Scourges Blasters vs Dark Lances

Is there any reason at all to take Blasters?

Can someone with actual math skills do a proper breakdown? Assuming 4+ to hit with Lances most of the time and 3+ for the Blasters, of course, I think they are extremely close. Obviously this leaves the 36" range vs 18", which is a huge difference in keeping these little squishies alive.

I'm showing Blasters at 1.78 wounds before the Damage roll. Rounding off, this should score 4 wounds.

Lances at 1.33 wound before Damage roll, rounding off to score 3-4 wounds.

What are we targeting here?

I'll do a writeup of 4 Blasters v 4 Dark Lances against 10man MEQ.  Followed by a writeup of 4 Blasters v 4 Dark Lances against a Land Raider.

Hold the phone for a couple of minutes, I'll be back.

Could you do a Rhino too please?

I put them in different categories, not moving, moving and advance move.
Cant be arsed to make a spread sheet since the to wound modifier is the same for both weapnds.
WM is 5/6, 2/3 or 1/2 depending on target.
Also note that the board (6*4) is 72*48" for us superior metric users. (Basicy DL reaches frak everything)

(This is per model btw, not squad.)
---Dark Lance---
Stationary:
Threat Range 36"
Dmg: 2.33*Wound modifier(WM)

Moving
Threat range 50"
Dmg: 1.74*WM

advancemove... non...

Blaster:
Stationary:
Threat Range 18"
Dmg: 1.33*WM

Moving:
Threat Range 32"
Dmg. 1.33*WM

Advancing:
Threat range: 35.5 (average)
Dmg: 1*WM

Havent really tripple checked everything but it looks resonable


So... yeah no. Blasters seems only good when you really need to be mobile. Like agains faster armies that you'd rather not stay a while and listen to.
I'd say Blaster are also good agains Necrons since necrons will remove  A LOT of the DLs dmg reducing the average dmg per hit to 1.55 dmg instead of the normal 3.5 (-64% efficiency basicly)
Balster only reduce to 1,555 aswell, but only losing 23% efficiency.

So, against MEQ we have the following number of unsaved wounds per gun:
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 25/54 25/54 25/72
Dark Lance: 25/54 25/72 0

So from this we can determine that yes, there is a purpose to bringing a Blaster. I'd say that the 18" range difference can be offset by the ability to actually move and retain meaningful firepower

Now, if we turn this up to a whole unit of Scourges opening fire?
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 100/54 100/54 100/72
Dark Lance: 100/54 100/72 0

And if we then turn this into whole numbers for those not mathematically inclined:
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 1.85 1.85 1.38
Dark Lance: 1.85 1.38 0

Against Marines, the D3 and D6 damage has no effect, as they are already dead by the time that they've failed their saving throw.
Remember, the process is as follows:
Roll to Hit.
Roll to Wound.
Opponent rolls to save.
Roll Damage.

Personally I'd prefer:
Roll to Hit.
Roll to Wound.
Determine Damage.
Opponent rolls to Save for each point of Damage.

But as it stands, Blasters and Dark Lances are wasted on MEQ. Maybe they claw back their worth if you're hitting Blood Angels or Nurglings with their better version of our FNP throw. [inaudible grumblings redacted]

Now, as promised, against Landraiders...

No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 2/9 2/9 1/6
Dark Lance: 2/9 1/6 0

It doesn't look good.
Now, looking at the whole unit?
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 8/9 8/9 4/6
Dark Lance: 8/9 4/6 0

Still less than one wound per unit...
But here damage actually has an effect! So let's assume that a Blaster deals an average of 2 Damage per failed saving throw, and that a Dark Lance deals an average of 3.5 Damage per saving throw.
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 16/9 16/9 8/6
Dark Lance: 28/9 14/6 0

And back to decimals...
No Movement Moved Advanced
Blaster......: 1.778 1.778 1.333
Dark Lance: 3.111 2.333 0
Wooh! We're above one Wound per Unit's worth of fire at a single Transport!!!

But it's still (frankly) pretty crappy.

Honestly, I'm not sure that Haywire is a bad way to go, but I've got to get moving, so I'll leave it here for now.

I might come back later.

Ciao!

Rhinos incoming.

For rhinos (T7, 3+):

Stationary: 4xDL = 10.67 wounds
                4xBlaster = 5.33 wounds

If they move: 4xDL = 8 wounds
                    4x Blasters =5.33 wounds

So yea, even on the move the DL still dish out more dmg on average, that being said, we all know how dice can be.

