How are the 1.1 FAQ's playtest units?

[Argel Tal]

They are great improvement for all mele legion.

 

I have a set of 10 with jump packs for my world eaters and I cant' waut to test them!5aon the charge at str 5 with - 1 to the toughness looks so good on paper and complement veey well with other mele units!

[Mazryonh]

They are great improvement for all mele legion.

 

I have a set of 10 with jump packs for my world eaters and I cant' waut to test them!5aon the charge at str 5 with - 1 to the toughness looks so good on paper and complement veey well with other mele units!

I think they'll work well because they the World Eaters have a lot of melee buffs in their legion rules that melee-oriented Destroyers will like, not the least of which are the free Chainaxes and access to Rage. But it also shows how far vanilla Destroyers have to go to specialize in melee.

 

Being a long time proponent of the greatness of Destroyers in my local group, I'm definitely not opposed to any of the upgrades you guys are proposing. Special Ammo, more/different rad or phosphex stuff, power weapons, all of this (or event just some, would be amazing).

 

However. Having played a game with a full squad of ten jump packing dudes over the weekend, I don't know if this discussion takes into account how much better they've actually become with these changes. Are we looking for ways to make them an auto-include rather than just better? Because they're genuinely much better than I've ever seen them before.

 

The combined lower points cost, extra attack and existing rad grenades is huge. With an attached Chaplain, I shot and charged a 16/17 man Tac squad (it was late game, so casualties) and wiped it off my opponent's deployment zone objective, robbing him of a VP and giving me on for Linebreaker. Extra attacks meant more chances of hitting successfully, and Rad Grenades meant those hits were more likely to turn into wounds.

 

Now, I definitely rolled well, and he definitely botched his saves, but the sheer weight of dice these guys put out (plus the re-rolls from Chappie's Zealot) made them incredibly effective. As much as it would be fluffy and cool to have them with those other upgrades mentioned above, and I'm definitely not arguing against them, don't lose sight of the fact that Destroyers are demonstrably better on the table now than they've ever been.

 

Yes, Destroyers are better than before at melee and you don't have to give up as many options as before to field them.  But as of the 1.1 FAQ, what they offer is either available from other sources or they're just not great at it.

• Rad Grenades can also be taken by Forge Lords, Techmarines, Moritats, and with certain RoWs, many other models.
• Rad Missiles max out at two for Destroyers, but a Techmarine's Servitors can take more in a squad.
• Flamer and Plasma upgrades for Destroyers are limited to pistols only, but Tactical Support Squads can take more of them with better range and affect more targets per attack, while taking up only a Troops slot.
• Their main ranged attack, dual Bolt Pistols, is less firepower and shorter ranged when maxed out than what a max-size Tactical Squad can bring to bear. Destroyers aren't even better shots than Tactical Squads.
• Their signature trick, the Phosphex Bomb, is critically short-ranged and possibly dangerous to them, and can also be taken on much longer-ranged artillery units.

If you had used a similarly-sized Assault Squad in that game, with or without a Chaplain, would you have gotten similar or better results? Assault Squads also have Hammer of Wrath (which Destroyers don't have if they don't have jump packs), have the same pistol options, can get more power weapons than Destroyers can, and have access to combat shields (which can't be taken by Destroyers at all) for increased durability. I think an Assault Squad might have served you better and freed up an Elites slot for something else.

 

I'm not interested in making Destroyers "auto-include" units, but rather in making them become more uniquely useful while at the same time more characterful given their BL fluff, because right now they're still a bit lacking in both, which is partly due to power creep and points reductions over time.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Keep in mind you need to charge with a pack to get HoW, something that rarely happens. Otherwise I do agree with you.

 

On the whole, destroyers are necessarily going to be better in melee legions. Soh for sure due to death death dealer and merciless fighter; night Lords ATfM and chain glaive; ba +1 to wound; eaters axes. Raven guard might have the most interesting use, as you can choose between fire support with infiltrate or melee hammer with packs and furious charge.

 

Not auto include, but for sure a possibility

[Gorgoff]

"Rad Grenades can also be taken by Forge Lords, Techmarines, Moritats, and with certain RoWs, many other models."

 

True, but those are expansive characters you have to buy in addition to a unit. In case of the Techmarines you have to pull of a doublecharge which is a lot harder then it seems.

