What’s our most point efficient units?

[Helycon]

Are you asking where they are in the spreadsheet? Below the Venerable Dreadnoughts entries.

 

Are you asking how they fare? Firepower-wise, they're almost twice as inefficient as Plasma Devs with overcharge and WotDA. They're better than Las Preds, though.

Of course, they have range advantage. This I didn't factor in my calculations.

 

-----

 

 

I'm adding some more stuff to the spreadsheet and report (some FW stuff and terminators) in my particular file; I'll upload whenever I can. Also, I'm creating the melee spreadsheet as well.

How do preds fare with killshot?

[Vector Strike]

 

Are you asking where they are in the spreadsheet? Below the Venerable Dreadnoughts entries.

 

Are you asking how they fare? Firepower-wise, they're almost twice as inefficient as Plasma Devs with overcharge and WotDA. They're better than Las Preds, though.

Of course, they have range advantage. This I didn't factor in my calculations.

 

-----

 

 

I'm adding some more stuff to the spreadsheet and report (some FW stuff and terminators) in my particular file; I'll upload whenever I can. Also, I'm creating the melee spreadsheet as well.

How do preds fare with killshot?

 

 

Didn't factor that in, as I'm comparing only unit by unit

[march10k]

Are you asking where they are in the spreadsheet? Below the Venerable Dreadnoughts entries.

 

Are you asking how they fare? Firepower-wise, they're almost twice as inefficient as Plasma Devs with overcharge and WotDA. They're better than Las Preds, though.

Of course, they have range advantage. This I didn't factor in my calculations.

 

-----

 

 

I'm adding some more stuff to the spreadsheet and report (some FW stuff and terminators) in my particular file; I'll upload whenever I can. Also, I'm creating the melee spreadsheet as well.

Ah, got it.  I can't open the spreadsheet at work.  I'm pretty surprised that they compare so poorly to plasma devs.  I guess it doesn't matter for me, I face enough T8 that S8 vs S9 is kind of the only factor that matters.  Also, since I'm using two squads, and only one of them could benefit from WotDA... I am going to be hybridizing them, though...three lascannons and a signum-supported plasma cannon per squad.  A forum member (maybe you?) taught me that.  It's a great trade-off...slightly less capable against T8 (D3 shots instead of one helps, but only so much), but superior against anything lighter, especially heavy infantry.

 

 

Are you asking where they are in the spreadsheet? Below the Venerable Dreadnoughts entries.

 

Are you asking how they fare? Firepower-wise, they're almost twice as inefficient as Plasma Devs with overcharge and WotDA. They're better than Las Preds, though.

Of course, they have range advantage. This I didn't factor in my calculations.

 

-----

 

 

I'm adding some more stuff to the spreadsheet and report (some FW stuff and terminators) in my particular file; I'll upload whenever I can. Also, I'm creating the melee spreadsheet as well.

How do preds fare with killshot?

 

 

Didn't factor that in, as I'm comparing only unit by unit

 

Waitaminit, you're allowing WotDA, but not kill shot?  Sounds like a stacked deck...

[Vector Strike]

Edit: managed to factor Signum into Devs.

---

 

Certainly I'm not the one that told you that (on 3xLC + 1xPC), as I'm not an advocate of mixed-weapons unit.

 

Also, I'm not counting in Killshot because you need 3 units of Predators for that to happen (and very few people use them), while WotDA needs only 1 unit (and plasma units are widely used).

 

I've put the numbers of the same unit without WotDA in the report. Some of them still do great even without the stratagem:

 

4 Lascannon Devastators (no cherub): average 41,12 PPD.

4 Plasma Cannon Devastators (no cherub): average 20,42 with WotDA, 29,88 without - meaning Plasma Devs are a better deal than Las against the full menagerie of enemies. In fact, even in all specific cases Plasma Devs surpass Las ones (T8 is the only one they're close to 2-ish PPD). The advantage of Lascannons is the extra 12" range, of couse.

