Hey all,
I've taken a few years off from 40k due to life getting in the way of me painting and fighting over my plastic dolls. As such, I have a few questions about what to expect when I get back in to tournament play.
I've heard rumors that transports aren't as hip as before. Is the trend now footslogging?
Is assault really dead?
I'm looking at Necron, Eldar, or Csm as my main army. Can anyone give me pointers on how to field either of the three with success in 6th ed?
The Meta: There are currently shooty armies being favored, as the last three dexs were SM, Tau, and Eldar. Eldar and Tau (especially together) are considered the top Dog for now. Necrons, Marines, and Daemons are all close behind to wrap up top five. Transports are less popular, true, but not a total waste.
Don't think of assault as dead: Daemons/CSm can still do it well enough, but it happens that the traditional "shooty" armies have newer codexs. Tyranids and Orks are both incoming at some point soon, which may upset the balance of long-ranged power.
Agreed, don't let people fool you into thinking close combat is dead. it still highly effective. As the newest codexes are of shooty armies (elder are still VERY nasty in close combat), so you just happen to see more of them. You know, the flavor of the week, new stuff so everyone has to run out and build a tourney list using them deal.
One cool thing going on now is http://www.torrentoffire.com So we actually get a decent snap shot of the meta from a stats basis. It's far from perfect, but the top 3 is
1) Eldar
2) Tau
3) Daemons
True, anyone will tell you that, but it's interesting to see how far the gulf is from 3 to 4 (which is Necrons), and how 2 and 3 are pretty close, with 1 basically sitting on their own.
I'm going to go ahead and stay counter culture...if you are looking to play competitive then assault is dead. If you are looking to just play and have fun, you can assault just fine. If you are looking to do semi-competitive you can assault just fine until you come up against a maximized Tau list.
Daemons can do assault still solely because of the Book of True Names, if you are looking at assaulting with any other army you are going to be fighting an uphill battle. Nids and orks are better off shooting than they are at assault, I am of the opinion that they new codices wont fix it. The problem isn't their codices, the problem is 6th edition because it is an edition that heavily favors shooting. Assault and shooting are NOT balanced, it is all about shooting and assault is still viable, but it takes a massive back seat to shooting.
Despite sounding negative I still run assault whenever I can for my Nids but you will feel like you are playing a substandard list.
6th edition 40k is an exciting adventure for two gunlines. Don't worry about such tedious things as the movement phase or the assault phase. You don't even need to bother with terrain much of the time!
This newer, lighter, simpler version of the game puts you straight into the cinematic action. All you have to do is roll dice, and the winner is determined quickly and easily, with almost no player skill required!
Best of all, with your gunlines (especially mech gunlines), you will so quickly and easily tackle your opponents into submission that soon, everybody will be playing gunlines before you know it, making the game much more efficient. After just a few rounds, games can be decided with little more than both players whipping out their gunlines onto the table, and seeing whose codex's is biggest. You can even figure out who is going to win before the game even begins, and can skip over all that old, boring playing you had to do in older versions of 40k. Unless the dice decide differently, of course!
As a bonus, GW has released several balanced codices over the last few years, and then have turned around and given you tau and eldar - guaranteed to get you that sweet, sweet victory with as little effort possible! And you can even ally them together!
6th edition 40k is a new kind of game with dozens of new rules that streamline and simplify your choices. Get your copy, and start tau/tau and tau/dar-ing your hapless foes today!
Despite Ailaros' excessive optimism, the game is far removed from "gun line vs gun line" 5/6 missions rely on objectives, which requires movement. With shooting armies in the light, it makes movement that much more important. Fast assault units like Khorne Dogs or bikers are incredibly good. So Assault is viable, but currently a little trickier to use.
jifel wrote: Despite Ailaros' excessive optimism, the game is far removed from "gun line vs gun line" 5/6 missions rely on objectives, which requires movement. With shooting armies in the light, it makes movement that much more important. Fast assault units like Khorne Dogs or bikers are incredibly good. So Assault is viable, but currently a little trickier to use.
And if you play with the suggested amount of terrain from the book (ie a lot), Assault does a lot better. Look at the final bracket from a terrain heavy GT, 11th Co. http://app.torrentoffire.com/#/tournament/11th-Company-GT/1/leaderboard Only one Tau, and it was the most mobile, most assault heavy Tau build there is (the Oseva star, which may be a redonk, borderline broken build, but it actually uses Assault).
Two Daemons (including the winner), a Chaos Space Marine list based around SPAWN (3 sets of them, at that), a Space Marine bike Army and of the three Eldar armies one of them is based around Assault (Seer Council, again borderline broken, but does all its damage in assault) That's a lot of assault coming out on top of a 7 game GT with the east coast meta.
jifel wrote: Despite Ailaros' excessive optimism, the game is far removed from "gun line vs gun line" 5/6 missions rely on objectives, which requires movement. With shooting armies in the light, it makes movement that much more important. Fast assault units like Khorne Dogs or bikers are incredibly good. So Assault is viable, but currently a little trickier to use.
This is nullified by the fact that players place the objectives. Basically it means that you can set them up in your deployment, shoot your enemy off of his before he can shoot you off of yours. So the game once again devolves into gun lines, unless you play assault but then it is in your best interest to place objectives in the enemies deployment zone...which helps them if they are playing a gun line...
This has been gone over several times, guys. Terrain helps gunlines because it hurts everyone else more than it does gunlines, and 6th edition isn't a game about objectives. It's a game where 2/3rds of your games are practically guaranteed to roll over to secondaries, and it's easy to make any of the remaining one third do the same. Plus, objectives only count at the end of the game, and strolling onto them with token scoring units is easy once you've nearly wiped your opponent off the table. Even if you can't manage a win by this way, you can easily force a draw on primaries, rolling it over to secondaries.
It's first blood: the game once you know what you're doing. Yet another thing gunlines excel at.
If you want to figure out what the meta is like, I suggest lurking around the local game stores, and reading/watching battle reports. Look to some of the people like Reecius of Frontline Gaming, jy2, and other popular competitive report makers for quality reports which often reveal what competitive play is like. The most important is the local meta though, because that's what most of your games will be composed of.
Eldar recently got a new codex, and they seem like a very solid choice right now.
We're playing different games then... If your whole army is dead and they walk onto objectives, you have a whole separate problem. It's very easy for two armies to hold there own and go to secondaries. Gun lines can do that. But gun lines have a harder time winning just on primary, which assault and mobile armies can do. To emphasize, mobility is more important than just assault. That's why Eldar are the better shooting army than Tau. Static armies lose games, because opponents can just late contest/claim.
Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Vertebrae wrote: Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Helldrakes are amazing, they defined the meta for awhile but have recently become less prominent as Tau/Eldar became the new hotness. They didn't lose power or viability they just aren't as powerful as Tau/Eldar. Mech armies are...not as prominent as they used to be but are still good enough to get the job done.
Vertebrae wrote: Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Actually, it's basically the opposite of this. Assault, unless you're playing that one demon army build, is certainly dead. Not only did we go from a shooty-heavy rules edition and make it shootier, and, in the process killed horde close combat in particular, while new transport rules killed what little of vehiclular assault. To add injury to torture, you also have to add in the new codices, especially tau, who make a mockery of close combat.
Meanwhile, fliers generated a lot of insanity, but they also have a lot of problems they need to overcome (not applying killing power right away, being vulnerable to interceptor and skyfire, having mobility restrictions, among a long list of problems), and the helldrake is particularly bad because it doesn't offer CSM anything that they're not already bringing a lot of to the table (their whole codex is designed to kill space marines, they don't need an expensive, specialist tool that does little else but this). Fliers are mostly hype, and caused a great deal of hatred only among people who weren't already bringing enough anti-tank. Anyone who can handle a mech gunline, though, can handle fliers, even without specialist weapons.
Vertebrae wrote: Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Actually, it's basically the opposite of this. Assault, unless you're playing that one demon army build, is certainly dead. Not only did we go from a shooty-heavy rules edition and make it shootier, and, in the process killed horde close combat in particular, while new transport rules killed what little of vehiclular assault. To add injury to torture, you also have to add in the new codices, especially tau, who make a mockery of close combat.
Meanwhile, fliers generated a lot of insanity, but they also have a lot of problems they need to overcome (not applying killing power right away, being vulnerable to interceptor and skyfire, having mobility restrictions, among a long list of problems), and the helldrake is particularly bad because it doesn't offer CSM anything that they're not already bringing a lot of to the table (their whole codex is designed to kill space marines, they don't need an expensive, specialist tool that does little else but this). Fliers are mostly hype, and caused a great deal of hatred only among people who weren't already bringing enough anti-tank. Anyone who can handle a mech gunline, though, can handle fliers, even without specialist weapons.
No offense, but just about everyone is saying the opposite...
Heldrakes are still good, because Taudar can't strip its Invuln, its tough, and can kill a lot of the good units in todays games (MCs, Wave Serpents, Marines, etc) and Assault is the ONLY way to beat Tau and Eldar, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Not assaulting Tau is literally conceding the game. Yes, Flyers are in part overhyped, but Chaos, Crons, and Marines all bring legitimately good flyers to the table. Horde Close isn't great right now, yes, but both Orks and Nids have codexs of 4 years or more. The problem there is simply in the order of updates, not a problem with 6th edition. Guard aren't a Close Combat army, sorry. They're for shooting stuff.
Vertebrae wrote: Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Actually, it's basically the opposite of this. Assault, unless you're playing that one demon army build, is certainly dead. Not only did we go from a shooty-heavy rules edition and make it shootier, and, in the process killed horde close combat in particular, while new transport rules killed what little of vehiclular assault. To add injury to torture, you also have to add in the new codices, especially tau, who make a mockery of close combat.
Meanwhile, fliers generated a lot of insanity, but they also have a lot of problems they need to overcome (not applying killing power right away, being vulnerable to interceptor and skyfire, having mobility restrictions, among a long list of problems), and the helldrake is particularly bad because it doesn't offer CSM anything that they're not already bringing a lot of to the table (their whole codex is designed to kill space marines, they don't need an expensive, specialist tool that does little else but this). Fliers are mostly hype, and caused a great deal of hatred only among people who weren't already bringing enough anti-tank. Anyone who can handle a mech gunline, though, can handle fliers, even without specialist weapons.
No offense, but just about everyone is saying the opposite...
Heldrakes are still good, because Taudar can't strip its Invuln, its tough, and can kill a lot of the good units in todays games (MCs, Wave Serpents, Marines, etc) and Assault is the ONLY way to beat Tau and Eldar, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Not assaulting Tau is literally conceding the game. Yes, Flyers are in part overhyped, but Chaos, Crons, and Marines all bring legitimately good flyers to the table. Horde Close isn't great right now, yes, but both Orks and Nids have codexs of 4 years or more. The problem there is simply in the order of updates, not a problem with 6th edition. Guard aren't a Close Combat army, sorry. They're for shooting stuff.
While I agree with you about the heldrake Jifel, I have to agree with him about assault. New codices aren't going to help Orks and Tyranids unless they fundamentally ignore a lot of 6th edition and have their own little index of ways to ignore things like random charge lengths, taking casualties from the front, the lack of reliable ways to get CC squads across the board and then charge, the ability for rapid fire to move and shoot all day long, and so many more.
Assaults problems stem from 6th, not bad codices, and until they do something to change that there isn't much to be done about it.
But if assault would be good , that armies that can't do it would automaticly be unplayable .
If anything assault should be rare , just like in real combat . Or am ok with assault getting better , if overwatch gets a suppression rule. Each hit means -1"charge range .
Makumba wrote: But if assault would be good , that armies that can't do it would automaticly be unplayable .
If anything assault should be rare , just like in real combat . Or am ok with assault getting better , if overwatch gets a suppression rule. Each hit means -1"charge range .
Why? Why on earth should some armies that are primarily assault based like Tyranids and Orks be subjected to handicaps like that when no one else is? I understand that you like shooting but this game has three phases, not just two.
Makumba wrote: But if assault would be good , that armies that can't do it would automaticly be unplayable .
If anything assault should be rare , just like in real combat . Or am ok with assault getting better , if overwatch gets a suppression rule. Each hit means -1"charge range .
Amen. I don't get how assault was so over powered in other editions.
Why? Why on earth should some armies that are primarily assault based like Tyranids and Orks be subjected to handicaps like that when no one else is? I understand that you like shooting but this game has three phases, not just two.
No one else? you mean , armies that can't be as fast as eldar or shotier then static tau. Ah right now IG . why should I want that my army gets suckier to play with , so that someone who plays nids or orks can play his army ?
