Blasterborn vs. Scourges

Hey all.

Up until the FAQ I always went for Blasterborn but with the change to jinking making embarked troops snapfire does this now increase the viability of AT Scourges?

What are your thoughts?

The FAQ really does nothing to help the Scourges, they are unchanged, it only makes blasterborn more over priced for what they can do while jinking.

I agree with curst, though I'm not sure his message is clear. Mine would be this:

Scourges were a better value before the jink change, and they're a better value now.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I agree with curst, though I'm not sure his message is clear. Mine would be this:

Scourges were a better value before the jink change, and they're a better value now.

Ah fair enough. Would you recommend Blasters, Haywire Blasters, or Heat Lances? Or does that selection depend upon the rest of the army?

I prefer haywire blasters because I prefer not to use them as suicide units. But understand that haywire blaster scourges are the specialized option. They're the most reliable unit we have to take hullpoints off of vehicles, but don't do much else. As such, I generally would only recommend 1-2 units of HWB scourges max, while filling out the rest of your anti-tank with triple lance ravagers if you're not using allies.

If you are hunting vehicles and only vehicles, haywire scourge will outperform blasterborn every day FAQ or no FAQ. Scourges are faster, more durable, and are better at stripping down hill points than blasterborn
The only advantage blasterborn have (vs vehicles) is the ability to get that lucky one-shot from being AP2

This topic was brought up in my thread about scourges.

Hands on I would say that if you have to chose only one unit for your whole army, the blasterborn are a more common choice. Most will tell you to start from this side. To hover over to the scourges. They are spit at. Why would anybody want them? I'd say that it depends on what you want to to with the army.

Say that you want to attack a point held by a landraider. It will likely shoot down a venom before units can disembark, killing one blaster. Blasterborn have short range and their shooting will at points fail you. Scourges are lithe and are reliable tank killers if they survive. If played recklessly, they die like flies. If played strategically, they become a large threat.

Hellraiser wrote:

Hands on I would say that if you have to chose only one unit for your whole army, the blasterborn are a more common choice.

This is just wrong. Blasterborn are a last choice, when there are simply no other options for some unknown reason.

Hellraiser wrote:

Say that you want to attack a point held by a landraider.

What's a Land Raider? Lol I haven't seen anyone play Landraiders in years. You're more likely to be up against something on the extreme ends of the spectrum, like a free Rhino with Obsec, or a damn Imperial Knights that doesn't care about AP2 anyway.

As for the discussion at hand, it really depends on your opponent. If you know you're up against things like Tyranid Warriors, Tau Crisis Suits, GK Paladins, Ork Nobs... Then yeah, blasters in bulk are pretty scary. That is list tailoring though, and is generally frowned upon. Imagine if your opponent knows you're playing Dark Eldar, and decided to exclusively use flamers and autocannons.

So I see the argument matters more for generic take all comers lists. In which case I think Blasterborn generally struggle to do well. Those 4 Blasters might be asked to shoot something as seemingly trivial as single rhino, and may well still fail to inflict 3 hull points on it. They end up being closer and costing more and likely to die for their efforts.

Scourges on the other hand, pack the same amount of dakka per model, but have Haywire Blasters, which as already mentioned are more reliable for killing things like Rhinos. They can also stack up glances quite reliably against super heavies. They do have their drawbacks, such as having only S & AP 4, so I also think a maximum of 2 units of them is a good limit.

Their biggest drawback is actually competing in the fast attack slot where our Reavers are very popular, where our only somewhat viable flyer is, and where we can get unique options like cheap, small Khymera units. At least we won't need to compete with Hellions right?

If you're worried about Scourges filling up the FA slots just slap on a Lhamaean for a second detachment and split your troops between the two of them (you are taking at least 4 troops choices right?)
With such easy access to a 10 point HQ unit we have arguably the easiest time abusing FOC slots

What are peoples thoughts on Haywire vs Heat Lance Scourge units? How about a mix of the weapons?

6 Fast Attack slots is still not always enough if you're mix/maxing and playing lots of 3 man Reaver units, or even some Beasts, and still want to find space for Scourges.

As for Heat Lances, they're ok if you don't mind sacrificing the unit. I wouldn't mix weapons within a single squad though.

hydranixx wrote:

Hellraiser wrote:

Say that you want to attack a point held by a landraider.

What's a Land Raider? Lol I haven't seen anyone play Landraiders in years. You're more likely to be up against something on the extreme ends of the spectrum, like a free Rhino with Obsec, or a damn Imperial Knights that doesn't care about AP2 anyway.

I play a land raider achilles occasionally, but mostly just because I've always loved the thunderfire cannon, and normally can't field one in a dark angels army.  I'm also a bit obsessed with vehicles built around weapons (like the A10 warthog) and it's a theme in that army.

That said - it's immune to the lance/melta rules anyway so it's a moot point.

