I'm going to be picking up a Dark Eldar army soon and really like the incubi and wyches.
From reading various sources though it seems shooting is king in 6th edition. I still think
an mainly assault focused army will work with some dedicated shooting elements, but
would love some outside input.
Not too sure about DE but I think shooty DE is the strongest. CC is certainly viable and daemon and soon nids (hopefully) are very strong CC armies. On torrentoffire daemons have one of the highest win rates and are entirely psychic/cc based.
DE beaststar can be good?
Nope. Only baron with a 2++ and some allied farseer to make a cheesy 2++ rerollable. Other than that...u need both speed and toughness to be viable in mellee. Numbers won't help.
Actually Tyranids, Orks and DE each have very strong CC capabilities. The main problem is it is hard to getting into range without getting shot to hell. Each of those three armies has a way to handle that either with Hordes(Tyranids and Orks) or Assault Transports(Orks and DE). Space Marines have an Assault Transport but it is far too expensive to field solely as such.
yes, CC armies are still viable and actually powerfull. The difference is that while in earlier editions all you had to do was shw up and auto win with them, now you actually have to use strategy and tactics to win. I'm sure that very soon, this thread will be inundated with spam cutting the game apart because this has been a hot topic between a loud vocal few and those of us who are tiring of listening to them and each time, more and more of us just let them vent. Try it out and you will see for yourself the truth of the matter though.
Indeed, remember spped is a huge factor as well as terrain set-up. You no longer can just casually stroll across planet bowling ball for the win, you have to make use of cover and LOS blocking terrain. Guns also play a larger role in the overall game so you will find that your CC troops will also now actually have to fire them once in a while.
Good luck and happy hunting.
I still really enjoy Incubi in my Dark Eldar army. Strength four, three plus armor saves, and AP2 weapons make them both survivable and deadly. Wyches on the other hand can be frustrating to field and often only do well if you can catch an opponent unawares. Your mileage may vary, but I would use wracks with liquifiers before wyches.
Yes they are viable... Does it take more strategy to get them into combat? If your not just playing Flying Daemon Circus, SeerCouncil with the Baron, then it does take some strategy to get them in there.
EVIL INC wrote: yes, CC armies are still viable and actually powerfull. The difference is that while in earlier editions all you had to do was shw up and auto win with them, now you actually have to use strategy and tactics to win. I'm sure that very soon, this thread will be inundated with spam cutting the game apart because this has been a hot topic between a loud vocal few and those of us who are tiring of listening to them and each time, more and more of us just let them vent. Try it out and you will see for yourself the truth of the matter though.
Indeed, remember spped is a huge factor as well as terrain set-up. You no longer can just casually stroll across planet bowling ball for the win, you have to make use of cover and LOS blocking terrain. Guns also play a larger role in the overall game so you will find that your CC troops will also now actually have to fire them once in a while.
Good luck and happy hunting.
Please don't listen to this. CC is horribly nerfed and all the tournament results show it. This post is borderline lying if you look at it from an objective and mathematical point of view.
Most CC troops don't have any guns worth firing so I don't even know what that part of the post is about.
Dezstiny wrote: Yes they are viable... Does it take more strategy to get them into combat? If your not just playing Flying Daemon Circus, SeerCouncil with the Baron, then it does take some strategy to get them in there.
This. You need to plan your army and approach rather than just sitting and shooting. You'll find that this can give you the advantage in Objective games though, as you can lock people in to board edges and similar things.
Keep in mind what an assault unit is though. It either needs to be fast and deadly or tough and killy. A slow, fragile unit will never make it. Similarly, ensure you give target saturation - give them too many targets to shoot and one will get through. Just make it count.
Some shooting armies will blow you off the table, sometimes that's just how it goes. But theres nothing quite like the feeling of a choppa in your hand
AdeptSister wrote: Dark Eldar cc armies took a huge hit in 6th. Right now they are better shooting. But if you do, Grotesques and Wracks would be your best bet.
this, have a cheap haeme in there and pass out some pain tokens, of course beast pack is pretty beastly also. As said above it is stll viable but much more delicate to weasel in, especially on mas overwatching tau.
Outside of some previously mentioned, horribly broken 2++ rerolls, assault dies off long before reaching the top tiers of competitive gaming.
For casual games with your mates, or 'semi-competitive' games where people aren't looking to actually break 40k with ridiculous combos, it works but you'll almost always be underwhelmed with it
DE can still do assault, but the lynchpin of DE assault is built on the effectiveness of the beastpack. Beastpacks are dead lethal, tough, and not breaking the bank on cost. Incubi are deadly but expensive, and easily killed/wasted on non prime targets. Wytches are really weak for CC power unless you want to haywire tanks or tarpit MC's. Wracks and Grotesques are the other good CC units if you want them, and they do not compete with beastpacks for a slot.
If I was going to run a CCDE army, it would look something like this
HQ Baron
Hamey
ELITE
Grotesques 1-2. Maybe incubi, maybe.
TROOPS
Wracks3-5. Maybe 1-2 wytches
FAST
Beastpacks1-2
HEAVY
RavagersX3 or Triple talos
All units that can get a transport would have a venom or raider based on size.
Assault is not dead, but shooting is very powerful. As others have said, you need multiple fast threats that are tough and dangerous, along with skill.
Wytches are really weak for CC power unless you want to haywire tanks or tarpit MC's.
Seconding this. God, for elite warrior gladiatoresses, Wyches are bloody awful at actual fighting. Not to mention they can almost never get to hand to hand
It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
Anyway, CC armies are "viable" in the same sense that using a 500-point army is "viable" against an 1500-point army. If I'm a REALLY good general I can make up for the utterly massive advantage my opponent has.
Similarly, if you want to run a melee-army in an environment that isn't "beer n' pretzels", it's possible to do well, but you're going to have to play a lot smarter than your opponent in order to bridge the gap.
Jimsolo wrote: It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
This is the best post about the subject in a long time.
All the debate about assault versus shooting is centered around what's competitive. In most games, against people who don't declare themselves competitive, you can do well with assault units. They key is tactics.
For me, I like to take a large squad of bikers and turbo-boost them up the board. The worst that is going to happen is needing to make some saves along the way.
Certain players will tell you this is foolish, but the number one rule of assault is taking risks. The bikers will get there most of the time and make a horrific assault. My opponents will spend a lot of time trying to shoot them up, and everything else in my army gets to move up the board.
Many units that are classed as CC units by Games Workshop are almost completely incapable of doing their job this edition. Some are still capable of getting into and winning a close combat. These units are typically fast and durable. This means monstrous creatures (mostly FMCs or Jump/Jet MCs), Beasts (Spawn/DE BeastPack) or Deathstars (Screamerstar/Jetseer Council).
In your case, Incubi are alright in cc if their transport survives (never ever footslog them), Wyches less so. Wyches are best used (imo) as a group of 5 in a venom with Haywire Grenades, to kill a vehicle and then die horrible deaths. You have the advantage of having Fast Open-Topped Vehicles galore in Dark Eldar, so you're better off than say, Marines, but your guys are very squishy in combat, and your vehicles are too. Incubi have enough killing power to make a difference though.
CC is horribly nerfed and all the tournament results show it. This post is borderline lying if you look at it from an objective and mathematical point of view.
Since 6th has dropped, there have been Wraith Wing, Power Blobs, FMC spam that have all had major components in tournament placing lists and all are heavily focused on CC. And that's just off the top of my head.
In short, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Jimsolo wrote: It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
Wishing I could hit exalt more times for this!!
OT, Melee is not dead, it is just an extra challenge to achieve.
i dont think CC will ever die, my brother uses a mostly bezerker army against my DA and unless i can get enough of them in the first turn i dont stand a chance.
not sure about DE though never played them so i have no experience
CC is horribly nerfed and all the tournament results show it. This post is borderline lying if you look at it from an objective and mathematical point of view.
Since 6th has dropped, there have been Wraith Wing, Power Blobs, FMC spam that have all had major components in tournament placing lists and all are heavily focused on CC. And that's just off the top of my head.
In short, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Wraithwing wasn't a thing so much as the Flying Dedicated Transports backing it up, Power Blobs weren't taken for their melee prowess (and indeed the "power" part was removed entirely, because you don't want it to actually fight, just to stand around with a 4++ and ATSKNF), and FMC spam is one army.
How many times have Necron Airforces, Triptide-lists, TauDar, Serpent Spam, and other shooting lists won compared to the few times that lists including some sort of melee element have?
For someone claiming that Power Blobs were taken for their melee prowess, you sure like telling people they have no idea what they're talking about...
Jimsolo wrote: It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
I think you've earned an exalt....I loved this.
Well played
Speed is the most important thing for CC right now. I feel like a lot of armies have more mobile options in 6th.
A properly geared GUO will murder just about everything and anything in CC, as it has plenty of instant death attacks and enough wounds and toughness to survive whatever you throw at it. With the proper rolls, it has EW too.
However it moves at 6" and cannot run. That is 4 turns to get 24 inches, so people don't run him that often.
CC is horribly nerfed and all the tournament results show it. This post is borderline lying if you look at it from an objective and mathematical point of view.
Since 6th has dropped, there have been Wraith Wing, Power Blobs, FMC spam that have all had major components in tournament placing lists and all are heavily focused on CC. And that's just off the top of my head.
In short, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
It happens, but not that often. And there is also the concept of bringing a wild card list. But, in general, assault is vastly inferior to shooting at the moment. To claim anything else is disingenuous.
Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
See sig. Shooting was already dominant in 5th, claiming that it was "run-into-everything-chin-first" IS disingenious.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
See sig. Shooting was already dominant in 5th, claiming that it was "run-into-everything-chin-first" IS disingenious.
Shooting was indeed dominant in 5th. Which is why I didn't specify an edition in my post. But when I got into 40k in the tail end of 3rd/beginning of 4th, I rarely if ever saw shooting-heavy lists win over assault-oriented lists. 5th certainly helped bring the two styles closer into balance. And 6th has done so even more.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
See sig. Shooting was already dominant in 5th, claiming that it was "run-into-everything-chin-first" IS disingenious.
Shooting was indeed dominant in 5th. Which is why I didn't specify an edition in my post. But when I got into 40k in the tail end of 3rd/beginning of 4th, I rarely if ever saw shooting-heavy lists win over assault-oriented lists. 5th certainly helped bring the two styles closer into balance. And 6th has done so even more.
How is going from shooting dominance to relative shooting buffs bringing it closer into balance?
as has been pointed out, assault is alive and well. Both in for fun games and competitively.. in past editions, guns were left out of the game and only pure assault armies without guns stood a chance. they literally only had to show up to a game to win it.
Now, the game is a mixture of guns and assault and the dominant assault units make use of both.
this means that some of the names have changed. For example, before berserkers ruled close combat for chaos while now, it is the spawn with character units. Many past assault players just have not learned to adapt to new and updated rules and still try to play the game as they did in past editions. Of course, this means they lose and come online to cry that assault is dead.
If you us the correct units in the correct ways, supporting them correctly with other units and approach the game with actual strategy and tactics, it has been proven time and again in the face of the naysayers, that assault is definately still alive and well and competetive.
now, I am sure, there will be a few who come on, troll and spam that what i said is not true. However, they are unable to provide proof. Look to the actual game and usage. The proof is in the pudding and they are proven wrong.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Assault was difficult to get to work in 5th. Did you even play 5th against good lists? The amount of dakka in 5th was getting out of hand before 6th came along. Assault lists were leaf blowerd off the table frequently by the IG. Did you miss that somehow?
Assault is vastly inferior for a plethora of reasons. Maybe you play against players who don't understand how to neuter assault lists with some basic movement strategies.
a lot of players overlook or simply do not properly use the table set up phase of the game. A good player willuse this time to set up the lanes of assault and cover for said asault through the placement of terrain that blocks LOS and provides cover. Of course, there is more and more in the actual playing of the game as well. You look worldwide at the players who "win games", you will notice that they can beat you with an army geared towards shooting and then turn around and beat you just as badly by simply switching sides of the table and using the assault oriented army. It comes down to how good of a player you are and if it suits your playstyle.
As said though, this is not earlier editions, now you have to actually use strategy nd tactics.
EVIL INC wrote: Many past assault players just have not learned to adapt to new and updated rules and still try to play the game as they did in past editions. Of course, this means they lose and come online to cry that assault is dead.
Sure thing. But from what dark eldar have atm, assault is not dead on a beaspack with a 2++ baron. 1 unit in a codex is assault worthy. To be honest i've seen whacks in a few games and they were blown off the board by my shootaboy'z firepower. And i'd not say shootaboyz boast best firepower nowadayz. Though, they can be used from time to time if the map is heavy on blos. The issue with assault is that you must be fast, durable and hit hard. Also high ini and fearless is very preferable. So tu got only deathstars and monstrous creatures remaining effective assaulters. With some exceptions like bikes and spawns cause they're fast and acceptably durable if not focused down. Footslogging slow hordes and fragile assaulters like witches stopped working with the release of 6 ed even before new tau, eldar and thunderfire cannonz hit the board.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Assault was difficult to get to work in 5th. Did you even play 5th against good lists? The amount of dakka in 5th was getting out of hand before 6th came along. Assault lists were leaf blowerd off the table frequently by the IG. Did you miss that somehow?
Assault is vastly inferior for a plethora of reasons. Maybe you play against players who don't understand how to neuter assault lists with some basic movement strategies.
I totally missed that! I was busy assaulting the crap out of Imperial Guard armies.
Assault is a totally viable option. Maybe you play with people who don't understand how to use assault lists correctly.
In 5 edition such things like witches, footslogging hordes, mellee outflankers and jump packs worked. While bikers and cavalry/beasts were meh. Now bikers and cav/beasts work while footslogging hordes, jump packs are meh and witches, mellee outflankers don't work at all. Also, you generally don't want to be heavy on mellee with all the ammount of flyers and fmc around. And challenges - oh i wish i could unsee this part of the rulebook!
Anywayz, as i've allready told. Mellee works good for deathstars and MC - preferably FMC or JMC. Forget about witches, hordes, commandoes and jumppacks. No more fun en masse.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Don't give false hope to new players that is just mean! He could spend $100's on model he will end up selling on eBay after a few weeks. If he can find a buyer.
Shooting is so powerful now that at my club there is a DA player that will never assault ever he just parks 1" always shoots & then waits for other units to assault. Because overwatch is OP
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Don't give false hope to new players that is just mean! He could spend $100's on model he will end up selling on eBay after a few weeks. If he can find a buyer.
Shooting is so powerful now that at my club there is a DA player that will never assault ever he just parks 1" always shoots & then waits for other units to assault. Because overwatch is OP
I like your style Jimsolo. Defy the meta by thinking outside the box! Exalted.
Wyches aren't exactly good at assaulting troops, or infact anything with a gun in it's hands... But... they do are awesome against vehicles with their Haywire grenades
Hmm, if you like the Wyches that much, here's a way to keep them pretty usefull: What about making them groups of 5, put them in a Venom with a cannon (Quite a lot of shots.). That way they can deepstrike a bit in front of your enemies vehicles and charge those with haywire grenades. This means they'll become something of a suicide squad though. But pop goes the Landraider.
Or use the Wyches as a cheap bullet sponge. Using a small group to take away a enemy units overwatch and them assault them with let's say... Incubi with Drazahr in it? Not sure if it's viable, but it'll hurt your enemy a lot if it hits.
Pure CC armies, aren't that viable, but with some creativity you can make some aspects work somewhat. At least with DEldar.
EVIL INC wrote: The proof is in the pudding and they are proven wrong.