A Predator with 4 Lascannons costs 53,18 PPD. It is so much more expensive in this metric that it can't come close in efficiency. It's good side is being faster, firing farther and having more HP than the Devs (as being better against Poison weapons). You need other 3 of those to even be able to use Killshot and count on the enemy not killing at least one of them to let you use the stratagem. 

 

---

 

Did the calculations. Killshot makes a trio of Predators cost 32,20 PPD on average - certainly not bad, but as I showed before, just a tiny bit better than 4x Plasma Cannon Devastators... that only had to overcharge and stand still. Even yet - except on the T8 bracket, the plasma dudes are still better by 1-2 PPD. Oh, I forgot to say that the 3 Preds cost almost 600p.

 

So, to recap:

A simple unit of 5 Devastators, 4 of them sporting a Plasma Cannon each, overcharging and standing still, has better cost-effectiveness against any kind of monster/vehicle up to T7 2+/3++ (doing measly 2 damage), costing almost 3 times less, than a trio of Predators armed with 4 Lascannons each AND using Killshot stratagem (4 damage each weapon). If we use WotDA stratagem on the Devs, things become really bad for the Predators. Again, the only 3 advantages Preds have are range, speed and HP (the latter not a really good one, as it would lose BS and thus gain even more PPD).

 

Conclusion: Don't use Predators unless the tables are really long/wide. And get a bunch or them, as they're not really hard to kill.

[Helycon]

Thanks for that!

 

What was the loadout for the Preds? I fell that the cheaper option is actually more effective due to number of shots and the fact you get both a +1 on the wound roll AND the damage.

[Vector Strike]

Thanks for that!

 

What was the loadout for the Preds? I fell that the cheaper option is actually more effective due to number of shots and the fact you get both a +1 on the wound roll AND the damage.

 

Annihilator-patter (all Lascannons). I'll calculate with autocannon + lascannons and I'll tell you later

[Helycon]

 

 

Thanks for that!

 

What was the loadout for the Preds? I fell that the cheaper option is actually more effective due to number of shots and the fact you get both a +1 on the wound roll AND the damage.

Annihilator-patter (all Lascannons). I'll calculate with autocannon + lascannons and I'll tell you later

You're a champ, many thanks :)

[Vector Strike]

You're a champ, many thanks

 

 

Ok, done the math. A simple 1x PAC + 2x LC goes by 45,69 PPD, meaning it is more cost-effective than the all-Lascannon version - only against T8 the latter takes the lead.

 

Now, considering Killshot: for almost 550p, the Predators go down to 26,85 PPD. Now they can compete with Plasma Devs, but still... had to spend a CP and have 3 working Predators at BS 3+.

[march10k]

Edit: managed to factor Signum into Devs.

---

 

Certainly I'm not the one that told you that (on 3xLC + 1xPC), as I'm not an advocate of mixed-weapons unit.

 

Also, I'm not counting in Killshot because you need 3 units of Predators for that to happen (and very few people use them), while WotDA needs only 1 unit (and plasma units are widely used).

 

I've put the numbers of the same unit without WotDA in the report. Some of them still do great even without the stratagem:

 

4 Lascannon Devastators (no cherub): average 41,12 PPD.

4 Plasma Cannon Devastators (no cherub): average 20,42 with WotDA, 29,88 without - meaning Plasma Devs are a better deal than Las against the full menagerie of enemies. In fact, even in all specific cases Plasma Devs surpass Las ones (T8 is the only one they're close to 2-ish PPD). The advantage of Lascannons is the extra 12" range, of couse.

A Predator with 4 Lascannons costs 53,18 PPD. It is so much more expensive in this metric that it can't come close in efficiency. It's good side is being faster, firing farther and having more HP than the Devs (as being better against Poison weapons). You need other 3 of those to even be able to use Killshot and count on the enemy not killing at least one of them to let you use the stratagem. 

