Best melee weapons for Astartes

[XeonDragon]

What stats did you use for Meq, Gec and VEQ? Why didn’t you consider doing the results for Teq? Not trying to shoot holes through your results but I just think five terminators armed with thunder hammers would do more damage to a Knight than if they had say power swords.

 

I used whatever states were loaded into the web Mathhammer site at the time I did it (a short while ago). You click GEQ, MEQ etc. TBH, I didn't include KEQ because it's rare in my local meta. As for TEQ, they are also rare. If I get around to updating it, I will probably add in TEQ as I suspect Terminators are going to be making a bit of a comeback in 9th

Edited August 27, 2020 by XeonDragon

[Blindhamster]

Assault intercessors (or death company)

 

Have 2+1+1+1 attacks each from turn 3 as blood Angel's. With +1 to wound and AP-2. 10 models have 51 attacks..

 

42 hits.. 28 wounds.. 14 wounds to tactical terminators... or 4 and a bit dead terminators.. or 9 wounds to assault terminators with storm shields for 3 dead terminators.

 

Its not the optimal thing to use a chainsword wielding squad against but even with terminators now being 3 wounds they manage to do reasonable work tbh considering how much cheaper the squad was.

 

On the topic of vanguard with power swords - I have done it in the past, yeah. I wouldnt now because primaris dont have an option for it.

[Captain Idaho]

It's nice information to have but the practical here is needing to kill things with a finite number of models. If a Knight is coming at you, 5 Vanguard with Chainswords won't stop it even if they are an otherwise efficient weapon, after all.

 

Essentially, it's relevant as to what you need to do at the time.

 

The Thunder Hammer is king due to its killing power. It is expensive but even just a couple of these weapons doted around the army can be potent.

 

I quite like the power sword. It breaks armour well and has utility against all targets for Marines.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

For DC Primaris can each take a chainsword though ? Also if the terminators are say close in size and have multi damage melee weapons they’ll pulverize what’s left.

 

ive seen sw players field TWC with chain swords and they tend to struggle versus hard targets.

Edited August 27, 2020 by Black Blow Fly

[Blindhamster]

For DC Primaris can each take a chainsword though ?

i was talking about regular death company, or id have said death company intercessors (who absolutely cannot take chainswords yet, but i imagine may well be able to whenever there is a BA supplement). Sorry for any confusion there!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

The master crafted power sword is decent. A power sword will struggle against any t5 multi wound unit with a good save.

[Captain Idaho]

Definitely will. I guess we need to differentiate close combat weapons on units, squad leaders and characters, as well as said roles.

 

Hmmm. I think I feel a youtube video coming along...

[ashc]

I think the main place is on veteran sergeants, vanguard veterans, and terminators maybe? - units where the choice will make quite a big difference.

[Khornestar]

Definitely will. I guess we need to differentiate close combat weapons on units, squad leaders and characters, as well as said roles.

 

Hmmm. I think I feel a youtube video coming along...

 

Wouldn't have time to be the one to run the analysis, but oh my gods I would LOVE to see such a robust comparison of roles and weaponry among Astartes, and somewhat by extension, believers in the true faith.

[chapter master 454]

Damage 1 is for chipping at best versus hard enemy units. No one would ever arm a smash captain with a chain sword. If you look at a typical list how many units are viable that can spam chain swords? With the new profile for Incursors they can be much more prolific in terms of sheer numbers you can put on the table. If you watch video batrep should you’ll notice players are bringing lots of hardened units like plague burst crawlers and talos... good luck chipping those nasties down. Terminators are going to be making a comeback as well so AP1 is not a big deal for them. We don’t need AP1 1D to deal with chaff either.

 

Captain Slash would like to disagree. Just saying, it may be for a relic but that relic was only accessible via a chainsword and he is a terror to run amok in infantry and other hard targets.

 

And damage 1 is at best chip damage? Tell that you Mechanicus and their dakka bots. Even without fury of mars they swiss cheese anything.