The proof being exactly what? EVIL INC.Hammer 40k? The lists that won tournaments in 5th took as many powerful ranged options as possible, and just happened to be decent at CC at the same time. No one took Razorbacks or Chimerae because they were awesome at assaults. We've been through this whole thing already, but you still don't have anything to refute that.
Were assault not viable, players who us strategy and tactics would not be able to win with a shooty army against an assaulty army and then simply trade armies with the opponent and win JUST as handily.
The internet is chock full of players who jumped on the "I auto win with assault" bandwagon in earlier edition and never actually learned to use strategy or tactics or terrain set up because they never had to to win. This shows in today's current edition because now those items are needed and those players have been left behind because they never learned thoseskills and you see them across the internet complaining because they (personally, not assault) "cant win". This does not make them bad people. They are just as good as anyoe, they just never developed those skills. Heck, I never learned to ice skate but that is just a skill I never learned so to tell me I cant, is not an insult, it is just a statement of fact.
Jimsolo wrote: Hardly. If anything, I'd call saying 'assault is vastly inferior to shooting' disingenuous.
Seriously though, assault is totally viable in this edition, even an assault-focused army. It just isn't the 'run-into-everything-chin-first' slugfest that it was in previous editions. The addition of random charge ranges and overwatch, as well as melee AP values, has made assault tactics require a modicum of forethought and strategy. You know, like shooting lists.
Assault was difficult to get to work in 5th. Did you even play 5th against good lists? The amount of dakka in 5th was getting out of hand before 6th came along. Assault lists were leaf blowerd off the table frequently by the IG. Did you miss that somehow?
Assault is vastly inferior for a plethora of reasons. Maybe you play against players who don't understand how to neuter assault lists with some basic movement strategies.
I totally missed that! I was busy assaulting the crap out of Imperial Guard armies.
Assault is a totally viable option. Maybe you play with people who don't understand how to use assault lists correctly.
Or maybe you play with people who don't understand how to leverage their shooting armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlmightyWalrus wrote: A statement of fact that is demonstrably wrong. There was no "auto-win" for melee in 5th edition, which your entire premise is built on.
Im sorry, maybe you came into the hobby a little late. Believe it or not, Warhammer 40k did NOT start at 5th edition. The reason for the number '5" in 5th edition should clue you in that there were 4 editions before that one. The 1st edition was not actually called 1st edition, we called it Rogue Trader when it came out. However, it is considered to have been the first edition.
Now, if you want to steamroll your private agenda and spam that assault is dead, go right ahead. I and the others will continue to tell the truth and provide the OP with correct information.
However, it is known that you have a personal issue with me which is demonstrated by the fact that you call me out by name and leave the others with higher post counts than yourself who disagree with you even more than I do alone in order to harass. If you have some sort of personal issue with me, use the PM function or the ignore button. .
the simple fact remains that a good player who uses strategy and tactics along with proper terrain placement can use a shooty army against an assaulty army and win. They can then switch or trade armies with their opponent and STILL win just as easily. If you want to deny this, the onus of providing proof that this is not possible is on you.
The fact also remains that close combat still plays an iportant role in 40k. The difference is that different units have come to the fore while oters have faded away. For example, spawn have eclipsed berserkers. So now you find berserker players crying that assault is dead because their favorite unit isnt as usefull and they dont want to buy the spawn to once more own the tables.
Ever stop to think that this is a marketing ploy? By switching around the power levels of individual units and models, they can keep players buying new and different units?
Speed now plays a larger part in the game. "Guns" have now been brought on par with close combat weapons. while in earlier editions, you were putting yourself at a disadvantage by having guns in your army, now they actually play a part. You will notice that while the best assault units are not only fast but that they will also happen to carry guns as well. Dont fall into the deluded thinking that they are shooty units who "just happen to be good in close combat", they are assault units who just happen to carry guns. I have YET to see a game in 6th edition that did ot have an assault in the game. You will also note that as often as not, those assaults play key roles in who wins. will the unit be alive at the end of the gam to claim the objective? or obtain line breaker? Will the army commander be brought down by the genestealers for slay the warlord? will this unit of necron warriors stay alive long enough to deny an objective to the marines? The list is endless.and gives a glimmer of just how important strategy and tactics play a role in this.
Now to the OP, I would ot suggest taking an all berserker army or anything like that because while assault is not dead as has been proven in just a few examples I gave, but then neither is shooting. When I mention strategy and tactics, you need to consider, prepare for and utilize BOTH to be trule effective.
Close Combat has taken a number of hits in 6th edition, improvements to rapid fire, casualty removal, random assault range and so forth. melee focused armies have certainly been brought down a notch or two, so i would say, no, purely melee armies are no longer viable, or at least nowhere as viable as they used to be.
That being said, in my experience, Close Combat is still alive and well. the majority of games i have played have involved close combat, and in those games, the close combat has been decisive in one way or another. Over the weekend, my imperial fists were getting murdered by Thousand Suns shooting, the options was shoot back, or assault, i elected to assault, and while the close combat took several rounds to resolve, that combat won me the game because the thousand suns were unable to shoot me for 4 rounds (i lost the combat eventually).
Need to push a unit of an objective? or stop a unit shooting? assault them, need to take out a tank and all you have that can hurt it is Krak grenades? assault it.
If assault was truly dead, as many seem to claim, then why do necron players take wraiths and mindshackle scarabs, they are ONLY good in assault. why does anyone take any close combat weapons of any kind? why are chapter masters usually running round with thunder hammers? thats a close combat weapon, and assault is dead! There are also gimick armies, Seer councils with the baron, Screamer stars, why do tyranid MC's usually sport close combat weapons? why do Daemon Princes run around with the black mace?
So, from what i've observed, Close Combat is very much alive, but outside of a few armies, a purely foccused close combat army isn't viable alternative to a shooting one. but almost all armies i've faced have, at the very least a counter assault unit, or more likely, a close combat powerhouse
Well said. As we and a few others have been saying you put it well. It proves the lie that these others have been spamming about that close combat is dead and no longer plays any part in the game at all.
First of all I don't think you should make a Dark Eldar assault focused army, but you can take one or two assault units for the purposes of counter-assault or flanking or somesuch, remember that when non-fearless units are fighting assault can completely obliterate an unit, none of that "yay I gots me one troop model left from your shooting he's holding an objective" thing. But, I don't think Dark Eldar have the necessary toughness to focus on assault as assault units do nothing unless they're in combat and are wasted points if they just get killed off by shooting.
Secondly, who even cares about the differences of this and the other editions, apparently seventh is coming anyway, but now we're playing 6th. It's simply not true that assault was dominating post-3rd, somebody has got their editions mixed up or are thinking of some weirdo cases like first turn assaults on an IG army (an army that was commonly said to win as massacre if they could tie). Fourth was very much a shooting edition other than some incredibly broken stuff like the siren princes. Not saying that the games where a chaos army first-turn assaulted with infiltrating raptors weren't stupid but best tournament armies thorough fourth usually shot. Useless to argue about it now though, after all it's an entire edition worth of changes too so it's not smart to say "well it was just this".
This edition I haven't even seen other assault armies than Demons, because that's a completely assault based book. It's a very good assault army though.
People who say assault is dead have no ground to stand on. It's more difficult in this edition for sure but just as integral.
Torrentoffire records win rates for armies at big tournaments and such. If you look there you'll see that Eldar and Tau have the highest win rates followed by daemons then comes Necrons and C:SM. How can CC be dead if one of the strongest tournament armies literally doesn't have a single gun in the entire army. Additionally necron wraiths and aforementioned thunder hammer wielding captains are integral parts of tournament armies.
Just because eldar and tau are super strong doesn't mean CC is dead. If anything it just means those codex's were written either better or more poorly depending on your perspective. A lot of tournaments lack LoS blocking terrain and its the opinion of many warhammer players that given proper LoS blocking terrain and stuff assault armies can do very well and can be very frustrating for armies like Tau to deal with.
Rautakanki, this goes back a ways. There is a small and very loudly vocal group who is on a crusade to bring 40k back to 2nd or 3rd or whatever edition they liked best. They go about spamming and trolling any thread that involves close combat in order to push their personal agenda and in order to do that, it is more fun for them to harass someone they have a personal dislike towards. So since i tried to help the OP out with some advice, it started the ball rolling.
it comes down to as has been said, few PURE assault armies are viable now while in previous editions they were the rage. The "assault" or close combat has been toned down to be where it should be, a valid PART of the game instead of being the entire game. close combat elements are great when used correctly and in conjunction with other aspects using strategy and tactics.
For a dark eldar army, I also would not suggest a "PURE" close combat orientation, a mix is usually best. using elements that complement one another.
Okay, then. CC is pretty much dead for non-Daemons, then?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
madtankbloke wrote: Close Combat has taken a number of hits in 6th edition, improvements to rapid fire, casualty removal, random assault range and so forth. melee focused armies have certainly been brought down a notch or two, so i would say, no, purely melee armies are no longer viable, or at least nowhere as viable as they used to be.
That being said, in my experience, Close Combat is still alive and well. the majority of games i have played have involved close combat, and in those games, the close combat has been decisive in one way or another. Over the weekend, my imperial fists were getting murdered by Thousand Suns shooting, the options was shoot back, or assault, i elected to assault, and while the close combat took several rounds to resolve, that combat won me the game because the thousand suns were unable to shoot me for 4 rounds (i lost the combat eventually).
Need to push a unit of an objective? or stop a unit shooting? assault them, need to take out a tank and all you have that can hurt it is Krak grenades? assault it.
If assault was truly dead, as many seem to claim, then why do necron players take wraiths and mindshackle scarabs, they are ONLY good in assault. why does anyone take any close combat weapons of any kind? why are chapter masters usually running round with thunder hammers? thats a close combat weapon, and assault is dead! There are also gimick armies, Seer councils with the baron, Screamer stars, why do tyranid MC's usually sport close combat weapons? why do Daemon Princes run around with the black mace?
So, from what i've observed, Close Combat is very much alive, but outside of a few armies, a purely foccused close combat army isn't viable alternative to a shooting one. but almost all armies i've faced have, at the very least a counter assault unit, or more likely, a close combat powerhouse
Marine vs marine is totally different. Marine armies don't have the firepower to keep each other from getting to CC. I guess maybe the statement "CC is dead" is far too general. If you're not a Daemon list trying to CC against Tau/Eldar or even Necron, you are probably in for a long day.
LOS blocking terrain is far from an equalizer, because the scoot and shoot Eldar can use it to their advantage as well.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jakl277 wrote: People who say assault is dead have no ground to stand on. It's more difficult in this edition for sure but just as integral.
Torrentoffire records win rates for armies at big tournaments and such. If you look there you'll see that Eldar and Tau have the highest win rates followed by daemons then comes Necrons and C:SM. How can CC be dead if one of the strongest tournament armies literally doesn't have a single gun in the entire army. Additionally necron wraiths and aforementioned thunder hammer wielding captains are integral parts of tournament armies.
Just because eldar and tau are super strong doesn't mean CC is dead. If anything it just means those codex's were written either better or more poorly depending on your perspective. A lot of tournaments lack LoS blocking terrain and its the opinion of many warhammer players that given proper LoS blocking terrain and stuff assault armies can do very well and can be very frustrating for armies like Tau to deal with.
It's not integral because I've seen many tables where it never happens.
However, it is known that you have a personal issue with me which is demonstrated by the fact that you call me out by name and leave the others with higher post counts than yourself who disagree with you even more than I do alone in order to harass. If you have some sort of personal issue with me, use the PM function or the ignore button. .
No, I have a personal issue with you because you post stuff like
EVIL INC wrote: Well said. As we and a few others have been saying you put it well. It proves the lie that these others have been spamming about that close combat is dead and no longer plays any part in the game at all.
where you call people like me a liar without backing it up. It has nothing to do with post counts and everything to do with the fact that you literally cannot argue in a nuanced way. You don't ever engage people's points and you seem to have some sort of righteousness complex where anyone who disagrees with you is out to get you personally. We're not, we just disagree with your claims and strongly disagree with the flawed way you're trying to argue.
And for the record, Virus Outbreak was better than any melee unit in 2nd edition, so there's another edition where shooting was stronger.
it comes down to as has been said, few PURE assault armies are viable now while in previous editions they were the rage. The "assault" or close combat has been toned down to be where it should be, a valid PART of the game instead of being the entire game. close combat elements are great when used correctly and in conjunction with other aspects using strategy and tactics.
For a dark eldar army, I also would not suggest a "PURE" close combat orientation, a mix is usually best. using elements that complement one another.
You can play a pure shooting army, why "should" melee only be supporting units at best? When was melee EVER the entire game?
First of all I don't think you should make a Dark Eldar assault focused army, but you can take one or two assault units for the purposes of counter-assault or flanking or somesuch, remember that when non-fearless units are fighting assault can completely obliterate an unit, none of that "yay I gots me one troop model left from your shooting he's holding an objective" thing. But, I don't think Dark Eldar have the necessary toughness to focus on assault as assault units do nothing unless they're in combat and are wasted points if they just get killed off by shooting.
Secondly, who even cares about the differences of this and the other editions, apparently seventh is coming anyway, but now we're playing 6th. It's simply not true that assault was dominating post-3rd, somebody has got their editions mixed up or are thinking of some weirdo cases like first turn assaults on an IG army (an army that was commonly said to win as massacre if they could tie). Fourth was very much a shooting edition other than some incredibly broken stuff like the siren princes. Not saying that the games where a chaos army first-turn assaulted with infiltrating raptors weren't stupid but best tournament armies thorough fourth usually shot. Useless to argue about it now though, after all it's an entire edition worth of changes too so it's not smart to say "well it was just this".
This edition I haven't even seen other assault armies than Demons, because that's a completely assault based book. It's a very good assault army though.
This. There are a few CC units that are still viable, mostly FMCs or Beasts. Even the Daemons, the supposedly "assault-based" book, though, have stuff like 6D6 S6 shots, whips on Slaanesh princes and the like.
Ultimately, I think part of the disconnect is that we're talking about different things. When I say CC is dead, I'm talking armies focussed on assault as their primary means of damage. In 5th you could, even if not as strong as a shooting army, concievably stand up to shooting armies with an army built mostly around melee. If you build an army around mostly melee today, you'll not be as successful as if you played a shooting army. The top 8 armies, accoring to TorrentofFire, have one melee-centric army, Daemons, in it. If that doesn't tell you that shooting is more dominant then I'm interested to hear how you came to that conclusion.
And this isn't even taking Str D shooting into account...
Martel732 wrote: Okay, then. CC is pretty much dead for non-Daemons, then?
Marine vs marine is totally different. Marine armies don't have the firepower to keep each other from getting to CC. I guess maybe the statement "CC is dead" is far too general. If you're not a Daemon list trying to CC against Tau/Eldar or even Necron, you are probably in for a long day.
LOS blocking terrain is far from an equalizer, because the scoot and shoot Eldar can use it to their advantage as well.
First off There are a great many different "marine" armies. lets do a little mah here. How many 'marine" armies are there? Chaos marines, "marines", grey Knights, Blood Angels, Black templars, Iron hands, Space wolves, plus whoever else i am missing. Now how many tau armies are there? 2, How many daemons? 1, How many eldar? 2 maybe 3. I'm sure your getting the picture here. there are mre marine armies than any other single army out there and out of all the armies possible, I would say that they likely make up over half of them. Now, you also make my point for me when you mention the scoot and shoot eldar, they are able to scoot, shoot and assault as fast as any other army. With the wave serpent, they are also much more likely to reach assault.
Saying that close combat is no longer a part of the game is just ludicrous.
Martel732 wrote: It's not integral because I've seen many tables where it never happens.