 

"Rad Missiles max out at two for Destroyers, but a Techmarine's Servitors can take more in a squad."

True, but Destroyers are mobile, can kill stuff in cc, can have jump packs and are overall a lot of more versitile then the Techmarine with Servo-automata.

 

"Flamer and Plasma upgrades for Destroyers are limited to pistols only, but Tactical Support Squads can take more of them with better range and affect more targets per attack, while taking up only a Troops slot."

 

True, but again the same applies.

Complete different combat role and TSS is more expansive.

 

"Their main ranged attack, dual Bolt Pistols, is less firepower and shorter ranged when maxed out than what a max-size Tactical Squad can bring to bear. Destroyers aren't even better shots than Tactical Squads."

Dito.

You compare two very different units with completely different combat roles here.

And why should D have more firepower than a TS?

They kick their asses in cc, are more mobile, have better LD and so forth.

 

"Their signature trick, the Phosphex Bomb, is critically short-ranged and possibly dangerous to them, and can also be taken on much longer-ranged artillery units."

Completely different weapon.

A Phosohex Bomb has S5 and AP2 while the Phosphex Canister has S4 and AP3. And again you not only need the guns you need a Siege Breaker as well which raises the cost here significally.

And again they have a very different combat role.

 

I think you made the mistake and took one aspect of the D and compared that to units which are specialised on that.

Of course they don't have as many Bolter shots as an unit of tacticals, and of course they don't have as many missles as a Techmarine with Servo-automata, but why should they and what kind of argument is that?

It's like you'd say "Terminators are worse then tacticals because you get more Bolter shots for the same prize with the latter".

Technically that is true but it lacks the whole picture. ;)

 

Destriyers are a special purpose unit and it's biggest asset is their versatility. They shouldn't just shoot stuff and they shouldn't just beat stuff. To utilise them perfectly they should do both and they can do both.

So let them shoot and then charge. That's how you use them. A ten men squad is way to expansive for shooting with their pistols and two missles each turn and their also to expansive to just beat things up. It's all about the combination of those two things.

 

"On the whole, destroyers are necessarily going to be better in melee legions. Soh for sure due to death death dealer and merciless fighter; night Lords ATfM and chain glaive; ba +1 to wound; eaters axes. Raven guard might have the most interesting use, as you can choose between fire support with infiltrate or melee hammer with packs and furious charge."

That.

I may add that AL could squeeze more out of them too.

For all the other legions I'd go for a small unit which attacks artillery pieces and small HSS.

5 dudes with one missle launcher and one Phosphex Bomb on the sergeant should do the trick.

Put them in some kind of transport or give them jump packs and you have a very good unit to harass your opponents back field.

Of course Veterans and the like could do that as well but that's not the point.

Destroyers can do that and they are a very cool unit so why not?

[Cadmus Tyro]

Yes We could squeeze more out of destroyers.....but we are waiting for the BA specific destroyers....so we can steal them.....

[Gorgoff]

Yes We could squeeze more out of destroyers.....but we are waiting for the BA specific destroyers....so we can steal them.....

Oh damn you sneaky Alpha Legion basterds.

[rendingon1+]

Destriyers are a special purpose unit and it's biggest asset is their versatility. They shouldn't just shoot stuff and they shouldn't just beat stuff. To utilise them perfectly they should do both and they can do both.

So let them shoot and then charge. That's how you use them. A ten men squad is way to expansive for shooting with their pistols and two missles each turn and their also to expansive to just beat things up. It's all about the combination of those two things.

And what's their specil purpose? Essentially they are much more expensive ssault squad with additional attack and +1 to wound vs =<6 .

Their shooting is terrible no matter how you put that, they have no power wepaons except sergreant so aren't good in cc either.

"Let them shoot and chrge" - shoot and charge what? Terminators? They will die very easily. MEQ? There are other units who excell at erasing MEQ when compared to destroyers cheaper. Also you just cannot say that "you can't compare them to units with different roles".  What role are destroyers and why I cannot compare them to an assault squad? Destroyers are clearly cc unit, their shooting without upgrades is really lame.

So what if they have mobility if lack  punch to make use of it?

