Haywire Blasters/DLs/HLs mathhammer

Hello guys,

not sure if anyone did this so far, but I was wondering if the DLs and Ravagers and the usual stuff is really the best choice we have to bust enemy armour. Thats why I made this spreadsheet concentrating on what is the best choice for us.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AuJCbok1e64XdG5dIuxx2PoKbQGAMgptoHIMfO_jOK4/edit?usp=sharing

I came to the following conclusions:

1. That our best ranged choice is Haywire Blaster on a mobile platform (Scourges)
   
2. If you could get 3 Heat Lances into melta range, it "should" be a dead vehicle, but it is damn close for comfort for both expensive scourges and reavers...
   
3. Given the HWB numbers which can be translated to HWG, the best wych squad size is 5 if you take into account the target saturation. Larger squads might seem better, but you lose much more in pts if the vehicle goes boom.
   
4. Giving your trueborn HWG can be a really good idea...
   

Next thing I am going to try is a list with no Ravagers. They are starting to seem like really less ideal compared to HWB and HWG.

I would like to hear your thoughts on this guys. And please check my math.

EDIT: It also does not count with an overall utility of the weapons - like that HWB is really useable against vehicles only, but DLs, blasters, HLs are also good against other targets.

Also everything counted with BS4.

Range and cost make the triple lance Ravager so good. There is no denying that haywire blasters are more reliable but they are harder to get, more fragile, shorter ranger and cost WAY more than the lance Ravager

I seem to remember separate ones popping up for each of these at various times, but an actual side by side comparison is reallu useful, so thanks for taking the time to do it   I do think it's important to bear in mind what Massaen says in terms of cost and range though. It's great that ten Scourges with four haywire blasters will probably wreck anything, but you'll spend 260 points doing it, and they won't stand up to the return fire at all well. Being able to move 12", fire three strength 8 lance shots 36", then jink means the Ravager is just too good to leave on the shelf.

I know what you mean, so far I was using 3 ravagers in every game. But after quite a few games against AM, Eldar and Tau I started to doubt them... Against things like Wave Serpents they are at a severe disadvantage and when the enemy vehicles are gone, their utility drops severely. As the WS gets usually a 4+ save, you need 18 lances on average to glance it to death. So you are using two rounds of shooting of 350pts worth of Ravagers to kill a 150 pts WS. Thats 700:150. Very bad ratio. Against Tau - worthless too, albeit for bit different reasons. And what do we get when they fire back? Usually a dead ravager, so their 150 pts worth of shooting killing our 115pts Ravager... nonono... I dont call that good. Similar ratios apply for AM and Tau. It is the toughest vehicle that we get, but its still a paperbox.

I have to agree with you on the HWB due to inaccessibility. But HWG... thats a different thing.

If I put those 350 pts into the HWG Wyches, even Beasts, Grots, Incubi, hell even Hellions and Mandrakes that everybody scorns, they will most probably kill more vehicles than those Ravagers and can kill the units too and in some cases will be even more resilient.

So this leads me to another question, why the hell do we need ranged anti-tank at all? I dont think we do...

5 Trueborn w/ Haywire grenades in a Raider. Nasty AT that doesnt risk loss of Objective Secured units

I’m so glad you put the link to your working out. But I think you got the odds wrong for the pen with a melta range heat lance on AV12, I think the odds of rolling a 7+ with two dice is 21 in 36 (But please correct me if I’m wrong).

But I really liked your spreadsheet it was easy to follow and easy to check. However I’ve amended it a bit to see what the cost per HP removed is, just as others were saying the ravager is quite cost effective. Please note that the odds of explodes was not included. For this I’ve put the bare minimum cost for a ravager, 10 scourges with 4 haywire blasters, and 9 reavers with three heat lances. Please feel free to suggest cheaper ways of bringing these weapons.

See the attached picture for the pts/HP and yes it does show the ravager to be the most cost effective with scourges the next most cost effective. However, once you get to AV12+ the cost per HP is more or less equal between the two (ravager is 90% of the scourges cost per HP) and therefore I suppose it really depends on utility / play style / Meta, for which one to choose.

@der-al:
You are right about the odds. Corrected now.

Odds of explodes is there in the upper table, column %Exp.

As for the cost effectivity - I didnt put that column there on purpose. Because you cannot measure the utility of the unit by just considering one of its roles and dividing its cost. I would argue that Ravager is good for AT but only for that, which decreases its utility greatly. Pack of 9 reavers with 3 HLs who can move within melta range and jump back by 2D6, who can bladevane, enjoy 3+ jink, can assault, do have poison shots too and can redeploy almost anywhere on the tabletop. Can we really compare them to the Ravagers?

@1++:
Very true. I hope we get some character in the next dex that will make the Trueborn a troop choice. :-) I am currently working on a list concentrating on HWG and aggressive style of play.

I will expand the table later to get the numbers on melee AT too, I expect the numbers be most interesting. As my Eldar friend told me: Ravagers have a great disadvantage. They threaten me on T1, everything else threatens me on T2+. I have a very clear target priority, no difficult choices... Thats when I started wondering if a list concentrating threats and really forcing tough choices wouldnt be better. We have incredibly fast vehicles, Aether Sails, high initiative, paintokens, close combat units that can take on MEQ, TEQ, Tanks. But our shooty lists do not emphasise on that. Everyone fears our poison, but that is not our greatest weapon IMHO.

aurynn wrote:

@der-al:Ravagers have a great disadvantage. They threaten me on T1, everything else threatens me on T2+. I have a very clear target priority, no difficult choices...