Gotta call BS on this one. How many tournaments and events has there been worldwide where not a single round of close combat was fought? Not a single one. Ever.
In normal games even i is an urban legend. The ONLY time it happens (and even then rare enough to be discounted) is the first phase of an escelation tourney where you start off with a single unit. In normal games, your GONNA have close combat.
No, I have a personal issue with you because you post stuff like
where you call people like me a liar without backing it up. It has nothing to do with post counts and everything to do with the fact that you literally cannot argue in a nuanced way. You don't ever engage people's points and you seem to have some sort of righteousness complex where anyone who disagrees with you is out to get you personally. We're not, we just disagree with your claims and strongly disagree with the flawed way you're trying to argue.
Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks. I address the actual topic and provide support and proof for my words. You have yet to provide any yourself however. Reversing your actions to represent the person who disagrees with you is a comman form of strawman. It has also been proven that it is a personel vendetta against me in particuler because there are MANY others who disagree with you and provide proof that you leave alone. if you are unable to interact with someone politely, make use of the ignore button or use PM, the public forums are not the place for that sort of personal agenda.
The fact remains that Close combat still plays a part in the game and the idea that close combat is dead and no longer plays a part, dont ever take anything that is decent in close combat blah blah blah... Well, lets just say that that is a surefire way to lose games.
I refer you to the players who can beat you with either army just as easily. The bottom line is that it boils down to strategy and tactics. learn them and you will be a much better player who is able to make use of ALL the integral elements of the game.
OP, something that may help you is to borrow models from someone or proxy for a few games until you "get the feel of it" and decide for yourself what works best for you. Experiment with different units and see for yourself what combos you like best before actually spending a load of money. You may indeed find that you want to go all out close combat or that you want to forego close combat and stick purely to shooting or a combination of both. Find out what works for YOU. Most of the rest of us are just trying help but without knowing YOU and your style, they are just words in the wind.
Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks.
Where? Quote me or concede the argument.
EVIL INC wrote: It has also been proven that it is a personel vendetta against me in particuler because there are MANY others who disagree with you and provide proof that you leave alone.
The fact remains that Close combat still plays a part in the game and the idea that close combat is dead and no longer plays a part, dont ever take anything that is decent in close combat blah blah blah... Well, lets just say that that is a surefire way to lose games.
Yep. It's also a strawman to claim that that's what I've been saying, read my last post in this thread.
I refer you to the players who can beat you with either army just as easily. The bottom line is that it boils down to strategy and tactics. learn them and you will be a much better player who is able to make use of ALL the integral elements of the game.
See, if you didn't indirectly assume I suck as part of your argument this whole thing would be so much more civil.
two of my main armies, ORKS and GK have been winning games with CC, orks are 7-1 W-L, and my GK have won 90% of their games in the last year and a half...(the GK list has lots of shooting too, but it is designed to get 75% plus of my points into CC by turn two as well, and thats where the opponents lose the game by turn 3 lol)
you CANNOT half arse CC this edition, you MUST have a plan to get your army into CC, and your whole army must be part of it.
no "this unit tries to get into CC turn two, this one turn 3 ect"
everything has to hit their lines at the same time.
DE, you have lots of cheaper transports, lots of high I, low durability, but cheapish CC units.
dont get bogged down in upgrades, just means they have a units to focus on killing,
your best bet is to take multiples of bare bones or minor upgraded units that are redundant unto themselves (IE copies so they cant just target the one unit with ap2 or anti whatever in it)
I find that with CC armies, even if 2/3 of them die before getting into combat, once you are in combat, so long as you are better at CC then your opponent (not hard, people are hugly ignoring taking counter charge units) then you hopfully are doing your charges or multi charges right so that you are stuck in combat for their shooting turn, and get to charge again on your turn.
once you line that kind of thing up, non CC units just start to dissapear.
two of my main armies, ORKS and GK have been winning games with CC, orks are 7-1 W-L, and my GK have won 90% of their games in the last year and a half...
you CANNOT half arse CC this edition, you MUST have a plan to get your army into CC, and your whole army must be part of it.
no "this unit tries to get into CC turn two, this one turn 3 ect"
everything has to hit their lines at the same time.
DE, you have lots of cheaper transports, lots of high I, low durability, but cheapish CC units.
dont get bogged down in upgrades, just means they have a units to focus on killing,
your best bet is to take multiples of bare bones or minor upgraded units that are redundant unto themselves (IE copies so they cant just target the one unit with ap2 or anti whatever in it)
I find that with CC armies, even if 2/3 of them die before getting into combat, once you are in combat, so long as you are better at CC then your opponent (not hard, people are hugly ignoring taking counter charge units) then you hopfully are doing your charges or multi charges right so that you are stuck in combat for their shooting turn, and get to charge again on your turn.
once you line that kind of thing up, non CC units just start to dissapear.
Getting into CC is not good enough. That's the problem. Your opponent chooses what you assault. And then shoots you more the turn after you win. No good player is going to let you multi-charge unless they want to be, like Space Wolves. Losing 2/3 of your list getting to CC is not good enough because good players will then gun down everything that made initial contact the following turn. I KNOW this works, because I did it with BA in 5th and STILL do it with BA/C:SM. Your typical assault scheme won't work against MY lists, much less good lists. Now, if you are the magical few with 2++ rerollable, you can do fine, because you are *immortal*.
Everytime someone lines up a CC army against me, I sigh with relief. CC armies have to waste time busting their humps to get into CC, only to fail to do enough damage 80% of the time. I get a chance to maneuver and weaken you and also dictate every engagement since the CC list is the one desperate to close the distance. (Which can be non-trivial vs BA) Contrast this to Eldar, which are just death from 36", unrelenting, unyielding. You can't outmaneuver 36" guns. They don't miss. They don't fail to wound meqs. They choose what dies, not me. What part of this don't you get?
"everything has to hit their lines at the same time. "
I, as the defensive shooter, can engineer this not to happen.
I agree with the above poster. CC is still viable but requires more planning and stronger lists to be effective. Out of the tournament competitive lists out there very few are CC based. For friendly games CC lists with CSM or you know whatever are fine but in a tournament the only "CC" oriented list I've heard of that does well consistently is Chaos Daemons based.
Eldar, Tau, Necrons and Daemons and recently C:SM are generally considered to be the things you prepare to face when you go into a tournament. Problem is 4/5 of those competitive scene armies are majority shooting based. You could even argue that daemon shoot their psychic powers more than they close combat. Most involve CC elements like wraiths captains etc but the majority of the competitive scene armies rely almost entirely on shooting. I don't think that is because of the edition of the rulebook but because of codex's. Once new orks and GK and Space Wolves and other CC armies get updated the meta will shift again (i hope).
Do try to stay on topic instead of insisting derailing the thread for your personal agenda. if you are unable to interact with other members politely in accordance with the rules, you can always make use of the ignore button or take your grudges to PM.
I have made my points and i have supported them with data and evidence which you ignore while refusing to provide any of your own.
I will repeat my statement for the OP in order to bring the thread back on track...
Close combat is still alive and well in 40k. The difference is that it has been brought back to a realistic and reasonable role instead of being the end all be all it was in earlier editions where all you had to do was walk in say "i brought an all close combat army" and they would just hand you the win or first place.
Guns now actually play a part in the game and you will note that now most close combat oriented troops happen to carry guns to support their melee effectiveness.
terrain also now plays a part. Where before, you could play on planet bowling ball and still casually stroll across the board and walk over an opponent with nothing bt pure close combat units, you now are forced to make use of cover and LOS blocking terrain.
You also need to have your units work together to help them be more effective then they would normally be on their own.
In essence, now yo actually need to use strategy and tactics along with terrain twin games with ANY army whereas before that was not really the case. This is proven by the fact that a good player can win using a "shooty" army against an "assaulty" army and then simply trade sides of the table and still win just as easily. This is a fact that some seem to want to ignore in this thread.
For YOU, the OP, your best bet is to find out what works fo YOU. try to borrow models or proxy before spending a lot of cash s that may save you some money. You may find pure shooty works for you and you may find pure assaulty works for you. Most likely, you will find that an army that has elements of both working together works better. Whatever the case, ddo your own experimentation and trial ad eror insteadof taking our word for it.
jakl277 wrote: I agree with the above poster. CC is still viable but requires more planning and stronger lists to be effective. Out of the tournament competitive lists out there very few are CC based. For friendly games CC lists with CSM or you know whatever are fine but in a tournament the only "CC" oriented list I've heard of that does well consistently is Chaos Daemons based.
Eldar, Tau, Necrons and Daemons and recently C:SM are generally considered to be the things you prepare to face when you go into a tournament. Problem is 4/5 of those competitive scene armies are majority shooting based. You could even argue that daemon shoot their psychic powers more than they close combat. Most involve CC elements like wraiths captains etc but the majority of the competitive scene armies rely almost entirely on shooting. I don't think that is because of the edition of the rulebook but because of codex's. Once new orks and GK and Space Wolves and other CC armies get updated the meta will shift again (i hope).
"
Chaos Demons couldn't do CC well without the magic of 2++ rerollable. Meqs don't have this. What are these "stronger lists"? I'd like to know.
Also, I'd like to see someone post a list here or over in the list thread that doesn't have rerollable 2+ or 2++ that you think has a hope of winning say even 45% of its games with primary damage through CC. Quit telling me you can do it, I'd like some specifics.
jakl277, You are correct. Of course, most tourney winners are the ones who have loads of money to spam out the most cheese and even then, you will notice that they are more often than not armie that have elements that incorporate close combat. Even the tau have kroot which arent shabby at close combat and happen to carry guns. Even the riptides are able to fight in close combat in order to win a game, For example assaulting a guard vet unit after shooting at it in order to be within range to contest an objective.
Winning armies and players know when to use which element to greatest effect. They will tell you that to totally ignore close combat and eschew everything about it as others suggest, is a bad idea. Winning armies are most often not "shooty" armies or 'assaulty" armies anymore, they are effective combination armies that make use of both elements. That is why I say it is bad to label an army as a shooty or an assaulty army because then you are pigeonholing yourself into an outdated stereotype and assuming that you will not be using units that make use of the 'other game element".
as an example, look at the post above this one. they are asking for army lists that do their damage primarily through a single element. That is needlessly tying one arm behind your back to play. What he SHOULD be asking for an army list that wins making use of both elements. heck, you can win a game through close combat without killing a singe unit through it. look at this example... A player has a singe objective claimed while their opponent has 3 claimed and is sitting there for the easy win. lastturn of the game, the player with only a sing objective claimed assaults the units holding the 3 other objectives, draws combat and contests those objectives so that at the end of the turn, only one objective out of 4 is claimed and that player won the game through the use of assault..it comes dn to strategy and tactics.
Assault is a last resort. If you have no ability to out-shoot an army, assaulting is the only thing that is going to get it done. Taking dedicated assault units in TAC lists is just throwing points away unless they are really, really good at what they do. Few armies have them, fewer armies can use them effectively, and even fewer win with them. 5th was about shooting, but assault had enough little things like assaulting out of transports or outflank assaults that you could make it work. Gone are those things, in are the 2++ reroll gimicks that are the only things keeping assault-based armies in the game. If 5th was 25% assault, 75% shooting, 6th is 90% shooting, 10% assaulting.
Your numbers are way off and transports can actually be useful. Even the lowly rhino is a stf used correctly. they can ot only cary a unit but also block LOS o other units from enemy units. Rammng tonger tanks or such and becomeing wrecks can slowdown an enemy as they try to get over or around it. he ability to provide OS blocking "terrain" after the game has egun can be usefull. Dont even start dissing drop pods. a very cheap trasport for units such as sternguard into the enemy lines for a tur of shooting, another turn of shooting plus asault. Assaulting alongside the vanguard veterans who then deepstrike with no deviation (you DID buy the pod upgrade didnt you) and assault the turn they come in.
the thing is tonot go "pure" one way or the other but to combine elements together to a cohesive whole.
Thank you for conceding the argument Evil. Now, could I please ask you to stop claiming that we're saying that you shouldn't take any melee units whatsoever, under any circumstances? You know, like we've been saying all thread, and for all of the last thread too?
EDIT: And just because I'm curious, how are Kroot good at CC? They're Strength 3, have one attack and a 6+ save. What are you going to kill with that? They USED to be decent-ish in close combat, but then 6th edition happened.
EVIL INC wrote: Assaulting alongside the vanguard veterans who then deepstrike with no deviation (you DID buy the pod upgrade didnt you) and assault the turn they come in.
Assuming the enemy didn't see the blatantly obvious trick coming, shot the AV12 Open Topped vehicle to death and left your Vanguard castrated.
Getting into CC is not good enough. Yes it is, thats the point, shooting doesnt sweeping advance whole units, also you are protected from shooting while in CCThat's the problem. Your opponent chooses what you assault. actually, in the rules, YOU choose how to assault, your opponent has two choices as a "shooty" army, spread out along his edge, or turtle in a corner, both had very good CC counters via denied flank, feints, or simply controlling the midfeild and denying objectivesAnd then shoots you more the turn after you win. No good player is going to let you multi-charge unless they want to be, again totally false... I play plenty of good players, and get plenty of multi charges because I can force them very easily, especially with mobile unitslike Space Wolves. Losing 2/3 of your list getting to CC is not good enough because good players will then gun down everything that made initial contact the following turn.again, you are ignoring that CC hides units... you are also assuming the opponent has enless supplies of models, and are IGNORING that good CC armies will outnumber the opponent 2-1 or 3-1 or more... I KNOW this works, because I did it with BA in 5th and STILL do it with BA/C:SM.references to 5th edition while we are in 6th are pretty much meaningless Your typical assault scheme won't work against MY lists, much less good lists. Now, if you are the magical few with 2++ rerollable, you can do fine, because you are *immortal*. and yet I am constantly winning with orks, and GK with CC tactics, and have even won a tournament with the CCGK.. massacreing the tau, eldar, taudar, and heldrake spam lists i played.. this isnt one or two games, this is almost 10 games in a row won with ORKS.. and 90% of the games in the last year with GK (easily 50+ games)
Everytime someone lines up a CC army against me, I sigh with relief. CC armies have to waste time busting their humps to get into CCtrue enough, you gotta take some lumps to get there, only to fail to do enough damage 80% of the timetotal BS... once in cc you do not fail to damage 80% of the time, total BS... once in CC your problem becomes NOT sweeping advancing the entire unit in one turn, and getting a 2nd CC turn out of it.. I get a chance to maneuverOh really... your static gun line with no manuverability is out manuvering assault armies that move ar double or more your speed? sounds like you just play really REALLY untalented people who dont know how to play CC lists and weaken you and also dictate every engagement since the CC list is the one desperate to close the distanceagain, if your turtle is dictating how things move on the board, your opponent sucks.. the turtle is desparate to stay out of CC, and ther is only so much board to run on, and again a good CC player is taking fast units, or in enough #'s that closing the gap is doable.. (Which can be non-trivial vs BA) Contrast this to Eldar, which are just death from 36", unrelenting, unyielding. You can't outmaneuver 36" guns. They don't miss. They don't fail to wound meqs. They choose what dies, not me. What part of this don't you get?sure if you live in a magical world where shooting doesnt miss, doesnt fail to wound, and your oppoent is the only one with tactics or control.. but again, inthe REAL world, shooting still has to roll to hit, wound, and get through saves... in the REAL world, there is LOS blocking terrain. In the real world, a good CC opponents list is in CC turn two, and you have one turn to shoot them, maybe two, before you start losing entire units to SA
"everything has to hit their lines at the same time. "
I, as the defensive shooter, can engineer this not to happen.again total BS... you keep thinking like your static gun line is more mobile then a properly made assault force.. not to mention your handwaivium that the shooter just has total control of everything so why bother... you either play totally clueless CC lists/players or are just talking big to sound big.
in short, while assault took some big hits this edition, and isnt "top teir power listing" to lots of internet folk,
its still very much viable as long as you can adjust your tactics for each engagment, and have a SOLID plan before hand for how you close the gap (ie speed, #'s, other durability factors, ect)
im still laughing at the poster above me... suuure shooty armies can out manuver CC armies all the time, and out shoot them, and not be hurt in CC 80% of the time... sure they can... lol
thats what the eldar player said when we at the 40k final table for 1st place at thr tournament "lolCCGK? really? how did you even get to this table? Im actually glad to see this" 5 turns later, after every troop he has is gone, and his last WS cant score any objectives, his tone was "I lost turn two.. there was nothing I could do.. OMG interceptors are OP"
" and are IGNORING that good CC armies will outnumber the opponent 2-1 or 3-1 or more"
I guess my BA missed the memo on how to CC then. Actually, when does any meq list outnumber ANYONE 2-1 or 3-1? What the heck are you talking about?