As for dealing with hard targets, there is more than just melee to handle that as would also be true in reverse. But for your spam question: bit rude to write off assault intercessors that hard man, they are only doing their best! Which is being a spammable chainsword source that has obsec.

 

Also, we aren't saying it is going to take down all-comers but sadly your terminators very often are overkill for what they need to do, part of the reason lightning claw terminators aren't used is because you want expensive to deal with expensive, not chaff. And last I check, hammer-nators don't handle masses very well. That isn't to say I don't think terminators won't make a come-back but thats a UNIT, not a weapon.

 

We are discussing weapons here and by far, the overall best one is the chainsword. It ain't fancy, it isn't decorated but it will do work now with AP1 on it.

 

If we are talking units, Terminators may make a comeback more because of their wound buff and I would actually say tactical terminators are more favoured than assault variants. A lot of those big targets like to high behind screens of various kinds and screening out deep strike isn't hard thus reaching out and touching them seems more effective than charging them while the inverse is true of infantry where being able to get choppy is extremely useful as even shooty troops want to get on objectives and thus put themselves in harms way for chopping.

But thats vacuum hammer, nothing is clear cut. However one aspect can be said: Argue that the Chainsword is bad. I mean, I would rather have that than the combat knifes of incursors because the chainsword gives an extra attack every fight, the paired combat knifes only give an extra hit ever 6 attacks. For a standard incursor, without charge boost they need 3 rounds to "assure" an extra hit. Though if your incursors have luck on their side then feel free, not going to judge someone whose models like rolling them hot sixes all day long (unlike my vindicare...2+ to hit...2+...and YOU MISSED 3 games in a row on turn 1).

[Gederas]

For DC Primaris can each take a chainsword though ?

i was talking about regular death company, or id have said death company intercessors (who absolutely cannot take chainswords yet, but i imagine may well be able to whenever there is a BA supplement). Sorry for any confusion there!

Well, not right now. But there was a picture showing what's clearly an Assault Intercessor in Death Company colours when the new Codex was previewed...

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I like Assault Intercessors and hoping the sergeant will get some melee options in the new codex.

[Mandragola]

I think that it's kind of impossible to come up with a calculation of weapon effectiveness like that. There are always going to be all kinds of modifiers in effect, so any calculation will either be absurdly complex or meaningless. In any event you should base the cost on the model and its weapon, not just the weapon alone. Take something like an Intercessor Sergeant and see how much damage he does to a variety of things.

 

Weapons also do very different things. Chainswords are a squad upgrade, generally, and used for killing enemy infantry. Thunder hammers tend to be found on characters or sergeants (except on TH/SS termies) and they're best for smashing up hard targets. They're not directly comparable.

 

There's a lot to discuss about which weapons are most effective in which context. Those termies might be best for my Fists, thanks to Pedro's aura of +1 attack, but a White Scar player might be better off using units like bladeguard or assault intercessors that have more attacks to start with, to get most use out of their +1 damage super doctrine. 

[dogfender]

I am really curious to see where the Bladeguard land. I suspect there wont be alternative weapon options, but it seems like a odd choice for a new kit without an alternate weapon build.

[Medicinal Carrots]

My rankings would go:

Thunder Hammer

Power Fist

Single Lightning Claw

Pair of Lightning Claws (they do more damage, but the cost isn't worth it vs a single claw)

Chainfist (random damage hurts it too much, IMHO)

Power Sword

Power Axe (it only has one niche, T5, and that is better handled by a fist)

 

The Chainsword doesn't really get included since, while worse than every other weapon damage wise, it has the advantage of having a special niche due to being free.

 

Ultimately, the choice will come down to what you want the unit to do, what options you have for the unit, and how many points you have available.

[Minsc]

My philosophy as a Salamanders-player: If my Sgt's can take Thunder Hammers, they get Thunder Hammers! 