 

---

 

Did the calculations. Killshot makes a trio of Predators cost 32,20 PPD on average - certainly not bad, but as I showed before, just a tiny bit better than 4x Plasma Cannon Devastators... that only had to overcharge and stand still. Even yet - except on the T8 bracket, the plasma dudes are still better by 1-2 PPD. Oh, I forgot to say that the 3 Preds cost almost 600p.

 

So, to recap:

A simple unit of 5 Devastators, 4 of them sporting a Plasma Cannon each, overcharging and standing still, has better cost-effectiveness against any kind of monster/vehicle up to T7 2+/3++ (doing measly 2 damage), costing almost 3 times less, than a trio of Predators armed with 4 Lascannons each AND using Killshot stratagem (4 damage each weapon). If we use WotDA stratagem on the Devs, things become really bad for the Predators. Again, the only 3 advantages Preds have are range, speed and HP (the latter not a really good one, as it would lose BS and thus gain even more PPD).

 

Conclusion: Don't use Predators unless the tables are really long/wide. And get a bunch or them, as they're not really hard to kill.

 

It is really interesting that the plasma cannons are that much more efficient, it's a good thing I have four of them painted up for tactical squads that I'm not fielding.  I guess I'll be running one plasma dev squad and one las dev squad instead of two las squads.  Since it's in the context of a list that has deepstriking termies and inceptors, losing 12" of range on one of the antitank squads won't be the end of the world.

 

As for predator annihilators, it's true that they aren't hard to kill.  It's criminal that rhinos are just as tough in this edition when AV13 and AV11 were worlds apart before.  One wound?  That's an insult.  That said, when I was running my annihilator last year, before I had the second dev squad finished, it did okay.  The dev squad took more fire because marines are still easier to kill than tanks, and the terminators dropping in the enemy deployment zone also helped to take the heat off of the tank.  They're made of tissue paper, but in the context of a list, an opponent, and a game, that doesn't necessarily mean they die on turn one, or even that they die at all.  Still, your comment that you need a ton of them to be sure of getting kill shot off is spot on. 

 

 

You're a champ, many thanks

 

 

Ok, done the math. A simple 1x PAC + 2x LC goes by 45,69 PPD, meaning it is more cost-effective than the all-Lascannon version - only against T8 the latter takes the lead.

 

Now, considering Killshot: for almost 550p, the Predators go down to 26,85 PPD. Now they can compete with Plasma Devs, but still... had to spend a CP and have 3 working Predators at BS 3+.

 

Sort of like spending a CP on WotDA? 

[Deathwalker]

Sigh.

[Isual]

 

 

 

 

Ok, done the math. A simple 1x PAC + 2x LC goes by 45,69 PPD, meaning it is more cost-effective than the all-Lascannon version - only against T8 the latter takes the lead.

 

Now, considering Killshot: for almost 550p, the Predators go down to 26,85 PPD. Now they can compete with Plasma Devs, but still... had to spend a CP and have 3 working Predators at BS 3+.

 

Sort of like spending a CP on WotDA? 

 

I marked the important part. Degrading your Predators will weaken the effect of killshot noticeably and killing even one will remove the possibility of it complete. Plus it works on vehicles and monsters only.

I think WotDA is more flexible to build on cause it has no target limitation and can be used vor other units if one is killed off.

[march10k]

 

Sort of like spending a CP on WotDA? 

 

I marked the important part.

 

 

That's not my point.  I meant that Vector Strike makes a point of emphasizing that kill shot costs a CP (implying that it's a burden), but if you go back and read his discussion of WotDA, that expense of spending a CP just never comes up.  So it's a downside in the case of killshot, but not in the case of WotDA? Using the CP cost as an argument against killshot when you conveniently ignore it in the case of the stratagem that you do like is...biased.

[Helycon]

The same can also be said for 'degrading plasma Devs' and the like. Killing Devs will make the squad less effective, and the CP spent less effective as well, but in that case, you can still spend it.

 

The thing is, it's all comparing in a vacuum, which is the only way to compare them properly. It's impossible to factor in everything for every unit. A predator has more range, which also factors in in points.