Space Wolves, last time I checked, are not considered "mobile". Except maybe the wolf riders.
References to 5th AREN'T meaningless because BA are a 5th edition codex. And if you try to CC my BA, you are basically teleporting yourself back to 5th edition except with 6th edition CC nerfs and making my codex good again. BA fast razors and preds will shred you unless you kill them at range. Which uh....... CC lists can't do. Guess who can?
Who said gun lines have to turtle? That's why I think you are playing low quality opponents. There is an art to putting the right speed bump in the way of the oncoming CC you. With premeasure, you can give them two choices: assault the unit selected for them, or suffer around round of shooting to get to assault the unit they want to assault. Either way, the shooter list wins. The shooter list doesn't have to be MORE mobile. It just has to be mobile enough. But a BA shooter list can be pretty damn mobile have fun with that.
As for CC talent, I smashed people with it in 3rd and 4th edition. Did I suddenly forget how to move my models or do math? No. I lost the ability to sweeping advance and started taking HUGE casualties just to get into CC. Cheap enemy models with potent guns are a lethal combination. That's why the 5th IG codex is still incredibly dangerous.
I'm laughing at you because you live in a magical, magical place.
"ts still very much viable as long as you can adjust your tactics for each engagment'
There is no "adjusting" to the amount of fire and the casualties generated thereof. The Eldar player tells you which models to pick up. And you pick them up. It's not even interactive.
I'm with others: assault is absolutely alive and well. There are MANY instances, where assault can be a game changer. Of course, the main things to bear in mind are speed and survivability.
Anyone declaring "assault is dead" has simply abandoned a core part of the game and is leaving a great tool at home.
Last night I played against 3 armies that failed to include any type of assault based units. The first one I tabled, the second one had his core shooting units tied up in CC for several rounds which kept them out of the game while MY shooting units took his troops apart. The third one was much closer, but as my assaulting units where bearing down on him he forgot about target priority, shot the wrong things and subsequently lost due to his own mistakes.
In all 3 cases, having an assault strategy and using them appropriately allowed me to win.
So, dissenters, please go ahead and tell everyone that assault is dead. Meanwhile I'll continue hitting them hard and wiping the floor with them.
Now, just to be clear, I would never take an entirely assault based army. Of course, I'd never take an entirely shooting based army either. Balance within a proper strategy is key.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Thank you for conceding the argument Evil. Now, could I please ask you to stop claiming that we're saying that you shouldn't take any melee units whatsoever, under any circumstances? You know, like we've been saying all thread, and for all of the last thread too?
EDIT: And just because I'm curious, how are Kroot good at CC? They're Strength 3, have one attack and a 6+ save. What are you going to kill with that? They USED to be decent-ish in close combat, but then 6th edition happened.
EVIL INC wrote: Assaulting alongside the vanguard veterans who then deepstrike with no deviation (you DID buy the pod upgrade didnt you) and assault the turn they come in.
Assuming the enemy didn't see the blatantly obvious trick coming, shot the AV12 Open Topped vehicle to death and left your Vanguard castrated.
Actually, it is YOU who have conceded the argument through an inability to support your stance.
How are kroot good at close combat? try 2 attacks (their weapons still give them +1 correct), infiltrate/outflank. lets put 20 fire guardsmen in base to base with 20 kroot. assume another +1 attak for kroot for assaulting. I'll put my money on the kroot. But as I said, i am not looking for them to win the game. I am looking for a combination of unit types to win the game. Relying on one solely is a bad idea. i used the kroot and tau as they are the most extreme "shooty sterotype army and to demonstrate that they too can have elements within them that are capable of close combat that could win a game in a pinch.
Yes, the enemy MAY shoot the transport and totally ignore the sternguard. Either way it is a win -win because then that is less shots going into the sternguard before they shoot/assault and there is still the chance the vanguard vets hit on target or close enogh to still assault..
Again, assault can be effective. Especially in a dark eldar army(remeber, the OP asked about DE), The speed DE have can really help you get what units you want to where you want them. Remember though, that jink rolls can be failed and you can get stuck out of effective assault range. This is where the guns come in handy. To help soften up targets and to protect/cover your units till they CAN get close enough. I think you'll find the cobination of units working together your best bet.
clively wrote: I'm with others: assault is absolutely alive and well. There are MANY instances, where assault can be a game changer. Of course, the main things to bear in mind are speed and survivability.
Anyone declaring "assault is dead" has simply abandoned a core part of the game and is leaving a great tool at home.
Last night I played against 3 armies that failed to include any type of assault based units. The first one I tabled, the second one had his core shooting units tied up in CC for several rounds which kept them out of the game while MY shooting units took his troops apart. The third one was much closer, but as my assaulting units where bearing down on him he forgot about target priority, shot the wrong things and subsequently lost due to his own mistakes.
In all 3 cases, having an assault strategy and using them appropriately allowed me to win.
So, dissenters, please go ahead and tell everyone that assault is dead. Meanwhile I'll continue hitting them hard and wiping the floor with them.
My whole position is predicated on both players knowing what the hell is up. Sounds like you should have lost the third game to someone who knew what they were looking at.
10% assault/ 90% shooting is not "no assault". But it is greatly trivialized. And that seems to be the proper ratio now.
Martel732 wrote: My whole position is predicated on both players knowing what the hell is up. Sounds like you should have lost the third game to someone who knew what they were looking at.
Which brings us back to you making our point for us. Strategy and tactics. I appreciate the support you are giving us.
sounds like you just hate eldar martel.... as apparently they just get to point at models and take them off now...
the OP is asking if CC is still viable,
it is, give him tactics related to his request in his post instead of repeating ad finitum the same, tired, untrue, "CC is dead OGURD"
you only need to outnumber the opponent for horde CC armies, MEQ's, such as my gks, normally # far fewer, but themobility saves them from dieing... if you actually read the posts you would see there are many different tactics you need, depending on the CC army you take.. .either full out speed+glass cannon, or all out durability with #'s, ect ect...
have fun trying to speed bump me.. thats just fancy talk for "my turtle has a mini tutrle 6-12 inches in front that forces the guys behind it to hug the table edge and be destroyed the second they fail moral...
you also get to CC in the opponents turn, something you dont do with shooting, which is effectively 2x the dmg output for your unit.
all your counters are things I have dealt with, quite easily... bubble wrap, speed bumps ect... what the heck do you even think I meant when I said "tactics"? its called flanking, boom you are on the sides and around the speed bump... heck even just massed ork boys roflstomp tau who thing they can just put a sacrifice unit up front and escape the green tides turn 3 assault.
there is one solid, hard counter to most CC lists,
But the one ACTUAL counter to CC lists is one i never, ever see... the counter charge CC unit in a shooty list... why do i never see it? because all these guys think CC is "dead" so why waste pts...
its laughable, no one takes the one hard counter they should be cause "CC is dead"
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Thank you for conceding the argument Evil. Now, could I please ask you to stop claiming that we're saying that you shouldn't take any melee units whatsoever, under any circumstances? You know, like we've been saying all thread, and for all of the last thread too?
EDIT: And just because I'm curious, how are Kroot good at CC? They're Strength 3, have one attack and a 6+ save. What are you going to kill with that? They USED to be decent-ish in close combat, but then 6th edition happened.
EVIL INC wrote: Assaulting alongside the vanguard veterans who then deepstrike with no deviation (you DID buy the pod upgrade didnt you) and assault the turn they come in.
Assuming the enemy didn't see the blatantly obvious trick coming, shot the AV12 Open Topped vehicle to death and left your Vanguard castrated.
Actually, it is YOU who have conceded the argument through an inability to support your stance.
How are kroot good at close combat? try 2 attacks (their weapons still give them +1 correct), infiltrate/outflank. lets put 20 fire guardsmen in base to base with 20 kroot. assume another +1 attak for kroot for assaulting. I'll put my money on the kroot.
Kroot weapons no longer grant additional attacks, and you're saying they're good because they can beat Fire Warriors in close combat. A wet paper bag could beat 20 Fire Warriors.
Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks.
Where? Quote me or concede the argument.
EVIL INC wrote: It has also been proven that it is a personel vendetta against me in particuler because there are MANY others who disagree with you and provide proof that you leave alone.
Where? Quote me or concede the argument.
You're claming I did things and when you're called out on it you don't back it up. That's conceding the argument. You'll note that when I'm making this allegation, I actually quote stuff to back it up.
easysauce wrote: sounds like you just hate eldar.... as apparently they just get to point at models and take them off now...
the OP is asking if CC is still viable,
it is, give him tactics related to his request in his post instead of repeating ad finitum the same, tired, untrue, "CC is dead OGURD"
you only need to outnumber the opponent for horde CC armies, MEQ's, such as my gks, normally # far fewer, but themobility saves them from dieing... if you actually read the posts you would see there are many different tactics you need, depending on the CC army you take.. .either full out speed+glass cannon, or all out durability with #'s, ect ect...
have fun trying to speed bump me.. thats just fancy talk for "my turtle has a mini tutrle 6-12 inches in front that forces the guys behind it to hug the table edge and be destroyed the second they fail moral...
all your counters are things I have dealt with, quite easily...
yet the one ACTUAL counter to CC lists is one i never, ever see... the counter charge CC unit in a shooty list... why do i never see it? because all these guys think CC is "dead" so why waste pts...
its laughable, no one takes the one hard counter they should be cause "CC is dead"
Guess what hangs out in my mobile BA shooter list? A squad with three IC power axes with furious charge and FNP. With jump packs. Because that's all it takes to slow down a CC list enough to turn it into turkey shoot.
Now flip it around. Is said counter attack squad going to be of any use against Eldar or Tau? No. Because they have firepower to remove them at a safe distance.
And, yes, I hate Eldar. BA are at a disadvantage against other meq lists, but it is a manageable one. Against Tau/Eldar, I simply can't withstand the punishment they deliver at 30"-36". I take way too much damage against them from way too far away to arrive with meaningful amounts of troops.
Speed bumps work very well because of pre-measure and in inability to consolidate into a new CC. Despite your tough talk, there is nothing you can do against a good shooter list that knows how to speed bump to nullify the speed bump. Now, not all shooter lists HAVE good speed bumps and that does open the door a bit.
EVIL INC wrote: i notice that out of all the posts providing evidence that CC is not dead, you still single me out to call wrong. Hmmmm
I am appreciative of you conceding the point because you have yet to provide evidence to back up your argument.
I'm not responding to the other posts because either someone else has already responded or because it's arguments we've already had in this thread.
Meanwhile, you really need to learn what conceding the argument means. You're not responding to any of my posts, you just make up your own allegations each time I ask you to back something up.
As the saying goes, "either put up or shut up".
And just to be extra specific, what I'm asking is where I called you names or used personal attacks against you, as well as where your proof of a personal vendetta against you is.
Guess what hangs out in my mobile BA shooter list? A squad with three IC power axes with furious charge and FNP. With jump packs. Because that's all it takes to slow down a CC list enough to turn it into turkey shoot.
OH MY GOD!!!! You cant use THAT!, its a unit that is effective at close combat! with each new post, you prove our point for us more and more. You are arguing for our cause better than we are ourselves. Thank you so much.
Martel732 wrote: Guess what hangs out in my mobile BA shooter list? A squad with three IC power axes with furious charge and FNP. With jump packs. Because that's all it takes
sounds like you are just angry you play BA....
curious as to how you have 3 IC's to spare just in a CC squad, and how they kill my interceptor GK's, even though my GK's go first, wound on 3/4+, ignore your armour, ignore your FnP, and you are I1 with the axe...
but please, do go on about how your 3 guys with I1 ap2 str 5 weapon attacks on a 3+ t4 marine beats my whole squad of i4 ap3 str 4/5 force weapon attacks ..
or how your three axes defeat mobs of boys that outnumber you 3-1...
speed bumps.. riiight cause they can fit infinate #'s of bumps in their 12" deployment zone...
literally EVERYONE has tried that against me, and failed miserably... my orks just swarm them and my GK just shunt behind their lines or DS behind the lines... MOBILITY get that through your head, it does in fact get around speed bumps...
maybe stay on topic, OP is asking how to make viable CCDE,
talk about that, or leave the thread, as screaming "CC IS DEAD DONT EVEN TRY"
isnt helpful, entertaining, or really doing anyone any good...
EVIL INC wrote: i notice that out of all the posts providing evidence that CC is not dead, you still single me out to call wrong. Hmmmm
I am appreciative of you conceding the point because you have yet to provide evidence to back up your argument.
I'm not responding to the other posts because either someone else has already responded or because it's arguments we've already had in this thread.
Meanwhile, you really need to learn what conceding the argument means. You're not responding to any of my posts, you just make up your own allegations each time I ask you to back something up.
As the saying goes, "either put up or shut up".
And just to be extra specific, what I'm asking is where I called you names or used personal attacks against you, as well as where your proof of a personal vendetta against you is.
yes indeed. Put up or shut up. The very fact that you have singled out my specific posts tyo respond to and argue with while ignoring anyone else who is making the same statements i am is evidence that you have something specific against me. this because I am saying nothing different from the others that you are ignoring. That is all the evidence required from me. now, "put up or shut up" and provide evidence to support your own stance.
Now, to try to veer the thread back on topic again (i think Easysauce and i are the only ones actually addressing the OP anymore lol....
Try for yourself the different variations. DEFINATELY do this before you drop a load of money on the army. As you can see this thread is likely done for you as it has turned into a personal agenda thread with a few ofthe rest of us responding to the,. From here, you might try the army list section of the forum and see some of the actual builds that people are using and how well they are working for them. that will ikely much more helpful to you than this nonsense.
literally EVERYONE has tried that against me, and failed miserably... my orks just swarm them and my GK just shunt behind their lines or DS behind the lines... MOBILITY get that through your head, it does in fact get around speed bumps...
The problem is that Battlesuits, Wave Serpents, Bikes, Jetbikes, Warp Spiders and the like also have mobility, but unlike you only have to keep away.
speed bumps.. riiight cause they can fit infinate #'s of bumps in their 12" deployment zone...
literally EVERYONE has tried that against me, and failed miserably... my orks just swarm them and my GK just shunt behind their lines or DS behind the lines... MOBILITY get that through your head, it does in fact get around speed bumps...
curious as to how you have 3 IC's to spare just in a CC squad, and how they kill my GK's, even though my GK's go first, wound on 3+, ignore your armour, and you are I1 with the axe...
but please, do go on about how your 3 I1 ap2 str 5 weapon attacks on a 3+ t4 marine beats my whole squad of i4 ap3 str 4/5 force weapon attacks
or how your three axes defeat mobs of boys that outnumber you 3-1...
maybe stay on topic, OP is asking how to make viable CCDE,
talk about that, or leave the thread, as screaming "CC IS DEAD DONT EVEN TRY"
isnt helpful, entertaining, or really doing anyone any good...