Vertebrae wrote: Thanks for the update guys! Good to hear that assault isn't dead. I've heard that flyers are great (heldrake) and that most mech armies are dead. Truth to this?
Actually, it's basically the opposite of this. Assault, unless you're playing that one demon army build, is certainly dead. Not only did we go from a shooty-heavy rules edition and make it shootier, and, in the process killed horde close combat in particular, while new transport rules killed what little of vehiclular assault. To add injury to torture, you also have to add in the new codices, especially tau, who make a mockery of close combat.
Meanwhile, fliers generated a lot of insanity, but they also have a lot of problems they need to overcome (not applying killing power right away, being vulnerable to interceptor and skyfire, having mobility restrictions, among a long list of problems), and the helldrake is particularly bad because it doesn't offer CSM anything that they're not already bringing a lot of to the table (their whole codex is designed to kill space marines, they don't need an expensive, specialist tool that does little else but this). Fliers are mostly hype, and caused a great deal of hatred only among people who weren't already bringing enough anti-tank. Anyone who can handle a mech gunline, though, can handle fliers, even without specialist weapons.
I have to disagree about assault armies being dead. I have a friend, Rich, who is featured on a lot of Blue Table battle reports with his Orks. He smokes most armies he goes up against, including Eldar, Tau, and Chaos. You can see some of these games on Youtube. In tournaments over the years, I can count maybe 4 times he has lost a game using them.
Martel732 wrote: Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then. Because I don't see it happening at the top level of the game, so I have to be a little dubious.
He took 6th place Nationaly in the first 'Ard Boyz tournament. Just watch him play against Tau or Eldar or Chaos with his Orks on Youtube if you feel dubious.
Martel732 wrote: Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then. Because I don't see it happening at the top level of the game, so I have to be a little dubious.
I cited the 11th CO GT earlier in this thread. Plenty of the "big name" East Coast guys were there. More than half the Armies in the top bracket were assault based:
Edit: it's the most recent big GT, so it's relevant. And it's a 7 game event with what 90 players? One of the most competitive events in the US
Two Flying Circuses
A Seer Council (although his list had PLENTY of shooting as well)
A Spawntide Chaos Space Marines build
Then two of them had heavy assault elements
Khan Bikers
Ovesa Star
Then the last two at least had counter assault in WKs.
It's hardly dead in tournament play; especially as the tournament scene has started to actually add terrain.
Edit: Also as an aside Martel, my buddy ran MSU Raven there and won the 4th bracket, going 5-2. He lost to Seer Council and some other Eldar build. heh
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Daemons can do assault still solely because of the Book of True Names, if you are looking at assaulting with any other army you are going to be fighting an uphill battle.
You must have never played a Seer Council Eldar squad on bikes backed up by 4-5 wave serpents.
This song describes what jetSeer builds will do to yours. Its quite likely the overall best build in the game today.
Martel732 wrote: Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then. Because I don't see it happening at the top level of the game, so I have to be a little dubious.
I cited the 11th CO GT earlier in this thread. Plenty of the "big name" East Coast guys were there. More than half the Armies in the top bracket were assault based:
Edit: it's the most recent big GT, so it's relevant. And it's a 7 game event with what 90 players? One of the most competitive events in the US
Two Flying Circuses
A Seer Council (although his list had PLENTY of shooting as well)
A Spawntide Chaos Space Marines build
Then two of them had heavy assault elements
Khan Bikers
Ovesa Star
Then the last two at least had counter assault in WKs.
It's hardly dead in tournament play; especially as the tournament scene has started to actually add terrain.
Edit: Also as an aside Martel, my buddy ran MSU Raven there and won the 4th bracket, going 5-2. He lost to Seer Council and some other Eldar build. heh
Most people that I've seen who say assault armies are dead usually play on tables with little or no terrain or have never faced anyone that knows how to run a good assault army.
CC is on par with shooting, but most tend to favor making shooting lists, which makes melee forces even better.
CC is not on par with shooting. Quit claiming this when it is demonstrably untrue.
It depends on what kind of terrain is on the table. If you have an open table, of course gunlines are going to rule. You'd be better off just rolling dice against each other without the bother of setting up armies and freeing your afternoon for more entertaining pursuits. With decent amounts of terrain, the game becomes more tactical.
Are there viable assault list? Yes. Screamstar is completely viable to the point that it is incredibly OP, that does not make assault a viable phase in 6th edition. The right amount of terrain makes it better, that is absolutely true, and I play with the right amount of terrain and can pull off wins against IG with my nids. More often than not though when I win against IG it is against my dad, while I love my dad dearly he is not the best 40k player even though he is good enough I know IG well enought to manipulate his weaknesses.
That is what it boils down to from my point of view, I know that if I were playing the army across the table from me I would win the vast majority of the time. I am playing against people who just aren't playing on my level and I can see it. I have played 7 armies in 6th editions and feel like I have a better than most idea of how each army fairs and how the armies stack up against each other. I recently sold off my Tau army, that had no Riptides in it, because I could just feel how easy they are to run. There was no fun going in with a list that used mostly Kroot, Stealth Teams, and an Etheral and still winning almost 100% of games. I know that I am not playing at the highest levels of 40k but it is so easy to break down the math in this game and compare armies to one another, I can look at tournament results and what list were played and compare it to the codex I play. There is very little a Tyranid player could ever do against a Tau list and the best option for the Tyranid player is to try and outshoot the Tau player. That is honestly a failing of the Tyranid codex more than anything but it is partly because of 6th edition, 6th edition is far to balanced in favor of shooting. 5th edition was far more balanced than 6th is between the two phases and I feel that if they had kept assault more or less as it was in 5th with the changes they made to shooting in 6th the game would be far more balanced. Keep overwatch, keep the ability to move and fire rapid fire, hell even keep overwatch and wound removement from the front. But give assault back the ability to assault from outflank. Get rid of random charge lengths...that is such BS because for everyone who claims that you can make a 12" charge ask yourself, with overwatch when are you EVER going to attempt that 12" charge? But how many times are you going to miss your charge with it? The hail mary charge is going to go off a lot less than the "almost guaranteed" charge is going to happen because people wont attempt the hail mary, but you are damned right they are going to go for that 4" charge only to roll snake eyes....
The way my friend plays Orks makes them an extremely viable army, He doesn't have time for tournaments these days due to responsabilities, but the opponents he regularly beats are extremely good tournament players.
I think if you went into a game against him thinking you were going to blow him away because he runs an Ork assault army, you'd have a rude surprise. He doesn't win all of his games, of course, but I'd put his win percentage at easily over 80%.
Ailaros wrote: This has been gone over several times, guys. Terrain helps gunlines because it hurts everyone else more than it does gunlines, and 6th edition isn't a game about objectives. It's a game where 2/3rds of your games are practically guaranteed to roll over to secondaries, and it's easy to make any of the remaining one third do the same. Plus, objectives only count at the end of the game, and strolling onto them with token scoring units is easy once you've nearly wiped your opponent off the table. Even if you can't manage a win by this way, you can easily force a draw on primaries, rolling it over to secondaries.
It's first blood: the game once you know what you're doing. Yet another thing gunlines excel at.
Gunlines are FAR from the most competitive builds.
Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
Ailaros wrote: This has been gone over several times, guys. Terrain helps gunlines because it hurts everyone else more than it does gunlines, and 6th edition isn't a game about objectives. It's a game where 2/3rds of your games are practically guaranteed to roll over to secondaries, and it's easy to make any of the remaining one third do the same. Plus, objectives only count at the end of the game, and strolling onto them with token scoring units is easy once you've nearly wiped your opponent off the table. Even if you can't manage a win by this way, you can easily force a draw on primaries, rolling it over to secondaries.
It's first blood: the game once you know what you're doing. Yet another thing gunlines excel at.
Gunlines are FAR from the most competitive builds.
Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
This is the truth. I said it earlier, I'll say it again. Static lists will never be top dog, this is why Eldar make Taudar a good combo. Assault is not as easy to use as shooting, and shooty + mobile is deadly, but assault can still turn the game around if its backed up properly.
Ailaros wrote: This has been gone over several times, guys. Terrain helps gunlines because it hurts everyone else more than it does gunlines, and 6th edition isn't a game about objectives. It's a game where 2/3rds of your games are practically guaranteed to roll over to secondaries, and it's easy to make any of the remaining one third do the same. Plus, objectives only count at the end of the game, and strolling onto them with token scoring units is easy once you've nearly wiped your opponent off the table. Even if you can't manage a win by this way, you can easily force a draw on primaries, rolling it over to secondaries.
It's first blood: the game once you know what you're doing. Yet another thing gunlines excel at.
Gunlines are FAR from the most competitive builds.
Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
This is the truth. I said it earlier, I'll say it again. Static lists will never be top dog, this is why Eldar make Taudar a good combo. Assault is not as easy to use as shooting, and shooty + mobile is deadly, but assault can still turn the game around if its backed up properly.
I don't know about Ailaros but I know I am not refering to gun lines, I am talking about the relation to shooting vs assault. Eladr and Taudar are pretty much the best armies for the shooting phase, with IG competing in that department. Referring back to the OP talking about the state of the meta, shooting is far more powerful than assault with Tau/Tau, Tau/Eldar, and Eldar/Tau being the dominate armies outside of Screamstar.
I actually agree with you that a purely static gun line, which is a style of play not a list, isn't the best...but it can still do well, if you wipe the table of your opponents scoring units and have one or two in your deployment you'll win. Typically it is only Tau that can do this regularly but gun lines are still better off than pure assault outside of an extremely few exceptions that are flat out breaking their codex, IE Screamstar. It's not like the CD codex was dominating tournaments until people figured out how stupid the Book of True Names could get with Kairos.
I've heard the speech about terrain over and over on these boards. But GWs methodology is weak for setting up the boards. If the terrain is so critical, there should be rigourous methods for setting up the board.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: I understand that you like shooting but this game has three phases, not just two.
Well, 1.16 phases. You have the shooting phase for five turns and then a quick bit of movement at the very end. Assuming your guns are in range, movement has very little to do in 40k for a majority of the game.
jifel wrote:No offense, but just about everyone is saying the opposite...
Martel732 wrote:Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then.
Relapse wrote:He took 6th place Nationaly in the first 'Ard Boyz tournament.
Relapse wrote:Most people that I've seen who say assault armies are dead usually play on tables with little or no terrain or have never faced anyone that knows how to run a good assault army.
ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
There, now that we've cleared the air, what are we left with? Right, armies that focus on delivering a great deal of killing power immediately with long-range weapons being by far, the best. Yes, a STATIC gunline MIGHT have problems, but it's trivial to get the necessary amount of mobility in those few games where objectives really matter. Any mech gunline does this by default, for goodness sake.
And stop saying that terrain makes assault armies better. It makes them worse. They may or may not get cover saves, while terrain will definitely slow them down or redirect them, and assaulting into terrain is always a disadvantage for assaulters compared to shooty defenders.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: I understand that you like shooting but this game has three phases, not just two.
Well, 1.16 phases. You have the shooting phase for five turns and then a quick bit of movement at the very end. Assuming your guns are in range, movement has very little to do in 40k for a majority of the game.
jifel wrote:No offense, but just about everyone is saying the opposite...
Martel732 wrote:Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then.
Relapse wrote:He took 6th place Nationaly in the first 'Ard Boyz tournament.
Relapse wrote:Most people that I've seen who say assault armies are dead usually play on tables with little or no terrain or have never faced anyone that knows how to run a good assault army.
ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
There, now that we've cleared the air, what are we left with? Right, armies that focus on delivering a great deal of killing power immediately with long-range weapons being by far, the best. Yes, a STATIC gunline MIGHT have problems, but it's trivial to get the necessary amount of mobility in those few games where objectives really matter. Any mech gunline does this by default, for goodness sake.
And stop saying that terrain makes assault armies better. It makes them worse. They may or may not get cover saves, while terrain will definitely slow them down or redirect them, and assaulting into terrain is always a disadvantage for assaulters compared to shooty defenders.
I don't know why saying that I know people who run assault armies that more often than not beats gunline armies is a fallacy. As far as terrain goes, yes, it does make assault armies better, if the person running the assault army is skilled. I've seen it enough times with good players to know that, and feel sorry for you that apparently in your area the game amounts to nothing more than lining armies up on opposite sides of a bare table and rolling dice, if your earlier post is anything to judge by.
Well, I would say that terrain helps out Orks a lot more than Tyranids. Because the cover saves you might get with Tyranids are going to be stripped by Tau which is mostly what we are talking about here and the lack of assault grenades means I1 across the board for bugs...