Honestly, I never have and likely never will run blasters on scourge: scourge have access to the best guns in our entire army, why would I stick blasters on them? Run the blasters in your 5 man Kab groups and use your Raiders and Ravagers for DLs. Save the heatlances and HWBs for your scourge (going to do a write up on these later).

We will have to see if its worth taking Blasterborn or double dark lance fisting trueborn in this edition, but its looking like a viable option to me!

RoadRageRob666 wrote:

For rhinos (T7, 3+):

Stationary: 4xDL = 10.67 wounds

I'm missing something! 4 shots, 3+ to hit (2.67 hits), 3+ to wound (1.78 wounds), no save (1.78 unsaved), D6 damage (6.23 wounds). How are you getting 10.67?

I'm thinking a unit of Blasterborn in Venom will be a good finishing move unit to take out whatever needs removing that turn. The d3 wounds and high S and AP gives you a reliable level of damage you can count on to finish off anything on the table. And you have mobility and a couple of cannons that operate in the same range as the blasters just to throw more dakka into the mix. I would probably only run one of them though.

Blasters seem like the go-to weapon on MSU warrior squads now. 5-man with a blaster is probably better now than running them naked. At 10-men you might consider a lance now.

I think there's a place for Dark Lance Scourge if you drop them in a table corner on your opponents side to cover one whole flank and strike anything they're hiding behind terrain (like indirect fire vehicles/guns). Their DS and high movement will let you get them into great position to create crossfire and force your opponents movement.

I like the assault Scourge options too. With shredders and a larger squad with the awesome carbine weapons you can charge into combat turn 3 onwards, hitting on 2's and having that nice 4+ armour to fall back on. With their speed and the damage output of their assault weapons you can do heavy damage before you hit whatever you charge. Don't write these guys off as shooting only now.

I think 5 men squads kabalite warriors are the best option for us now. With a PGL in a venom oR 2 of those in one raider.

Just: what do you guys think about blast pistols and agonisers?

Blast Pistols are meh, unless you're in combat or in a vehicle that got stuck in combat. S8 AP-4 suckerpunch.

And if you're close enough on the way in, a S8 AP-4 shot prior to charge.

Here goes my lazy calc for haywire with 9 shots

Against T5-7 vehicles with 3+ sv
9 shots 6 hits, lets just assume 1 of each to wound roll for averages
1-3 no wound
4 1 mortal wound
5 1 mortal wound + 0.5 unsaved wounds (ap -1 pushing the save to a 4+)
6 D3 (will use 2) mortal wounds + 0.5 unsaved wounds

average total 5 unsaved wounds per 9 shots (2.22 damage per 4)
T8+ would be 4.5 unsaved wounds per 9 shots (2 damage per 4)

Little variation on the save since most of the wounds come from mortal wounds, but seems to be a poor weapon choice compared to Dark Light

Wondering if the heat lance is any good

Just ran the numbers, copy-pasting from the DE Facebook group:

Looks like Dark Lances may well be the new hotness. Ran a quick comparison of Scourge firing at a T7 vehicle with a 3+ save, and got these numbers (assuming movement but no advancing, so Dark Lances get a -1 to hit):
4 Blasters: 32/9 = ~3.5 wounds
4 Haywire: 56/27 = ~2 wounds
4 Heat Lances: 322/81 = ~4 wounds
4 Dark Lances: 42/9 = ~4.5 wounds
Keep in mind that the Dark Lances are the only weapon that can't advance and fire from that set, but they also have by far the longest range. Haywire will also be more valuable against vehicles with invulnerable saves, while Heat Lances will climb in power against lower toughness vehicles. Since Heat Lances already reroll damage though, they won't benefit from the use of a command point so much as something like a Dark Lance or even Haywire Blaster would.

36.56pts for a Blaster wound.
56.89pts for a Haywire wound.
42.76pts for a Heat Lance wound.
32.14pts for a (moving) Dark Lance wound.

Blast pistols seem great for something that will charge vehicles, if you can get close enough to shoot it first. The shooting in combat thing (and using the blast pistol as a power fist+) is very unreliable because it's rare a unit will remain in combat through to your next turn. Though if something charges you then it might get some use if you can survive. Maybe late game when you're fearless and your champion is the model left after his unit gets killed in CC. But at 10 points (2/3 he cost of a full blaster) it seems too expensive for it's niche use.

