Topic: Optimal heavy weapon choices for units and reasons why

[Arufel87]

I thought that it would be interesting to get a collective opinion on everyone's preference for heavy weapons on units that have the capability to field them and why. I'll start with a few observations.

Jetbikes- Shuriken Cannons- Allows full accuracy when moving and is generally the best statistical weapon against a variety of opponents.

Backfield Guardians- Bright Lance/EML- A cheap 100 tacos buys you a good objective camper with a light amount of anti tank fire.

Frontline Guardians- Shuriken Cannon- Same as Jetbikes.

Hornets- Shuriken Cannons/Hornet Pulse Laser- These are now essentially faster war walkers. SCs take better advantage of lightning assault but the pulse lasers provide a rare plasma lite variant.

War Walkers- Bright Lances- Able to scout and lay down a decent volley of anti tank firepower. I think these work best holding down a mid or backfield position.

Falcons- Bright Lance/EML- These weapons match the firepower of the pulse laser and although you can split fire these days you will often find yourself looking to match the weapons.




 

[Tweedz]

I agree with your list for the most part. I would say that I don't think the AML is currently all that effective, even though it is more versatile. I would much rather just go ahead and either use a BL. 2 Better AP and 5 less points is well worth the loss in versatility imo.

Adding to what you have written:

Wraithlords: Either double SC (and maybe flamers and/or a sword) to advance down the field, or double BL for backfield fire support

Viper: I would stick with SCs since it does not have access to a CTM to help those 1-shot BLs hit while it is on the move.

Wave Serpent: Triple SC or Twin BL depending on the role you need it to fill. Both are viable imo.

[Adrastos]

I would like to add that Crystal Targeting Matrix complicates this a bit and shouldn't be overlooked as a viable option for many units.

But more or less I agree with this. I think what is tragic is that its such an obvious choice to ignore AMLs, StarCannons, Scatter Lasers.

I will say its easy to overlook this but; double cannon Vypers and Tripple Cannon Wave Serpents can still take advantage of the assault status of their weapons beyond not losing BS when moving; they can advance and shoot. Which is something many other factions have no access to.

its a small thing but I just wanted to mention it.

[Fenris]

Bright lances all the way, because shuriken cannons are not heavy
If we include shuriken cannons, then it depends on what else is in the army.

Taking shuriken cannons on serpents and anti-grav platforms will keep them cheap and durable and that is how I like them.
Serpents because they are already transporting stuff that often makes them target priority.
Platforms because guardians could use some more durability.

Starcannons, AML's and scatter lasers are just to expensive for what they do.
However I must admit, I was considering starcannons before they nerfed them.
On windriders I would probably stick with the twin catapults.

[Blazinghand]

Shuriken Cannons seem like good choices a lot of the time here. They are cheap and good against most things (though not as much against tanks and the like). Since War Walkers have Battle Focus, I wonder if it would be fun to run a 2x Shuriken Cannon War Walker, running around firing them.

Against Tanks and the like, it seems like Bright Lances are the most effective. It's too bad most units have to stay still to make the best use of them.

The old damage level for Starcannon had me thinking "expensive, but potentially worth it"—the new level not so much. Now, if it were exactly 2 instead of a variable amount, I think you'd still be able to make a case for it for hunting terminators and bikers and such. But if you shoot a terminator, hit, wound, get through save, and even after everything goes down there's still a chance you don't deal enough damage to kill it, that is not really good for such an expensive weapon.

[magenb]

Guardians are not good objective campers, they are far too easy to remove from the board even in cover.

[Blazinghand]

Guardians are not good objective campers, they are far too easy to remove from the board even in cover.

Hmm, well there's the idea that has been floated that is, you take a cheap weapon platform with the Defenders, and sit them all in a piece of terrain for cover. With the modifier to the save, the weapon platform now has a really really good armor save. You just assign all incoming wounds to the platform and let it make the saves.

So for example against guardians in cover, 10 rapid-firing bolters will put out 14 hits, 9.3 wounds, 4.6 wounds post-save against Defender Guardians. However, if we assign those bolter wounds to the weapon platform first, it will absorb 12 pre-save wounds before it goes down (on average, of course), thanks to its very strong armor save. Basically, regular marines rapid-firing at it will require a lot of output to take down the platform.

A canny player would have to use something like a Twin Assault Cannon to go after Guardians. a Twin Assault Cannon will get 8 hits, 6 and 2/3rds wounds, 4.5 models lost post-save against Guardians. However, if you assign things to the platform, it will be able to eat an entire volley from a Twin Assault Cannon on its own (just about). So, specialized anti-infantry weapons will take it down fast enough, but still buy a turn (or at least another unit shooting) for the Guardians. This effect can also be gotten with just over 4 Heavy Bolters instead of 1 Twin Assault Cannon.