If we get our spines back in the 6th codex I will die. Just drop dead.
But the reason he is calling what you are saying as a fallacy is because it is an appeal to authority in a way...
You know a guy who runs an assault army, implying that he is an expert in the field of running assault armies, and wins with them regularly against gun lines, which is anecdotal. But I see your point, it is possible to win with assault armies, I know it is true because I win frequently with them too. At the same time I know that I am mostly winning those games because my opponent isn't the best or they just don't care enough to go all the way cheese with their list.
jifel wrote: We're playing different games then... If your whole army is dead and they walk onto objectives, you have a whole separate problem. It's very easy for two armies to hold there own and go to secondaries. Gun lines can do that. But gun lines have a harder time winning just on primary, which assault and mobile armies can do. To emphasize, mobility is more important than just assault. That's why Eldar are the better shooting army than Tau. Static armies lose games, because opponents can just late contest/claim.
my local meta has ZERO static tau armies. Just teleporting deathstars of death
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Well, I would say that terrain helps out Orks a lot more than Tyranids. Because the cover saves you might get with Tyranids are going to be stripped by Tau which is mostly what we are talking about here and the lack of assault grenades means I1 across the board for bugs...
If we get our spines back in the 6th codex I will die. Just drop dead.
But the reason he is calling what you are saying as a fallacy is because it is an appeal to authority in a way...
You know a guy who runs an assault army, implying that he is an expert in the field of running assault armies, and wins with them regularly against gun lines, which is anecdotal. But I see your point, it is possible to win with assault armies, I know it is true because I win frequently with them too. At the same time I know that I am mostly winning those games because my opponent isn't the best or they just don't care enough to go all the way cheese with their list.
That's my point right there. It's easily seen on youtube how well he does and he's playing against fairly good opponents most times. Your point is taken about some not being the best, etc. but Ailaros's blanket statement implying that people might as well shelve their assault armies is most definitely a fallacy.
Martel732 wrote: Can we get a link of this guy's Ork against a non-meq list? Beating meqs in 6th is not exactly a super impressive accomplishment.
How about a sample list?
Just check the Blue table videos featuring Orks vs whatever. I posted a link earlier with a game of his against a Chaos player.. He doesn't win all of his games, but he wins most.
I will admit tournament results are anecdotal, but seriously, I need an actual rebuttal for why 60% of the top bracket at a tier one GT isn't a solid argument that assault is alive and well.
Let me try this again, at the 11th CO GT, the top bracket was 8 armies. Of those 8 we had
Assault focused
2 Flying Circuses (primarily assault, some shooting of course)
1 Spawntide list (at least 90% assault. He did have a Havoc squad)
Seer Council (primarily assault, but still a lot of shooting with 5 serpents)
Shooting focused with large assault element
Khan Bikers (with Space Wolf allies)
Oseva Star (this unit assaults a lot more than you think it does on paper)
Shooting primary
2 Eldar Armies (but still had WKs, who are major counter assault units)
Definitely anecdotal, but also the most recent snap shot of the "top of the meta"
anonymou5 wrote: I will admit tournament results are anecdotal, but seriously, I need an actual rebuttal for why 60% of the top bracket at a tier one GT isn't a solid argument that assault is alive and well.
Let me try this again, at the 11th CO GT, the top bracket was 8 armies. Of those 8 we had
Assault focused
2 Flying Circuses (primarily assault, some shooting of course)
1 Spawntide list (at least 90% assault. He did have a Havoc squad)
Seer Council (primarily assault, but still a lot of shooting with 5 serpents)
Shooting focused with large assault element
Khan Bikers (with Space Wolf allies)
Oseva Star (this unit assaults a lot more than you think it does on paper)
Shooting primary
2 Eldar Armies (but still had WKs, who are major counter assault units)
Definitely anecdotal, but also the most recent snap shot of the "top of the meta"
I'd say if those figures are true, it goes beyond anectdotal as far as proving that assault armies are still viable in this edition.
anonymou5 wrote: I will admit tournament results are anecdotal, but seriously, I need an actual rebuttal for why 60% of the top bracket at a tier one GT isn't a solid argument that assault is alive and well.
Let me try this again, at the 11th CO GT, the top bracket was 8 armies. Of those 8 we had
Assault focused
2 Flying Circuses (primarily assault, some shooting of course)
1 Spawntide list (at least 90% assault. He did have a Havoc squad)
Seer Council (primarily assault, but still a lot of shooting with 5 serpents)
Shooting focused with large assault element
Khan Bikers (with Space Wolf allies)
Oseva Star (this unit assaults a lot more than you think it does on paper)
Shooting primary
2 Eldar Armies (but still had WKs, who are major counter assault units)
Definitely anecdotal, but also the most recent snap shot of the "top of the meta"
I'd say if those figures are true, it goes beyond anectdotal as far as proving that assault armies are still viable in this edition.
I actually did mess up, there was only one regular Eldar build (Kurt Claus, placed 3rd. I actually beat him at the ATC with an assault based Daemon Army, since we're talking anecdotal). The 8th place Eldar was another Seer Council. So that's 5 of 8 with a bias towards Assault. And two of those shooting Armies are Khan Bikers and Oseva Star, which definitely do some assaulting.
Makumba wrote: But if assault would be good , that armies that can't do it would automaticly be unplayable .
If anything assault should be rare , just like in real combat . Or am ok with assault getting better , if overwatch gets a suppression rule. Each hit means -1"charge range .
Amen. I don't get how assault was so over powered in other editions.
Well, in previous editions it was easier for transports to get across the table, unload 10 marines and have them charge. Especially fast rhinos from Blood Angels. 40 marines in your face that are protected from shooting ( it was a lot harder to kill transports), unload, then move 6 and then charge 6.....
Couple in various other rules (hidden power fists,hitting on 3's, or wounding on 3's vs WS 4 or T4, things like that) no overwatch, and that you essentially have twice as many assault phases as shooting ( cause you fight in both turns) meant that it was easy to decimate many armies. HTH was king. It was also easier to break an army in assault. I shoot 10 marines and kill 6, they check morale on their base morale. I wound 4 guys, and out number him etc, and he takes leadership at a lower level.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Are there viable assault list? Yes. Screamstar is completely viable to the point that it is incredibly OP, that does not make assault a viable phase in 6th edition.
Lets look at the criteria for generating a powerful assault army.
- Very fast units (turn 2 assault is desirable)
- Ability to absorb damage before getting into assault (2+ rerollable save, land raider transport, lots of wounds)
- Use of psychic powers/relics/gifts/special rules to maximize effect
- Cheap for the amount of damage they do. (TH/SS termies are to expensive, for example)
These traits are not limited to a single book. Any book that can produce these traits can make an effective assault army.
The problem is that not many books can produce those combos. I've only seen the following on tables.
* Eldar and Dark Eldar allied
* CSM with spawn
* Daemons (calvary spam, FMC builds, screamerstar)
There might be other builds out there. You might be able to make something work with three land raiders full of DCAs, crusaders, and inquisitors. I've not seen them on the table though. The only ones I've seen that are frightening are the ones listed above.
Necron Wraiths are another really dangerous and viable assault unit which is notably missing there. SM Bike lists also seem to be doing pretty well in the assault aspect but they're still pretty new so info on them is erratic. Even Nob bikers pop up from time to time.
Makumba wrote: But if assault would be good , that armies that can't do it would automaticly be unplayable .
If anything assault should be rare , just like in real combat . Or am ok with assault getting better , if overwatch gets a suppression rule. Each hit means -1"charge range .
Amen. I don't get how assault was so over powered in other editions.
Well, in previous editions it was easier for transports to get across the table, unload 10 marines and have them charge. Especially fast rhinos from Blood Angels. 40 marines in your face that are protected from shooting ( it was a lot harder to kill transports), unload, then move 6 and then charge 6.....
Couple in various other rules (hidden power fists,hitting on 3's, or wounding on 3's vs WS 4 or T4, things like that) no overwatch, and that you essentially have twice as many assault phases as shooting ( cause you fight in both turns) meant that it was easy to decimate many armies. HTH was king. It was also easier to break an army in assault. I shoot 10 marines and kill 6, they check morale on their base morale. I wound 4 guys, and out number him etc, and he takes leadership at a lower level.
Yep, assault in third was unbelievably strong. In a tournament, I ran thirty Blood Angels, using super charged Rhinos, into an Ork army. By the end of the second turn, there were only 18 Orks left on the board.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: I understand that you like shooting but this game has three phases, not just two.
Well, 1.16 phases. You have the shooting phase for five turns and then a quick bit of movement at the very end. Assuming your guns are in range, movement has very little to do in 40k for a majority of the game.
jifel wrote:No offense, but just about everyone is saying the opposite...
Martel732 wrote:Then he needs to go to the big tourneys then.
Relapse wrote:He took 6th place Nationaly in the first 'Ard Boyz tournament.
Relapse wrote:Most people that I've seen who say assault armies are dead usually play on tables with little or no terrain or have never faced anyone that knows how to run a good assault army.
ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:Pretty much EVERY major GT was won by highly mobile and aggressive army skilled at capturing objectives.
There, now that we've cleared the air, what are we left with? Right, armies that focus on delivering a great deal of killing power immediately with long-range weapons being by far, the best. Yes, a STATIC gunline MIGHT have problems, but it's trivial to get the necessary amount of mobility in those few games where objectives really matter. Any mech gunline does this by default, for goodness sake.
And stop saying that terrain makes assault armies better. It makes them worse. They may or may not get cover saves, while terrain will definitely slow them down or redirect them, and assaulting into terrain is always a disadvantage for assaulters compared to shooty defenders.
Clearly you haven't played against a seer council or any Daemon list worth it's salt.
Whats this? A mad IG player talking about assault being dead? Say it isn't so!
In terms of top tier armies, Daemons with FMC and the silly 2++ trick are melee based. Bike armies have massive melee potential, and are common again, and so forth.
But really now, whats the best way to beat a shooty army? You're not going to beat a tau force with a marine force by shooting it, you beat it by getting into melee so you can't get shot at. That's basic tactics. Having a few support elements to shoot at things that would kill your assault force is also very sound.
Why are tau hated so much? Tau are a completely shooting focused army. Unless you're tailoring your lists just for tau, it's hard to out shoot them. Stop shooting tau, melee them instead.
juraigamer wrote: Whats this? A mad IG player talking about assault being dead? Say it isn't so!
In terms of top tier armies, Daemons with FMC and the silly 2++ trick are melee based. Bike armies have massive melee potential, and are common again, and so forth.
But really now, whats the best way to beat a shooty army? You're not going to beat a tau force with a marine force by shooting it, you beat it by getting into melee so you can't get shot at. That's basic tactics. Having a few support elements to shoot at things that would kill your assault force is also very sound.
Why are tau hated so much? Tau are a completely shooting focused army. Unless you're tailoring your lists just for tau, it's hard to out shoot them. Stop shooting tau, melee them instead.
Well run Orks do well against Tau also. This game is pretty indicitive of how an Ork army can work Tau. The guy playing Orks has never lost to a Tau army that I know of.
juraigamer wrote: Whats this? A mad IG player talking about assault being dead? Say it isn't so!
In terms of top tier armies, Daemons with FMC and the silly 2++ trick are melee based. Bike armies have massive melee potential, and are common again, and so forth.
But really now, whats the best way to beat a shooty army? You're not going to beat a tau force with a marine force by shooting it, you beat it by getting into melee so you can't get shot at. That's basic tactics. Having a few support elements to shoot at things that would kill your assault force is also very sound.
Why are tau hated so much? Tau are a completely shooting focused army. Unless you're tailoring your lists just for tau, it's hard to out shoot them. Stop shooting tau, melee them instead.
It's pretty hard to get to assault against a good Tau player. I don't find bikes that hot in melee, but maybe my standards are too high. Those few support elements you are talking about, due to marine pricing, are unlikely to significantly degrade the shooting potential of a good shooter list. Yeah, there's the TFC, but that's about it.
Martel732 wrote:It's pretty hard to get to assault against a good Tau player. I don't find bikes that hot in melee, but maybe my standards are too high.
I've seen a tau player table a ravenwing down to just sammael before the ravenwing player got to turn 2, a result that is easily predictable. The combination of bikes being expensive, and relying on cover saves that tau just ignore (or the huge volume of S5+ fire at +BS against only Sv3+), and the bikes meeting army-wide overwatch if they get there at all means that they're going to take absurd damage even before the bike player hits their first speed bump, only to rinse and repeat over the subsequent turns.