 

Many thanks for all the calculations, it's a huge help!

 

Just to be a bit of a pain... How do the Heavy Bolter sponsons look? They're dirt cheap and have the potential to do almost the same damage as a lascannon sponson when it comes to killshot.

[Solrac]

If you are talking units in a vacuum you can't take some stratagems into account for some units and not for others.

 

When you list build you don't just take one unit here and one unit there, you build your list around a theme, groups of units and stratagems.

 

I have never seen anyone at any competitive event take only 1 or 2 Predators. They will either take at 3 for Killshot or not take any and build their list around something else.

 

Btw best point efficient Predator loadout with Killshot is Predator Autocannon + 2x Lascannon. 2D3 shot, Damage 4 Predator Autocannon with +1 to wound is no joke.

[Vector Strike]

 

Sort of like spending a CP on WotDA? 

 

 

4x Plasma Devs just overcharging and standing still (no WotDA): 30,74 (Signum in)

1x AC+ 2x Las Predator: 45,69

4x Las Predator: 53,18

 

4x Plasma Devs overcharging, standing still and with WotDA: 20,49 (Signum in)

3x 1x AC+ 2x Las Predator with killshot: 26,85

4x Las Predator with killshot: 32,30

 

From here we get that Las-only Predators aren't a good deal (except vs T8) - their Killshot potential is worse than standard Plasma Devs.

Killshot AC Pred, while better than standard Devs, are worse than WotDA Plasma Devs.

 

30,74 - 26,85 = 3,89

26,85 - 20,49 = 6,36

 

This means that the Killshot AC Preds are closer in efficiency to the standard Plasma Devs than to the WotDA Plasma Devs. Between losing 4 PPD or 1 CP every turn (which can be used for WotDA or something else), I'd rather lose the PPD. Needing to have 3 Predators close to each other is a huge liability.

 

 

The same can also be said for 'degrading plasma Devs' and the like. Killing Devs will make the squad less effective, and the CP spent less effective as well, but in that case, you can still spend it.

 

The thing is, it's all comparing in a vacuum, which is the only way to compare them properly. It's impossible to factor in everything for every unit. A predator has more range, which also factors in in points.

 

Many thanks for all the calculations, it's a huge help!

 

Just to be a bit of a pain... How do the Heavy Bolter sponsons look? They're dirt cheap and have the potential to do almost the same damage as a lascannon sponson when it comes to killshot.

 

Didn't calculate that because Heavy Bolters aren't really used for AT business... sorry.

[Vector Strike]

If you are talking units in a vacuum you can't take some stratagems into account for some units and not for others.

 

When you list build you don't just take one unit here and one unit there, you build your list around a theme, groups of units and stratagems.

 

I have never seen anyone at any competitive event take only 1 or 2 Predators. They will either take at 3 for Killshot or not take any and build their list around something else.

 

Btw best point efficient Predator loadout with Killshot is Predator Autocannon + 2x Lascannon. 2D3 shot, Damage 4 Predator Autocannon with +1 to wound is no joke.

 

Every unit with WotDA that has at least some significant result (generally under 40 PPD) also has their no-WotDA result in the report file. Thus people can compare if it is worth using them even without the stratagem. 

 

As you've pointed out, AC+Las Predator with Killshot isn't bad at all - but is too expensive and prone to enemy action at the beginning of the game (invalidanting the use of the stratagem), while 3 units of Plasma Devs (still cheaper than 3 AC+Las Predators) will be able to keep using WotDA until they're cleaned up.

 

This spreadsheet is just to point out what is the most efficient units in our roster for anti-tank, firepower-wise. The report disclaimer has that info on its first page. Everything else must be considered by the reader to build his list.

For example: the Lascannon + 2 Plasmagun Razorback is an interesting choice as anti-tank when taken in the vacuum. However, noone in their right mind would spend WotDA on one or even use it as their main AT source when there are more appropriate units for that job.

