How many dark lances do I need, and what counts as a dark lance?

Hi denizens of the dark,

What follows are some musings on an issue close to my cold dark heart, namely how to ensure an army is packing enough darklight or equivalent to thrive on the modern 40k battlefield. I originally serialised this on my blog, but hopefully this combined post can generate some useful discussion. I apologise in advance for the length, I can be verbose at the best of times!


How many dark lances do I need?

Back in January, I ran a list at a tournament that was well shy of an acceptable amount of dark lance support. Why? It was what I had painted. The experience got me thinking, however, that I didn't have a clear idea of what how much darklight I wanted or needed; so I set out to rectify that knowledge gap with some probability-hammer.

Firstly, we need to know what the probability of a dark lance doing some damage is, and how many we then need to assign to have a respectable chance of taking a vehicle out of action. Thanks to Hull Points, the math is a little more complex, but also skewed in our favour. Hurrah!



(I should note at this stage that I omitted the chance to destroy a vehicle through a double immobilised result, so consider these low-ball estimates. In practice I have yet to achieve this, so I hope the error is small!)

I find it useful to compute a 'Kill50', or how many weapons I need to fire to have a 50% chance of achieving a kill. In the simple example above (ie no cover, everyone has 3 HP) it works out at:

K50 AV10: 3.284 darklight shots
K50 AV11: 4.224 darklight shots
K50 AV12: 5.912 darklight shots

Of course, we can't fire 4.224 dark lances at a Rhino, so some rounding is required for a sensible value. I think it's also worth looking at the chance that, in allocating a rough K50 number of shots, other damage may be inflicted;

	Shots	% Kill	% Damage
AV 10	3	44.95%	82.85%
AV 11	4	47.04%	80.25%
AV 12	6	50.82%	77.86%

And by damage, I mean achieve a roll on the damage table, whatever the outcome (stunned, dead, whatever). If a crucial vehicle is stunned and can't affect you next turn, I call that a win.

So it seems that by shooting enough weapons for an even chance at a kill, we give ourselves roughly an 80% chance of damaging a target vehicle and therefore inhibiting its utility against us. This gives us a clear guideline on the number of weapons we need to be pointing at targets, depending on their armour.

Of course, to extrapolate from that to how many lances we need in our army will depend on the number and variety of vehicles our enemies bring to the table; and also, how many of them we are prepared to accept functioning in any given turn.

From what I've seen in Imperial Guard armies recently, from 4 AV12+ chassis plus one flyer at 1200 points to double that at 2000 is quite average. If we go by the old maxim of one dark lance per 100 points, we have just enough firepower to suppress half of the Imperial Guard's ground forces at 1200, and not even that at 2000.

It's worth mentioning though that all of those Chimera chassis will go down in half as many shots when caught on the side. Thus, the key to dealing with superior armoured forces is to shoot them in their hurty bits whenever possible!

And, since the prevalence of vehicles becomes significantly larger much quicker in higher points value games, I'd suggest scaling your dark lance or equivalent numbers appropriately. 1:100 may be appropriate at 1200 points, but I feel it needs to double at 2000; at a minimum 24. For what its worth, this gives a trend like:



And of course, the elephant in the room is Flyers. If you thought the numbers above were bad, the K50 on an AV12 flyer like the Stormraven is about 25. The Necron flyers are much better though, with a K50 in the vicinity of 20.5, and by the time we get down to AV10 flyers like our very own Razorwing, it's only about 15.5. So if you can, deal with flyers some other way and save your limited dark lances to degrading the enemy's ground-based materiel. My personal preference is to get into close combat, where they can no longer hurt me. Failing that, getting behind or otherwise out of their arc can often negate them for a turn - bad luck if you're on an objective.

So how many dark lances do you need?

More.

You need more.

On a more serious note, we also need more data. Survey your regular opponents (surreptitiously, of course ). How many vehicles are they taking per point? If we could put together global estimates of what we are likely to face in a take-all-comers scenario, then we could start to make an optimal darklight distribution pattern.

In the mean time, probhammer says: use the tables above to work out how many dark lances you will need to suppress half of your opponents vehicles, and take at least that many.


What counts as a dark lance?