Relapse wrote:I don't know why saying that I know people who run assault armies that more often than not beats gunline armies is a fallacy.
It isn't.
Relapse wrote: It's easily seen on youtube how well he does and he's playing against fairly good opponents most times.
Relapse wrote:I've seen it enough times with good players to know that
But these are.
Relapse wrote:Ailaros's blanket statement implying that people might as well shelve their assault armies is most definitely a fallacy.
And this isn't. Spend some time with that link I sent you to. It will help make things clearer if you understand what is and what isn't a fallacy.
Relapse wrote:As far as terrain goes, yes, it does make assault armies better
Reason through it.
How does terrain help assault armies? Sometimes it gives them a cover save. It doesn't always matter if there's an invul save involved, and it doesn't always work if there's focus firing involved, and it doesn't work at all against tau, and it often doesn't work against barrage weapons, and it's of much less use against highly mobile armies (not that you were going to catch them anyways). This one benefit has a lot of contingencies. Lots of flaws and weaknesses to be exploited.
Meanwhile, how does terrain hurt assault armies? It makes them take longer to get into close combat - a fatal problem in general, but especially in a take-casualties-from-the-front world. You have to run units around terrain, which means a less direct route, which means it takes longer to get there. Or you can try and go through the terrain, which means difficult terrain tests, which means you're slower, which means it takes longer to get there. Worse, you could be stuck taking a few turns of it on larger terrain pieces or with worse die rolling. Assaulting a unit that's in terrain means that you roll 3D6 and pick the lowest for charge range, which very likely means that you're spending another turn not charging, and you get to eat a free round of overwatch to add insult to injury. Assaulting a barrage unit that's hiding out of LOS behind terrain is literally impossible, which means now you need to spend more time just trying to get into LOS for a charge. Assaulting units with MSM gives you all the penalties of assaulting through terrain without even the benefit of getting a cover save. Attacking units up in a ruins means that you're going to have to spend lots of time crawling through terrain, and might still even have LOS issues when you get there, AND your opponent gets to use a height advantage to shoot over terrain, making it so that you don't get a cover save.
One sometimes-sometimes-not advantage, with numerous disadvantages.
More terrain is bad for assault armies.
anonymou5 wrote: but seriously, I need an actual rebuttal for why 60% of the top bracket at a tier one GT isn't a solid argument that assault is alive and well.
Firstly, as you say, it's anecdotal. A few people playing a couple of dice games. The question isn't why someone should be skeptical with this data, but why someone would bother to believe in it.
Secondly, an appeal to "your betters" is a fallacy. If we're letting fallacies in, then I can claim that assault armies are dead because the invisible purple unicorn in the sky told me they were, and it knows all... and sees all...
ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:Clearly you haven't played against a seer council or any Daemon list worth it's salt.
Firstly, I did mention that demon list as an exception.
Secondly, an argument based on nothing but "you're insufficient" is a fallacy. If we're letting fallacies in, then I can claim that assault armies are dead because the invisible purple unicorn in the sky told me that you're a loser and nobody likes you, and so I shouldn't trust you because you're missing what's needed to have reasonable opinions.
Martel732 wrote:It's pretty hard to get to assault against a good Tau player. I don't find bikes that hot in melee, but maybe my standards are too high.
I've seen a tau player table a ravenwing down to just sammael before the ravenwing player got to turn 2, a result that is easily predictable. The combination of bikes being expensive, and relying on cover saves that tau just ignore (or the huge volume of S5+ fire at +BS against only Sv3+), and the bikes meeting army-wide overwatch if they get there at all means that they're going to take absurd damage even before the bike player hits their first speed bump, only to rinse and repeat over the subsequent turns.
Relapse wrote:I don't know why saying that I know people who run assault armies that more often than not beats gunline armies is a fallacy.
It isn't.
Relapse wrote: It's easily seen on youtube how well he does and he's playing against fairly good opponents most times.
Relapse wrote:I've seen it enough times with good players to know that
But these are.
Relapse wrote:Ailaros's blanket statement implying that people might as well shelve their assault armies is most definitely a fallacy.
And this isn't. Spend some time with that link I sent you to. It will help make things clearer if you understand what is and what isn't a fallacy.
Relapse wrote:As far as terrain goes, yes, it does make assault armies better
Reason through it.
How does terrain help assault armies? Sometimes it gives them a cover save. It doesn't always matter if there's an invul save involved, and it doesn't always work if there's focus firing involved, and it doesn't work at all against tau, and it often doesn't work against barrage weapons, and it's of much less use against highly mobile armies (not that you were going to catch them anyways). This one benefit has a lot of contingencies. Lots of flaws and weaknesses to be exploited.
Meanwhile, how does terrain hurt assault armies? It makes them take longer to get into close combat - a fatal problem in general, but especially in a take-casualties-from-the-front world. You have to run units around terrain, which means a less direct route, which means it takes longer to get there. Or you can try and go through the terrain, which means difficult terrain tests, which means you're slower, which means it takes longer to get there. Worse, you could be stuck taking a few turns of it on larger terrain pieces or with worse die rolling. Assaulting a unit that's in terrain means that you roll 3D6 and pick the lowest for charge range, which very likely means that you're spending another turn not charging, and you get to eat a free round of overwatch to add insult to injury. Assaulting a barrage unit that's hiding out of LOS behind terrain is literally impossible, which means now you need to spend more time just trying to get into LOS for a charge. Assaulting units with MSM gives you all the penalties of assaulting through terrain without even the benefit of getting a cover save. Attacking units up in a ruins means that you're going to have to spend lots of time crawling through terrain, and might still even have LOS issues when you get there, AND your opponent gets to use a height advantage to shoot over terrain, making it so that you don't get a cover save.
One sometimes-sometimes-not advantage, with numerous disadvantages.
More terrain is bad for assault armies.
anonymou5 wrote: but seriously, I need an actual rebuttal for why 60% of the top bracket at a tier one GT isn't a solid argument that assault is alive and well.
Firstly, as you say, it's anecdotal. A few people playing a couple of dice games. The question isn't why someone should be skeptical with this data, but why someone would bother to believe in it.
Secondly, an appeal to "your betters" is a fallacy. If we're letting fallacies in, then I can claim that assault armies are dead because the invisible purple unicorn in the sky told me they were, and it knows all... and sees all...
ImotekhTheStormlord wrote:Clearly you haven't played against a seer council or any Daemon list worth it's salt.
Firstly, I did mention that demon list as an exception.
Secondly, an argument based on nothing but "you're insufficient" is a fallacy. If we're letting fallacies in, then I can claim that assault armies are dead because the invisible purple unicorn in the sky told me that you're a loser and nobody likes you, and so I shouldn't trust you because you're missing what's needed to have reasonable opinions.
Interesting you talk about a singular instance that you saw and hold that up as an example of your point, yet say that multiple examples that can be seen on youtube proving my point that assault armies can win against shooting armies are worthless and fallacies.
So one story of Tau tabling Dark Angels is okay, but an entire GT is "just a few people playing dice games?"
96 players over 7 games is 672 games. In the context of sample sizes that's not great, but it's a hell of a lot better than your example. In 672 games, 6 assault based armies found them selves at the top of 96 players. That's a hell of a lot more relevant than "I think assault is completely dead"
Further, if that's still too anecdotal. Out of the thousands and thousands of games tracked on Torrent of Fire, Daemons are currently ranked as the second most successful Army (by percentage of games won). That's ahead of Tau, and below Eldar. You better believe those Daemon armies aren't winning most of those games through shooting.
Further: as mentioned earlier, play against a Seer Council. It's probably the best build in the entire game, and it wins through assaults.
No, the seer council wins through be unkillable and very mobile. Assault is really an afterthought. Bring some more standard CC troops and see how well it goes.
Last time I checked, no imperial list has access to a Screamerstar or Seer Council. People keep pointing out *very* specific assault units that still work, because they are essentially unkillable. That means that being unkillable is really good, not the assault mechanic.
Martel732 wrote: No, the seer council wins through be unkillable and very mobile. Assault is really an afterthought. Bring some more standard CC troops and see how well it goes.
Flesh Hounds, Screamers (in non Screamer Star form), Chapter Masters on Bikes, Wraith Knights, Daemon Princes, Lords of Change, Keepers of Secrets. Those are all assault units who have been at the top tables of recent GTs.
Look if you want to argue that non Daemon/Eldar assault is "mostly dead" I will agree (mostly dead because of Chapter Masters and Riptide Death Stars, who still do plenty of assaulting). But Daemons are the second best Army in the game. And they win mostly through assault. And it's usually not the Screamer Star at GT level, because it's too unreliable a list. It's usually either a Flying Circus or a Horde List.
Edit: Can't forget the Spawntide. That list came out of nowhere but did well at a bunch of GTs recently (Nova, BfS, 11th Co)
"Look if you want to argue that non Daemon/Eldar assault is "mostly dead" I will agree"
A couple of specific instances that do work very well do not validate the assault mechanic in general. I'm quite aware of council builds, screamer stars, and flying MCs. What about lists that don't have access to any of those units?
anonymou5 wrote: So one story of Tau tabling Dark Angels is okay, but an entire GT is "just a few people playing dice games?"
96 players over 7 games is 672 games. In the context of sample sizes that's not great, but it's a hell of a lot better than your example. In 672 games, 6 assault based armies found them selves at the top of 96 players. That's a hell of a lot more relevant than "I think assault is completely dead"
Further, if that's still too anecdotal. Out of the thousands and thousands of games tracked on Torrent of Fire, Daemons are currently ranked as the second most successful Army (by percentage of games won). That's ahead of Tau, and below Eldar. You better believe those Daemon armies aren't winning most of those games through shooting.
Further: as mentioned earlier, play against a Seer Council. It's probably the best build in the entire game, and it wins through assaults.
I keep running through my mind the scene from the Princess Bride where Andre the giant says that he doesn't think his partner in crime knows what a word means. I think it applies in Ailaros's case. If you read some of his earlier posts in this thread, it seems that where he games at the tables have minimal terrain with gunline armies on both sides of the table shooting at each other. Sounds pretty boring without any players developing any real skill, at least as he tells it.
anonymou5 wrote: Look if you want to argue that non Daemon/Eldar assault is "mostly dead" I will agree (mostly dead because of Chapter Masters and Riptide Death Stars, who still do plenty of assaulting). But Daemons are the second best Army in the game. And they win mostly through assault. And it's usually not the Screamer Star at GT level, because it's too unreliable a list. It's usually either a Flying Circus or a Horde List.
While I was making the Simhammer segment this past week, I crunched the total wins. When you add in 'allies', daemons drop to 4th place in relation to win percentage. This puts daemons in 4th. Still very strong -- but not quite #2. It not much of a shock what the top 3 are.
Well think about it a bit more Relapse. Let's say you have your table with both area terrain and LOS blocking terrain. Normally models can't move through the LOS blocking terrain, so they have to go around it. Obviously, the most popular assault elements of the current meta don't have this problem, but I"m discussing assault in general.
So your units have to move around this stuff to get where they're going, since hiding behind it the whole game doesn't win you the game. Moving around said terrain feature might cost you a turn or even two of movement of getting into assault range.
6th edition has forced me to shoot with the BA, and I've gotten a lot better at target prioritization. I find that I can stave off an assault for a whole turn by sometimes moving a few models 3" or so backwards. By prioritizing the units that are a) visible and b) a real assault threat, I've found that against non-seer council, non-daemons I can take assault out of the picture. Note that also *I* choose what gets assaulted, not the assaulting player. That is such a huge advantage that can't be stressed enough.
anonymou5 wrote: Look if you want to argue that non Daemon/Eldar assault is "mostly dead" I will agree (mostly dead because of Chapter Masters and Riptide Death Stars, who still do plenty of assaulting). But Daemons are the second best Army in the game. And they win mostly through assault. And it's usually not the Screamer Star at GT level, because it's too unreliable a list. It's usually either a Flying Circus or a Horde List.
While I was making the Simhammer segment this past week, I crunched the total wins. When you add in 'allies', daemons drop to 4th place in relation to win percentage. This puts daemons in 4th. Still very strong -- but not quite #2. It not much of a shock what the top 3 are.
I was just using Torrent of Fire's posted data for "Armies" I don't have an Ultimate Torrent of Fire subscription. What's going to be interesting is how Codex: Prescience and broken Grenades shakes things up.
But if you look at that, it's really still Eldar, Daemons, then Tau. Tau without Eldar are below Daemons, lol.
