Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I agree, there are a LOT of tactics in 40k. Playing "to the mission" will definitly help you discover them. I've seen too many great players win consistently with lists that others have trouble playing to believe differently.

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 9:00 AM

At least they are if you play with terrain on the table. And using missions, as opposed to "kill 'em all" with no turn limit.

Yep.  With some of the commentary I see on tactics, I wonder if the people making them play on virtually empty tables -- Without terrain, 40k is Yahtzee with mascots.

tactics LOL that funny when playing DE ur tactics is too capture and raid the emeny no matter what, and too evade if corner....

About most of the tournaments or stores that I have seen have horrible terrain and only 1 store in my town Rhubarb Games actually adhires to the 25% terrain rule. Sadly some of the terrain boards in Adepticon were just killing fields for a shooting army and I dont fault them with that its just terrain must have ben VERY VERY hard to gather for 300 players. Terrain was factored in the Deployment part which deployment is mostly about using the terrain to get a good setup. The mission is 10% because if you have built your army in a balanced "take on all" style then usually you have some elements to take objectives or quarters.

With most shooting armies its just comes down to just plainly target selection and rolling dice in that instance.


  Hey Mannahnin when did I become an authority on making "easy mode" Nid lists?

I am the last one to have any credibility when it comes to making Nid lists, Hell I still use Biovores , Lictors, and Tyranid Warriors.

I thought the tables at Adepticon were solid this year. Some were more open, and some were a bit clogged, and most had a decent balance, with plenty of cover but some open fire lanes.  Hank confirmed that was the idea.  This was the first year they've been able to get the level of the terrain up to a happy place.  My team played against Nidzilla in round four on a table which had three buildings each about a foot square! Plus some hills and other stuff.   In round 3 on Sunday I was fortunate and got an open able against DE, but in most games there was a good amount.

Hod, I just mentioned you because you were putting forth the argument. It's not exactly hard to build a Nidzilla list or pull one off the internet. I played against two Nidzilla teams Saturday, and it was still immediately apparent from those four players that even with that kind of list, the quality of the player is a major factor.

With shooting armies, target selection is major, but on any table with terrain, in any mission with objectives, maneuver has to happen. As you say, part of list design is taking some objective grabbers. And a big part of tactics is how you use those objective grabbing units.

Because I can hide my WHOLE force behind three trees, a ditch, and a house.
I hid like 80% rather well. Except not. Because he went first anyways.
And then I won.

But right now, tactics for me include where to deploy. Moving isnt an issue, nor is range, because a Heavy Bolter (36"?) will score anything that can be seen turn one.

And then there is the shooting phase. Which I think requires the most thinking for some armies.

Like, if you shoot a transport, and then the guys bail out, and then you shoot the guys afterwards.
And getting people below 50%.

Yes, I think tactics are really, really important to 40K. I've never won a game against my regular opponent with my Orks, in 2 years of play. Then, I played a relative newbie with the same kind of nid list with my orks, and wiped him out on turn three.
Tactics has a massive impact.
Strategy is also hugely important, more important in 40K than fantasy. For me, this isn't nessicarily a bad thing, it just means that list selection is a bigger concern.And army selection.
My friend threatens nidzilla on me occaisionally, but hasn't followed through yet, as he knows it would make for a boring game for me.

In our games I think we got 1 good terrain board, 2 half way decent and 1 near open death lane. Strategy is what the game is about more than tactics.

My friend Dave came up with a very good concept on how to win a 40K game and I think it applies very much to any game played: If you can dominate 2 of the 3 Phases of the game, you can win the game. For instance a Nidzilla list can win simply by dominating the shooting phase or the assault phase. A Mech Guard lists wins by dominating the shooting phase and the movement phase. A Fish of Fury army can simply dominate the assault phase by simply denying the assault to any unit. Most of the top armies can easily dominate 2 of the 3 phases with relative ease.

40k desperately needs some sort of suppressive fire mechanic.  Pinning really doesn't cut it because morale is barely a factor.  If one side could attain fire superiority, it would add a whole new tactical dimension to the game.

As it is now, most tactics are based on a calculated risk that is built into army selection.  For example, tooled up Falcon flies into the midst of enemy gunfire, loses a weapon and is shaken but disembarks Harlequins and then flies away.  500+ pts of troops that can be almost always relied upon to do what they are intended to do.  This is a tactical move, but it wouldn't work with Speed Freeks, or Tau.  Another similar situation would be a bunch of Drop Pods building a wall that cuts a stationary shooty army in half.  These are one size fits all weapon combinations that don't require much creative implementation.  At a higher level of gameplay, between players that know what they are doing, it boils down to the other factors - points efficiency, contingency planning, mission, terrain, deployment, luck.  A fortuitous alpha strike can crush a lot of armies. 

I remember for a while in college I played almost exclusively with my IG against another IG player and I must say that those were some of the most tactically interesting games I ever played.  Probably because of the equal playing field and the effect that morale and maneuver had on the game.  Now my armies are much sleeker and I've compensated for those weaknesses.  Implementing a fire suppression mechanic could force unkillable skimmers to think twice before moving into the middle of the enemy army.  It also might make ground armor more useful if a battle cannon round could make it harder for a Space Marine with a Lascannon to fire back.

Posted By Lowinor on 04/11/2007 10:29 AM

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 9:00 AM

At least they are if you play with terrain on the table. And using missions, as opposed to "kill 'em all" with no turn limit.

Yep.  With some of the commentary I see on tactics, I wonder if the people making them play on virtually empty tables -- Without terrain, 40k is Yahtzee with mascots.