This might seem like an obvious question with an obvious answer. A dark lance counts as a dark lance. But that's not what I want to get at. After all, the dark lance is not the only dedicated anti-tank weapon in the Dark Eldar codex.

Blasters are the other obvious go-to, for reasons of both cost and availability. But does a blaster count as a dark lance? It is pretty similar, but only has half the range. And what about the heat lance, which has different capabilities as well as a different range?

Hot on the heels of my ramblings about how many dark lances one needs in one's army of murderous cutthroats, it is high time to look at how the lesser darklights in the book stack up.

A little while ago (here, in fact) I looked at comparing the effectiveness of weapons with different ranges, and hence different threat radii, in a meaningful fashion. Now, I want to apply those findings to the thorny issue of 'what counts as a dark lance'?

Before comparing these (I'll deal with haywire some other time), I should define a dark lance unambiguously; my personal gold standard is a dark lance mounted on a Raider/Ravager chassis. Thus, the 36" range S8 AP2 lance that can move 12" and still fire with full effect. This gives it a threat radius of 48", comparable to many other races more stationary heavy weapons. This is what I will compare everything else to.

The obvious first comparison is to an infantry dark lance. By not being able to move and fire effectively, the threat radius is reduced to 36". While there are other advantages, such as being more survivable behind an aegis or similar cover, it is therefore unfortunately less effective at its primary task of turning enemy armour into pretty explosions. By my calculations the reduction in threat radius degrades an infantry borne dark lance to 0.63 of a Raider-mounted dark lance.

The blaster is another relatively easy comparison, as it shares S8 AP2 Lance. The 18" range is ameliorated somewhat by being an assault weapon, so the threat radius on normal infantry is effectively 24" (and a crap better than the 12" range its predecessor had!). This makes it equivalent to 0.33 of a dark lance; remember, you'll need to mount your guys on a faster platform if you want a chance to shoot these at your opponent on the first turn.

Speaking of a faster platform, both reavers and scourges can take blasters and move 12" while still shooting, for a 30" threat radius. This is certainly better than a normal dude, and rubs out to 0.46 of a dark lance.

These fast guys can also take a heat lance, which despite a shoddy S6 comes with AP1 and melta plus lance, making it quite effective within half range. Since its no good on the far side of half range, I'll stick to the short range for comparison purposes; 9" plus a 12" move makes for a 21" threat radius, worth 0.25 of the 48" threat of the vehicle-mounted dark lance.

However, within melta range the heat lance is significantly more likely to destroy its target than the dark lance. The probability of a kill ranges from 1.58x to 1.97x that of the dark lance, depending on the AV of the target, but averages 1.75x more killing power. Clearly this needs to be factored in. Multiplying the threat radius by the relative chance to destroy gives a final value of 0.44 equivalent dark lances for the heat lance (or 0.26 on the slower Talos).

Finally (for now), the blast pistol's pitiful 6" range or 12" threat leaves it equal to 0.13 dark lances.

To summarise:

Equiv dark lances:
Raider-mount 1.00
Inf mount 0.63
Bike-mount blaster 0.46
Inf mount blaster 0.33
Blast pistol 0.13
Bike heat lance 0.44
Talos mount heat lance 0.26

Next time I plan my army, I will try balancing the dark lance equivalents to the desired number of dark lances per points. And frag me some damn tanks!

May your dark lances be as effective on the tabletop as they are in (our) fluff!

-Creeping Darkness

I read this article on your blog a while ago, and it's still pretty great information. I'll have to give your rubrick a shot sometime.

That said, I've got an issue.

The Dark Lance is little better than a Missile Launcher at two and a half times the cost. Because of this, anyone who follows this rubric will be spending a higher proportion of points on mostly ineffective gear. Why buy lances when other options are much more cost effective?

We had been limited by codex previously. Now we aren't. Why settle for something far below par?

Really nice and interesting writeup/maths

Thanks doriii, sgb69.

25 points per infantry dark lance does seem a bit steep, which is why I try to get as many of mine as possible from vehicle mounts. After all a Ravager clearly isn't paying the same price. I miss my 10 man 2 lance warrior squad for 100pts although I have started mucking around with small lance toting Trueborn.