Okay, I never meant to argue whether daemons could assault or not. They have both screamerstar and flying MC circus at their disposal. My concern was mainly anyone else.
Martel732 wrote: Well think about it a bit more Relapse. Let's say you have your table with both area terrain and LOS blocking terrain. Normally models can't move through the LOS blocking terrain, so they have to go around it. Obviously, the most popular assault elements of the current meta don't have this problem, but I"m discussing assault in general.
So your units have to move around this stuff to get where they're going, since hiding behind it the whole game doesn't win you the game. Moving around said terrain feature might cost you a turn or even two of movement of getting into assault range.
I just direct your attention to the youtube videos I've linked. Those are just two of several examples. I admit my bud is extremely good with Orks as they are the only army he has run,with an occasional Templar foray, since the early 1990's. The key is that he knows the strengths and weaknesses of his army well and has a lot of experience facing every conceivable build of opponent's forces. He has literaly pissed a few people off when he beat them with his Orks because they thought their gunline was invincible and he rolled over it.
As I said, he doesn't win every time, but his record is impressive enough to put the "gunline can't be beat statement" down as a misconception.
I only see the link to the CSM vs Ork game. Which, unfortunately, doesn't prove much because meqs stink right now. I think if the Orks that battle had been taking Eldar/Tau levels of fire, they would have lost that game.
Martel732 wrote: Okay, I never meant to argue whether daemons could assault or not. They have both screamerstar and flying MC circus at their disposal. My concern was mainly anyone else.
Then we're mostly in agreement. Herald Hammer style Daemon lists also do really well (Hounds, Screamers and Seekers with Heralds). Although there are still a few other viable assault units in the game. I will agree it's not what it once was.
Ironically the Oseva Star is a fantastic assault unit. And it's Tau, lol.
A few others: Spawntides, Corbulo stars, Mephiston, Chapter Masters on Bikes (I like running him with a Bear Lord attached to Fenrisian Wolves), Beastpacks (they still do great, it's the rest of the Dark Eldar codex that has issues).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Honestly man, beating up on the Blue Table Guys means nothing. They're mid table obscurity skill level, at best. They're better than the MWG team, but not by a whole lot.
Martel732 wrote: I only see the link to the CSM vs Ork game. Which, unfortunately, doesn't prove much because meqs stink right now. I think if the Orks that battle had been taking Eldar/Tau levels of fire, they would have lost that game.
juraigamer wrote: Whats this? A mad IG player talking about assault being dead? Say it isn't so!
In terms of top tier armies, Daemons with FMC and the silly 2++ trick are melee based. Bike armies have massive melee potential, and are common again, and so forth.
But really now, whats the best way to beat a shooty army? You're not going to beat a tau force with a marine force by shooting it, you beat it by getting into melee so you can't get shot at. That's basic tactics. Having a few support elements to shoot at things that would kill your assault force is also very sound.
Why are tau hated so much? Tau are a completely shooting focused army. Unless you're tailoring your lists just for tau, it's hard to out shoot them. Stop shooting tau, melee them instead.
Well run Orks do well against Tau also. This game is pretty indicitive of how an Ork army can work Tau. The guy playing Orks has never lost to a Tau army that I know of.
I'm sure your friend is a great Ork player, but that Tau list sucked. I think I could have beat that list with BA even. Vespids and Hammerheads? No Riptides? That's not a fair test for the Orks.
Martel732 wrote: I'm sure your friend is a great Ork player, but that Tau list sucked. I think I could have beat that list with BA even. Vespids and Hammerheads? No Riptides? That's not a fair test for the Orks.
No Buff Commander, no Skyrays, no Kroot, no Riptides, no Broadsides, no Etherial. Those are the six best units in the Tau Codex (although you don't necessarily need all of them, you should at least have most). That's a joke list, lol. About what you get on Blue Table, they play the game for fun not for competition (not that there's anything wrong with that), so using them to gauge the meta is ridiculous.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Corbulo stars and Mephiston force you to play with a crap codex. Not worth it at all. The beastpacks are more playable, imo.
Chapter masters on bikes do their thing, but I feel it's a hollow unit to field compared to seer council, daemons, etc.
It's a shame Corbulo isn't an HQ. So you could bring him and some cheap Assault Terminators in to a Marine list (he is an elite right, I'm not being an idiot?)
If you've got twin linking on your Chapter Master (tau Commander, Rune Priest, Tiggy, whatever), it's a good way to ruin turn 1 for Daemons/Eldar. (force them to reserve if not kill units outright).
Martel732 wrote: I'm sure your friend is a great Ork player, but that Tau list sucked. I think I could have beat that list with BA even. Vespids and Hammerheads? No Riptides? That's not a fair test for the Orks.
Perhaps this list sucked, but no Tau player from a fair selection of players using other lists has ever beaten him.
Martel732 wrote: I'm sure your friend is a great Ork player, but that Tau list sucked. I think I could have beat that list with BA even. Vespids and Hammerheads? No Riptides? That's not a fair test for the Orks.
Perhaps this list sucked, but no Tau player from a fair selection of players using other lists has ever beaten him.
If they used lists like that, no wonder. That Ork list would evaporate against a well-played, *well-built* mono-Tau. We won't get into Taudar. I would feel comfortable taking my BA against either of those lists, and that's not a good sign.
It's not even a good Ork list. Cans, really? This isn't exactly the edition of the Dread…
Where is the Biker Boss going? With boyz? He has jink, they don't, so a smart opponent is just going to Focus Fire small arms fire and kill all the boyz, then use big guns on the now alone Biker Boss.
Trucks? You need a lot more than that if you want to make them work….like MAX numbers.
Renegade_commander wrote: Lol... that ork list would get smoked by anyone in my group. And who the feth runs vespids? Gtfo
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Renegade_commander wrote: Lol... that ork list would get smoked by anyone in my group. And who the feth runs vespids? Gtfo
sorry i had to make this two posts because i was laughing so hard about that video. That was a poor example of assault still being ok.
Say it until you play against it. All I can say is that he's played variations on this list against people that have said the same thing who used all the new lists and has won against them more often than not.
Okay, been at work so I haven't had a chance to post what I wanted to when I read this thread this morning...
Anonymou5, I read through the list you were linking to for the GT and I have to say...just because a list as an element of assault in it, when it also has 5+ Wave Serpents it is NOT an assault army. It is a shooting army with one assault unit. The only list I saw on there that I would consider an assault list were the Flying Circus list and that is a fair point, but ONLY CD have access to flying MCs like that.
On that point, marine bike armies are not great at assault and their strength lies in the heavy weapons and speed they can bring to the table. They are one of the better counters to Tau at this point but really they aren't any good against a Tau player who knows what they are doing.
Martel732 wrote: I've played against Ork lists meaner than that. I'd gladly take it on as a break from "Taudar makes me pick up all my meqs in 3 turns".
Any given Ork list at least lets an meq list try to play their game. No such luck with Taudar. Anything within 36" starts getting melted immediately.
He can make some fairly good lists. This is his "playing a friendly game list". If he is looking to face a more competitive player, he can put out quite a bit different army on the table. As I said, he placed 6th nationaly in the first 'ard boyz tournament, so he knows his way around a competitive Ork list.
Martel732 wrote: But 'Ard boyz was 5th edition. Lots of armies still had 3rd edition codices in 5th edition.
True, but he all of a sudden didn't turn into a crappy player just because of the edition change and wins far more often than not in 6th with his Orks. A lot comes down to the skill of the player. A good player, such as him, can make an assault list work. It might be harder in this edition, but it is still doable.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Okay, been at work so I haven't had a chance to post what I wanted to when I read this thread this morning...
Anonymou5, I read through the list you were linking to for the GT and I have to say...just because a list as an element of assault in it, when it also has 5+ Wave Serpents it is NOT an assault army. It is a shooting army with one assault unit. The only list I saw on there that I would consider an assault list were the Flying Circus list and that is a fair point, but ONLY CD have access to flying MCs like that.
On that point, marine bike armies are not great at assault and their strength lies in the heavy weapons and speed they can bring to the table. They are one of the better counters to Tau at this point but really they aren't any good against a Tau player who knows what they are doing.
No. The Seer Council is an assault Army. It's not winning because it has 5 Serpents shooting, they are the support piece. It wins because it multi assaults entire Tau/Eldar armies on Turn 2 and kills them. It is absolutely an assault Army. You can argue it's not a fair barometer because it's nigh invincible (and that's a fair point), but don't say it doesn't count because it has shooting in it.
Now, looking at the top 8 lists (the top bracket), there are two Circuses (one Tzeentch in 1st, one Slaanesh in 7th). There are two Seer Councils. One has 5 Serpents (placed second) and one has 4 and a WK (placed 8th). Those are assault lists. Finally there is the Spawn Tide list (placed 5th). It has Abaddon, a Juggerlord, a Nurgle Bike Lord 15 Spawn, two Maulerfiends a Drake and some Havocs. That list has almost NO shooting. Again, that's 5/8 Assault lists.
Two lists have strong assault elements but are primarily shooting. The Ovesa Star (placed sixth) and Khan Bikers (placed 4th). The Ovesa Star, if you've ever seen it in action, actually assaults fairly often. Obviously it's primarily a shooting element, but it does use Assault. Khan Bikers, again are mostly shooting, but that Chapter Master isn't carrying his Powerfist because it looks cool. And Bikers are great at assaulting to hide from shooting, then hit and run out and do it again.
The remaining list of the top 8 is the Eldau list (3rd). It's Kurt Claus's list, and it's not entirely without assault. I played him at the ATC and he charged my Daemons list twice. Once with the Riptide/Buff Commander/Farseer into my Khorne Dogs, and again with a WK into my Dogs.
5/8 are assault focused, and three of those are almost entirely assault (Spawntide, two Flying Circuses). 2 are shooting focused but have very important assault elements. 1 is mostly shooting but maintains good counter assault.
Martel732 wrote: The seer council would be a lot less scary if the Wave serpent wasn't broken. Kinda like in 5th.
Ever played against it with Venoms and Wraith Knights instead of Serpents? In some ways it's a lot better. For one it never fails psychic tests. For another the WKs provide anti AV 14, and additional assault threats coming up the table. I played against that version at the Redstone Rumble and he kept tossing invis on his WKs, and against my Daemons it was arguably a lot better than having a bunch of Serpents. I won by avoiding assault with pretty much his whole Army and just kiting everything and contesting objectives at the end. That's right, a Daemon Circus couldn't assault an Eldar Army.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Okay, been at work so I haven't had a chance to post what I wanted to when I read this thread this morning...
Anonymou5, I read through the list you were linking to for the GT and I have to say...just because a list as an element of assault in it, when it also has 5+ Wave Serpents it is NOT an assault army. It is a shooting army with one assault unit. The only list I saw on there that I would consider an assault list were the Flying Circus list and that is a fair point, but ONLY CD have access to flying MCs like that.
On that point, marine bike armies are not great at assault and their strength lies in the heavy weapons and speed they can bring to the table. They are one of the better counters to Tau at this point but really they aren't any good against a Tau player who knows what they are doing.
No. The Seer Council is an assault Army. It's not winning because it has 5 Serpents shooting, they are the support piece. It wins because it multi assaults entire Tau/Eldar armies on Turn 2 and kills them. It is absolutely an assault Army. You can argue it's not a fair barometer because it's nigh invincible (and that's a fair point), but don't say it doesn't count because it has shooting in it.
Now, looking at the top 8 lists (the top bracket), there are two Circuses (one Tzeentch in 1st, one Slaanesh in 7th). There are two Seer Councils. One has 5 Serpents (placed second) and one has 4 and a WK (placed 8th). Those are assault lists. Finally there is the Spawn Tide list (placed 5th). It has Abaddon, a Juggerlord, a Nurgle Bike Lord 15 Spawn, two Maulerfiends a Drake and some Havocs. That list has almost NO shooting. Again, that's 5/8 Assault lists.
Two lists have strong assault elements but are primarily shooting. The Ovesa Star (placed sixth) and Khan Bikers (placed 4th). The Ovesa Star, if you've ever seen it in action, actually assaults fairly often. Obviously it's primarily a shooting element, but it does use Assault. Khan Bikers, again are mostly shooting, but that Chapter Master isn't carrying his Powerfist because it looks cool. And Bikers are great at assaulting to hide from shooting, then hit and run out and do it again.
The remaining list of the top 8 is the Eldau list (3rd). It's Kurt Claus's list, and it's not entirely without assault. I played him at the ATC and he charged my Daemons list twice. Once with the Riptide/Buff Commander/Farseer into my Khorne Dogs, and again with a WK into my Dogs.