[Solrac]

 

As you've pointed out, AC+Las Predator with Killshot isn't bad at all - but is too expensive and prone to enemy action at the beginning of the game (invalidanting the use of the stratagem), while 3 units of Plasma Devs (still cheaper than 3 AC+Las Predators) will be able to keep using WotDA until they're cleaned up.

 

 

I agree with a lot of the points you make but if your spreadsheet is just calculating raw firepower the above comment should not be factored into unit comparisons because you are starting to venture from solid firepower vacuum to also comparing unit survivability.

 

Anyone could argue that while 3x Dev squads are cheaper than 3x Predators, the Devastator squads are a lot easier to kill than 1 Predator as well as killing 3 models from each devastator unit. Also who has Turn 1 is a moot argument because long range heavy weapons regardless of platform will usually be the first thing that gets targeted if your opponent has first turn.

 

My point is if you are comparing raw firepower output only, you should be factoring in all stratagems and non stratagem outcomes regardless of any other factors. If you include more than just the raw data the spreadsheet won't work because then you have to starting factoring in all scenarios for every entry and there are too many for that to work.

[Interrogator Stobz]

I’d like to see the data without any strategems, they obviously improve units, just like Azzy or a Master or a Lieutenant will.

The raw unit should be compared with other raw units. Cherubs, Signums etc. are a part of a unit in this context.

[Kasper_Hawser]

If I may interject, I read most of what discussed so far as "Points per Damage" almost exclusively to measure the unit. I hope you guys also take "resilience into mind". 

 

That being said, Devastators probably still win over a Predator, as despite T7, the degrading stats and relatively low number of wounds makes the Devastator more superior in damage.

 

In addition, DA and vanilla devastators can have at least 5 extra bolter mooks to absorb the shots. Plus Grim Resolve's natural reroll ones if they don't move, making the Company master redundant for them, though a lieutenant is still very good support for them.

 

Based on my experience as someone fighting AGAINST Dark Angels, I think  your most scary units are Ravenwing Blacknights. Good CC, good guns, not THAT much higher than a regular biker I think. But whether it is efficient, well, make sure you take speed into account as well.

 

1) Points per damage

2) Resilience,

3) Speed

[Solrac]

 

That being said, Devastators probably still win over a Predator, as despite T7, the degrading stats and relatively low number of wounds makes the Devastator more superior in damage.

 

Devastators still win over the Predator if you are comparing points efficiency vs shots/damage output before damage is taken.

 

Adding survivability like you have done above it gets very debateable and really there is no clear winner because there are too many variables. Yes a Predator degrades in stats as it takes damage but you haven't factored in that a Devastator squad loses heavy weapon shots as it loses models by taking wounds.

 

Weight of fire is a big deal in 8th edition. I would rather lose a point of ballistic skill than to lose the shots from a whole heavy weapon.

 

Having a pure run by the numbers RAW output of firepower will help you make your mind up to what you take but should be a guide only. It is why a spreadsheet like this shouldn't have any bias on experience and should be purely maths driven.

[Kasper_Hawser]

 

 

That being said, Devastators probably still win over a Predator, as despite T7, the degrading stats and relatively low number of wounds makes the Devastator more superior in damage.

 

Devastators still win over the Predator if you are comparing points efficiency vs shots/damage output before damage is taken.

 

Adding survivability like you have done above it gets very debateable and really there is no clear winner because there are too many variables. Yes a Predator degrades in stats as it takes damage but you haven't factored in that a Devastator squad loses heavy weapon shots as it loses models by taking wounds.

 

Weight of fire is a big deal in 8th edition. I would rather lose a point of ballistic skill than to lose the shots from a whole heavy weapon.

 

Having a pure run by the numbers RAW output of firepower will help you make your mind up to what you take but should be a guide only. It is why a spreadsheet like this shouldn't have any bias on experience and should be purely maths driven.

 

 

Not to mention the bolter mooks to absorb the shots for the heavy weapons. This is the only bad thing about Space Wolves Long Fangs, ALL bar sergeant of them are veterans with no option to take extra bodies, although we can get an EXTRA veteran sergeant with terminator armour. Sadly relentless is gone so no Full BS devastator on the move.