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

So I think a good way of looking at the value ‘add’ of the weapons is to look at how much damage output it will add to a model for its points. I did a little table comparing the average damage inflicted by the weapons below to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ. I results are the average of those results, expressed in points per point of damage inflicted (PPD). That is, the lower the better. For it to work, zero-point options such as chain swords were costed at 1 point.

 

In working out the figures I assumed 3 base attacks, and the only modifies to strength, AP, attacks are what is listed on the weapon profile. That is, no doctrines and no other buffs (e.g. from shock assault, re-rolls, chaplains etc.).

 

So, this is what I got, from most efficient (lowest PPD).

1. Astartes Chain sword: 1.48 PPD
2. Regular chain sword: 2.16 PPD
3. Power Maul: 2.78 PPD
4. Power fist: 4.93 PPD
5. Thunder Hammer: 5.26 PPD
6. Lightning claws: 5.62 PPD
7. Power Sword: 6.25 PPD
8. Power Axe: 6.88 PPD

Obviously, not all melee weapons are on that list. Also, as it is a ‘basket’ in that it averages damage to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ targets, it doesn’t capture the usefulness of certain weapons against certain targets. The result may be different if KEQ or TEQ were added in.

 

So yeah, based on this in terms of point efficiency the chain swords are the go-to option. Power Mauls surprised me, and power fists, thunder hammers and lightening claws are OK-ish. Power swords (normal) and power axes are over-costed for overall efficiency IMHO.

 

Are regular chainswords still available to C:SM in 9E or it just for a point of comparison? I'm not super up to date on the leaks and rumors, but I don't believe I'm out of the loop either, but maybe I missed something on chainswords.

 

The efficiency of chainswords and Astartes chainswords doesn't surprise me. It's why in last edition's netlists, you'd see thunder hammers doing the heavy lifting on Intercessor and VV squads, and then filling chaff out with the free/cheap chainswords. Might be worth discussing over in the LC thread, but this is why I believe it's very hard to make LC and dual LC a competitive option whenever chainswords are available. You'd only ever see a token dual LC user in VV squads for extra AP, but generally it's almost always chainswords for volume of attacks. Single LC is almost never seen at all outside of fluff or hobby reasons.

 

I believe TH are popular despite the poor average performance because they are one of the few options with such a high ceiling. Rather than banking on average wound generation, you buy them to try to spike when rolling the dice and blow up high wound targets. This is why I prefer to examine the min/max potential in addition to the average performance math, because it's important for hedging and because of how easy it is to get good variance in a D6 system.

Edited August 27, 2020 by Tyberos the Red Wake

[ashc]

Keep in mind that Powerfists are becoming a fixed D2 and Thunder hammers D4 - this is quite a significant change that may also shake things up.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Chainfist is still a great choice when taken en masse... terminators.

[Medicinal Carrots]

So I think a good way of looking at the value ‘add’ of the weapons is to look at how much damage output it will add to a model for its points. I did a little table comparing the average damage inflicted by the weapons below to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ. I results are the average of those results, expressed in points per point of damage inflicted (PPD). That is, the lower the better. For it to work, zero-point options such as chain swords were costed at 1 point.

 

In working out the figures I assumed 3 base attacks, and the only modifies to strength, AP, attacks are what is listed on the weapon profile. That is, no doctrines and no other buffs (e.g. from shock assault, re-rolls, chaplains etc.).

 

So, this is what I got, from most efficient (lowest PPD).

1. Astartes Chain sword: 1.48 PPD
2. Regular chain sword: 2.16 PPD
3. Power Maul: 2.78 PPD
4. Power fist: 4.93 PPD
5. Thunder Hammer: 5.26 PPD
6. Lightning claws: 5.62 PPD
7. Power Sword: 6.25 PPD
8. Power Axe: 6.88 PPD

Obviously, not all melee weapons are on that list. Also, as it is a ‘basket’ in that it averages damage to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ targets, it doesn’t capture the usefulness of certain weapons against certain targets. The result may be different if KEQ or TEQ were added in.