5/8 are assault focused, and three of those are almost entirely assault (Spawntide, two Flying Circuses). 2 are shooting focused but have very important assault elements. 1 is mostly shooting but maintains good counter assault.
I'm sorry but you are stretching this extremely far to define a list as assault based. 10 Warloks on bikes with spears does not an assault list make even if it is a scary assault unit. To deny that 5 and 4 WS, which are considered the one of the most if not the most powerful units in the game, set the stage for those wins you are just ignoring reality. What you are doing is defining any list that has a single assault unit in it as an assault based list...that is not right. The three Chaos list that you pointed out are the only ones I see that I would define as assault based. So at best I will grant you that 3 of the top 8 are assault list and that IS solid evidence, BUT Flying Circus is not a strong argument for assault so much as it is a strong argument for FMC. That list is defined by the FMC, not its assault capabilites. Those DP aren't assaulting their way to victory, they are abusing the fact that fliers, both vehicles and FMC, are poorly implimented and to compound that issue they are largely ignoring the one weakness FMC do have by taking Fateweaver. Finally, to add to my argument that a gun line is perfectly valid...look at the scoring units the daemons have. Two minimum squads of troops. They are not looking to take objectives with those list, they are looking to clear the opponents scoring units off the table and win with First Blood.
While those two ARE assault list yes, they are using a codex defining tactic, not something that any other codex has or will have in the future. FMC spam is not a great argument that assault is live and well in 6th edition. What I WILL grant you is the Spawntide list, that is incredible that he was able to do so well and I can absolutely see why that list would wreck the meta. Tons of spawn that can surge across the table to tie up shooting to be followed be the Maulerfiends? I am impressed by that list. It is a great counter meta list but against most other list? It wouldn't fair nearly as well.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Okay, been at work so I haven't had a chance to post what I wanted to when I read this thread this morning...
Anonymou5, I read through the list you were linking to for the GT and I have to say...just because a list as an element of assault in it, when it also has 5+ Wave Serpents it is NOT an assault army. It is a shooting army with one assault unit. The only list I saw on there that I would consider an assault list were the Flying Circus list and that is a fair point, but ONLY CD have access to flying MCs like that.
On that point, marine bike armies are not great at assault and their strength lies in the heavy weapons and speed they can bring to the table. They are one of the better counters to Tau at this point but really they aren't any good against a Tau player who knows what they are doing.
No. The Seer Council is an assault Army. It's not winning because it has 5 Serpents shooting, they are the support piece. It wins because it multi assaults entire Tau/Eldar armies on Turn 2 and kills them. It is absolutely an assault Army. You can argue it's not a fair barometer because it's nigh invincible (and that's a fair point), but don't say it doesn't count because it has shooting in it.
Now, looking at the top 8 lists (the top bracket), there are two Circuses (one Tzeentch in 1st, one Slaanesh in 7th). There are two Seer Councils. One has 5 Serpents (placed second) and one has 4 and a WK (placed 8th). Those are assault lists. Finally there is the Spawn Tide list (placed 5th). It has Abaddon, a Juggerlord, a Nurgle Bike Lord 15 Spawn, two Maulerfiends a Drake and some Havocs. That list has almost NO shooting. Again, that's 5/8 Assault lists.
Two lists have strong assault elements but are primarily shooting. The Ovesa Star (placed sixth) and Khan Bikers (placed 4th). The Ovesa Star, if you've ever seen it in action, actually assaults fairly often. Obviously it's primarily a shooting element, but it does use Assault. Khan Bikers, again are mostly shooting, but that Chapter Master isn't carrying his Powerfist because it looks cool. And Bikers are great at assaulting to hide from shooting, then hit and run out and do it again.
The remaining list of the top 8 is the Eldau list (3rd). It's Kurt Claus's list, and it's not entirely without assault. I played him at the ATC and he charged my Daemons list twice. Once with the Riptide/Buff Commander/Farseer into my Khorne Dogs, and again with a WK into my Dogs.
5/8 are assault focused, and three of those are almost entirely assault (Spawntide, two Flying Circuses). 2 are shooting focused but have very important assault elements. 1 is mostly shooting but maintains good counter assault.
I'm sorry but you are stretching this extremely far to define a list as assault based. 10 Warloks on bikes with spears does not an assault list make even if it is a scary assault unit. To deny that 5 and 4 WS, which are considered the one of the most if not the most powerful units in the game, set the stage for those wins you are just ignoring reality. What you are doing is defining any list that has a single assault unit in it as an assault based list...that is not right. The three Chaos list that you pointed out are the only ones I see that I would define as assault based. So at best I will grant you that 3 of the top 8 are assault list and that IS solid evidence, BUT Flying Circus is not a strong argument for assault so much as it is a strong argument for FMC. That list is defined by the FMC, not its assault capabilites. Those DP aren't assaulting their way to victory, they are abusing the fact that fliers, both vehicles and FMC, are poorly implimented and to compound that issue they are largely ignoring the one weakness FMC do have by taking Fateweaver. Finally, to add to my argument that a gun line is perfectly valid...look at the scoring units the daemons have. Two minimum squads of troops. They are not looking to take objectives with those list, they are looking to clear the opponents scoring units off the table and win with First Blood.
While those two ARE assault list yes, they are using a codex defining tactic, not something that any other codex has or will have in the future. FMC spam is not a great argument that assault is live and well in 6th edition. What I WILL grant you is the Spawntide list, that is incredible that he was able to do so well and I can absolutely see why that list would wreck the meta. Tons of spawn that can surge across the table to tie up shooting to be followed be the Maulerfiends? I am impressed by that list. It is a great counter meta list but against most other list? It wouldn't fair nearly as well.
I am not attempting to stretch anything. So I apologize if it seems like I am. But man, I've played against Seer Councils plenty of times. 5 Serpents is good, no denying that. But those lists win games because of assault. 5 Serpents isn't winning a gun fight against 9 Serpents, a Riptide, and Broadsides (or whatever other Eldau shooty lists are out there). Seer Councils are dominating the Eldar vs Eldar meta right now because of how insanely powerful they are in assault. You're talking about a unit that can engage and kill entire Armies, simultaneously. It's not 10 Warlocks, 2 Farseers and the Baron. It's 10 dudes with rerollable 2 up armors, 2 up covers, at WS6-9, STR 6-9, etc. They're insane. IMO it's an assault list. A ridiculous, broken, assault list.
And yes, I am simultaneously making an argument for FMCs as well as assault. I don't need to be told how to play a Flying Circus, I play one at a very high level.
Assault is alive and well, it's just vastly different than it was in 5th. It's not Rhinos driving across the board and coughing up Marines. It's beasts, cavalry, bikes, and MCs with buffs stacked on them, crossing the board in one turn and wreacking havoc. You know what else is different than it was in 5th? Shooting. Do you know what 15 Long Fangs do in a tournament today? They all die in 1-2 turns.
The argument isn't "assault is dead" The argument is "the 3 6ed power books have cranked the game up to 11. Their assault and shooting units are vastly more powerful than anything that existed before." I agree with that entirely. It's a different and silly game now.
Also, that player with the Spawntide list took it to BfS and Nova as well, and did well at both events (actually beat the Ovesa Star with it at BFS)
I'd much rather face venoms and Wraithknights. Anti-AV 14 is not so important as bringing LRs is its own penalty.
Your perspective is skewed because you were playing demons. A shooting army could shoot down whatever didn't get invis. The fact that you were able to kite it shows its inferiority to Serpents. You literally can't keep away from them.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: Okay, been at work so I haven't had a chance to post what I wanted to when I read this thread this morning...
Anonymou5, I read through the list you were linking to for the GT and I have to say...just because a list as an element of assault in it, when it also has 5+ Wave Serpents it is NOT an assault army. It is a shooting army with one assault unit. The only list I saw on there that I would consider an assault list were the Flying Circus list and that is a fair point, but ONLY CD have access to flying MCs like that.
On that point, marine bike armies are not great at assault and their strength lies in the heavy weapons and speed they can bring to the table. They are one of the better counters to Tau at this point but really they aren't any good against a Tau player who knows what they are doing.
No. The Seer Council is an assault Army. It's not winning because it has 5 Serpents shooting, they are the support piece. It wins because it multi assaults entire Tau/Eldar armies on Turn 2 and kills them. It is absolutely an assault Army. You can argue it's not a fair barometer because it's nigh invincible (and that's a fair point), but don't say it doesn't count because it has shooting in it.
Now, looking at the top 8 lists (the top bracket), there are two Circuses (one Tzeentch in 1st, one Slaanesh in 7th). There are two Seer Councils. One has 5 Serpents (placed second) and one has 4 and a WK (placed 8th). Those are assault lists. Finally there is the Spawn Tide list (placed 5th). It has Abaddon, a Juggerlord, a Nurgle Bike Lord 15 Spawn, two Maulerfiends a Drake and some Havocs. That list has almost NO shooting. Again, that's 5/8 Assault lists.
Two lists have strong assault elements but are primarily shooting. The Ovesa Star (placed sixth) and Khan Bikers (placed 4th). The Ovesa Star, if you've ever seen it in action, actually assaults fairly often. Obviously it's primarily a shooting element, but it does use Assault. Khan Bikers, again are mostly shooting, but that Chapter Master isn't carrying his Powerfist because it looks cool. And Bikers are great at assaulting to hide from shooting, then hit and run out and do it again.
The remaining list of the top 8 is the Eldau list (3rd). It's Kurt Claus's list, and it's not entirely without assault. I played him at the ATC and he charged my Daemons list twice. Once with the Riptide/Buff Commander/Farseer into my Khorne Dogs, and again with a WK into my Dogs.
5/8 are assault focused, and three of those are almost entirely assault (Spawntide, two Flying Circuses). 2 are shooting focused but have very important assault elements. 1 is mostly shooting but maintains good counter assault.
I'm sorry but you are stretching this extremely far to define a list as assault based. 10 Warloks on bikes with spears does not an assault list make even if it is a scary assault unit. To deny that 5 and 4 WS, which are considered the one of the most if not the most powerful units in the game, set the stage for those wins you are just ignoring reality. What you are doing is defining any list that has a single assault unit in it as an assault based list...that is not right. The three Chaos list that you pointed out are the only ones I see that I would define as assault based. So at best I will grant you that 3 of the top 8 are assault list and that IS solid evidence, BUT Flying Circus is not a strong argument for assault so much as it is a strong argument for FMC. That list is defined by the FMC, not its assault capabilites. Those DP aren't assaulting their way to victory, they are abusing the fact that fliers, both vehicles and FMC, are poorly implimented and to compound that issue they are largely ignoring the one weakness FMC do have by taking Fateweaver. Finally, to add to my argument that a gun line is perfectly valid...look at the scoring units the daemons have. Two minimum squads of troops. They are not looking to take objectives with those list, they are looking to clear the opponents scoring units off the table and win with First Blood.
While those two ARE assault list yes, they are using a codex defining tactic, not something that any other codex has or will have in the future. FMC spam is not a great argument that assault is live and well in 6th edition. What I WILL grant you is the Spawntide list, that is incredible that he was able to do so well and I can absolutely see why that list would wreck the meta. Tons of spawn that can surge across the table to tie up shooting to be followed be the Maulerfiends? I am impressed by that list. It is a great counter meta list but against most other list? It wouldn't fair nearly as well.
I am not attempting to stretch anything. So I apologize if it seems like I am. But man, I've played against Seer Councils plenty of times. 5 Serpents is good, no denying that. But those lists win games because of assault. 5 Serpents isn't winning a gun fight against 9 Serpents, a Riptide, and Broadsides (or whatever other Eldau shooty lists are out there). Seer Councils are dominating the Eldar vs Eldar meta right now because of how insanely powerful they are in assault. You're talking about a unit that can engage and kill entire Armies, simultaneously. It's not 10 Warlocks, 2 Farseers and the Baron. It's 10 dudes with rerollable 2 up armors, 2 up covers, at WS6-9, STR 6-9, etc. They're insane. IMO it's an assault list. A ridiculous, broken, assault list.
And yes, I am simultaneously making an argument for FMCs as well as assault. I don't need to be told how to play a Flying Circus, I play one at a very high level.
Assault is alive and well, it's just vastly different than it was in 5th. It's not Rhinos driving across the board and coughing up Marines. It's beasts, cavalry, bikes, and MCs with buffs stacked on them, crossing the board in one turn and wreacking havoc. You know what else is different than it was in 5th? Shooting. Do you know what 15 Long Fangs do in a tournament today? They all die in 1-2 turns.