The 3 ICs are with a full squad of ASM. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I guess it's technically 2 ICs and sarge. But BA are forced to have vet sarges, so they are more killy than the usual marine sarges you see anymore. They act as meat shields for the axes. It's not perfect, but it's dangerous enough.
You keep pretending that gun lines can't move. They certainly have more room to maneuver than 12". And they don't need infinite speed bumps. They usually only need the one. Because you are almost certainly in the open and in double tap range. Good night.
I'm not so much angry that I play BA is that armies like Tau and Eldar exist. A lot of what you say is applicable in meq vs meq battles, because neither side has the firepower to erase the other from across the board. But Tau/Eldar can do this. Even worse, Eldar have an immortal HTH unit and fire platforms that are also very tough and move 12". A lot of what you talk about is possible in say a BA vs C:SM matchup or BA vs CSM. The difference is that meqs lists usually have limited access to ignore cover and usually half or LESS the volume of fire around 30". That is game changing for CC lists.
The people you describe don't know the game well enough then, because if someone KNOWS what your units can do, they can speed bump you with pre-measuring.
The fact that you mentioned DS as a useful option against anyone who is any good speaks volumes. PLEASE, PLEASE DS. It wasn't good in 5th and isn't good now.
EVIL INC wrote: i notice that out of all the posts providing evidence that CC is not dead, you still single me out to call wrong. Hmmmm
I am appreciative of you conceding the point because you have yet to provide evidence to back up your argument.
I'm not responding to the other posts because either someone else has already responded or because it's arguments we've already had in this thread.
Meanwhile, you really need to learn what conceding the argument means. You're not responding to any of my posts, you just make up your own allegations each time I ask you to back something up.
As the saying goes, "either put up or shut up".
And just to be extra specific, what I'm asking is where I called you names or used personal attacks against you, as well as where your proof of a personal vendetta against you is.
yes indeed. Put up or shut up. The very fact that you have singled out my specific posts tyo respond to and argue with while ignoring anyone else who is making the same statements i am is evidence that you have something specific against me.
You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.
literally EVERYONE has tried that against me, and failed miserably... my orks just swarm them and my GK just shunt behind their lines or DS behind the lines... MOBILITY get that through your head, it does in fact get around speed bumps...
The problem is that Battlesuits, Wave Serpents, Bikes, Jetbikes, Warp Spiders and the like also have mobility, but unlike you only have to keep away.
except they have 12" of table to move on, while I control the other 36", they cannot move THROUGH me, they have to move AWAY... and cant keep doing that.. not to mention it gives up table control.
every single one of the units you mentioned is slower then the GK 30" shunt, or will get cornered, thats part of tactics, you have to use the terrain/board edge to trap them...
even the orks will box you in, as you cannot move THROUGH them, left or right dont help you as there are more orks to the left or right, and youonly get 12" movement backwards, at MOST assuming you deployed like a fool all the way forward. most will deploy in the 4-10" range from their board edge, and only have side to side movement available in lengths greater then 12"...
and as we discussed, the CC guy has FLANKED (ie covered the sides through mobility, or sheer #'s of guys crowding the table) so the shooty guy gets boxed in.
worst case scenario, they kite me all the way back to their table edge, wipe out my units, then lose as by now its turn 3-4, and they are too far from objectives to score (none of those mobile units are scoring save some bikes, so I generally would be taking out their troops instead, as thats what wins most games, capping objectives)
even bikes only move 12" and still fire, so if they ar turbo boosting, they are not damaging me, if they shoot, my 12" move + 2d6 assault is enough to charge them and wipe them out
Automatically Appended Next Post: question for martel:
are your gaming tables normally "planet bowling ball"
or are they properly covered in 25% terrain with at least one LOS blocking peice, as they are supposed to be?
because it sure sounds like all your scenarios invlove me being out in the open in double tap range... something I will pre measure to totally avoid...
Are these foot Orks or Orks in Battlewagons? Ork or GK primary FOC?
Why are opponents not obliterating the interceptors the turn after they shunt? That's usually what I do to them. Because they can't assault that turn. Nor can you assault from outflank, nor DS. That "dead" turn is murder. Literally.
Guess what hangs out in my mobile BA shooter list? A squad with three IC power axes with furious charge and FNP. With jump packs. Because that's all it takes to slow down a CC list enough to turn it into turkey shoot.
OH MY GOD!!!! You cant use THAT!, its a unit that is effective at close combat! with each new post, you prove our point for us more and more. You are arguing for our cause better than we are ourselves. Thank you so much.
I don't think many are saying CC is dead per say. The biggest problem I have noticed is that many CC units just don't have the means of reaching the enemy effectively anymore. Also, a single squad with 3 IC power axes, FC, and FNP with CC. That's not really what a CC army is. A CC army means a majority of your army wants to get in and beat them with stuff and poke them with the pointy end. This single thing added in is to respond to CC armies by stalling, slowing, and crippling enemy charges that make it through and heck to be honest it probably is a bit overcosted (then again BA do need an update)
"are your gaming tables normally "planet bowling ball" "
First off, relying on a certain terrain set up is weak sauce right there. Armies need to be balanced for both sparse boards and dense boards. You never know a priori what the board will look like, so counting on that is not good.
I have played on a variety of different boards. Boards with LOS terrain still have firing lanes, since assault elements generally still have to move around the terrain.
No, not all the scenarios. But I will make damn sure my speed bumps that you take so lightly are. So you will be forced to come out into the open to get me. But the way you talk, you list should work on planet bowling ball as well. Right?
Cover. LOL. You act like that means something to Tau/Eldar. Eldar can generate 50+ wounds against meqs in a single turn. More, if you within dire avenger range. Go ahead and take your armor saves and still take 17+ casualties. Weight of fire >>>>>>> quality of fire. Low AP doesn't make meqs bad; weight of fire does.
I also notice your list is padded with non-meqs. However, footslogger Orks have their own set of problems. Like TFCs. Dirt cheap TFCs. Battlewagon Orks are better, because the battlewagon is undercosted pretty significantly imo.
"r are they properly covered in 25% terrain with at least one LOS blocking peice, as they are supposed to be? "
That's not in the rules. The terrain is random. You could get one piece per section, and there is no guarantee that it would be LOS blocking. 25% is from 5th ed, chief.
Guess what hangs out in my mobile BA shooter list? A squad with three IC power axes with furious charge and FNP. With jump packs. Because that's all it takes to slow down a CC list enough to turn it into turkey shoot.
OH MY GOD!!!! You cant use THAT!, its a unit that is effective at close combat! with each new post, you prove our point for us more and more. You are arguing for our cause better than we are ourselves. Thank you so much.
I don't think many are saying CC is dead per say. The biggest problem I have noticed is that many CC units just don't have the means of reaching the enemy effectively anymore. Also, a single squad with 3 IC power axes, FC, and FNP with CC. That's not really what a CC army is. A CC army means a majority of your army wants to get in and beat them with stuff and poke them with the pointy end. This single thing added in is to respond to CC armies by stalling, slowing, and crippling enemy charges that make it through and heck to be honest it probably is a bit overcosted (then again BA do need an update)
No, no that's my counter assault unit in a shooty list. I don't try CCBA anymore. FMC spam is auto-lose right there.
Also, I have that guy on ignore for a reason. Yes, that unit is in my list, but it's just a hedge against players who foolishly still try to use CC as a primary. It's not in there as an actual CC threat. The unit is a 100% liability against Tau/Eldar. More guns would be better against them, since they can never reach them.
You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.
making that claim despite mountainour evidence proving otherwise, does not make it true. i have provided my evidence en-mass. Time for you to provide yours.
martel, you must be playing against real rookies. A proper shunt move will have at least 4 units of shunters in the enemy face, 2 Dreadknights, 2 interceptors. More if you go the 3 uit route and more if you combat squad them (i learned the hard way to not do that. te entire area you shunt to is cleared and then it is a matter of just hopping across the rest. If the opponent decides to run away, you have the game won as you chase down the runners picking them apart a lil at a time.
I don't think many are saying CC is dead per say. The biggest problem I have noticed is that many CC units just don't have the means of reaching the enemy effectively anymore. Also, a single squad with 3 IC power axes, FC, and FNP with CC. That's not really what a CC army is. A CC army means a majority of your army wants to get in and beat them with stuff and poke them with the pointy end. This single thing added in is to respond to CC armies by stalling, slowing, and crippling enemy charges that make it through and heck to be honest it probably is a bit overcosted (then again BA do need an update)
Unfortunately, that is exactly what they are saying. They pigeonhole an assault or close combat armies into the pure not a single gun in the army and if you do have it youd better not fire it kind of army and a shooty army as the exact opposite. That may have worked in earlier editions but currently, this is just not the case. Armies have to have elements dedicated to both aspects or units that can at least perform moderately well at both aspects.
Yes, some units that used to be a steal at their points are now overcosted and on the flip side units that used to be overcosted are now a steal. it is a matter of adapting and rebuilding to match. I remember in earlier editions where spawn flat out sucked while now they are the easiest way to slingshot your army commander into close combat without ever having a single shot fired at him on turn 2 (turn one if the enemy moves towards you far enough first). As much as they loath to admit it, strategy, tactics and terrain placement DO play a part in games today.
I notice that martel is still proving my point for me. never seen anyone make one claim and then work sooooo hard to prove himself wrong. lol
You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.
making that claim despite mountainour evidence proving otherwise, does not make it true. i have provided my evidence en-mass. Time for you to provide yours.
From what I have read I've seen anecdotes (aka hearsay) from you not hard evidence. The two are not the same. I would like to see some actual evidence.
I notice that martel is still proving my point for me. never seen anyone make one claim and then work sooooo hard to prove himself wrong. lol
Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.
CC would be incredibly useful against Tau if I could get enough meqs into *meaningful combats* with them. But that doesn't happen. CC with screening Kroot is *not meaningful*. Tau players are not going to offer up their Riptides right off the bat. If you shunt close enough to assault the Riptide, guess who eats the pie plate next?
so martel, care to mention a tournament you have won with your list?
FYI, planet bowling ball seems like the place you play the most...
the current rule book places a decent amount of terrain on every board, and technically I get to place half of it so it is advantageous to me...
and every time they get one turn of shooting at me... I am fully aware of that and have said so multiple times, its UNAVOIDABLE you WILL get shot at for one turn at least... some guys will die.. thats how it goes,
you seem to think that unless you can get everything into combat, with 0 casulaties, and without your opponent getting ANY chance to do anything about it, that CC tactics are dead...
which is just silly... he gets one turn to shoot me, but I ALSO get to shoot him... 10 presciented interceptors will put out almost 20 wounds on eldar/tau by themselves which is a wiped squad if they have 5+, and pretty much a wiped squad if they have 4+... look there went your bubble wrap/speed bump
and its very rare for them to shoot all 20-30 interceptors dead + the 3 DK's I can fit into a 1500pt list... so rare that even against the eldar that you contend I have no chance against, they dont wipe everything out in one turn... their they need to do 30 wounds to wipe a singe squad, and yet you think 50 wounds will wipe out 30 of the interceptors + 3 DK's...
just like your I1 power axes on your FnPMEQ's were your perfect answer to my i4 ap3 instant death causing guys...
totall BS... its like you dont get that your axes are the worst thing ever to deal with charging GK's, yet you said its the perfect solution... since you use that kind of logic, I am not suprised you seem to be being beaten all the time by tau/eldar.
maybe, as someone who gets beaten all the time by these armies, you should, oooo I dont know...
listen to someone who is REGULARLY walking through these armies... I am literally the reason why half the tau/eldar guys aroundhere swapped armies.. because my list is specifically designed to take advantage of shooty armies with 4+ saves or worse...
OH NOOO eldar can force 50 wounds? BFD.. I can force well over that with just the interceptors...and eldar dont have a 3+ ignoring most of them, they are fishing for 6's, and still have to deal with cover.
in REALITY, the TO's put all our boards at all our tournaments with about 25% coverage and at least one peice of LOS blocking terrain, so that shooty armies are not given an unfair advantage via planet bowling ball... we have province wide standards, so perhaps its just a problem wiht your tournaments if they are all on planet bowling ball....
even then, half the eldar/tau/taudar take either an aegis or a sky sheild, and I get to use that for cover as well...
Automatically Appended Next Post: for the OP, and please, everyone just screaming about how CC sucks, go make a thread about it and post there, the OP wants to know how to make a CC list, so help him, or GTFO already, we already know your opinion is "CC is dead"
for the record if you had read my posts, its not an ork/gk army, its an ork army AND a gk shunt army...
Martel732 wrote: I also notice your list is padded with non-meqs. However, footslogger Orks have their own set of problems. Like TFCs. Dirt cheap TFCs. Battlewagon Orks are better, because the battlewagon is undercosted pretty significantly imo.
FFS you dont even know what I am saying, dont read my post well enough to even get the basic concept that I am talking about both my GK army, and my ork army, not an alliancve between them...
you dont know what I say, but you are so sure im wrong *rolls eyes*
so in your world, where my GK is allied with orks (they are not) where close combat fails to damage units 80% of the time (total BS) where MEQ's with i1 power axes and FnP "own" MEQ's with i4 force weapons that do instant death... where 50 wounds from eldar kills 10 3+ save guys every time, even if they have cover... IE in total bizzaro world.
FYI my ork army usually IS bw spam with green tide inside... even when its just boyz on foot, they do very well.
If what you describe were so easy, it would be happening regularly in major tournaments. It's not.
I never said anything in BA were a perfect solution. Now you are just being a jerk poster making up quotes. In fact, here is MY EXACT QUOTE.
" It's not perfect, but it's dangerous enough. "
Did you miss the "not"?
I don't understand how your list cracks wave serpents/jetseer councils at all. Against many Eldar lists, there are no exposed 4+ saves to take advantage of.
I also mentioned that Eldar can cause a lot more than 50 wounds at close range. Close range is where the intercetors have to be to launch any kind of assault. Because they can not out shoot a Tau or Eldar list in any way.
And I have won some games using C:SM. Because the grav gun can actually get some things done against Wave Serpents.
What I think about CC is that need to get a certain number of models into CC against critical models in my opponent's list. ROFL stomping some Kroot and then getting pie plated by a Riptide the next turn gets me no where.
You really haven't explained how your list deals with Xeno fire power. Triple Riptide can cripple all your interceptor squads in one turn. Eldar can do about the same with a combination of firepower/jetseer council assault.
The top players in the game don't "walk through these armies", so I suspect there is something you are leaving out in your narrative.
You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.
making that claim despite mountainour evidence proving otherwise, does not make it true. i have provided my evidence en-mass. Time for you to provide yours.
From what I have read I've seen anecdotes (aka hearsay) from you not hard evidence. The two are not the same. I would like to see some actual evidence.
I notice that martel is still proving my point for me. never seen anyone make one claim and then work sooooo hard to prove himself wrong. lol
Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.
The evidence I have provided is partially anecdotal. it is also based on worldwide events and tounaments. You have not provided any at all. Period.
Noting that martel is supporting the side he proffesses to hate is not mocking him at all and no one could claim it with a straight face. it is a statement of fact. He says close combat is dead and no longer plays a part in the game and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build. It is not my fault his statements and his actions dont match.
Martel732 wrote: CC would be incredibly useful against Tau if I could get enough meqs into *meaningful combats* with them. But that doesn't happen. CC with screening Kroot is *not meaningful*. Tau players are not going to offer up their Riptides right off the bat. If you shunt close enough to assault the Riptide, guess who eats the pie plate next?
