100%)

Night Lords Tactical squad

10 attacks --> 5 hits --> 3.3 wounds (+33%)

Assault squad (or charging Tactical squad) (2 Attacks)

Regular Assault squad

20 Attacks --> 10 hits --> 5 wounds

Sons of Horus Assault squad

30 attacks --> 15 hits --> 7.5 wounds (+50%)

Night Lords Assault squad

20 attacks --> 10 hits --> 6.6 wounds (+33%)

Veteran Squad (or charging Assault squad) (3 Attacks)

Regular Veteran squad

30 Attacks --> 15 hits --> 7.5 wounds

Sons of Horus Veteran squad

40 attacks --> 20 hits --> 10 wounds (+33%)

Night Lords Veteran squad

30 attacks --> 15 hits --> 10 wounds (+33%)

Charging Veteran Squad (4 Attacks)

Regular Veteran squad

40 Attacks --> 20 hits --> 10 wounds

Sons of Horus Veteran squad

50 attacks --> 25 hits --> 12.5 wounds (+25%)

Night Lords Veteran squad

40 attacks --> 20 hits --> 13.3 wounds (+33%)

Against a T4 opponent, Sons of Horus units with 1 or 2 attacks are better than Night Lord units, units with 3 attacks are about even*, and Night Lords units with 4 attacks are better than Sons of Horus units.

Against a WS3 and T3 opponent, the resulting wounds by a 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 attack unit would be as follows:

Regular:

4.4 / 8.8 / 13.3 / 17.7

Sons of Horus:

8.8 / 13.3 / 17.7 / 22.2

Night Lords:

5.5 / 11 / 16.6 / 22.2

As previously noted, the Night Lords rule is not as good against lower toughness, so now the 1 / 2 / 3 Attack Sons of Horus units are better, while the 4 Attack units are about equal*.

In summary, Sons of Horus units with a lower attack count (1 or 2 Attacks) will generally perform better than similar Night Lords units, while units with a lot of attacks will benefit more from the Night Lords rule. Against Marines, Sons of Horus units and Night Lords units with 3 Attacks (Veterans, also Reavers and Terror squads, or Charging assault squads) perform about equal*, while units with with 4 attacks (charging veterans, or charging Reavers or Terror squads) will be better off with the Night Lords rule.

*Though with 3 attacks a Sons of Horus and a Night Lord unit will both get a 33% increase in damage output, this does not take into accout the initiative order. The Night Lords bonus is applied when they make their regular attacks, so usually at Initiative step 4. The Sons of Horus Attacks is applied at Initiative step 1, so all models that were killed in the previous Initiative steps cannot make the additional attack and so do not benefit from the rule at all. So in general the Night Lords rule is a bit better than calculated in these "dry" examples. The more models the Sons of Horus lose during the combat phase, the less they get out of their rule.

Another point; why do the Ultramarines gain a "coordination" bonus towards shooting and charging into combat, but not within combat itself.

No real reason. The Ultramarines doctrines are perhaps the most difficult to pin down and express in a simple rule. They strive to optimise all processes across the board, so really it would be justifiable to grant them a small bonus in just about every area. But they are not supposed to be super awesome killers, just a little bit more efficient and reliable, less blunders or lapses, so they cannot just get some "+1" bonus to everything. Letting them re-roll 1's when wounding or the charge distance is not the worst expression of their reliable and trained doctrine, cutting down on some particular types of failure. Not entirely satisfying, but not that bad either. That Forgeworld tied this to a "teamwork" requirement is something they came up with. Obviously Ultramarines units would work well coordinated and with good cohesion, but the doctrines of "best practices" and optimized efficiency would enhance the performance of a lone operating squad or even just an individual just as much. Though it could be argued that the more actors are in play, the more the lapses of an individual will drag down the overall performance, so the "reliability" of the well drilled and prepared Ultramarine units are probably more noticeable in larger team efforts than with the individual. The performance of a single Ultramarine might only be negligibly better than that of a Marine of another Legion, but in a group scenario the deficiencies of the individual participants add up and compound one another, impairing the overall performance, whereas the Ultramarine units might perhaps work more seamlessly together.

[Kais Klip]

Awesome reply Legatus, thanks for that.

 

In terms of a murderhunt, I was more talking about fluff, though the mathhammer is appreciated to illustrate the point.

 

How would you go about (fluff wise) demonstrating a fight between a reaver and a terror legionnaire, what with his preferred enemy towards infantry, in a single combat context, a group fight, and a battle group engagement, i.e. a Reaver company encountering a terror one?

 

With the preferred enemy bonus, seems like the Night Lords actually walk away with some of the better fair fighters as well.

[Legatus]

Fluffwise the Reavers are tribal headhunters meant to take out high value targets, while the Terror squads are sadists, meant to terrorize the enemy through sheer acts of cruelty. In any confrontation betwee the two, be it just individuals, squads, or larger formations, I would expect the Reavers to go for the throat and smash through the Terror squads. The latter are not really meant to go against very heavy opposition. I assume the 'Preferred Enemy (Infantry)' special rule is meant to represent that they much prefer to cut apart hapless victims rather than take out armour, vehicles, or other enemy assets. 'Preferred Enemy' and 'Fear' give them a very potent first round of combat, overpowering a lot of opposition in they initial, horrifying charge. Tougher opponents will not be as affected by their mostly low AP attacks and the fear effect. The Reavers on the other hand can take special close combat weapons (especially the powerfist will make very good use of that bonus attack) and they can snipe critical enemy models in the shooting phase or in close combat.

 

So Terror squads are somewhat outclassed by Reavers. But they would be aware of that, and so would probably try to lure the Reavers into a trap, or to get them to overextend themselves. Perhaps they feign a retreat, so that the Reavers follow them. If they manage to catch the Reavers unprepared (in the game that could be represented by the Reavers failing their 'Fear' test) they could hurt them critically. Sons of Horus are not stupid, but some Champions might get overly confident. So the Terror squads would definitely try something dirty, and it depends on the cunning and sense of the Sons of Horus leader whether he falls for it. If he is not caught off guard, the Reavers will probably smash the Terror squads.

[helterskelter]

Terror squads have precision shot too no? I can't remember if it was strike or shot they retained.

[Legatus]

Ah, I had only checked 'Massacre', and they don't have it in there. It seems they got 'Precision Strike' in the red 'Legiones Astartes' book, though.

 

The Reavers have 'Precision Shot' as well, plus more power weapons to potentially precision strike with.

[Slips]

Terror squads have precision shot too no? I can't remember if it was strike or shot they retained.

If they do, it was either added or removed in an FAQ

[helterskelter]

 

 

Terror squads have precision shot too no? I can't remember if it was strike or shot they retained.

If they do, it was either added or removed in an FAQ

They got both, then in the new red book they were only allowed one. And I haven't got the newest red book yet still for the legions (for shame, also the fact that looming wolves and t sons, I thought I'd wait just in case)

[bluntblade]

I totally thought this was going to be the coolest diorama ever.

I think I hear a gauntlet being thrown down.