Note that when doing this, you need to roll your armor saves sequentially; as soon as the Platform loses its last wound, all further armor saves must be rolled by Defenders (AFAIK).

[magenb]

yeah, only problem is VP are only awarded to the side holding it at the end of the match and that heavy weapon platform becomes a target fairly early on, so it tends not to be around by turn 3 or 4.

To be honest by turn 4 neither side seems to have much left on the board these days

One thing I have noticed though, is if your scorpions are still alive, they are a great deterrent, even if they are just hiding in cover near the objective. If the try to take it they end up in CC and might not have the numbers to win it. - Most likely will not work against hordes.

You could keep them in a wave to try and keep them safe until turn 4, but you are holding back a chunk of firepower and points.

[Partninja]

If you're playing Maelstrom, you can't wait until the final turn to just grab objectives. You need to have more bodies at every turn. Having that platform keep enough dudes alive for turn 1 and 2 can mean quite a few victory points depending on the cards you draw.

[Arufel87]

So, we've established the two best weapons out of the selection and have talked quite a lot about shuriken cannons. I would be interested to know what everyone thinks is the most effective platform for the bright lance?

[Fenris]

Best platform for the bright lances is probably the Crimson hunter, but there is not really an option to take anything else.
The Wraithlord is probably the best option after that (not considering possible FW models).

This due to the Crimson Hunter will hit well on the move, and it is quite durable, not as durable as the wave serpent, but not far from it.

The Wraithlord because it does not have to move, so will hit decently as well.

I could see potential for falcons with CTM, but they cost more points than a crimson hunter, has only 1 lance, and is already a target if it transports models, and they need to transport models to be worth their points cost. Falcons are also less durable than crimson hunters.

[Tweedz]

Yeah I'm with Fenris on the note about crimson hunters though, like he said, it is not optional there.

I am not as confident that wraithlord is the best beside that. I think that war walkers likely come second to CHs. Warwalkers are 40 points cheaper than a lord, do not degrade with damage, and have an invulnerable save. That said, lords are good in CC against hard targets and are slightly tougher to damage. I think it is a hard call, but I would say war walkers are better as a pure BL platform.

[Arufel87]

I would also consider hornets as an alternative to war walkers. For almost a third more points you get better mobility, wounds and armour save but no invulnerable. The problem is that the hornet pulse laser is a rare weapon in the Aeldari arsenal in that it causes a lot of damage 2 shots. Handy for beating necron quantum shielding and primaris marines. Still, I am considering changing mine over to bright lances as I don't have enough in my army at the moment.

[Blazinghand]

It might be worth comparing, say, 5 hypothetical war walkers with Bright Lances, to 4 hornets with Bright Lances, if we want to compare point for point. Those two groups cost the same. So for the same cost, War Walkers are putting out 25% more damage output in Bright Lances. They are less mobile since they can't take CTM, but they get the scout-move. How do these units stand up on average to certain kinds of fire?

3 Meltagun (half range) Hits
Vs War Walkers: 2 wounds, 4/3 after saves, 6 damage on average - enough to take down 1 War Walker
Vs Hornets: 2 wounds, 2 after saves, 9 damage on average - enough to take down 1 Hornet

2 Lascannon Hits
Vs War Walkers: 4/3 wounds, 8/9 after saves, 3.1 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.5 War Walkers
Vs Hornets: 4/3 wounds, 10/9 after saves, 3.6 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.5 Hornets

2 Plasma Gun Overcharged Hits
Vs War Walkers: 4/3 Wounds, 8/9 after saves, 1.7 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.25 War WAlkers
Vs Hornets: 4/3 wounds, 10/9 after saves, 2.2 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.25 Hornets

9 Assault Cannon Hits
Vs War Walkers: 4.5 wounds, 3 after saves, 3 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.5 War Walkers
Vs Hornets: 4.5 wounds, 2.25 after saves, 2.25 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.25 Hornets

18 Bolter hits
Vs War Walkers: 6 wounds, 3 after saves, 3 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.5 War Walkers
Vs Hornets: 6 wounds, 2 after saves, 2 damage on average - enough to take down about 0.25 Hornets

--

So basically, thanks to the Power Field, War Walkers are about as durable as Hornets are, against dedicated antitank weapons against which the Power Field actually matters—it makes up for the worse armor save and lower wound count. However, small arms fire and anti-infantry weapons are twice as effective against War Walkers as they are against Hornets, since the Power Field doesn't do anything against that.