 

So.Comparison:

10 jump pack destroyers (no upgrades) - 240pts

10 men assault squad - combat shields, 2x power weapon, AA and power weapon on sgt. 245

OR Suicide Melta bomber squad - 230

5 Man command squad with jump packs - 5x power weapon 230

 

vs MEQ on charge (full unit)

Destroyers  =4,5 wounds

Assault Squad  = 1,7 (chainswords) + 2,5 (p.swords) wounds

Command Squad - 20 attacks, (p.swords)  = 6,6 wounds

 

In addition Assault squad has 5+ inv in cc and sgt has AA, while entire command squad is in AA.

 

So....? How good are destroyers?

 

Now, people are free to enjoy destroyers as the are, sure. But I'm sure most of us will agree they need more BANG!.

Of course no disrespect was meant to any who disagrees with me.

[SkimaskMohawk]

You might want to include shooting in there too, as there's literally no point not to. With base pistols, you get another 2.2 wounds from the destroyers, another 1 from the asm and .5 from the commands. End result being commands having 7.2 output, destroyers 6.7 and asm 5.2.

 

Now, without knowing the math, which units would look the most threatening to your MEQs. Commands, then asm, then destroyers; asm are also troops, further incentivising them as targets over destroyers. So for 5 under asm you get a better unit offensively, while flying a bit under the radar. Give that seargent a sword and you've jumped to 7.7, putting the asm for shame for 5 more points. Change that to a phosphex, and if you hit 3 guys (not hard with dealing fire) you're at 8.4 in a turn.

 

Now for a thought experiment; you've been charged by I4 or lower, stock jump destroyers vs. that asm squad vs. commands. Overwatch included.

 

Destroyers: 5.1

Asm:1.4+ 1.8

Commands: 0.1 + 3.3

 

Looks like destroyers are plain better than the rest due to counter charge.

 

So, they're offensively the most versatile against meq. I don't think I could recommend them over commands in terms of take x or y, but certainly over asm unless scoring units are needed. And as I mentioned, certain legions can leverage even more from them.

 

Oh, also the obvious fact to escort a moritat and receive a charge very well post chain fire.

[Mazryonh]

A Phosohex Bomb has S5 and AP2 while the Phosphex Canister has S4 and AP3. And again you not only need the guns you need a Siege Breaker as well which raises the cost here significally.

And again they have a very different combat role.

 

I think you made the mistake and took one aspect of the D and compared that to units which are specialised on that.

Of course they don't have as many Bolter shots as an unit of tacticals, and of course they don't have as many missles as a Techmarine with Servo-automata, but why should they and what kind of argument is that?

It's like you'd say "Terminators are worse then tacticals because you get more Bolter shots for the same prize with the latter".

Technically that is true but it lacks the whole picture.

 

The Phosphex Bomb having more strength and AP than Phosphex Artillery Canisters never made much sense to me, because the former is just a grenade and the latter should be a large artillery shell. Of course Phosphex Bombs are half-pistol range, but at that range the only really viable targets are infantry about to charge you or infantry that is too stupid to realize that close-by Destroyers have a Phosphex bomb and that they really ought to get away!

 

My point was that Destroyers' bag of tricks just isn't very impressive with regards to the alternatives you can get elsewhere.

 

And what's their specil purpose? Essentially they are much more expensive ssault squad with additional attack and +1 to wound vs =<6 .

 

Their shooting is terrible no matter how you put that, they have no power wepaons except sergreant so aren't good in cc either.

So....? How good are destroyers?

 

Now, people are free to enjoy destroyers as the are, sure. But I'm sure most of us will agree they need more BANG!.

Of course no disrespect was meant to any who disagrees with me.

 

 

This is a good distillation of the issues with Destroyers.

 

You might want to include shooting in there too, as there's literally no point not to. With base pistols, you get another 2.2 wounds from the destroyers, another 1 from the asm and .5 from the commands. End result being commands having 7.2 output, destroyers 6.7 and asm 5.2.

 

Now, without knowing the math, which units would look the most threatening to your MEQs. Commands, then asm, then destroyers; asm are also troops, further incentivising them as targets over destroyers. So for 5 under asm you get a better unit offensively, while flying a bit under the radar. Give that seargent a sword and you've jumped to 7.7, putting the asm for shame for 5 more points. Change that to a phosphex, and if you hit 3 guys (not hard with dealing fire) you're at 8.4 in a turn.