 

So yeah, based on this in terms of point efficiency the chain swords are the go-to option. Power Mauls surprised me, and power fists, thunder hammers and lightening claws are OK-ish. Power swords (normal) and power axes are over-costed for overall efficiency IMHO.

There's something funky in that list, Mauls are nowhere near that efficient.

 

I ran the numbers vs Guard infantry, Marines, Terminators (w/o shields), and T7 3+ vehicles. I went with 2 attacks base, assuming a standard Sergeant or Vanguard/Company vet.

 

Vs Guard, most to least point efficient were: 

Dual Claw > Chainsword > Single Claw > Axe > Maul > Sword > Power Fist/Chainfist > Thunder Hammer

 

Vs Marines, it was:

Power Fist > Chainfist > Thunder Hammer > Dual Claw > Sword > Single Claw > Chainsword > Axe > Maul

 

Vs Terminators (I didn't check Chainfists here, since 3W models and random damage means more math than I want to do at the moment):

Thunder Hammer > Power Fist > Dual Claw > Sword > Single Claw > Axe > Chainsword > Maul

EDIT: The Chainfist should theoretically come in after the Thunder Hammer and before the Power Fist, as the odds of rolling a 3 for damage are greater than the odds of rolling double 1's.

 

And Vs. T7 3+ Vehicles:

Thunder Hammer > Chainfist > Power Fist > Dual Claw > Single Claw > Chainsword > Sword > Maul > Axe

Edited August 27, 2020 by Medicinal Carrots

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

That looks a whole lot more accurate to me .

[XeonDragon]

It's nice information to have but the practical here is needing to kill things with a finite number of models. If a Knight is coming at you, 5 Vanguard with Chainswords won't stop it even if they are an otherwise efficient weapon, after all.

 

Essentially, it's relevant as to what you need to do at the time.

 

The Thunder Hammer is king due to its killing power. It is expensive but even just a couple of these weapons doted around the army can be potent.

 

I quite like the power sword. It breaks armour well and has utility against all targets for Marines.

 

I agree to a certain extent. Efficiency is one thing. Effectiveness is another. A lack of efficiency can undermine effectiveness. Likewise a lack of effectiveness can make the efficiency of a process almost irrelevant.  

 

Case in point, as you have correctly pointed out is that thunder hammers are very, very effective. But they are not efficient, because of their cost. But I agree with you, if you need to take down a knight or a blob of razorback spam, they are very good at doing that, especially if combined with a tanky platform or a hidden in a blob of ablative armour (e.g. on a veteran intercessor sergeant in a squad of 5).

 

As a relatively new player who plays in local tournament leagues, it appears that TAC is the way to go. So from that perspective, I am always trying to find a nice balance between efficiency and effectiveness. So yeah, I run lots of chainswords. But I also have powerfists and a few thunder hammer wielding non-character units.   I run a teeth of terra jump captain, which has been super successful, although it is a real toss-up between that and a Burning Blade slash captain. One better vs hordes/ clearing infantry on objectives, the other taking out VEQ/KEQ.

 

That said, when I speak to some of the older, very successful players their opinion of 9th ed *so far* is that given the importance of holding objectives, efficiency might be *slightly* more important than effectiveness, as it might make the difference between being able to take an extra unit or two of obsec-holding infantry. Case in point: a thunder hammer on a captain (40pots), plus three on veteran intercessor sergeants (48 points) is 88 points. With that, you could almost get a tactical squad with a heavy weapon, or a scout squad with some nifty stuff, either of which could assist in board control and bog down your opponent. 

 

But, yeah, I do agree you have to consider effectiveness. A whole lotta chain swords against an elite/VEQ heavy list ain't gonna be that useful!  