The argument isn't "assault is dead" The argument is "the 3 6ed power books have cranked the game up to 11. Their assault and shooting units are vastly more powerful than anything that existed before." I agree with that entirely. It's a different and silly game now.
Also, that player with the Spawntide list took it to BfS and Nova as well, and did well at both events (actually beat the Ovesa Star with it at BFS)
The three power books have made assault dead for everyone else. That makes assault dead in the meta unless you are a special exception. Hence, the phrase "Assault is dead".
The three power books have made assault dead for everyone else. That makes assault dead in the meta unless you are a special exception. Hence, the phrase "Assault is dead".
They've also made shooting dead for everyone else. What's the last tournament IG won? Our shooty Wolves? Or Grey Knights?
Those were the 5ed Shooting Armies.
With the exception of specific niche builds (Spawntide, MSU Raven, maybe Khan Bikers), there are effectively only three books. One is shooty (Tau), one is assaulty (Daemons), one is both (Eldar).
Although really you could make an argument that there's only one book. Eldar are better than Tau and Daemons (who are roughly equal IMO)
Also. Daemons can kite Serpents. You can stay out of range of the Scatter Laser, the Serpent Shield doesn't matter if it's not twin linked (for FMCs). And if he does shoot it away I'm going to lash him to death.
I propose an experiment at this point, since we appear to be talking in circles. Each of us record our win loss record against good opponents of a particular style of play, whether assault or shooting.
Let's define our terms as to what constitutes either type of army, ie., percentage of units needed to constitute an assault or shooty army.
No fair playing lil' Timmy or other inexperienced or lower tier than you are player types and counting that as an honest victory. The skill levels between both opponents should be as close to equal as can be created.
Everybody plays 5 games and reports results back here and we see what the results are.
It's a very loose and nebulous idea, so if you're interested, feel free to throw in any ideas or suggestions.
It would also be interesting to note how easy the victory was.
I'll say at this point that my belief is that from what I've seen here localy, assault is not as dead as it's made out to be.
Martel732 wrote: 36" radius of effect is huge. At the very least the will wound spam all your scoring troops to death. Unless Daemons can make FMC scoring somehow.
It's also hard to believe that IG can't still do better than meqs in 6th edition. Especially against Tau.
It's actually 48, due to the 12 inch move. Still doable once you push them to a board edge with Fateweaver.
Against Eldar with Daemons I am 3-0 at GTs (including a win over the number 1 ranked player on TOF). I'm actually working on an article for FLG about it, but in short I basically play straight asymmetrical.
DPs kite Wave Serpents. Fateweaver engages and kills any soft targets, and forces Wave Serpents to stay on the board edge (if they expose rear armor he will kill them). Portaglyph goes behind my bastion. Flesh Hounds posture midfield early game to push Serpents to a side. After that Hounds suicide themselves into a WK. Daemonnettes find places to hide to threaten WK movement, as they will kill a WK if they catch him. Horrors spend most of the game going to ground, or sitting in/behind my Bastion.
End game Daemon Princes fly onto objectives (to contest or draw fire), Fateweaver takes awy an objective. Troops run onto objectives.
If you follow the link in my sig I have batrep I have a win against a decent Eldar list against a good general (many RTT wins, although mostly with Crons), where I basically do what I just described (although he had two Serpents so I was a little more aggressive)
Martel732 wrote: 36" radius of effect is huge. At the very least the will wound spam all your scoring troops to death. Unless Daemons can make FMC scoring somehow.
It's also hard to believe that IG can't still do better than meqs in 6th edition. Especially against Tau.
It's actually 48, due to the 12 inch move. Still doable once you push them to a board edge with Fateweaver.
Against Eldar with Daemons I am 3-0 at GTs (including a win over the number 1 ranked player on TOF). I'm actually working on an article for FLG about it, but in short I basically play straight asymmetrical.
DPs kite Wave Serpents. Fateweaver engages and kills any soft targets, and forces Wave Serpents to stay on the board edge (if they expose rear armor he will kill them). Portaglyph goes behind my bastion. Flesh Hounds posture midfield early game to push Serpents to a side. After that Hounds suicide themselves into a WK. Daemonnettes find places to hide to threaten WK movement, as they will kill a WK if they catch him. Horrors spend most of the game going to ground, or sitting in/behind my Bastion.
End game Daemon Princes fly onto objectives (to contest or draw fire), Fateweaver takes awy an objective. Troops run onto objectives.
If you follow the link in my sig I have batrep I have a win against a decent Eldar list against a good general (many RTT wins, although mostly with Crons), where I basically do what I just described (although he had two Serpents so I was a little more aggressive)
Just curious, can you counter them without Fateweaver? Because meqs lists have nothing like that.
Maybe. But I've got a BA army and only have a few bikers. I've got none of the space marines best tech anyway. I'm not sure how helpful my data points would be. I have decided against getting all the space marine goodies to make my list a "counts as" list. So I guess for now, I'm sort of out of the game.
Martel732 wrote: Maybe. But I've got a BA army and only have a few bikers. I've got none of the space marines best tech anyway. I'm not sure how helpful my data points would be.
Just note the terrain on the table and what the lists were. I think if the lot of us put our heads together we can hammer out some good controls.
If we know people that play assault or shooty, we can enter their data if they want to participate as long as they abide by the controls we are setting. I think this could be pretty fun.
Martel732 wrote: 36" radius of effect is huge. At the very least the will wound spam all your scoring troops to death. Unless Daemons can make FMC scoring somehow.
It's also hard to believe that IG can't still do better than meqs in 6th edition. Especially against Tau.
It's actually 48, due to the 12 inch move. Still doable once you push them to a board edge with Fateweaver.
Against Eldar with Daemons I am 3-0 at GTs (including a win over the number 1 ranked player on TOF). I'm actually working on an article for FLG about it, but in short I basically play straight asymmetrical.
DPs kite Wave Serpents. Fateweaver engages and kills any soft targets, and forces Wave Serpents to stay on the board edge (if they expose rear armor he will kill them). Portaglyph goes behind my bastion. Flesh Hounds posture midfield early game to push Serpents to a side. After that Hounds suicide themselves into a WK. Daemonnettes find places to hide to threaten WK movement, as they will kill a WK if they catch him. Horrors spend most of the game going to ground, or sitting in/behind my Bastion.
End game Daemon Princes fly onto objectives (to contest or draw fire), Fateweaver takes awy an objective. Troops run onto objectives.
If you follow the link in my sig I have batrep I have a win against a decent Eldar list against a good general (many RTT wins, although mostly with Crons), where I basically do what I just described (although he had two Serpents so I was a little more aggressive)
Just curious, can you counter them without Fateweaver? Because meqs lists have nothing like that.
Well with my Circus list my Hounds obviously are good at killing Serpents, depending on how much fire they take turn 1 and whether or not there is a WK to tarpit. I also sometimes deep strike Horrors behind them and go full dakka into rear armor. I had a game where I did that, did two glances, got Warp Surge (+1 invuln), had FIVE Serpents shoot into my Horrors (with one left alive due to 4++ rerolling 1s) and that single horror did another glance to a different Serpent. Pretty funny (and lucky for sure).
MEQ options. Well, Storm Ravens are excellent Serpent killers. Storm Talons are also good at killing Serpents, however, Serpents will kill them extremely quickly in return. The Tiggy plus Tau Commander plus Centurion Unit is good at doing it, and good at tanking fire (just Gate of Infinity to where you need to be, Tau Commander tanks and grants ignores cover). I also really like the IronTau death star (more than the Centurion unit actually):
http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2013/10/22/irontau-fun-with-battle-brothers-by-anonymou5/ Just give the Riptide a Bust Cannon
Khan Bikers are good at killing Serpents, because they can get close enough to krak grenade them to death. Unfortunately Khan Bikers are about to be useless, since there will be Servo Skulls everywhere. Reece's Raven Guard Rhino Rush also can do it, but is also about to go away because of Servo Skulls as well.
Link anyway http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2Tchlf7lXU
Imperial Fists Devastators with Tigerius (perfect timing) should kill a Serpent a turn. Just tank with the Chapter Master you're going to take because why would you not always take him?
Really in general, anything you can take that can either move fast or shoot far, coupled with either Tiggy or a Tau Commander.
Storm Talons are the best TAC bet I think. Basically until the Talons are dead, he has to keep his Serpents on the rear board edge, because otherwise the Talon is shooting him in the ass. If he's on the board edge, his firepower is severely reduced and you can advance to where you need to be. Think of it this way, T1-2 he's on the board edge. T2 your Talon comes on, fly him on at an oblique angle so that he can only engage with the Shield. (kiting the Scatter Laser). Good odds you keep your Talon and yet another turn of the Serpent on the back edge. Then fly your Talon off and repeat. KEep him pinned, once he really joins the fight you can be where you need to be (midfield, on objectives, and with krak grenades in hand)
StarTrotter wrote: On a side note do you think that hounds will dissapear due to the servo skulls as well?
Dogpile lists? Probably. As part of Herald Hammer or Flying Circus lists? Probably not. In those style lists they are just as useful as disruption units coming off the board edge (they can outflank too), bubble wrap for drop pods, a durable block if you null deploy your FMCs, fast scoring in the Scouring, etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Not sure if I'd let a couple storm talons dictate where I moved wave serpents. The assault cannon is not that amazing of a weapon.
But it doesn't matter as I currently own zero stormtalons.
Haha. Well if they don't stay on the back board edge, you double up and kill one Serpent the turn you come on (as you're always going to run two Talons), which reduces his firepower. Then he has to turn around to engage your Talons, which exposes his rear to your more traditional shooting.
IDK, just spit balling ideas. Only Marine list I've been running lately has been my super friends list, and it handles Serpents by charging straight forward, lol.
Martel732 wrote: Okay I was cheap and didn't get the new thingie. What exactly do servo skulls do?
Servo skulls are a counter placed before deployment, anywhrere on the table that creates a 12" zone where you cannot infiltrate or scout into. They also reduce blast scattering and deepstriking range by allowing them to roll 1 less D6 than normal.They are destroyed if an enemy moves within 6" of them.
64 points gets you a level 1 divination caddy with 3 of these servo skulls. Only 34 points if you are willing to drop your psychic abilities. He also doesn't cost a FoC slot.
Drop them 6.1" outside of the enemies deployment zone and you should be able to create a buffer of ~72" wide where they cannot scout toward, Severely limiting their deployment options....for 34 points.
Oh it's worse than that. That same Inquisitor can take all the GK Grenades. Meaning you could run a power blob WITH GK Grenades, and say Tiggy (for GOI). Deep strike forward turn 1, using the Servo Skull to prevent scatter. That's 50 bodies with a 4++ (between Tiggy and the Inquisitor you should get forewarning), that can beat anything in the game in assault, and can also put out 100 twinlinked (or 150 if you have a PCS somewhere), flash gun shots (which are a lot more lethal once you use a rad grenade).
Power blobs suffer right now because they can't take three turns of shooting. They can absolutely take one turn of shooting.
And that's just one example of how silly this codex is going to be.
Relapse wrote: Is GW purposly trying to destroy any enjoyment of 40K?
Kinda feels that way doesn't it? I really have to question the competency of both their business and their game development side.
If it comes down to it, my group has substantial quantities of material for and plays Epic Armageddon, Warmaster, BFG, and Blood Bowl. Games, which are thankfully out of print and beyond the reach of GW to ruin.
anonymou5 wrote: With the exception of specific niche builds (Spawntide, MSU Raven, maybe Khan Bikers), there are effectively only three books. One is shooty (Tau), one is assaulty (Daemons), one is both (Eldar).
Those three books only have specific niche builds in them that work. Its not like you can just open up the Eldar book and pick units and random and call "WIN". Vyper Jetbikes, Nightspinners, Falcons, Shining Spears, etc. There are tons of units that are not in the 'winning armies'.
Likewise we can do the same with Tau or Daemons. Pure Tau without abusing a buffmander is actually not that awesome of an army. Even with markerlight support I've been able to overrun them with bikes on a regular basis. Its when you start allying in with Eldar or buffmanders that things get silly. Daemons only have a few specific builds. We don't see troop spam with 100+ troops for a reason.
As such, saying that niche builds exist out of the other books is an obvious statement. We might just say 'builds' exist out of the other books. Are the builds as strong as the top 3? Well, that's to be decided. As of last month, the answer was pretty simple. Starting next month things might change. C:I may have some impacts on the meta as a whole by improving imperial armies.