But as for other options... heat lances suffer from a short effective range, and haywire grenades even more so. Both are relatively specialised in terms of who can take them. I definitely think that a range of weapons is useful, and I try and include both of these, plus the easier to get blasters on infantry, supported by dark lances on vehicles. Because the ability to reach out and frag someone is just so important.

How do you manage your anti-tank?

I agree that the Ravager feels like it gets them at a discount, and that it's unquestionably a useful platform for them.

The Raider on the other hand... kinda feels like a 35 to 40 point vehicle with a mandatory 25-ish point gun strapped on.

Small squads of lance toting trueborn are pretty great, and I do use them on occasion. Though they're a crying shame when compared to similar units in other codexes.

That said, I do take Dark Lances. Just few.


Most of my anti-tank comes in the form of Haywire toting Wyches and HQs, Heat Lance Reavers, Razorwing Flocks, or str 6 shooting from eldar allies. Though, to be fair, it's been almost a year since I've encountered av 14 on the table, and av 13 has been exceedingly rare as well. Never getting to use that lance rule makes them feel... more like just expensive, shorter range missile launchers.

The massive amount of points I save on Lances, blasters, transports, etc. typically goes into more bodies and more units. Usually with around only 9% to 12% of my points spent on wargear, and it isn't uncommon for me to fill up the force org chart at 1250. This kinda minimizes how fragile my DE are. More bodies than bullets, massive friendly casualties, and all that jazz.

Quote :

Most of my anti-tank comes in the form of Haywire toting Wyches

Mine too.

6 DarkLance shots to pop a tank, or 5 wyches with HW grenades, one thrown, 5 CC'ed

Lances are a very good weapon, but there is a lot of competition for those HS slots. If you live in a flier heavy META, you have to consider Razors a better choice than Ravagers, and leaves wyches as almost your only option

Great article, it has been added it to the pages of pain, as I'm sure future generations of Dark Eldar will find it most helpful.

Personally I find one of our most effective forms of AT to be the Talos Smash. Grotesques are pretty good too, unlike wyches they can actually get to their target in one piece. The limiting factor is the range. Without Dark Lances your army has to put up with a lot of dakka before you close in and take out their armoured threats. Even if all the lance does is stun, it's still doing its job. The Talos is nice in that regard as it draws a lot of heat away from your army anyway.

Dark lances are one of the reasons I prefer raiders over venoms, I don't need more anti infantry.

Realistically in my experience, haywire wyches are a bit of a joke once you take into account the armies you need them most against (Imperial Guard Mech, Tau Mech, GK Mech) will have flamers coming out of their ears. If you see a chimera without a hull mounted heavy flamer then your opponent is lacking in experience.

Fair enough. Much as I like the idea of more bodies, I can't bring myself to leave the Raiders behind; I feel like I lose too much speed. I haven't tried Razorwing flocks or beasts yet, though. I know, I really should.

I love haywire Wyches in theory. But in my last ten games I think they have accounted for 2 hull points, total. Admittedly one of those games was against tyranids... but I've been underwhelmed.

I haven't taken a Talos yet in 6th ed, even though I used to religiously run one under the old codex, so I can't comment yet on the smash. It seems I really need to run the numbers on close combat attacks too. After all, the idea is simply to make it easier to know when there is 'enough' anti-tank - whatever the source. Range will continue to be an issue though.

And thanks for the pages of pain, Mushkilla

I have switched all my lances to disintegrators, packed in hawire in form of talos engines and scourges. As Mushkilla just said here above, talos smash has proven to be the best anti-tank we got.

I gave up on my lances, for me the darklance curse is real. I don´t know how many 1 or 2s I have rolled for armour penetration, but it’s a lot. And hitting with them, don´t get me started on that, it beyond matherhammer, borderlineing the unimaginable low numbers.