 

 

 

So I think a good way of looking at the value ‘add’ of the weapons is to look at how much damage output it will add to a model for its points. I did a little table comparing the average damage inflicted by the weapons below to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ. I results are the average of those results, expressed in points per point of damage inflicted (PPD). That is, the lower the better. For it to work, zero-point options such as chain swords were costed at 1 point.

 

In working out the figures I assumed 3 base attacks, and the only modifies to strength, AP, attacks are what is listed on the weapon profile. That is, no doctrines and no other buffs (e.g. from shock assault, re-rolls, chaplains etc.).

 

So, this is what I got, from most efficient (lowest PPD).

1. Astartes Chain sword: 1.48 PPD
2. Regular chain sword: 2.16 PPD
3. Power Maul: 2.78 PPD
4. Power fist: 4.93 PPD
5. Thunder Hammer: 5.26 PPD
6. Lightning claws: 5.62 PPD
7. Power Sword: 6.25 PPD
8. Power Axe: 6.88 PPD

Obviously, not all melee weapons are on that list. Also, as it is a ‘basket’ in that it averages damage to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ targets, it doesn’t capture the usefulness of certain weapons against certain targets. The result may be different if KEQ or TEQ were added in.

 

So yeah, based on this in terms of point efficiency the chain swords are the go-to option. Power Mauls surprised me, and power fists, thunder hammers and lightening claws are OK-ish. Power swords (normal) and power axes are over-costed for overall efficiency IMHO.

 

Are regular chainswords still available to C:SM in 9E or it just for a point of comparison? I'm not super up to date on the leaks and rumors, but I don't believe I'm out of the loop either, but maybe I missed something on chainswords.

 

The efficiency of chainswords and Astartes chainswords doesn't surprise me. It's why in last edition's netlists, you'd see thunder hammers doing the heavy lifting on Intercessor and VV squads, and then filling chaff out with the free/cheap chainswords. Might be worth discussing over in the LC thread, but this is why I believe it's very hard to make LC and dual LC a competitive option whenever chainswords are available. You'd only ever see a token dual LC user in VV squads for extra AP, but generally it's almost always chainswords for volume of attacks. Single LC is almost never seen at all outside of fluff or hobby reasons.

 

I believe TH are popular despite the poor average performance because they are one of the few options with such a high ceiling. Rather than banking on average wound generation, you buy them to try to spike when rolling the dice and blow up high wound targets. This is why I prefer to examine the min/max potential in addition to the average performance math, because it's important for hedging and because of how easy it is to get good variance in a D6 system.

 

 

Not sure about CSM and regular chainswords, guess we'll have to wait for the new codexes to be sure I've never come across 'net lists' before (fairly new player), but that description of giving free chainswords wherever possible sounds legit. I mean, it's free and gives an extra attack, so why not, right? 

 

Totally agree on thunder hammers. Then going to D4 will make them even more scary. I'll try and find the time to update the table with new stats in the near future. 

 

So I think a good way of looking at the value ‘add’ of the weapons is to look at how much damage output it will add to a model for its points. I did a little table comparing the average damage inflicted by the weapons below to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ. I results are the average of those results, expressed in points per point of damage inflicted (PPD). That is, the lower the better. For it to work, zero-point options such as chain swords were costed at 1 point.

 

In working out the figures I assumed 3 base attacks, and the only modifies to strength, AP, attacks are what is listed on the weapon profile. That is, no doctrines and no other buffs (e.g. from shock assault, re-rolls, chaplains etc.).

 

So, this is what I got, from most efficient (lowest PPD).

1. Astartes Chain sword: 1.48 PPD
2. Regular chain sword: 2.16 PPD
3. Power Maul: 2.78 PPD
4. Power fist: 4.93 PPD
5. Thunder Hammer: 5.26 PPD
6. Lightning claws: 5.62 PPD
7. Power Sword: 6.25 PPD
8. Power Axe: 6.88 PPD

Obviously, not all melee weapons are on that list. Also, as it is a ‘basket’ in that it averages damage to GEQ, MEQ and VEQ targets, it doesn’t capture the usefulness of certain weapons against certain targets. The result may be different if KEQ or TEQ were added in.