 

Now for a thought experiment; you've been charged by I4 or lower, stock jump destroyers vs. that asm squad vs. commands. Overwatch included.

 

Destroyers: 5.1

Asm:1.4+ 1.8

Commands: 0.1 + 3.3

 

Looks like destroyers are plain better than the rest due to counter charge.

 

So, they're offensively the most versatile against meq. I don't think I could recommend them over commands in terms of take x or y, but certainly over asm unless scoring units are needed. And as I mentioned, certain legions can leverage even more from them.

 

Oh, also the obvious fact to escort a moritat and receive a charge very well post chain fire.

 

Raven Guard Destroyers with Jump Packs have it even better; they can have it both ways and get both Furious Charge and Counter-Attack! Of course, it still doesn't change that they're stuck acting as an assault-type squad with mediocre short-ranged firepower most of the time due to the very short-ranged nature of the majority of their firepower. I would still like to see them using more fluff-appropriate weapons like Irrad Cleansers and the aforementioned Poisoned ammunition.

[Laughingman]

Got to play some destroyers in ZM game against some thousand sons and have some observations 

 

-Rad missiles are no joke especially against battle automata (wound on a 2+ even with the Cybernetic resilience, rule forcing you to re-roll the wound)...

- Phosphex bombs can be hilarious especially when you direct hit a group of Sekhmet terminators and kill a couple....

[Gorgoff]

IW player here.

I use a Siege Breaker on a regular basis and he always has a Phosphex Bomb because of reasons.

Since he walks the battlefield beside my five men unit of Tyrant Siege Terminators you'd be surprised how often he is able to throw that thing onto some unfortunate unit.

Always good for a laugh. :)

[SkimaskMohawk]

@maz sure they're an assault like squad, especially bare bones. But as we can see, they do the job better than a unit who's role is clearly assault.

 

And don't even get me started on night Lords destroyers, possibly the most deadly melee version of them.

[rendingon1+]

@SkimaskMohawk some good points you had there.

 

I think most melee legions Destroyers are deadly in their own way.

DA - add stasis shells to the launcher. Hitting your WS<5 dudes on 3+, striking first wounding on 3+. I think it's better than NL numbers dependant bonus.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Ill admit to being unfamiliar with the da stasis weapons, iirc it drops initiative and ws?.

 

So the math; you have the same 2.2 from shooting and then get a solid 5.9 wounds in combat.

 

Night Lords pump out 7.4 wounds in combat (remember you get +1 to hit and wound if you outnumber, and bulky count as 2 for it).

 

So in sheer damage, night Lords reign supreme. But, it's important to note that the da strike first so suffer less casualties in return. Vs 10 meq (stock so 1 attack a guy, 2 on sarge) night lords lose suffer .74 wounds (because of the pistols thinning down the ranks pre combat) while da only take .25.

 

So they're far more defensive, but at the same time the average doesn't even kill off a whole model.

[Nova_Dew]

Has any one done the maths against Solar Auxilia/Militia or Orks/Nids since while the HH is mostly played SM vs SM by us the resin crack addicts, Fluff wise the units were designed to be used against soft squishy things, just as a hypothetical?

[SkimaskMohawk]

No, because while militia and auxilia are opponents, the rest hasn't been for almost two years. Marines are still the most prevalent opponents.

 

On the whole, things like imperial fists destroyers would be better vs human stats, world eaters too due to axes. Night lords and raven guard are comparatively less good as they don't need their legion rules to wound dudes on a 2+

[rendingon1+]

Ill admit to being unfamiliar with the da stasis weapons, iirc it drops initiative and ws?.

 

So the math; you have the same 2.2 from shooting and then get a solid 5.9 wounds in combat.

 

Night Lords pump out 7.4 wounds in combat (remember you get +1 to hit and wound if you outnumber, and bulky count as 2 for it).

 

So in sheer damage, night Lords reign supreme. But, it's important to note that the da strike first so suffer less casualties in return. Vs 10 meq (stock so 1 attack a guy, 2 on sarge) night lords lose suffer .74 wounds (because of the pistols thinning down the ranks pre combat) while da only take .25.

 

So they're far more defensive, but at the same time the average doesn't even kill off a whole model.

Yup. Unit hit has -1 WS and I. Until the end of a game turn.