That's actually why I take ravagers (apart from the great movement and ranged AT). IF my opponent goes first they will almost always shoot them. This keeps the stuff that threatens turn 2 alive + ravagers are cheaper than all other units so if they die its no big loss.

Also why do you say ravagers are worthless vs tau? I have found some ranged s8 ap2 useful against tides and suits after clearing away the drones with splinter. They also draw fire which is great.

Against anything T6 or less with AS 3+
Venom - 65 pts - 12 shots - 8 hits - 4 wounds - 1,33 unsaved
Ravager - 105 pts cheapest - 3 shots - 2 hits - 1,66 wounds - 1,66 unsaved
Note that if the Riptide activates its shield, the Ravager is at 0,55 unsaved wounds, any kind of cover will severely decrease its efectiveness too.

Against Riptide or T6 or less with AS 2+
Venom - 65 pts - 12 shots - 8 hits - 4 wounds - 0,67 unsaved
Ravager - 105 pts cheapest - 3 shots - 2 hits - 1,66 wounds - 1,66 unsaved
Note that if the Riptide activates its shield, the Ravager is at 0,55 unsaved wounds, any kind of cover will severely decrease its efectiveness too.

Still think it is better? :-)

As for having Ravagers as ablative - AV11 is too fragile for this use IMHO. This will trick an inexperienced player, but the guys I play with do not even shoot at ravagers as they know that they cannot win me the game unless we play Big Guns.

Suppose I lose the first turn so I deploy everything out of transports effectively doubling the amount of targets. He will most probably shoot the transports to prevent me getting to him, but shouldnt be able to shoot enough. Anyway he will prolly destroy the same amount of transports as he would Ravagers, but the points cost is half of the ravagers.

Suppose I win the first turn, I will turboboost/aethersail and concentrate on a small front of his, limiting his maneuverability, line of sight and therefore available targets. You can also jink as much as you wish to, coz you dont need to shoot with your raiders. And Venoms should carry only shooty troops.

I know that there are armies (like T1 drop pod assault armies) that would pose a serious detriment to this strategy, but still the number of targets and usually low enemy unit count and the dangerousness of our forces up close si going to compensate for this.

EDIT: Riptide has AS 2+, corrected accordingly

Haywire wyches seem still a good option.

With the new vehicle-damage table, they can't blow up a vehicle and kill themselves unless it is open topped. Even then you need a six twice.

Other than that, I am really not ever going to run reavers with guns anymore, and I am switching to caltrops. They need to jink, and they will get a +3 even on first turn and without turboboosting which helps a bit. And it wont affect bladevaning at all because no roll to hit.

Ravagers are still good and easily the target most people will go for after they first look at raiders and venoms. Possibly not the smartest thing to do but it still happens. But unless they have to snapfire each turn they get more expensive with flickerfields....

@Aurynn I hope you didn’t mis-understand me, all I was trying to point out was the cost effectiveness (for stripping HP) is more or less the same and therefore saying one unit is more cost effective than another is just wrong. What matters is utility / play style and meta.

I play against a lot of landraiders, lord of wars and imperial knights and I always take heat lances (2x6man reaver units both with two heat lances) ten scourges with 4 haywire, void raven bomber and ten wyches with HWG in a raider. And once the wyches get stuck in they generally finish the job off but I’ve had games when it was the scourges that made the difference and even had melta range heat lances one shot land raiders. The one unit that consistently underperforms is the void raven bomber………. But I like my conversion.

albeit I'm not bothering with the heat lance on reavers in 7th anymore (unless i have points to burn) as the Jink rule just doesn't help and unless you can get the shots in first it really isn't worth it. however with 9 man reavers and 3 caltraps i over kill a 11 pink horrors with herald (who was the warlord) on my first move of my first turn to gain 2VP straight off the bat.

Don't worry, I am just trying to use this discussion to finalize my own opinion. :-)

Okay. I have to say something redeeming for Ravagers... They are the second greatest gunship in the game after Hornets. After much deliberation and much discussion with my friends I have come to a conclusion that the most frightful DEldar list is a non-spam all-comer. :-D

If Ravager cant kill WS reliably, then dont spam it. But it does not mean that you should not take one. :-)

Thinking in absolutes is not good I guess...

As it is our points dedicated to.kill some thing vs what they actually accomplish is sad. I hope we can take ravagers in squadrons next codex. As it is it takes around 3ravagers to kill a rhino if it pops smoke. Haywire blasters need to be rapid fire or assault 2. Scourge need at least a five point drop. With those changes both would be effective AT.

Well I run an eldar CAD so that obviously effects my options but I love my ravagers. Over time I went from 3 to 1 to none back to 2. Then swapped them out for eldar hornets for more S8 and 3+ jink. Guess what back to 2 ravagers. The lance rule is still incredible especially since I see so much av13+ and moving and firing all 3 is gold not to mention night shields and torment grenade launchers (both meta dependent).

I agree jinking skimmers are hard to bring down at range. Thats the same for many armies and why I prefer combat to deal with them. If I want haywire I'm not taking scourges. Its either wyches, hwg trueborn or hawks or sometimes all the above.