So, if you want a platform that's more durable against small arms fire and more mobile, the Hornet delivers that to you. However, if you want a platform that gets more firepower, point-per-point, War Walkers give you about 25% more firepower in return for being much worse against anti-infantry guns (though still reasonably sturdy against them)

As a minor note, the superior BS and S of the War Walker could at some point be useful as well. The Hornet is effectively incapable of dealing damage in Assault except via extreme luck. Three War Walkers, on the other hand, will kill about one Space Marine on average in each round of assault, which while also quite bad, isn't nothing. I wouldn't ever use them in assault but they are at least capable of it.

I think that the Hornet being generally more durable is a good case for it. That being said, I own War Walkers and not Hornets, so I'll be using War Walkers

[Partninja]

Not counting FW I'd prefer a unit of War Walkers with lances. Wraithlords wouldn't be good for me anymore as I prefer to move them up the field with my other foot units to use their flamers and CC to counter charge with. I'm not a fan of the Crimson Hunter (specially since the Hemlock is so good now).

[Blazinghand]

I feel like with Wraithlords you're spending a good number of points on their durability, the close-range weaponry, and their close combat output. So unless you're moving them up you're not making the best use of them, maybe? Not sure what that means in terms of optimal heavy weapons for them, but they will be less accurate on the move.

I wonder how good War Walkers actually are as heavy weapon platforms. They in theory seem reasonably durable, but in practice I think they may not be. I want to play a few games with them before making a judgment call on them one way or the other.

I've been trying to think if there is a good case for Scatter Lasers anywhere? I like the idea of a War Walker putting out 8 Scatter Laser shots, it seems like it could be pretty good anti-horde, even without the Shuriken Cannon rending.

[Partninja]

Scatter-walkers used to be a staple in my 4th edition lists. I didn't use them much until 7th when warhosts required them.

My main issue is most options get reduced BS when moving and firing the heavy weapons. It makes none of them very viable to me anymore.

[Fenris]

I can see the reason to take war walkers over a wraithlords, I even have 3 of them kitted out with brightlances. What it really depends on is probably what else is in your army, however if we assume durability and fire power are equally important, we can mathhammer it.

2x Wraithlords (2xBL, 2x catapults) 306p
3x War walkers (2x BL) 303p

That's close enough in points IMO.
War walkers will have 50% more firepower to start with.

Let's check durability against bolters and lascannons.

Against bolters:
Lords = 3*1.5*1.5*20 = 135 shots
Walkers = 2*1.5*1.5*18 = 81 shots
That's 67% more durable.

Against lascannons:
Lords = 1.25*1.5*1.5*20= 56.25 shots
Walkers = 1.5*1.5*1.5*18= 60.75 shots
That makes the Walkers 8% more durable.

Assuming every 1 in 10 shot is a lascannon we get
Lords: 135*9 + 56.25 = 1271,25
Walkers: 81*9+60,75 = 789,75
That make the Lords 61% more durable

If it's 1/5 shots:
Lords: 135*4 + 56.25 = 596,25
Walkers: 81*4+60,75 = 384,75
That make the Lords 55% more durable.

Then it's off course the Lords declining statline, and the Walkers losing models faster, but the walkers will be ably to shrug of more wounds due to overkill.

I still think the wraithlords wins out, but not by much. 55% durability > 50% firepower.

[Blazinghand]

So assuming the War Walkers get picked off: Until the War Walkers lose a model, they're better than the Wraithlords. Until they lose two, they're at least as good. So what do we get with Wraithlords, besides durability? Well, there are wrist-mounted catapults, which give a little bit of shooting, and Wraithlords are actually pretty decent in combat. Even without a Ghostglaive they're putting out several accurate melee attacks with good strength, AP, and Damage. To some extent we should expert these capabilities to be "priced in" even if we're not using them. And if a Wraithlord is used, we should try to make use of those abilities.

[Tweedz]

Wraithlords are actually pretty decent in combat. Even without a Ghostglaive they're putting out several accurate melee attacks with good strength, AP, and Damage. To some extent we should expert these capabilities to be "priced in" even if we're not using them. And if a Wraithlord is used, we should try to make use of those abilities.

I agree wholeheartedly. You should take lords over walkers if you indent to make use of their cc ability. This means moving them, which is bad for their lance accuracy, but can be made up for my having an Autarch around. Either that or do a dual-SC lord w/ a glaive.