A dreadknight laughs at a single pie plate. By all means hit my dreadknight with that pie plate. Too bad it doesnt also hit his buddy dreadknight nearby. It is also too bad that those units of fire warriors wont be able to shoot at all as they wil be dead from the intercepters fire. Any straggler are just eaten alive on the following turn of shooting/assault.
Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.
The evidence I have provided is partially anecdotal. it is also based on worldwide events and tounaments. You have not provided any at all. Period.
Noting that martel is supporting the side he proffesses to hate is not mocking him at all and no one could claim it with a straight face. it is a statement of fact. He says close combat is dead and no longer plays a part in the game and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build. It is not my fault his statements and his actions dont match.
That's not what he, or I, or anyone else, is saying. Stop erecting strawmen. We've already called you out on it in this very thread.
You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.
making that claim despite mountainour evidence proving otherwise, does not make it true. i have provided my evidence en-mass. Time for you to provide yours.
From what I have read I've seen anecdotes (aka hearsay) from you not hard evidence. The two are not the same. I would like to see some actual evidence.
I notice that martel is still proving my point for me. never seen anyone make one claim and then work sooooo hard to prove himself wrong. lol
Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.
The evidence I have provided is partially anecdotal. it is also based on worldwide events and tounaments. You have not provided any at all. Period.
What tournaments? You've not said a thing about tournaments, and even if you did we've already pointed out that Tau and Eldar are the top dogs, with Daemons being the only one out of the top eight armies played that is played primarily as a melee Codex. I'll even link you to TorrentOfFire to back it up.
Martel732 wrote: CC would be incredibly useful against Tau if I could get enough meqs into *meaningful combats* with them. But that doesn't happen. CC with screening Kroot is *not meaningful*. Tau players are not going to offer up their Riptides right off the bat. If you shunt close enough to assault the Riptide, guess who eats the pie plate next?
A dreadknight laughs at a single pie plate. By all means hit my dreadknight with that pie plate. Too bad it doesnt also hit his buddy dreadknight nearby. It is also too bad that those units of fire warriors wont be able to shoot at all as they wil be dead from the intercepters fire. Any straggler are just eaten alive on the following turn of shooting/assault.
Sorry, but you're saying that Martel is proving your point for you and then go on to describe how your melee units shoot Tau to death? Wut?
literally EVERYONE has tried that against me, and failed miserably... my orks just swarm them and my GK just shunt behind their lines or DS behind the lines... MOBILITY get that through your head, it does in fact get around speed bumps...
The problem is that Battlesuits, Wave Serpents, Bikes, Jetbikes, Warp Spiders and the like also have mobility, but unlike you only have to keep away.
except they have 12" of table to move on, while I control the other 36", they cannot move THROUGH me, they have to move AWAY... and cant keep doing that.. not to mention it gives up table control.
Table control, true. They can move sideways too, though, as well as make holes to move through by shooting stuff to death.
every single one of the units you mentioned is slower then the GK 30" shunt, or will get cornered, thats part of tactics, you have to use the terrain/board edge to trap them...
But you can't assault after the 30" shunt, so they'll still have a turn to get away from you.
even the orks will box you in, as you cannot move THROUGH them, left or right dont help you as there are more orks to the left or right, and youonly get 12" movement backwards, at MOST assuming you deployed like a fool all the way forward. most will deploy in the 4-10" range from their board edge, and only have side to side movement available in lengths greater then 12"...
Assuming they've not shot a hole in your lines somewhere.
and as we discussed, the CC guy has FLANKED (ie covered the sides through mobility, or sheer #'s of guys crowding the table) so the shooty guy gets boxed in.
So why hasn't the shooting player shot some of those units? You're not going to be able to block everything forever.
worst case scenario, they kite me all the way back to their table edge, wipe out my units, then lose as by now its turn 3-4, and they are too far from objectives to score (none of those mobile units are scoring save some bikes, so I generally would be taking out their troops instead, as thats what wins most games, capping objectives)
Bikes are scoring, jetbikes are scoring, Battlesuits can be scoring, troops in Wave Serpents are scoring. The strength lies in them being mobile, Dakka-y as gak and scoring. Sure, Riptides and Heldrakes aren't scoring (outside one mission for Heldrakes), but plenty of the other problem units are.
even bikes only move 12" and still fire, so if they ar turbo boosting, they are not damaging me, if they shoot, my 12" move + 2d6 assault is enough to charge them and wipe them out
And if they shoot you hard enough that you don't win the charge anymore?
Automatically Appended Next Post: for the OP, and please, everyone just screaming about how CC sucks, go make a thread about it and post there, the OP wants to know how to make a CC list, so help him, or GTFO already, we already know your opinion is "CC is dead"
The title of the thread is "New Player Question: Are CC Armies Viable?". The first post is as follows:
WarMonger33 wrote: I'm going to be picking up a Dark Eldar army soon and really like the incubi and wyches.
From reading various sources though it seems shooting is king in 6th edition. I still think
an mainly assault focused army will work with some dedicated shooting elements, but
would love some outside input.
Where does that say he wants help with a list? He's specificly asking about the very thing we're debating. If you don't like it, I suggest you GTFO.
trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...
the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)
you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...
rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.
turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.
walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen.
I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community.
Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.
To once again, try to steer the conversation away from your agenda.
OP, we have pretty much covered everything that would be helpful to you already. Your best bet now would be to try the army list forum to see what others are using and discuss the pros and cons of specific units that have caught your eye.
trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...
the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)
you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...
rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.
turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.
So why doesn't this happen in top tournaments? Are you just smarter than all those players? Go show them how its done.
trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...
the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)
you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...
rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.
turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.
What happens if the Tau player infiltrates two throwaway units of Kroot to block you off, forcing you to shunt into a bad position or not shunt at all? I mean, the Kroot die, obviously, but then what?
And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.
EVIL INC wrote: walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen.
I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community.
Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.
Again, where are the personal attacks?
Again, did you miss the part where I'm arguing with other people than you?
Again, you haven't proven squat. Zilch. Zero. If you think I'm harassing you, report me, but I'm going to continue to call BS on unsubstantiated claims that ought to be simple enough to prove with actual quotes. You're claiming that I've said something, it's up to you to prove it with concrete evidence, not more of this "oh, but it's been proven!". Show us where, if you're right it should be easy.
Table control, true. They can move sideways too, though, as well as make holes to move through by shooting stuff to death.
But you can't assault after the 30" shunt, so they'll still have a turn to get away from you.
seriously...
how many times do I have to say this
I KNOW THEY GET ONE TURN TO SHOOT ME... that is the PLAN , that is INEVITABLE.. stop citing it as the reason why my tactic "wont work" because everyone gets to shoot EVERYONE for one turn..
just because you cannot charge turn one, does not make CC un viable.
I also already told you, MULTIPLE times, that they only get to move sideways... thats a good thing, and it still means they hit a board edge sooner rather then later, and it still means they are abandoning objectives and giving up table control, and is still countered by simple flanking maneuvers..
I literally said "trap them against their board edge, and flank them so they cant go sideways"
to which you go "yeah, but they can sill move sideways!"
trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...
the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)
you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...
rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.
turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.
What happens if the Tau player infiltrates two throwaway units of Kroot to block you off, forcing you to shunt into a bad position or not shunt at all? I mean, the Kroot die, obviously, but then what?
And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.
Ummm. Yeah. I didn't even think of this point. His list is doing all its damage in the shooting phase. Talk about proving the other guy's point. Shooting up the joint with fancy move powers and then mopping up survivors is not a victory for CC. In fact, I'd say this isn't even a CC list at this point.
Martel732 wrote: "and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build."
I said I use it to slow them down and shoot some more. It's not "the end all be all".
My C:SM builds have no CC elements in them at all, unless you count a chapter master beatstick whose primary job is to tank wounds or bikers.
Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.
EVIL INC wrote: walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen. I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community. Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.
To once again, try to steer the conversation away from your agenda. OP, we have pretty much covered everything that would be helpful to you already. Your best bet now would be to try the army list forum to see what others are using and discuss the pros and cons of specific units that have caught your eye.
Table control, true. They can move sideways too, though, as well as make holes to move through by shooting stuff to death.
But you can't assault after the 30" shunt, so they'll still have a turn to get away from you.
seriously...
how many times do I have to say this
I KNOW THEY GET ONE TURN TO SHOOT ME... that is the PLAN , that is INEVITABLE.. stop citing it as the reason why my tactic "wont work" because everyone gets to shoot EVERYONE for one turn..
just because you cannot charge turn one, does not make CC un viable.
I also already told you, MULTIPLE times, that they only get to move sideways... thats a good thing, and it still means they hit a board edge sooner rather then later, and it still means they are abandoning objectives and giving up table control, and is still countered by simple flanking maneuvers..
I literally said "trap them against their board edge, and flank them so they cant go sideways"
to which you go "yeah, but they can sill move sideways!"
.....
And I've responded that you shoot your stuff at one unit, create a hole and then take back manouverability. You're also missing the part where Wave Serpents, Jetbikes, Jump Infantry and the like CAN move over you if they have to.
Martel732 wrote: "and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build."
I said I use it to slow them down and shoot some more. It's not "the end all be all".
My C:SM builds have no CC elements in them at all, unless you count a chapter master beatstick whose primary job is to tank wounds or bikers.
Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.
If you'd actually read what we're saying you'd know that's not it.
I had already refuted his every argument in previous posts. At this point it has come down to just making personal attacks towards me for revenge as he is unable to provide any actual evidence. That is why, it would be best for him to join the rest of us in addressing the ACTUAL topic and OP.
How does a list with three squads of interceptors and three dreadknights and presumably an HQ pay for Ork allies?
I might also point out that after you shunt, you're footslogging. That presents all kinds of problems as well. This sounds a lot like Space Wolf or SM drop pod alpha strike; builds I've beaten many times.
EVIL INC wrote: I had already refuted his every argument in previous posts. At this point it has come down to just making personal attacks towards me for revenge as he is unable to provide any actual evidence. That is why, it would be best for him to join the rest of us in addressing the ACTUAL topic and OP.
Look, I'm asking you where I said the things you're alleging I said. That's not something you can refute, that's something you can refuse, but there's no reason to do so if you're in the right.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.
its about merged, synergized tactics to support the CC... its not just "placing guys infront of a gun line at 2x tap range" as you guys seem to think.. and while I wipe off a few units to shooting, it is indeed in CC where the rest of the army gets wiped out, especially when using the tactic of planning asssaults to last/tie up multiple units so your own units are "hidden" in CC for a turn.
yes, shooting plays a big part of the GKCC army, mostly 1st turn, the shooting just takes out the key or vunerable units, and the assault is what rolls over the whole tau/eldar list, riptides/WK's and all.
the sweeping advances i get in melee after that are what wipes out the rest of his troops, and the melee is what wipes out the serpants/heavies/riptides/ect
GK ints are not uber CC units, but they are good CC units, and they are hugly mobile, meaning tactics like controlling who you charge, how many units you charge, ect become very very viable...
CC is about forcing the SA, and hiding your units from their shooting for a turn in CC, as well as reaping the benifits of being able to make attacks in their turn.
Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.
What he actually said was that in some games he's gone without having anyone in assault, rather than in the whole of 6th edition.
If you think that a tactical marine is any good in assault, you need to go back and think about it some more. A tac marine has all the combat power of a wet paper towel. They can slowly kill guardsmen or fire warriors, but that's about it. Anything that's even slightly good in an assault will beat them without any problem whatsoever.
Assault may not be dead, but unless you're playing daemons, a CC army isn't viable. It's too easy for most armies to shoot you, throw an expendable unit or two out front to slow you down and then shoot you some more. The top armies are mobile as well as shooty, so you won't get into assault unless they want you to.
walrus, my evidence is within this very thread. the simple fact that you select me out of all the others who disagree with you to target for the attacks. The others who have the exact same stance and make the exact same statements. The very fact you single me out is proof enough. Now put up or shut up. provide evience to support your stance. Also, do try to gear it to remain on topic as the rest of us have done.
franky, You assault a tac marine into a guardsman. tell me who wins. I'll put money on the marine every time.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.
its about merged, synergized tactics to support the CC... its not just "placing guys infront of a gun line at 2x tap range" as you guys seem to think.. and while I wipe off a few units to shooting, it is indeed in CC where the rest of the army gets wiped out, especially when using the tactic of planning asssaults to last/tie up multiple units so your own units are "hidden" in CC for a turn.
yes, shooting plays a big part of the GKCC army, mostly 1st turn, the shooting just takes out the key or vunerable units, and the assault is what rolls over the whole tau/eldar list, riptides/WK's and all.
the sweeping advances i get in melee after that are what wipes out the rest of his troops, and the melee is what wipes out the serpants/heavies/riptides/ect
GK ints are not uber CC units, but they are good CC units, and they are hugly mobile, meaning tactics like controlling who you charge, how many units you charge, ect become very very viable...
CC is about forcing the SA, and hiding your units from their shooting for a turn in CC, as well as reaping the benifits of being able to make attacks in their turn.
But they're not hugely mobile. They're mobile for one turn. And then you're fethed against a truly mobile opponent because then you're footslogging with the Dreadknights. You're all in on a great alpha strike. An alpha strike, I might add, that an opponent can manipulate by limiting the amount of places around them you can legally shunt to.
EVIL INC wrote: walrus, my evidence is within this very thread. the simple fact that you select me out of all the others who disagree with you to target for the attacks. The others who have the exact same stance and make the exact same statements. The very fact you single me out is proof enough. Now put up or shut up. provide evience to support your stance. Also, do try to gear it to remain on topic as the rest of us have done.
I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.
Refuting your slanderous remarks is not off topic, because you're claiming that I've said things that I haven't pertaining to the topic, and then built your case against this invented argument (strawmanning).
To clarify (AGAIN), I'm arguing the case that melee is inferior to shooting and generally should not be the focus of a list if you're aiming to win, NOT that all melee units at all times are worthless.
Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?
franky, You assault a tac marine into a guardsman. tell me who wins. I'll put money on the marine every time.
And if you put a Defiler up against a unit of Fire Warriors, odds are the Defiler's going to win. That doesn't prove that the Defiler is a better shooting unit than the Fire Warriors. You're literally ignoring everything else in the armies, potential weapon loadouts AND points cost, and then claiming that because one is better at melee than the other that means it's a good melee unit.
Let's do it this way: Bloodletters are awful melee units (we both agreed on that in that other thread). If you assault a Bloodletter against a Sister of Battle, odds are you'll win. Does that make the Bloodletter a good melee unit all of a sudden?
Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.
What he actually said was that in some games he's gone without having anyone in assault, rather than in the whole of 6th edition.
If you think that a tactical marine is any good in assault, you need to go back and think about it some more. A tac marine has all the combat power of a wet paper towel. They can slowly kill guardsmen or fire warriors, but that's about it. Anything that's even slightly good in an assault will beat them without any problem whatsoever.
Assault may not be dead, but unless you're playing daemons, a CC army isn't viable. It's too easy for most armies to shoot you, throw an expendable unit or two out front to slow you down and then shoot you some more. The top armies are mobile as well as shooty, so you won't get into assault unless they want you to.
You take a single tac marine and assault a singleguardsman. I'll put money on the marine every time.
The whole claim of me ing assault armies are god is a strawman the "other side" has put out. stance is that assault and close combat are still alive and well. that it is possible to make use of assault or close combat using trategy and tactics to win games. that speed and having a synergy between your different units helps them be more effective than they would be on their own. as shown earlier, it is possible to win a game because of an assault without even ever destroying a single unit in close combat. close combat can win you a game simply by tying up an enemy unit long enough for you to acomplish a different goal or to contest an objective.