I should talk my buddy into sculpting the bingo Troll army.

Here's a pic:

Hmm, interesting where this conversation has gone.

I was actually talking about peoples insistance that most tournament lists require no thinking at all, and that the lists will win regardless of who plays it or how.

But this is also an interesting discussion.

Edit: Oh and Samwise, I personally think it would be better to implement a 'flanking' mechanic for CC and shooting.

Posted By StarGate on 04/11/2007 12:17 PM
tactics LOL that funny when playing DE ur tactics is too capture and raid the emeny no matter what, and too evade if corner....

I'd just like to pause for a moment and nominate this for BEST POST EVAR.  I mean it really is a work of art.  Much like a great painting or the movie Mortal Kombat: Annihilation, it reveals new subtle intricacies to appreciate upon each subsequent viewing.  Bravo!

Anyway - yeah, suppressive fire and flanking would be good.

Posted By malfred on 04/11/2007 7:26 PM

Posted By Lowinor on 04/11/2007 10:29 AM

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 9:00 AM

At least they are if you play with terrain on the table. And using missions, as opposed to "kill 'em all" with no turn limit.

Yep.  With some of the commentary I see on tactics, I wonder if the people making them play on virtually empty tables -- Without terrain, 40k is Yahtzee with mascots.

I should talk my buddy into sculpting the bingo Troll army.

Here's a pic:

Can that Combat Squad of Trolls take a Las/Plas? 

Posted By Jester on 04/11/2007 10:43 PM

Posted By malfred on 04/11/2007 7:26 PM

Posted By Lowinor on 04/11/2007 10:29 AM

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 9:00 AM

At least they are if you play with terrain on the table. And using missions, as opposed to "kill 'em all" with no turn limit.

Yep.  With some of the commentary I see on tactics, I wonder if the people making them play on virtually empty tables -- Without terrain, 40k is Yahtzee with mascots.

I should talk my buddy into sculpting the bingo Troll army.

Here's a pic:

Can that Combat Squad of Trolls take a Las/Plas? 

I believe they are allowed to upgrade two trolls to have high powered hair dryers and can take the hair gel runt option.   Sadly this also makes them slow and ponderous. 

Posted By Mannahnin on 04/11/2007 9:00 AM
Britney can bring a Godzilla nid list designed by Yakface or thehod and I will still trounce her with new codex DA.

Tactics are a larger part of the equation than people are giving them credit. At least they are if you play with terrain on the table. And using missions, as opposed to "kill 'em all" with no turn limit.

On one level, I agree with you.  Playing a maxed out marine list vs. maxed out Nids/Eldar/Tau can be exceptionally challenging and rewarding.

On the other level, take Codex: Orks and then go beat a Mech Tau or Godzilla Nids army. 

Codex: Orks is a softcover book, and not great for beating on anything. Try the hardcover rulebook; it beats on Tau tanks like nobody's business.

Actually this has happened. See for example the Italian invasions of Ethiopia in the 1890s, and again in the 1930s -- where the Italians, defeated by tribesmen the first time around, outnumbered them in the second invasion and used armour, yet still felt the need to use chemical weapons to defeat the Ethiopian tribesmen, whose tactics were better than those of the Italians.

Well, they were italians.

(I should now be fired from MSNBC).

I guess I mistakenly advocated for more people to use orcs to beat ultramauleens. But that's cool, though. I thought the Ewok battle in Star Wars was just one of those "that's pretty awesome if it were true" stories.

Posted By mauleed on 04/12/2007 3:34 PM

Well, they were italians.

I was going to say that!

(at least WWII era anyway)

Posted By mauleed on 04/12/2007 3:34 PM

Well, they were italians.

(I should now be fired from MSNBC).

I think being given a job at MSNBC would be a worse punishment, Mauleed.

I agree. There are tons of tactics in 40K.

This video is proof of that.

That's some funny stuff. I just can't decide if the spelling is an annoying distraction or a deliberate joke.

Hm, so I guess the Internets has stepped the ante and youtube is now the golden standard where the "Serious Business" and "ORLY" image macros used to rule.

Mann, it's obvious that MC Giver was used so he wouldn't infringe IP. Oh yeah, and in the end when the marines were running around the side of the rock, I'm gonna use that to prove once and for all that marines do in fact use LOS sniping.

Holy molly chaplain!

Plenty of terrain on that table.

wheres the VID???

A few comments:

1) Primitive tribesmen have defeated modern western armies on numerous occasions. The Zulu Wars, King Phillips War, the battle of Little Bighorn, are all examples of this. Heck, the initial Islamic Jihad of the 7th century falls into this category too, since the Byzantines and Persians (and later, the Chinese) were much more sophisticated militarily than the Arabs.

2) The MC Giiver, etc., misspellings were certainly for comedic effect. If the filmmakers were worried about IP they shouldn't have been, since it is a parody and therefore not IP infringement(though maybe the rules are different in the UK). But that movie is excellent. Thanks for sharing, Hellfury.

K.I.T.T. FTW!

Posted By Saber on 04/13/2007 10:34 AM
A few comments:

1) Primitive tribesmen have defeated modern western armies on numerous occasions. The Zulu Wars, King Phillips War, the battle of Little Bighorn, are all examples of this. Heck, the initial Islamic Jihad of the 7th century falls into this category too, since the Byzantines and Persians (and later, the Chinese) were much more sophisticated militarily than the Arabs.

I'm pretty sure that the modern forces were massively outnumbered in those examples.
The repeating rifle really changed the face of war for the most part.