[Vector Strike]

 

 

As you've pointed out, AC+Las Predator with Killshot isn't bad at all - but is too expensive and prone to enemy action at the beginning of the game (invalidanting the use of the stratagem), while 3 units of Plasma Devs (still cheaper than 3 AC+Las Predators) will be able to keep using WotDA until they're cleaned up.

 

 

I agree with a lot of the points you make but if your spreadsheet is just calculating raw firepower the above comment should not be factored into unit comparisons because you are starting to venture from solid firepower vacuum to also comparing unit survivability.

 

Anyone could argue that while 3x Dev squads are cheaper than 3x Predators, the Devastator squads are a lot easier to kill than 1 Predator as well as killing 3 models from each devastator unit. Also who has Turn 1 is a moot argument because long range heavy weapons regardless of platform will usually be the first thing that gets targeted if your opponent has first turn.

 

My point is if you are comparing raw firepower output only, you should be factoring in all stratagems and non stratagem outcomes regardless of any other factors. If you include more than just the raw data the spreadsheet won't work because then you have to starting factoring in all scenarios for every entry and there are too many for that to work.

 

 

But I said that! All the non-pure firepower things must be considered by the player when building his list. The spreadsheet only covers firepower.

I can't consider all the factors involved because this would become tremendously huge and I have other stuff to do in my life. What I wanted to do with this is to provide a guide for people when considering our options; this very thread sparked the idea in my mind.

 

However, I will factor WotDA but not Killshot because I'm comparing only 1 unit, not groups of them. I've automatized all plasma entries, so people can just change the D column and have their PPDs without WotDA involved. And again, the report file has the PPD without WotDA to each plasma entry.

 

I’d like to see the data without any strategems, they obviously improve units, just like Azzy or a Master or a Lieutenant will.

The raw unit should be compared with other raw units. Cherubs, Signums etc. are a part of a unit in this context.

 

The data without stratagems is in the report*. I've managed to add the Signum to the Devastators, but I won't add cherubs or hunter-killer missiles for one reason: they are expendable. I did this only with perennial weapons.

 

*I'm updating both the spreadsheet and the report I'll post them here later in the day.

 

 

 

That being said, Devastators probably still win over a Predator, as despite T7, the degrading stats and relatively low number of wounds makes the Devastator more superior in damage.

 

Devastators still win over the Predator if you are comparing points efficiency vs shots/damage output before damage is taken.

 

Adding survivability like you have done above it gets very debateable and really there is no clear winner because there are too many variables. Yes a Predator degrades in stats as it takes damage but you haven't factored in that a Devastator squad loses heavy weapon shots as it loses models by taking wounds.

 

Weight of fire is a big deal in 8th edition. I would rather lose a point of ballistic skill than to lose the shots from a whole heavy weapon.

 

Having a pure run by the numbers RAW output of firepower will help you make your mind up to what you take but should be a guide only. It is why a spreadsheet like this shouldn't have any bias on experience and should be purely maths driven.

 

 

But the spreadsheet is. It has nothing else than math. The report has it organized in rankings and my own conclusions on it (prone to disagreement)

[march10k]

 

When you list build you don't just take one unit here and one unit there, you build your list around a theme, groups of units and stratagems.

 

This, 10,000%.  Groups of units because buffs, bubble wrap, etc, matter.  Because overwhelming the enemy's ability to prioritize targets matters.  Because pre-planned spending of CP is part of list-building.

 

I'm not just running two devastator squads.  I'm running them with Azrael and a lieutenant.  With a darkshroud behind them.  Almost always in cover, preferably a multi-story ruin.  With scouts out front as bubble wrap.  None of that affects a comparison between plasma cannons and lascannons too much, but it's clearly a static firebase, so the range advantage of heavy weapons (and to a minor extent, the extra 12" that lascannons get over plasma cannons) over hellblasters is critical.  The 4++ from the lion helm wouldn't apply to a predator annihilator.  So many factors that add up to a conclusion that mathhammer is fine, and it helps decide what weapons to give the devastators, but in this build, it has to be devastators. 