And of course, things are even more complicated with allies.
I can say that I've had very good luck with a marine army thus far. I actually don't think bikes are the strongest build from the book.
anonymou5 wrote: With the exception of specific niche builds (Spawntide, MSU Raven, maybe Khan Bikers), there are effectively only three books. One is shooty (Tau), one is assaulty (Daemons), one is both (Eldar).
Those three books only have specific niche builds in them that work. Its not like you can just open up the Eldar book and pick units and random and call "WIN". Vyper Jetbikes, Nightspinners, Falcons, Shining Spears, etc. There are tons of units that are not in the 'winning armies'.
Likewise we can do the same with Tau or Daemons. Pure Tau without abusing a buffmander is actually not that awesome of an army. Even with markerlight support I've been able to overrun them with bikes on a regular basis. Its when you start allying in with Eldar or buffmanders that things get silly. Daemons only have a few specific builds. We don't see troop spam with 100+ troops for a reason.
As such, saying that niche builds exist out of the other books is an obvious statement. We might just say 'builds' exist out of the other books. Are the builds as strong as the top 3? Well, that's to be decided. As of last month, the answer was pretty simple. Starting next month things might change. C:I may have some impacts on the meta as a whole by improving imperial armies.
And of course, things are even more complicated with allies.
I can say that I've had very good luck with a marine army thus far. I actually don't think bikes are the strongest build from the book.
.
I will say that I still have hope for the Marines book, and have not dismissed it yet. I thought the Scouting Rhinos list was going to be a winner, btu that just got servo skulled, lol. Marines with a Buff Commander are super strong, as well.
Okay, niche builds was obviously poor choice of wording. Older codexes can put out some really awesome anti meta builds (MSU Storm Raven, 4 Rune Priests in 3 Land Raiders, etc) that definitely can catch people by surprise, and even match up really well vs one of the three. But in general, they have trouble competing. Yes, the new books don't have infinite builds either, but they do have crazy ass combos that reach levels of power that exceed almost everything a 5ed book can do.
As to Daemon Troop spam: I stll think an Army built around 120 Daemonettes would work, that's only 1080 points…more than enough room for a ton of support. And while massed Horrors/Heralds isn't TAC, it's arguably a lot more powerful than anything Orks can put on the table. Just goofing off with a Horrors build I once shot a pretty good Tau list off the table (super anecdotal, I know)
My point still stands though. Assault isn't dead, "old builds" are dead. Old books can't outshoot Tau, they can't out assault Daemons, and they can't out anything Eldar. The synergies of those three books (along with CSM and DE, tagging along) get ridiculous. Codex: Prescience may shake it up though. Now crazy combos are available for everyone!
anonymou5 wrote: My point still stands though. Assault isn't dead, "old builds" are dead. Old books can't outshoot Tau, they can't out assault Daemons, and they can't out anything Eldar. The synergies of those three books (along with CSM and DE, tagging along) get ridiculous. Codex: Prescience may shake it up though. Now crazy combos are available for everyone!
Here was a good battle report featuring assault vs. shooty at Vallhalla. My bud was running his Orks allied with a kid learning the game vs two Eldar players.
What happened to the Wraithknights is amusing and shows that assault can work if played right. They started videoing at the start of turn 2. The first turn involved Orks blasting forward.
anonymou5 wrote: My point still stands though. Assault isn't dead, "old builds" are dead. Old books can't outshoot Tau, they can't out assault Daemons, and they can't out anything Eldar. The synergies of those three books (along with CSM and DE, tagging along) get ridiculous. Codex: Prescience may shake it up though. Now crazy combos are available for everyone!
Relapse wrote: Is GW purposly trying to destroy any enjoyment of 40K?
Welcome to 6th ed. competitive 40k, where its basically rock paper scissors with added Boltguns- ... sorry marker lighted guide.
To the OP, imo, if you want to play a competitive game don't pick up 40k, not trying to be nasty or horrible but as someone else has posted up on this thread the competitive scene is really bland atm with a more solid attitude in the form of rock paper scissors than former editions, my best advise would be to play it with stuff you just want to use, instead of trying to win every game or think of mean combos because they have all been found and there not very creative either just an even more cemented attitude of spamming certain units with a few pieces of wargear here and there.
If you want to test your mind in strategy, then tbh there will be other games that you will get your moneys worth out of, 40k is now just a game of random rolling dice..
I don't know. I really am of a split opinion on this. I've been in some games where all it felt like was dice rolling, but I've been in others where it became fairly tactical based on where you moved and who you chose to attack and in what order. Choosing who to use as a draw and what kind of counter attackyou use, etc. I run mainly Dark Eldar and Necrons without allies, so the games can get interesting.
My bud, Rich, plays Orks with that old codex and does a very good job with them by being tactical. The last link I posted of his game against the Eldar force running the Wraithknights is a good illustration of what a tactical player can do with what is widely considered an inferior codex, and using mainly assault at that.
I feel like the Eldar player could have prevented that from happening, though. Assault seems to rely heavily on your opponent making critical movement mistakes. What if these mistakes never come?
In contrast, Taudar don't need BA to make mistakes. They just need to point and tell me which models go back in the case. See the difference?
Martel732 wrote: I feel like the Eldar player could have prevented that from happening, though. Assault seems to rely heavily on your opponent making critical movement mistakes. What if these mistakes never come?
In contrast, Taudar don't need BA to make mistakes. They just need to point and tell me which models go back in the case. See the difference?
This is true to a good extent since most people rarely play a flawless game, The thing with Rich and players of his caliber that run asault armies is that they can immediatly capitalize on mistakes, while minimizing their own and be all over their opponent. The Orks were taking a solid beating in the first turns of the game, but they kept coming on, looking for the mistakes you talked about. That is the hallmark of a high caliber player who can make things work in the current, or any edition of this game.
The problem is eventually in a tourney you run into someone who doesn't make those mistakes. Or just shoots you off the table, giving you no chance to exploit anything. I guess that's hard to do to boyz.
Let's say I Rich is a world class player, its certainly possible. The problem is, he's not alone. And for the most part, good players run good lists (at least in the tournament scene). Rich isn't beating Andrew Gonyo, Bill Kim, Kurt Clauss, Jim Yeh, Reece Robbins, whatever, when they're running a high level list and he's running what isn't even a good Ork list.
That said, while I am on record saying the game is horribly imbalanced right now, and I stand by it. It's also the most tactical and rewarding it's ever been. If you are playing at the top of the power curve, the games are awesome. Directional combat, force multipliers, raw speed, and a bunch of other changes in 6ED have created an awesome gaming experience. My GT games with my broken ass FMC build are waaaay more fun than bringing Missile Wolves was in 5ED. And when I adjust my list at the FLGS, and run less powerful nonsense, the game is awesome.
When played between relatively even Armies, the game has never been better. I actually love the 6ED rule set, I just hate the codex balancing in the game right now.
"When played between relatively even Armies, the game has never been better."
I actually completely agree with this. But getting the relatively even armies is very difficult in general. Maybe tournaments should hand out pregenerated lists as well as tables.
Martel732 wrote: "When played between relatively even Armies, the game has never been better."
I actually completely agree with this. But getting the relatively even armies is very difficult in general. Maybe tournaments should hand out pregenerated lists as well as tables.
Shrug. When I play with friends we tend to match Armies. When I play in a tournament I mollywhomp my first opponent and then play a bunch of great games.
Martel732 wrote: The problem is eventually in a tourney you run into someone who doesn't make those mistakes. Or just shoots you off the table, giving you no chance to exploit anything. I guess that's hard to do to boyz.
Yep it's a good point you present and I can't argue that it never happens, but I'll say it's not every tournament do you find people that make zero mistakes. A lot of top players speak of games that they might have played differently.
Martel732 wrote: The problem is eventually in a tourney you run into someone who doesn't make those mistakes. Or just shoots you off the table, giving you no chance to exploit anything. I guess that's hard to do to boyz.
Yep it's a good point you present and I can't argue that it never happens, but I'll say it's not every tournament do you find people that make zero mistakes. A lot of top players speak of games that they might have played differently.
I'm assuming the assault list makes a few mistakes as well. Shooting lists are more forgiving in that a wrong move might mean some lost shooting, but a wrong move with assault means you eat another entire TURN of shooting.
anonymou5 wrote: Let's say I Rich is a world class player, its certainly possible. The problem is, he's not alone. And for the most part, good players run good lists (at least in the tournament scene). Rich isn't beating Andrew Gonyo, Bill Kim, Kurt Clauss, Jim Yeh, Reece Robbins, whatever, when they're running a high level list and he's running what isn't even a good Ork list.
That said, while I am on record saying the game is horribly imbalanced right now, and I stand by it. It's also the most tactical and rewarding it's ever been. If you are playing at the top of the power curve, the games are awesome. Directional combat, force multipliers, raw speed, and a bunch of other changes in 6ED have created an awesome gaming experience. My GT games with my broken ass FMC build are waaaay more fun than bringing Missile Wolves was in 5ED. And when I adjust my list at the FLGS, and run less powerful nonsense, the game is awesome.
When played between relatively even Armies, the game has never been better. I actually love the 6ED rule set, I just hate the codex balancing in the game right now.
I'll just say that the Ork lists he runs on these videos are his sit back and have some fun type lists, not destroy his opponent ones like he would take to a tournament if family and work responsibilities allowed him to still play in them.
Even with what is called an inferior Ork list, he took on an Eldar army with three Wraith Knights and beat it. He gets his butt handed to him from time to time, but using his assault army he is far more in the win column.
It will be interesting if the game swings back to favoring assault more in the next edition and what a new Ork codex will bring to get them in line with what is going on now.
Seriously, I was chasing around wave serpents with Mephy and ASM getting shot to pieces until I dumped them and started using them as counts-as-marines, but I lack a ton of vanilla models. So I'm kinda stuck in a $350 abyss. It's just not worth it to me right now.
I'd like to weigh one little subject in from my own experience; Mech in general is a lot weaker than it used to be, but I find AV14 heavy armies do quite well.
I often run Forgeworld's Armoured battlegroup allied to my guard, but similar levels of armour are available otherwise. While Daemons eat tanks for breakfast due to insane movement, good invulns for everyone, can't be broken by shooting, the warp storm and low points costs, the competitive Tau and Eldar lists I've fought on occassion (my own group is not very competetitive, outside of a few players) just get plastered by tanks.
When people think of AV 14, they often think of the Land Raider, which is not a good unit at present; most of the top tier armies have fantastic close-range AT weapons; melta, haywire, etc. Land Raiders, in their role as transports, want to get close, and thus rarely survive games in my experience. The Leman Russ Battletank, however, is in its prime right now. The only armies I tend to lose them to are Daemons and Tyranids (oddly enough); everyone else tends to flail and die under massed armoured firepower, unable to bring their guns into range to reliably kill of my tanks. Usually a fire dragon or two might get close enough to pop one, but in the mean time, the Serpents are dead, their infantry are hiding in cover or dead, and their forces scattered.
I've had great success with tank-centric Guard against most TAC style lists.
Martel732 wrote: Interesting. I've often wondered why the IG aren't doing better in a shooty edition.
It comes down to force composition; most people are still hung up on 5th edition lists, which were awesome then, and good for a while in 6th, but mechvets/aircav really doesn't hold up against the top tier armies very well anymore. I've seen some pretty unconventional lists do rather well, my own Leman Russ Road Party being one of them. Hell, I've seen power axe blobs do quite well; a lot of these top tier armies excel at killing small, elite units, but neither Eldar nor Tau excel at volume of fire or blast templates. A blob backed by some heavy hitters firing from beyond their range can knock out the most dangerous units to that blob, and if properly supported (particularly by using some allied characters) it can really mulch those armies at close range.
Martel732 wrote: Interesting. I've often wondered why the IG aren't doing better in a shooty edition.
but neither Eldar nor Tau excel at volume of fire
… Lost me there. A bog standard Serpeant list is dropping roughly 80 wounds a turn. Assuming your blob has DA support (4++), that's 40 Guardsmen before you leave your deployment zone
I could see AV14 Leman Russ wall working against Tau, for sure, although I'm not sure how you're killing the Riptides before they punch your tanks in the face. But good Eldar lists have plenty of tools for AV14. And as you said yourself, Daemons are going to munch a Leman Russ wall.
Now a power blob with Tiggy and an Inquisitor? I could see that working. 4++ and deep striking onto a servo skull. Rad Grenades to make those flash lights really hurt. Psycho grenades to ensure you kill anything you touch.