No one is saying build an entire army dedicated soley to assault without ever having a single gun or shooting attack as their strawman is claiming. My (and many others if you read the thread) is that assault and close combat still play a role in the game and can be very usefull. useful enough to possibly win you a game WHEN USED WITH STRATEGY AND TACTICS. This last is important as our claim is that strategy and tactics play a role in who wins or loses. We are alone in this thought.
So digging around the internets a bit, I looked at the GK codex. So it's great that GK get a unit that basically has a built-in drop pod with no chance of mishap and remains jump infantry afterwards. This is a rather unique mechanic, and I was just curious what the rest of us are supposed to do, since no other codex can replicate this feat to my knowledge.
I'd also like to have jump infantry with stormbolters. Or any non-terminator infantry with stormbolters. Now I remember why everyone hated the GK in 5th.
In fact, it's been a long time since I looked at the GK codex. It's a lot more like a Xeno codex than a marine codex in many ways. So basically you're saying that your Xeno shooting can beat Xeno shooting, assuming the other Xenos aren't meched up.
I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.
Slanderous lies. Until this very post, i have not called you on them. This is my first one. You make these claims and never provide evidence. Reported
Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?
Your "evidence actually supports ME rather than yourself. Each and every one of those armies have elements within them that are capable of close combat and in each and every one of their games, close combat took place and assisted in the wins. Thank you for helping me disprove your strawman.
You pigeohole models to be purely what the stereotype is and forget that they can be used for other things or that situations can and do arise where a unit can shine in a role it was not designed for. An example being a guard unit standing firm in close combat with a space wolf grey hunter squad on an objective to contest it at the end of a game denying the space wolf player the objective needed to win the game.
Just out of interest easysauce (and this isn't me trying to take a dig at you or insult you), what does your list look like? I've actually been toying with the idea of an Interceptor/Dreadknight-heavy list for my GK, mainly because no one ever plays them.
Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?
Your "evidence actually supports ME rather than yourself. Each and every one of those armies have elements within them that are capable of close combat and in each and every one of their games, close combat took place and assisted in the wins. Thank you for helping me disprove your strawman.
For the third time, that's not what I'm saying. Read. Understand. Respond to what I'm actually saying. Other posters have pointed that out to you too.
I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.
Slanderous lies. Until this very post, i have not called you on them. This is my first one. You make these claims and never provide evidence. Reported
You claim that you're not making strawmen, and then proceed to make the same strawman again.
To start with;
A: On page 2, you wrote:
EVIL INC wrote: Well said. As we and a few others have been saying you put it well. It proves the lie that these others have been spamming about that close combat is dead and no longer plays any part in the game at all.
Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks.
Where? Quote me or concede the argument.
EVIL INC wrote: It has also been proven that it is a personel vendetta against me in particuler because there are MANY others who disagree with you and provide proof that you leave alone.
Where? Quote me or concede the argument.
You didn't provide any quotes of me calling you any names or of any personal attacks, and you didn't prove any "personal vendetta" (and before you go on about me "singling you out", it's because you called me, among other things, a liar without backing it up, as evidenced above). When repeatedly called out on this, you go on about how "it's been proven", but don't actually provide that proof for everyone to see. If you want me to stop posting then prove me wrong, line up your proof against me and defend your statements, or accept that I'm going to call bull on them for being false.
And yes, an Imperial Guardsman can win combat against Abaddon himself. That doesn't make it a melee unit, or mean that it's generally a good idea to try to win combat on a regular basis with Imperial Guardsmen, just like not every unit with a ranged attack is a good shooting unit.
while back, I won a tourney with a grey knight list that had a shunting intercepter squad and dreadknight, coatez and some henchmen units with a single chimera, the unit with chimera had monkeys and coatez attached. Guard allies with a wall, harkers mob/camo/LC behind a wall wit a comm lord and a camo manticore. Sure there mighta been a few other lil things.
Did very well, but i got lucky on a game stealing initiative where the other player had set up VERY aggressively and was wide open. This past one, i went pure grey knights and ha 2 dreadknighjts and intercepter squads, coatez and 3 squads of henchmen and 2 razorbacks with LC. Only game i lost was to the new bugs which ate me up, literally. The games were a lil skewed in this one though because there was a superheavy stormlord someone was using and a necrom player using a biggie 900 pnt c-tan.
Sor, cant remember the exact units and compositions of what I used. Those are the main gist lists of what I had. I wont 1st in the one where I only had 1 dreadknight, didnt place in thislast one due to getting eaten alive in close combat by the gribblies.
on the previous discussion,I still remain vindicated.
WarMonger33 wrote: I'm going to be picking up a Dark Eldar army soon and really like the incubi and wyches.
From reading various sources though it seems shooting is king in 6th edition. I still think
an mainly assault focused army will work with some dedicated shooting elements, but
would love some outside input.
Close combat needs to be balanced with ashooting, and Dark Eldar have no problems in that regard. However, the Wyches seem the poorest option for trying to accomplish close combat dominance in the Dark Eldar Codex. On the surface they look tailor made for it but they are simply not good at surviving the trip across the board (though as a reserved defender, not too shabby at all)
The way I did it was with BeastMasters (ultrafast and lots of wounds), Wracks (tough and poisoned) and Grotesques (Aaaaaawesome in melee, take the punches well and Urien is just silly fun). The Carnival of Flesh is strong with me.
Assault isn't dead but they haven't ensured well against the amount of benefits basic shooting has gained in the year and a half that 6th has been out. Shooting (and shooting armies) have been buffed in this edition while assault-based armies have lost some resiliency due to general point cost and adjustments to number of shots being fired now.
The key to assault is speed. Necron Wraiths and Scarabs as well as Chaos Spawn are known to be fairly effective options overall due to their ability so get to combat quickly. Orks on the other hand require transports to get across the table faster and that reduces their unit size (and general effectiveness) by 1/3-2/3s depending on the transport. If you attempt to move a full unit of 30 across the board, they aren't resilient enough to withstand the mass amounts of shots that'll come their way each turn to make them effective if/when they make it into CC.
As for DE and Wyches - I would advise against Wyches. S3 doesn't do too well and being only T3 with a 6+ save, you'll be losing a lot when your AV10 raider blows up. Last night I played a DE player with a raider full of wyches and killed 7 out of his 10 just from the explosion. There are better options for CC units in DE. I use Grots with Urien (which are T5) and do rather well since they survive the raider explosion and can manage getting into my opponent's lines in 1 turn. Wyches in Raiders (or Venoms even) are deathtraps.
cant horde it up, cant really get fast enough with the normal marines... too expensive for the land raider...
I would THEORY craft that WS bike armies could be pretty good as somthing that utilizes CC to its potential, but have not tried it out so much, so cant really say if they do well on the table
but, in dexes like *new*NIDS, ORKS< GK< DE, there are some VERY viable CC builds, trust me.
for DE specifically, you can spam really cheap CC units in assault transports, backed up by things like dark lances
so that you can overwhelm the enemy, take out key units/vehicles and get turn 2 charge with enough of your forces to make it count. lots of access to poisen and combat drugs and some other nifty combos make it a very good army for CC minded people, the basic CC stuff in DE will still kill other units, and heck, you dont want them to steam roll over them, as taking two turns in combat to kill them is actually better as it prevents you from being shot.
lots of stuff besides wyches that are usefull, someone already brought up beast masters and grotesques.
basically, fill up as many transports as you can with decent CC guys, ensure you are controlling the table properly/using terrain properly/moving your guys in a way as to mitigate the turn or two of fire you WILL be taking, and once your in CC you will start rolling over guys.
to almightwalrus's above post,
my full GK list is in the GK tactics thread if you can find it, simply put: coteaz + another div rolling INQ if points allow, bolter henchmen for troops, maxxed interceptors w psybolts and jump DK's,
so in 1500pts or less, I can have 9 shunting units with 54 " of table to threaten, from any direction I want, and 42" of table that can be assaulted turn 2 guaranteed, again from pretty much any direction I want... as jump units they ignore terrain on the charge usually (check your FAQ) + HoW hits do wonders against high I low armor stuff like eldar.. krak grenades and str 5 st bolters take out lots... the DK's take out the rest in CC
I think thats also one thing you guys might be missing for why my INT's last so long, the opponent really has a lot of stuff right in their face (but not in 2x tap range, pre measure and put things juuust out of 2x tap) so generally they are focusing on the DK's turn one, not the INT's.
martel/evil just put each other on ignore, or just take it to PM's... kinda cluttering up the thread here guys...
for the OP in case he missed it as the thread is getting quite cluttered
ciable CCDE:
cheap assault transports, that have decent shooting. lots of them
lots and lots of cheap small units to charge out of them
take enough so that you can lose half, and still have 3-4 left to charge with.
darklances to take out some key vehicles, or haywire on some of the CC units, Ill go through the codex some more for specific combos, but that is what I would use as a starting point.
Nice to know the CC advocate admits that meqCC is poor.
"so in 1500pts or less, I can have 9 shunting units with 54 " of table to threaten, from any direction I want, and 42" of table that can be assaulted turn 2 guaranteed, again from pretty much any direction I want... as jump units they ignore terrain on the charge usually (check your FAQ) + HoW hits do wonders against high I low armor stuff like eldar.. krak grenades and str 5 st bolters take out lots... the DK's take out the rest in CC "
Fine. Add this to the list with Screamerstar, Jeetseer Council, and FMC circus. Now we have "Shunt cheese". And it's specific to GK codex. FML.
I'm not seeing how AV10 open-topped vehicles are going to live any meaningful amount of time at all (and once they die, so do the units inside from the explosion). They were known as paper airplanes in 5th edition, and 6th edition wasn't exactly kind to vehicle survivability.
Beastpacks and allied Seerstar could probably work (or, well, in the case of Beastpacks, Seerstars are good, if weak to certain matchups), but I'd still put everything else into shooting. With the amount of poisoned anti-infantry shooting Dark Eldar can put out you're going to do more damage that way than through CC.
No one claimed otherwise. Thats the bad part about being a jack of all trades, you usually end up master of none. MEQs sufer from that.
Easysauce, I've asked MANY times that they take their personal issues with me out of threads and i nto PM or just set me to ignore if they cant interact politely. It DOES clutter up the threads.
yeah AW, they die fast, thats why you take 6-10+ in a 1500pt game, and assume half will die in one turn if you go 2nd.
the same issues you see with them as assault vehicles, would still be there for them as venom poisen spam shooters, and we all know the latter is pretty powerfull... you still get most of the best parts of venom spam with CC troops inside them as well.
so its, not really as much of an issue as you would think, even with so much stuff able to knock em down.
if you get turn one, you almost auto win, as your across the board already with one flat out.
if you get turn two, so long as you do everything you are supposed to to mitigate the fire they take, you still have a good shot at getting half of it into CC
Yes, you cant half do it. With that, you pretty much have to go all out. Provide the enemy so many targets that they cant deal with them all. Invariable, they will end up splitting their shots up amongst them and thus weakening their shooting and playing into your hands. Multiple threats all at once. Combine that with proper placement of terrain and use of it to block LOS to man of their units...
easysauce wrote: yeah AW, they die fast, thats why you take 6-10+ in a 1500pt game, and assume half will die in one turn if you go 2nd.
the same issues you see with them as assault vehicles, would still be there for them as venom poisen spam shooters, and we all know the latter is pretty powerfull... you still get most of the best parts of venom spam with CC troops inside them as well.
Except you don't. You have more mobility when using them as shooting, as you don't have to get as close. Further, you can engage the enemy sooner and in a more concentrated manner, as you'll be attacking from a distance.
If you're going for a melee attack, you'll, as you say, have to turbo-boost everything and then hope the enemy doesn't blow you to pieces with everything you're now in range off. While shooty Venoms are just as fragile as melee delivering Venoms, they don't have to get into range of every source of small-arms fire in the enemy army, and can start contributing to damage earlier.
Further, while being inside an exploding Venom is bad news for DE infantry, being OUTSIDE is worse. You get out of your Venoms, charge whatever the enemy decided to place closest to you (because the rest is blocked off) and then one of three things happen:
1. You win combat overwhelmingly, wiping the enemy out either through sheer killing force or sweeping advance. You're now stood in the open surrounded by the entire enemy army. Have fun with those 6+ armour saves.
2. You don't win combat overwhelmingly, or if you do the enemy doesn't break, meaning you stay locked in combat. The enemy moves away from the combat while engaging your transports, probably blasting most them to tiny pieces. If you win combat on their turn you get to charge something next turn. What you get to charge is decided by your opponent, who decides where he moves his units.
3. As above, except instead of just moving away and shooting at other things the enemy also decides to counter-charge you with either something disposable and fearless/stubborn (Plague Zombies, Termagants, any Daemon unit) or a shooting unit that is good enough at melee to murder you (Wraithknights, Dakkafexes, Plague Marines). Either they kill you or they lock you up for long enough to effectively neuter your killing power.
AW.. dude, there is literally 0 ways around being shot at for at least one turn...
if they can shoot 10 venoms that are 18" away to death, they can shoot 10 venoms that are 23" away to death... literally 0 difference... you dont NEED to flat out most of the time for the turn 2 charge, i just offered that as a solution because you seem so damn worried about speed bumps, and flat outing gets waaaay around the sides of that.
you will take casualties, thats a given, but no you wont lose 10 venoms first turn to someone who hasnt tailored specifically to your army.. remember its DE.. you get night fight on TOP of your DE venom cover saves
thats why you have so many of the damn things, you only need half to get through...
even tau with basic troops having str 5 is going to be hard pressed to take out 10+ venoms in one go,at such a low pts game, they get really good cover saves and are small enough to hide completely out of LOS lots of the time.
they need one unit per venom, barring armies of split fire... which dont really exist,
also keep in mind that a shooting army is going to be shot at just as much as a CC army, provided you are smart about NOT putting yourself into 2x tap range needlessly, if not more as turn 3 onwards, you are STILL getting shot, instead of being in CC tying up their best shooting units.
easysauce wrote: AW.. dude, there is literally 0 ways around being shot at for at least one turn...
Exactly. When you've got paper-thin armour, you want to hit the enemy first, not expose yourself to a round of fire and then hit back with what you've got left.
Tau have 15" Rapid Fire, so you're either staying at 21.1"+ to avoid getting shot or you take on average 2 Hull Points worth of damage from a 10-man Fire Warrior squad, even with 3+ cover. Stuff like HYMP Broadsides, who conveniently ignore Night Fighting, will do nasty things to their targets, and HBC Riptides will do the same. This isn't even factoring in Markerlights or Ignores Cover Commanders. Two 10-man units of Fire Warriors, a Riptide and a unit of HYMP Broadsides would reliably kill four of your 10 transports on turn 1. You then get to choose between charging a screen of Kroots or standing around for another turn of fire.
Versus Eldar it's your AV10 2HP open-topped transports against Wave Serpents. I agree that shooting isn't going to fare very well against them either, but at least you'd have a chance of doing damage. You're not catching Wave Serpents in CC.
Bikes of any type can shoot you from 24" and generally keep away until your transports go down. Twin-linked Overwatch also has a chance of downing your charge ranges.
IG put out 12530164239164239564213 prescienced shots, some of them potentially including Ignores Cover if they get the correct psychic power for it. If they bring Vendettas (and why would they not?) you'll have your Heavy Support and nothing else to go after them.
Necrons will absolutely murder you. You can't reliably deal with their aircraft with a shooting DE army, a melee-centric one is going to have a snowball's chance in hell.