 

I'm also planning in advance to spend 3CP on DWA with Belial in support, and if I don't lose any terminators that first turn, another CP to combat-squad them afterwards.  What gives me hope of not losing a terminator on arrival?  I'm deepstriking 2x6 inceptors at the same time (not necessarily the same place).  Now the enemy has two -1 to hit, 2+/4++ devastator squads, 2 large inceptor squads (if not combat-squadded, otherwise more targets), and the eleven terminators to worry about. 

 

 

Based on my experience as someone fighting AGAINST Dark Angels, I think  your most scary units are Ravenwing Blacknights. Good CC, good guns, not THAT much higher than a regular biker I think. But whether it is efficient, well, make sure you take speed into account as well.

 

1) Points per damage

2) Resilience,

3) Speed

 

Totally effective, totally inefficient.  If you care about points efficiency.

[sneakybamsen]

I'm sorry, but the whole damage-per-point deal becomes moot quite quickly as everything must be viewed at in context. March10k uses devs because they fit his playstyle and/or meta better than hellblasters. I use devastators because they are good, I know hellblasters are better, but I don't run primaris. Yes, you can do DPP calculations, and it might seem good, but they never really account for other aspects than what throughput you get. Range, survivability, mobility and other abilities are forgotten in the process, and with good reason, as they cannot really be factored in reliably.

 

When you try to find the most points effective unit, you have too try different units over several games to give you an idea of how a unit performs. You might find Black knights to be very effective for you, even though they are not considered so widely by DA players. It all depends on playstyle and meta.

 

Personally I think dark talons, devastators with plasma cannons, scout bikers and Ezekiel are some of the more effective units for their points. The latter because he is so many times better than a regular librarian for not a lot more points. An extra psychic power to choose and 1 more he can deny. And he is tougher, and better equipped. Azrael makes the day of hellblasters and devastators along with ancient and lieutenant. But by himself he doesn't do that much. It's what he can make other selections do that makes us use him.

On the contrary I don't field a lot of dreadnoughts these days, as they just don't stack up as well as they should. They're not bad, but they don't quite do what they should either. I love dreads, they are so cool, and I have tried numerous 8th edition games with them, but they are for the time being resigned to the shelves.

[G8Keeper]

I'm sorry, but the whole damage-per-point deal becomes moot quite quickly as everything must be viewed at in context. March10k uses devs because they fit his playstyle and/or meta better than hellblasters. I use devastators because they are good, I know hellblasters are better, but I don't run primaris. Yes, you can do DPP calculations, and it might seem good, but they never really account for other aspects than what throughput you get. Range, survivability, mobility and other abilities are forgotten in the process, and with good reason, as they cannot really be factored in reliably.

 

When you try to find the most points effective unit, you have too try different units over several games to give you an idea of how a unit performs. You might find Black knights to be very effective for you, even though they are not considered so widely by DA players. It all depends on playstyle and meta.

 

Personally I think dark talons, devastators with plasma cannons, scout bikers and Ezekiel are some of the more effective units for their points. The latter because he is so many times better than a regular librarian for not a lot more points. An extra psychic power to choose and 1 more he can deny. And he is tougher, and better equipped. Azrael makes the day of hellblasters and devastators along with ancient and lieutenant. But by himself he doesn't do that much. It's what he can make other selections do that makes us use him.

On the contrary I don't field a lot of dreadnoughts these days, as they just don't stack up as well as they should. They're not bad, but they don't quite do what they should either. I love dreads, they are so cool, and I have tried numerous 8th edition games with them, but they are for the time being resigned to the shelves.

 

In what will be proof of your comment sneaky, I find Dreadnoughts quite useful.  My opponents often ignore them and let them get within charge range of medium vehicles, which they can still rip to shreds.  Dunecrawlers fall apart nicely :)