It's not the most effective unit for the points ; I think of it as a distraction/table control unit that is both very hard to kill and difficult to ignore. I sometimes forget it has a unit inside it.

hydranixx wrote:

Hellraiser wrote:

Say that you want to attack a point held by a landraider.

What's a Land Raider? Lol I haven't seen anyone play Landraiders in years. You're more likely to be up against something on the extreme ends of the spectrum, like a free Rhino with Obsec, or a damn Imperial Knights that doesn't care about AP2 anyway.

You've been away for awhile so probably haven't seen the posts from this guy. He's a roleplayer who often mixes fiction into his strategy discussions.

Also, I'm pretty sure he inherited a bunch of 40k books, or just downloaded a bunch of them and quickly read them, and hasn't actually played much, if any, 40k.

But he certainly composes his posts as if he's an expert tactician! And he does have a tendency to make things sound awesome to people who also have no idea what they're talking about. Basically, he's a public health risk for noobs, at least until he learns more.

There is absolutely no need for attacks on another member's character. I suggest revising TDC's rules, most importantly section 4. http://www.thedarkcity.net/t5-the-dark-city-forum-wiki-chat-rules-updated-please-read . We do not seek to foster such an atmosphere on this forum where members are insulted.
Cavash

Since I'm positive that comment is going to spawn a flame war: seconded for truth.

Yarr. Betray. Why don't you pull that one about the evil leprechaun who betrayed the world by tricking children with his candy and stories. You seem to be in the mood for telling.

I think betray was actually kind of gentle about it.

That said I seem to remember getting jumped on here at one point for suggesting people watch youtube videos for entertainment purposes, so.... ya - it's the internet.

Anyway, In 5th edition blasterborn were actually a thing, if only because there was basically nothing else in elite worth taking and no other way to concentrate as much firepower.  Even before the faq though, the overall improvements in scourges from the 7th edition book made them miles better than trueborn.

Why does even admitting there is an improvement in the 7th edition codex make me want to go take a shower?

stilgar27 wrote:

I think betray was actually kind of gentle about it.

That said I seem to remember getting jumped on here at one point for suggesting people watch youtube videos for entertainment purposes, so.... ya - it's the internet.

Anyway, In 5th edition blasterborn were actually a thing, if only because there was basically nothing else in elite worth taking and no other way to concentrate as much firepower.  Even before the faq though, the overall improvements in scourges from the 7th edition book made them miles better than trueborn.

Why does even admitting there is an improvement in the 7th edition codex make me want to go take a shower?

Well, technically Trueborn did get worse. After all you could buy simply 4 of them, give everybody a Blaster, stick them together with an Archon into a Venom and save the cost for a fifth guy.

Not trying to spread bad mood, I just want to bring that back into memories.

I think I'll be going for haywire blaster scourges. I need some more dedicated anti tank and god damn the scourge models are just too good to not have! Would you recommend deepstriking or footslogging?

StiXFletcher wrote:

I think I'll be going for haywire blaster scourges. I need some more dedicated anti tank and god damn the scourge models are just too good to not have! Would you recommend deepstriking or footslogging?

Hayscourges are excellent dedicated AT but they do need MSU like target/threat saturation in the rest of your army to survive.

With haywire you should have the range to deploy behind LOSB terrain or move on from reserve and then shoot.

Only DS if this is impossible.

Painjunky wrote:

StiXFletcher wrote:

I think I'll be going for haywire blaster scourges. I need some more dedicated anti tank and god damn the scourge models are just too good to not have! Would you recommend deepstriking or footslogging?

Hayscourges are excellent dedicated AT but they do need MSU like target/threat saturation in the rest of your army to survive.

With haywire you should have the range to deploy behind LOSB terrain or move on from reserve and then shoot.

Only DS if this is impossible.

I think I have a reasonable number of units with a pretty varied range of AT weapons although against a heavily mechanised list I think they will be singles out fast. In my meta their main purpose will be to isolate anti-air vehicles (such as Dunecrawlers, Dreadnoughts, and Stalker/hunters). That way my fliers will have an easier time of things.

I always try to mention that there is something of a counter to haywire for space marine vehicles in the "schism of mars" legacy which grants a 4++ after the fact save (like FNP) against haywire hits. It's 25 points, and you can only take 1 legacy of glory per 1000 points of your army but this is one of the better ones as it also grants tank hunter and +1 bs vs anything with the daemonforge rule.

I'll sometimes take it in my dark angels list, partly because it's fluffy, but also because I typically only have a vehicle or two worth using haywire on anyway.

Hellraiser wrote:

Yarr. Betray. Why don't you pull that one about the evil leprechaun who betrayed the world by tricking children with his candy and stories. You seem to be in the mood for telling.

Surprise, surprise. What do you know? Turns out we have something in common. Neither one of us knows what you're talking about.