Re: [Epic] Firepower vs Anti-Tank (long)

From: Ken Taborek <oberon_at_...>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 12:04:06 -0400 (EDT)

On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Richard Dewsbery wrote:


[chomp]
> > Let's get down to the nitty-gritty here.
> >
> -snipped example that Land Raiders ronk all over an equal formation of
> Leman Russ in a stand up fight -
> that's why they're called "anti-tank" shots.
>
[chomp]
>
> In terms of the nitty gritty, we know Raiders kill Russ's. But how does
> each do against infantry? Say Orks?

Here you left out one important fact. The Land Raiders (with their 45cm
range) should get a turn of fire at full effect while the Orks are moving
to within 30cm. This will change the results dramaticaly of your example
below. Also, your assumption that other fire will effect the number of BM
on each unit makes your example invalid. If you make that assumption, you
bring in all kinds of personal opinion about which unit is seen as the
greater threat. You specifically stated that the LR would attract more
"outside" fire, while your example shows that the infantry is the greater
threat. If your example holds true (I didn't check your math), then more
"outside" fire should be directed at the infantry.

And, my earlier example was not about "a stand up fight". It was giving
every advantage to the Leman Russ tanks, and showing them lose anyway.


>
> Example 1 - detachment of 9 Land Raiders (340 pts) vs 18 boyz stands, 10
> nobz and warboss (342 pts). Land raiders have armour 6, 2At each for a
> total of 18AT. The Orks have armour 4+ (with about 60% of the units
> having a save), FP1 each for a total of 29.
>
> Conclusion, if the Imperials fire first, they will come out on top,
> marginally. If the Orks get the first blow in, the Land Raiders will be
> decimated for little or no loss.
>
> Example 2 - detachment of 10 Leman Russ (345 pts) vs 18 boyz stands, 10
> nobz and warboss (342 pts). LRs have armour 6, F3 each for a total of
> 30. The Orks have armour 4+ (with about 60% of the units having a
> save), FP1 each for a total of 29.
> First, assuming the tanks get the initiative, the orks are left with 9
> boyz 7 nobz and the warboss, with 8BMs (64%)
> The imperials have 6 tanks and 7 BMs (63%).
>
> Conclusion - again, the tanks will be blown away if they lose the
> initiative, but will cause more casualties to the orks. the exchange
> when the tanks have the first fire is less conclusive for the first 3
> rounds.
>
> Overall, running the numbers showed me yet again that ork nobz' staying
> power can be a real pain, and that BMs will reduce Land Raiders to a
> quivering mess. However, while they are fresh, they are much more
> potent than the Leman Russ tanks. The lesson then is to use Leman Russ
> tanks in the longer, bruising engagements, and keep the Land Raiders out
> of harm's way until the hammer blow is required.
>
> Richard
>
Yes, AT weapons take a greater loss in killing power from BM. The most
BM that can be inflicted by a single det on another is 4, removing 4 50%
chances for a kill. 4BM against a FP det reduces FP by 4, removing 2 dice
of effect. Even firing at Grechin or Guardians the best odds for a kill
is 50%, and is likely to be much less. My point is that LR are very
potent units, and why you would want to take a det of Land Raiders and a
det of Leman Russ tanks is beyond me. Take two det of Land Raiders!


--Ken
Received on Sun Jun 22 1997 - 16:04:06 UTC