According to my calcultions (http://www.mathhammer40k.com) :

Close combat:

DA (stasis shot) - 6 W

NL (talent) - 5,6 W

 

I know it's +30 pts for missle launcher and stasis shells for DA but since they have literally nothing at the moment. Well.

Not arguing which ones are the best (I think WE under Assault win hands down) as I said before every serious close combat legion can buff them in some way.

[SkimaskMohawk]

I have no idea how they're calculating things on that site. They seem to add .1 to .2 to my results. Also, I don't know what numbers you're plugging in for NL, but they get both +1 to hit and wound off the outnumber; they're effectively strength 6 for that calculator of yours.

 

And yes. World eaters with blood madness do the very most at 8.2 from melee, not even considering hatred from the one rite. With hatred it jumps to 12.3; 14.5 from pistols. A very very respectable amount for 240.

[rendingon1+]

Ah, I forgot NL's +1 to hit, sorry. I gave NL S6, S5 for DA. Vs MeQ of course. Indeed NL are better on the charge than DA.

 

But I think that somehow DA' striking first and hitting on 3+ is near the top anyway. Not arguing NL is not powerfull, it is.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It's for sure context dependant I agree. WE, NL, DA, BA and RG have the best destroyers, since they have the most upfront synergy with the rad grenades and number of attacks. Interesting to note that eaters and NL can both wipe an average 5 man termi squad as well; eaters don't even need to shoot while the latter do. The other three all average out the exact same 4.2 post shooting. Still not too shabby imo.

 

I do wish they had more special weapon variety though, just to mix things up and allow you to lean into short ranged shooting or all-in melee.

[Mazryonh]

It's for sure context dependant I agree. WE, NL, DA, BA and RG have the best destroyers, since they have the most upfront synergy with the rad grenades and number of attacks. Interesting to note that eaters and NL can both wipe an average 5 man termi squad as well; eaters don't even need to shoot while the latter do. The other three all average out the exact same 4.2 post shooting. Still not too shabby imo.

 

I do wish they had more special weapon variety though, just to mix things up and allow you to lean into short ranged shooting or all-in melee.

 

So what does Mathhammer say about comparing the updated WB's Ashen Circle to Vanilla Destroyers then? Surely with their power weapons and Power Axes they'd be able to mulch Terminators even more effectively.

[Slips]

Their baseline Axe-Rakes being AP3 definitely helps vs PA enemies since you dont need to upgrade them.

 

Vs Termies, their lack of invuln and low number of attacks (1 per guy, 2 on the sarge) means that even if you upgrade them all to have power axes, theyre probably going to fold. Hard.

 

They also dont have Rad Grenades like normal Destroyers (offset a bit by the +1S of their axes), to make wounding easier. 5d3 Auto-Hits in overwatch is nice as is the template spam though.

 

In short: use them to kill 3+ saves or weaker, leave Terminator killing to other Terminators or units in that weight class.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Pretty good; against meq you get 13.5 from your melee attacks off a unit of 10. Hammer of wrath is tricky to calculate, as are flamer templates. For 220 it's solid, not even counting potential dark channelling or any other word bearer buff.

 

The only thing with power axes against terminators is that while most strike at I1 due to fists, any with swords, claws or any thing else funky can really throw a wrench into your plans. Against swords you kill them at the cost of 2.5 casualties; axes 3.3 and fists 4.1. That's not the best for 270, especially when the top 2 kill terminators before taking hits.

 

Now I'll say again that's without taking shooting or how in. A picture perfect shooting round plus how will change it up and net you 3.9 killed in advance and then you can cut the rest down properly.

 

So tldr; axe rakes are very good, power axes less so. WE and NL destroyers hunt terminators better

[Gorgoff]

I used a (1) Phosphex Thudd Gun yesterday against WE and can say that it is still overpowered. Whith one hit I killed 6 Destroyers with ease. Way to cheap to pull that off. 

 

The best (and obvious) way to use it is to shoot at units you just blew out of their car which is easy peasy.

 

I killed three of his Rhinos in one turn for example and could choose which unit I wanted to kill with the Thudd Gun. Ridiculous. 

[LtDan]

It's a 80pt unit plus a siege breaker tax. So it does add up. If I have spare slots I always seperate them because of exactly this reason. Tho the extra 2" move does help this