Excellent analysis and number crunching - but with a few big flaws imo:

The first and bigger, is that no one takes more tanks than IG. Setting out to really take apart an IG mechanised column really is the extreme end of things, much like setting splinter fire take-up on the grounds of "What if I need to kill 150+ lightly armed infantry at 2k". Although maybe I'm wrong. To check, I went on to the army lists bit of Dakka Dakka and on the first page, the 2k armies brought

4 Doom Scythes, 3 Annie Barges, 1 Ghost Ark
2 Tetra Scouts, 1 Skyray, 2 Hammerheads
1 Manticore, 1 Vendetta, 5 Drop Pods (if you count the latter)
1 Hammerhead
2 Stormravens, 3 Dreadnoughts
1 Catacomb Command Barge, 3 Ghost Arks, 2 Doom Scythes,3 Annie Barges, Triarch Stalker
2 Devilfishes, 2 Piranhas, 1 Hammerhead
3 Hammerheads, 2 Skyrays

Repeating the same game on Warseer...

Hammerhead, Skyray, 2 Piranhas
Hammerhead
2 Hammerheads
1 Banewolf, 3 Leman Russ variants
5 Night Scythes
2 Skyrays

Well, the first thing to take away from that is everyone's asking questions about Tau! So the numbers might be off. But, basically, unless you're facing Necrons it seems, you're only really preparing to face 5-6 vehicles, although would point out there's no straight IG lists in that. But that is a very small sample, not every army is shown, not all of those are tournament lists etc.etc.

However, this does not figure in other targets that really you want to point Dark Light at - T4 multiwound models appear in quite a few lists, and are ideal targets.

You also need to figure out, imo, how many threats really need to be killed from a distance, and how many are ok to be killed closer up, as that effects the usefulness of blasters/haywire grenades.

I have to say, access to high RoF S6 weaponry, which can be used to have a pop at light vehicles, is one of the most useful things to be gained from taking allies imo. There are times when you want 24+ dark lances, but I suspect I'd find such a list quite boring, and limiting when facing armies with few obvious targets. Some Scatter Lasers keep things interesting, keep things flexible, and keeps up the number of things that can menace tanks.

One thing this article shows, is how much of a problem AV12 is for us. However the other thing it shows is the importance of mobility. But that's to be expected as it's what Dark Eldar are all about.

The big question is are you getting the most out your lances?

Being able to move 12" and shoot is what makes dark lances better than missile launchers (other than AP2).

In the picture bellow, the raider uses its 12" move to hit the softer AV11 side armour of the vindicator. As you measure from the weapon, only the weapon need be in side facing, not the entire raider.

You would be surprised how many times you shoot at AV12 when you could be shooting at AV10-AV11.

EDIT: If you start about 24" or less away from your target vehicle, moving 12" in a direction perpendicular to the front facing/side facing line and rotating at the end of your move will get you shots on side armour more often than not. Against marine pattern tanks, that's will increase the chance of that lance penetrating by 50%. Against chimera pattern transports and artillery will increase the chance of that lance penetrating by 100%.

Correct me if wrong Mush, but won't the tank in that example get an improved cover save due to firing at side armour while being in front arc? I agree with your point in general, just checking that one out.

wanderingblade wrote:

Correct me if wrong Mush, but won't the tank in that example get an improved cover save due to firing at side armour while being in front arc? I agree with your point in general, just checking that one out.

No because the weapon is not in the front arc, it's in the side arc and it's firing at the side armour.

If say there was a rhino next to the tank meaning I couldn't see the side armour and therefore could only see the front armour, then the tank would get an improved cover save. As the weapon would be in the side armour arc, but only be able to see the front armour (in which case it would have been better to just shoot the front armour from the front arc).

Hope that clears it up.

Ekh I dont understand it Mush. Not only imho in that pic, raider has no arc of fire to vindicator, but also why you say lance on raider is side mounted?

So what's the raider DL/DC arc of fire and also ravager sponsons''?

Zanais wrote:

Ekh I dont understand it Mush. Not only imho in that pic, raider has no arc of fire to vindicator, but also why you say lance on raider is side mounted?

It's not side mounted. If you assume that the Dark Lance on the raider has a 180° arc of fire (what they use in my area), then the picture makes sense.

DarkCycu wrote:

So what's the raider DL/DC arc of fire and also ravager sponsons''?

Between 90-180° depending where you play. Some places even argue it's a pintle mounted weapon and has 360° fire arc (as technically it is a pintle mounted weapon, and the rule book says pintle mounted weapons have a 360° fire arc). It's one of 40k's many mysteries.

Mushkilla wrote:

It's not side mounted. If you assume that the Dark Lance on the raider has a 180° arc of fire (what they use in my area), then the picture makes sense.