So on Scourge Heat Lances are great vs lighter vehicles and on Scourge that want to bounce around the board hitting things. Dark Lances are better generally and particularly good at dropping into a key position to lay down zonal control of the board.

If there's a key piece of central terrain or some high ground overlooking your opponents deployment zone then dropping down a squad of Dark Lance Scourge onto that terrain (and hopefully into cover) will be a great strat. If you can get cover and excellent LoS you now have a 3+ save and a 36" bubble in which your opponent doesn't want to put his vehicles. We could see the return of the 3rd ed Dark Lance Scourge.

So if DL's are better

Would they be worth it then for the Points?

Ravager is 5pts more with 1 less shot but MUCH more survivable and 3+ to hit always, can even Advance and shoot if need too.

Granted i like Scourges just wondering if 1 extra shot is worth the points is all.

I think so. That said, the most cost-effective (although slowest, and in a sense more expensive if you factor in the Raider or Venom) are Trueborn with 3 Blasters and 2 Lances - coming at only 28 points for a single wound on a T7 Sv3+ vehicle. That number again assumes movement on the Lances, and it does beat the quad-Lance Scourge.

I guess that's the final question. If Dark Lances are the best option, which it looks like they are, why bother with Scourges at all. Ravagers are a LOT more survivable and can move without taking the -1 to hit negative. Ravager spam anyone?

MHaruspex wrote:

I think so. That said, the most cost-effective (although slowest, and in a sense more expensive if you factor in the Raider or Venom) are Trueborn with 3 Blasters and 2 Lances - coming at only 28 points for a single wound on a T7 Sv3+ vehicle. That number again assumes movement on the Lances, and it does beat the quad-Lance Scourge.

It's not so much the speed, it's the 18" range on the Blasters makes them extremely likely to get assault by gunfire or, even worse, assaulted.

Well, there is the deepstrike, and the fact that you can leap into cover without the dangerous terrain test. Pretending to be Devastators might be the way to use Scourge, but with the option to leap around when needed.

More importantly with how deployment works in 8th, being able to say "I deploy my Scourge into reserve" 2-3 times during deployment while your opponent actually puts models down onto the table is going to be worth something.

DSing Scourge IMO are best with Blasters for Ignore cover 2+ save guys.

This is what im going to do, i have 12 of them so i'm making 1 unit of Blasters for now and test it out before i covert them all.

If you are going 18" range I think the heat lance is the go to over the blaster

S6 vs S8 a loss for sure to the heat lance
AP is a win for the heat lance
Damage is a win for the heat lance, especially if at half range
Both are assault 1 weapons on a BS3+ model so that's a wash

Against a rhino... T7, 3+ save, 10 wounds...
4 scourges land 2.66 hits with either weapon

HL- 0.88 wounds with no saves and d6 (potentially with rerolls) damage
BL - 1.78 wounds with no saves and d3 damage

It actually looks like a wash at long range (with the blaster more reliable) but the HL is likely to out damage at close range while again, being less reliable.

Against lighter vehicles, T6 & T5, the heat lance is the winner.

T8 - the Blaster is again, more likely to do some damage but on average, its lower than the heat lance. Once you hit T9 through T11 - the heat lance is better because both weapons get the same hits and wounds but the extra damage of the heat lance simply does more harm!

I would do blasters for me for 2 reason,
1) i'm not going for AT with them
2) they are cheaper

I would use them for Anti 2+ saves or Cover units and leave the many Dark Lance for AT.

If you want anti cover weapons, the heat Lance is for you. AP -5? Yes please!
Terminator in cover has a 6+ save left after that.

I.think they might be monster hunters with this weapon.

but its 10pts more making it 40pts and im not worried about termies in cover they most likely will be in land raiders or teleporting, shoot, charge attempt.

I just want to keep them cheap, shoot, kill

I honestly dont know if i will actually play them now, Melee is MUCH better imo for anti cover units.

FYI we can have DE and Harlequins in the same army now, just take a Shadowseer with a 7-8 man unit as your only option from them as an insanely good melee unit (they ignore they -2" charge into terrain), and this gives you a Psyker too. It about 350pts for 10 models all with gear (can go cheaper and do it for 277 ts with 6 models). They get -1 to hit vs 1 unit (a power), and at all times -1 to wound against them.

If you are probably going to face necrons regularly then the blaster may be a better choice.