 

So yeah, based on this in terms of point efficiency the chain swords are the go-to option. Power Mauls surprised me, and power fists, thunder hammers and lightening claws are OK-ish. Power swords (normal) and power axes are over-costed for overall efficiency IMHO.

There's something funky in that list, Mauls are nowhere near that efficient.

 

I ran the numbers vs Guard infantry, Marines, Terminators (w/o shields), and T7 3+ vehicles. I went with 2 attacks base, assuming a standard Sergeant or Vanguard/Company vet.

 

Vs Guard, most to least point efficient were: 

Dual Claw > Chainsword > Single Claw > Axe > Maul > Sword > Power Fist/Chainfist > Thunder Hammer

 

Vs Marines, it was:

Power Fist > Chainfist > Thunder Hammer > Dual Claw > Sword > Single Claw > Chainsword > Axe > Maul

 

Vs Terminators (I didn't check Chainfists here, since 3W models and random damage means more math than I want to do at the moment):

Thunder Hammer > Power Fist > Dual Claw > Sword > Single Claw > Axe > Chainsword > Maul

EDIT: The Chainfist should theoretically come in after the Thunder Hammer and before the Power Fist, as the odds of rolling a 3 for damage are greater than the odds of rolling double 1's.

 

And Vs. T7 3+ Vehicles:

Thunder Hammer > Chainfist > Power Fist > Dual Claw > Single Claw > Chainsword > Sword > Maul > Axe

 

 

Yup, well spotted. I had *two* fat finger moments when I double-checked this morning, thanks! So the updated list is this:

 

1. Astartes Chain sword: 1.48 PPD
2. Regular chain sword: 2.16 PPD
3. Power fist: 4.93 PPD
4. Thunder Hammer: 5.26 PPD
5. Lightning claws: 5.62 PPD
6. Power Sword: 6.25 PPD
7. Power Axe: 6.88 PPD
8. Power Maul: 8.70 PPD

I'll update my post at the top, cheers!

Edited August 27, 2020 by XeonDragon

[Vermintide]

20 power swords in a blob are good. No space Marine unit can have 20 power swords.

 

 

Death Company come pretty close, coming units of up to 15, and you can give them all power swords (and 15 chainswords in their other hand if you really want a pointlessly over the top loadout.)

 

I can attest that 10 with power swords will blend almost anything. Obviously I use them for anti-infantry, not tank or knight hunting, but in a pinch I feel like they would actually do a pretty good job of it if they had to.

[ashc]

The thing with thunder hammers and powerfists is that they are an opportunity weapon when it comes to playing take-all-comers, you are paying for the flexibility to do some serious wounds to big things the rest of the unit isn't really capable of doing. Sometimes that will be overkill but when the time comes they will shine. This applies to the likes of tac squads and Intercessors.

 

It's a completely different discussion regarding units that can all take the options, in particular terminators and vanguard veterans are up for discussion here. If you are taking all thunder hammers here then you are clearly aiming to throw them at their ideal target - and they can get slowed down by having to fight through chaff shields by a canny opponent.

 

It's interesting that xeondragon's algorithm still puts them at the top of the melee weapon pile (ignoring chainswords) considering the inflated costs, but they are worthwhile as soon as you encounter tougher, multiwound models.

 

The lightning claw thread is running closely to this one but I feel there is a lot of crossover in the discussions being held.

Edited August 28, 2020 by ashc

[Jings]

Black Blow Fly isn't wrong.

GW seems to vastly undervalue multiple damage weapons. For some crazy reason they think it is of equal value with +1 attack. Just look at double lightning claws vs single. Even before the double wound marine meta this was absurd. Now it's just silly.

Great. Now I want Twin Lightning Claws to be D2 and I'm going to forever be annoyed they aren't.