Being hull mounted, wouldn't it technically have a 45° arc? The model piece itself is certainly unable to pivot more than 90° with the gunner attached, and definitely not 180° due to the guard rails preventing it. (Fortunately, I've not yet been in the position where it's arc of fire has been called into question)

Whatever angle you use for the fire arc the idea is the same (I think most people use 90°).

If you don't glue the gunner, the gun mount itself can move 180°. That of course doesn't leave space for the gunner directly behind the gun but he could stretch his arms, or as I like to imagine hang/balance from the side of the raider like a boss.

This is an excellent article, if nothing else it illustrates just how badly DE need another form of AT besides dark light. Coming over from various meq armies I was shocked at just how limited our AT selection is. idk about you guys but I dont see much armour of the av10-11 variety anymore, its all 12-13 and I see a healthy amount of mech. The other problem with our AT is that it comes attached to such fragile platforms, whether skimmer or infantry, that the value is less than a similar volumn of AT from another army with more durable platforms. In short 3 ravagers is absolutely necessary, and id say NS are too just to keep them alive and firing as long as possible by limiting what can shoot them.

If your like me and arent using reavers (I own a whole bike armies already so I want something different) then combat is really the next best option IMO simply due to the dual purpose and durability of either talos or grots, and the scoring nature of wyches which im still trying to make work to my liking. Ive also come to understand those people who run HWGs on their HQs and I personally love em inside a grot unit.

Thanks for taking the time on the article.

There does seem to be a Dark Lance curse whenever I play, my game last night yielded more misses than hits with these good AT weapons. I had 5 Dark Lance shots I could get out for quite a few turns and I only manage to strip hull points with no spectacular explodes or results. It wasn't until my bloodbrides took on a defiler with Haywires that I finally took down the beast in the 5th turn. The Ravager even with 3 shots a turn only seemed to tick off a hellbrute and not destroy it...

There are still plenty of ways to get the DL's you need.

Fristly, statistics and mathematics are useless in a game of chance, which is what this game is.
It's unprobable to succdeed 5+ saves, yet some of us manage to do it easily with luck.

i've seen too many one shot destroying a tank, to even care about statistics.

When you play dark eldar, it's best to focus around the Dark Matter shots.
Usually when you have plenty of DLs, you'll also have more than enough anti infantry as most of our normal guns and cc are made to handle infantry.

The best Heavy support choice we've got is the ravager, cheap and comes with 3 DLs, it's spam powergaming to have 3 X 3 DLs, but it works.

Next, shouldn't be underestimated, and I don't see it enough: Warriors in a raider, with a DL.
it's is expensive but worth it. I don't even see much point in having Splinter cannons in these squads anymore, normal splinter fire and cc already provides enough anti infantry, besides, the extra SC doesn't make such a big difference, a DL on the other side is NEVER forgotten and you really need it.
In this edition and codex and don't even know why I even have SCs on my warriors anymore, I used to be fine with them, when you could take 2 heavy weapons at a very cheap price. Back in the old days, you need some anti infantry as you splinter fire was less good and the SC clearly made a difference. The warriors could take 2 DLs, you had plenty of DLs usually, right now you need those DLs more than ever and the SC havs become somewhat useless on warriors as the standard splinter riffle is already quite good on most infantry,
The blaster also counts as a DL in a way, it certainly is a must for warriors, if the battle goes well and the enemy forces are diminished, you can afford to get closer to get that second gun into range. If the squad is un a raider, it has 3 Dark matter shots like a ravager,

THe raiders are a must, especially in the bigger games, you need the bigger squads and most importantly, you need the DL on the raider. The venom should have an anti tank option, seeing how good our splinter fire is, adding one or two big splinter guns, isn't much better, in the bigger games, the venom acts more as a transport than a real killer, the splinter fire it has is more to anoy rather than kill. You never have enough anti tank, but you can easily have too much anti infantry.
ALl the raiders used to transport all your squads provide a nice amount of independant DL shots, the more raiders you have the better usually.
A normal army has 6-9 raiders, add 3 ravagers to the fun, 15-18 DL, with skimmers only.

Another great source for DL are the obvious Trueborn, a trueborn squad with 2 DL in a raider is much better than 4 blaster trueborn, simply because of the range. Also got 3 shots like a ravager, can't move though, but still 3 DL shots. I've seen quite a lot of 5 trueborn ,with 4 blasters in a venom. I've used it myself, but this squad is too fragile, it's shorter range, begging to be shot down, as it poses a serious threat to most armies.
This squad is fairly expensive and fragile. I find 10 trueborn in a raider + 2 DLs much better. It's easier to use and lasts a lot longer, posing a greater threat during a longer period.

Haywire on wyches is a nice anti tank addition I admit, not that expensive and worth it, when you get to use it, though I wouldn't focus on it, getting into cc is a dangerous business, especially with 6+ saves. Shooting at long range, with a mobile platform is the easier and saferway to do business.

Scourges are also a nice source of Dls, Dls are the best because of their range, scourges with haywire, blasters or heatlances work, but less good. Scourges and reavers are used for anti tank, however they work less good because of their more limited range.

So the best list we currently have all rely on Dark Matter shots, take the blasters where you can get them.
Take as many DLs where you can. Take as many raiders as possible and avoid venoms.

Another source of anti tank, that doesn't rely on Dark Matter is Haywire, not just scourges, I'm talking about the FW Reaper. One or two of these babies, have proven to work even better than Ravagers. They have close to the similar role, but give better results because of their rules and tactics. I've seen them used in tournaments and competive inviiroments, in pairs tough.

Khain mor wrote:

When you play dark eldar, it's best to focus around the Dark Matter shots.
The best Heavy support choice we've got is the ravager, cheap and comes with 3 DLs, it's spam powergaming to have 3 X 3 DLs, but it works.

I beg to differ; yes they are cheap lance platforms, but fragile as hell. Mine rarely survived to the start of game turn 3. I fill my heavy support with taloses, with tw haywire. They shave hullpoint just as reliable as the revenger, are durable, attract a lot attention and firepower, and wrack faces in cc. All this for just over 100pts.

Are you seriously suggesting 10 warrior blobs in raiders? An expensive missile launcher with the hidden extra cost of 10 warriors? Right…I don´t really know what to say, this is just, this is definitely a bad unit choice. Warriors themselves aren´t really that amazing to begin with, ther massed splinter fire are easily outshined by venoms, and ther AT weapons are overpriced.

There is a reason you tb have a minimum size of three, filing the squad with useless bodies are like throwing the pts away, 10 tb with two lances. Both scourges and revers are superior to tb in AT duty.

Khain mor wrote:

Fristly, statistics and mathematics are useless in a game of chance, which is what this game is.
It's unprobable to succdeed 5+ saves, yet some of us manage to do it easily with luck.

i've seen too many one shot destroying a tank, to even care about statistics.

Statistics is one of many ways to better understand the world around you. Reality is probability, so to understand probability is to understand reality. Understanding requires both correct numbers and the correct interpretation of those numbers. It sounds like you are latching onto a very simple number or data point and extrapolating too many conclusions from it. This is not wisdom, or understanding, or even intuition. This is just wrong. Do not claim that statistics are useless in anything, let alone a game of chance, so lightly.

Mathshammer is great for giving you a rough idea of what a unit is capable of. That's why it's so useful.

In this case it's not the simple mean calculation that gets flaunted around the internet where people forget that it's just an average. This is cumulative chance of success, which is far more helpful as it lets you determine the chance of something occurring rather than the average output of something.

Knowing the odds of something is really helpful and can be invaluable during those critical moments that win/lose games.

Quote :

Fristly, statistics and mathematics are useless in a game of chance, which is what this game is.
It's unprobable to succdeed 5+ saves, yet some of us manage to do it easily with luck.

There is a one in three chance you will pass a 5+ save.
Thats a fact.
There is a one in 9 chance you will pass two, and a one in 27 chance you will pass three.

9 Lances can all miss, and we can work out the chances of that.

Statistics DOMINATE games of chance.
If you cant work out the chance of a card being drawn, dont play poker...

Understanding them is a powerful tool.
Using them without understanding is not.
There is a chance an Archon with +1S CD and FC can charge and blow up a rhino, but not much of one, but it can still happen.