Daemons have stuff putting out 6D6 S6 shots and are an army of higher-initiative-than-DE blendermonsters who can still shoot.
Orks put out an ungodly number of shots on Overwatch and have Lootas who eradicate one unit a turn.
Tyranids are hard-countered by shooty Venom Spam simply keeping away from them and drowning them in wounds. Assaulting 'Nids as Dark Eldar is suicide, and prevents you from shooting them to boot.
CSM have things like Plague Marines, Beatstick Lords, and Noise Marines who can generally handle Dark Eldar in CC while still being tremenduously shooty.
Grey Knights will absolutely murder you anyway, the best chance you've got is the alpha strike, which you won't get through CC.
Any other MEQ faction would rather you assaulted them than simply removed them from the board in a deluge of poisoned shooting.
And so on, and so forth.
The entire strength in Dark Eldar lies, as you've correctly identified, in mobility, but NOT in CC mobility. You want the alpha strike to reduce the return fire against your fragile glass cannons. By standing around with suboptimal firepower for a turn you're wasting that chance, instead letting your opponent bring his firepower to bear on you. When you through your excellent speed can decide what gets to engage what, giving that up in order to send mostly mediocre, paper-thin CC units into the enemy is folly. Even if it works, it's blatantly inferior to traditional shooty Venom spam.
1. Yes, most of the DE units only have a 6+ save in the open like wyches. However there are other CC oriented units as well: Grots and Wracks (also 6+) that get FNP at the start which, just running the numbers, is pretty close to having a 4+ save on average.
Incubi have a 3+ and Khymera have a 4++. Both before you apply any tokens you might get along the way. So, again, it depends on what you are hitting and what you are hitting it with.
2. I'm not entirely sure where you are going with this. That's the way it's always been. Also, sometimes you want to stay locked depending on what you are hitting.
3. Ditto.
CC, just like shooting, will have a particular goal depending on the situation. Sometimes you want to wipe that unit. Sometimes you just want to speed bump it to protect something else. Sometimes you want to effectively pin it in place.
These are tactical goals that all have their place and are all viable in 6th edition. Which, I believe, is what the entire original post was about.
Indeed it is. We have more than shown that Close combat is alive and well and that it is viable for units that are good at it to be included in an army.
Additionally, we also proven that there are times in games that assault or close combat is the way to go even if your unit is not tailered for it in order to win a game.
in an army that has the speed and mobility of dark eldar, our case is made even more crystal clear.
Evil inc you keep saying "we" have "proven" and "shown" assault is alive yet you provide zero proof or examples. You should stop clogging this thread with heresay. It's annoying.
easysauce wrote: AW.. dude, there is literally 0 ways around being shot at for at least one turn...
Exactly. When you've got paper-thin armour, you want to hit the enemy first, not expose yourself to a round of fire and then hit back with what you've got left.
Tau have 15" Rapid Fire, so you're either staying at 21.1"+ to avoid getting shot or you take on average 2 Hull Points worth of damage from a 10-man Fire Warrior squad, even with 3+ cover. Stuff like HYMP Broadsides, who conveniently ignore Night Fighting, will do nasty things to their targets, and HBC Riptides will do the same. This isn't even factoring in Markerlights or Ignores Cover Commanders. Two 10-man units of Fire Warriors, a Riptide and a unit of HYMP Broadsides would reliably kill four of your 10 transports on turn 1. You then get to choose between charging a screen of Kroots or standing around for another turn of fire. get this whole "i have to charge the absolute stupidest thing to charge in their army" idea out of your head..you can fly over or around anything in their army, and have a 14"-24" assault range... at the point level when DE ONLY have 10 venoms, the other player is not getting everything in their codex. you just said it yourself, they will reliably kill 4-5 transports turn one, then I get to charge 5-6 units into whatever I have positioned myself to do so.
Versus Eldar it's your AV10 2HP open-topped transports against Wave Serpents. I agree that shooting isn't going to fare very well against them either, but at least you'd have a chance of doing damage. You're not catching Wave Serpents in CC.again, 10 venoms is not a lot pts wize, at this kind of low pts, DE still have things like lances, but yes, serpent spam is basically a hard counter to venom spam as its all str 6 ignores cover... so? DECC does not have to beat the most brokenest of broken units, which happens to be a HARD counter for it, to be considered "viable" now does it? everything is supposed to have hard counters to balance the game (not that WS are balanced)
I cut the rest out as its really just problems with av 10 in general, which there are plenty
that all really sounds more like "this is why DE suck" or "av 10 vehicles have 0 use" talk to me,
again, none of the armies you listed have all that you said they do are going to have on the table 10 venoms is CHEAP... like sub 1200 pts cheap.
your opponent wont have as many "anti venom units" as you will have venoms... look at the pts value of every counter you just listed, is it more, or less (WS include troops inside, its a tax) then the cost of one venom with cc troops inside?
* Nightfall Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
* Darkness Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
those venoms, with troops, are REALLY cheap
sure tau and eldar do particularly well against av 10 with st 5 spam and WS no cover str 6 spam... but they will also wreck your av 10 shooty army... at least if you get 1st turn with the CC one you have a decent chance stuff will get into combat where its needed and do what it needs to do while tying up the enemies shooting in their phase, and protecting your units from shooting...
not a certain thing against those hard match ups, but nothing in a game of dice is certain,
I would call it viable however
should be noted that shooting wise, venom spam with warriors inside, is prety much identical to venoms spam with other stuff in side considering you can give haywire grenades to CC dudes.. except the CC spam is cheaper per venom...
and yes some armies you want to soften up at 26-36" with the venoms + lances before going for it,
again tactics, some armies you face you dont need/want to get into cc asap
Jano, you need to read through the thread. It iscrammed full of proof. Unless you are also of the sort that simply skips over and refuses to read anything that you disagree with. Now try to stay on topic eh?
that all really sounds more like "this is why DE suck" or "av 10 vehicles have 0 use" talk to me,
again, none of the armies you listed have all that you said they do are going to have on the table 10 venoms is CHEAP... like sub 1200 pts cheap.
your opponent wont have as many "anti venom units" as you will have venoms... look at the pts value of every counter you just listed, is it more, or less (WS include troops inside, its a tax) then the cost of one venom with cc troops inside?
* Nightfall Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
* Darkness Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
those venoms, with troops, are REALLY cheap
10 Fire Warriors are 90 points. 10 Kroot to block your charging for a turn is 70 points. 5 Marine Bikers with 2x Grav is 120 points. 20 Guardsmen with two Autocannons are 120 points. Even if you reach CC with some of your units, is it going to be enough to murder your way through most of the opposing army? Above all else, is it going to be enough to do more damage than the shooting build?
* Nightfall Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
* Darkness Constructs; 5 Wracks w/ Dual Poison Weapons. Mounted in a Venom w/ 2 Splinter Cannons. [115]
those venoms, with troops, are REALLY cheap
Yep. You'll also only get 6 before running out of FoC.
EVIL INC wrote: Indeed it is. We have more than shown that Close combat is alive and well and that it is viable for units that are good at it to be included in an army.
Additionally, we also proven that there are times in games that assault or close combat is the way to go even if your unit is not tailered for it in order to win a game.
Yes, good job. It's a shame that no one was arguing the opposite, but well done anyway!
1. Yes, most of the DE units only have a 6+ save in the open like wyches. However there are other CC oriented units as well: Grots and Wracks (also 6+) that get FNP at the start which, just running the numbers, is pretty close to having a 4+ save on average.
Assuming that whatever is shooting at you doesn't have AP6 or better. It helps against explosions, yes, but then you're stuck on foot halfway across the board.
2. I'm not entirely sure where you are going with this. That's the way it's always been. Also, sometimes you want to stay locked depending on what you are hitting.
Yes, and it's always been one of the weaknesses of close combat. You do not decide what you have the opportunity of charging. Your opponent does. Have fun slaughtering Kroot, that Riptide you were after is going to move away from you while killing something else. Once you've killed your first sacrificial unit you're on foot and no longer have the mobility granted by the Venom.
The enemy can't lock you from shooting, except by killing you. He can tie up your mega-murder squad with junk for a couple of turns and make it inconsequential. If you're killy enough to get through, you'd have murdered whatever you charged and thus reverted to point 1 above.
CC, just like shooting, will have a particular goal depending on the situation. Sometimes you want to wipe that unit. Sometimes you just want to speed bump it to protect something else. Sometimes you want to effectively pin it in place.
These are tactical goals that all have their place and are all viable in 6th edition. Which, I believe, is what the entire original post was about.
We're probably using different variations on the word "viable". Could a melee-centric Dark Eldar list be made that could win games? Absolutely, and if that's what the OP wants then more power to him. I just want him to be aware that a shooty list is going to be better equipped than that melee list to take on the strongest builds of other Codices. Such a DE melee list would lose most of the time when played against a competent Taudar, Tau/Tau, Eldar, Necron, or similar player of equal skill and while the same may be true for Venom spam, it would stand a much better chance and as such be the closest thing to a viable list that Dark Eldar can field.
A better example to illustrate the viable vs. non-viable is Codex: Space Marines. It's an army that has several viable builds, but melee really only features in them in the form of bike Chapter Masters taken because they're required to unlock bikes as troops and because they can tank for one squad. They go into melee if they get an opportune opening, but the viable archetypes are predominantly shooting. Then there's people like me who are stubborn and refuse to play a shooting-centric list. I'm well aware that my list probably isn't viable, e.g. it can't reliably fight Tau, Eldar, Necrons or Daemons, but I play it anyway because I like CC. As such, the shooting lists are the viable lists, while CC lists aren't viable. That doesn't mean that you can't get the melee lists to work, only that if you put the same effort into a shooting list you'd do better.
easysauce wrote: AW.. dude, there is literally 0 ways around being shot at for at least one turn...
Exactly. When you've got paper-thin armour, you want to hit the enemy first, not expose yourself to a round of fire and then hit back with what you've got left.
Tau have 15" Rapid Fire, so you're either staying at 21.1"+ to avoid getting shot or you take on average 2 Hull Points worth of damage from a 10-man Fire Warrior squad, even with 3+ cover. Stuff like HYMP Broadsides, who conveniently ignore Night Fighting, will do nasty things to their targets, and HBC Riptides will do the same. This isn't even factoring in Markerlights or Ignores Cover Commanders. Two 10-man units of Fire Warriors, a Riptide and a unit of HYMP Broadsides would reliably kill four of your 10 transports on turn 1. You then get to choose between charging a screen of Kroots or standing around for another turn of fire. get this whole "i have to charge the absolute stupidest thing to charge in their army" idea out of your head..you can fly over or around anything in their army, and have a 14"-24" assault range... at the point level when DE ONLY have 10 venoms, the other player is not getting everything in their codex. you just said it yourself, they will reliably kill 4-5 transports turn one, then I get to charge 5-6 units into whatever I have positioned myself to do so.
And if the only thing you get to position to charge is Kroot you get to choose between the Kroot or nothing. That's my entire point. You CAN'T fly over stuff on the charge with your Infantry, so if there's a unit between you and your target you're outta luck.
Versus Eldar it's your AV10 2HP open-topped transports against Wave Serpents. I agree that shooting isn't going to fare very well against them either, but at least you'd have a chance of doing damage. You're not catching Wave Serpents in CC.again, 10 venoms is not a lot pts wize, at this kind of low pts, DE still have things like lances, but yes, serpent spam is basically a hard counter to venom spam as its all str 6 ignores cover... so? DECC does not have to beat the most brokenest of broken units, which happens to be a HARD counter for it, to be considered "viable" now does it? everything is supposed to have hard counters to balance the game (not that WS are balanced)
If you run into Daemons you die in CC but have a chance if you're shooting. If you run into 'Nids you die in CC but have a chance if you're shooting. If you run into Necrons you're SOL either way but stand a better chance if shooting, same with IG. If you run into Dark Angels you want to be shooting, if you run into Space Wolves you want to be shooting, if you run into anything with ATSKNF really you want to be shooting.
You do more damage by shooting. Plain and simple. It's not just that Tau and Eldar counter you, it's that Tau, Eldar, Daemons, Necrons, Vanilla, Space Wolves, IG and even friggin' Tyranids counter you if you try to run a Dark Eldar CC list like that.
EVIL INC wrote: Jano, you need to read through the thread. It iscrammed full of proof. Unless you are also of the sort that simply skips over and refuses to read anything that you disagree with. Now try to stay on topic eh?
Don't look at it as though we're ignoring the proof. We literally can't see it, so would you PLEASE, point it out to us? We've asked repeatedly.
Assuming that whatever is shooting at you doesn't have AP6 or better. It helps against explosions, yes, but then you're stuck on foot halfway across the board.
this is true. Fleet can help with that a little bit, but only a unit or two at most will have to worry about it. the rest get through unscathed and untouched.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Yes, and it's always been one of the weaknesses of close combat. You do not decide what you have the opportunity of charging. Your opponent does. Have fun slaughtering Kroot, that Riptide you were after is going to move away from you while killing something else. Once you've killed your first sacrificial unit you're on foot and no longer have the mobility granted by the Venom.
This is where the mobility comes in. Some of the faster vehicles are able to flankve faster than the average infantry can wal. Even if an eney tau player is able to get a couple of kroot between me and a unit I want to assault, all I need to do is fire a tamplate weapon at the uit i want to assault covering a few kroot and make sure to hit the target unit. the fire the rest of my shots at the target unit (with them getting a 5+ cover save) and assault them anyway through the hole burned throughthe kroot line. depending on the size of the target unit and my own, i may even do disordered charge and pop both units in one go.
EVIL INC wrote: Jano, you need to read through the thread. It iscrammed full of proof. Unless you are also of the sort that simply skips over and refuses to read anything that you disagree with. Now try to stay on topic eh?
Don't look at it as though we're ignoring the proof. We literally can't see it, so would you PLEASE, point it out to us? We've asked repeatedly.
Read through the thread. it is in almost every post. I have provided MY proof (if you refus to admit it's existanc, that is on you. just dont try that when stepping into something physical that is just as "in your face", like for example, a train, it wont go as easy for you as it does when ignoring black and white words.. Now it is time for you to provide yours. oh, wait, you seem to have finally let your strawman go. Dont worry about i your concession is more than enough.
CC, just like shooting, will have a particular goal depending on the situation. Sometimes you want to wipe that unit. Sometimes you just want to speed bump it to protect something else. Sometimes you want to effectively pin it in place.
These are tactical goals that all have their place and are all viable in 6th edition. Which, I believe, is what the entire original post was about.
We're probably using different variations on the word "viable". Could a melee-centric Dark Eldar list be made that could win games? Absolutely, and if that's what the OP wants then more power to him. I just want him to be aware that a shooty list is going to be better equipped than that melee list to take on the strongest builds of other Codices. Such a DE melee list would lose most of the time when played against a competent Taudar, Tau/Tau, Eldar, Necron, or similar player of equal skill and while the same may be true for Venom spam, it would stand a much better chance and as such be the closest thing to a viable list that Dark Eldar can field.
I started to respond to the other stuff you said, but honestly that doesn't matter. What does matter is your statement above (emphasis mine) as we are now to the heart of the matter. The original question was "Are CC armies viable?" I assume by "Absolutely" you have now agreed with the rest of us here in that, yes CC is "viable" regardless of definition. Thank you.
Whether there are potentially better choices than an melee-centric list within a given codex is immaterial.
I don't agree on orks. Grots form really effective screens you can use to transport much larger mobs. Spend the transport points on dudes. Grots help ensure you're doing the charging. Just one way to skin a cats.
Omg u've ruined the thread once again, guyz There are tons of topics here with mellee is well and shiny vs mellee is dead. And they all state the same.
Take fast and tough units for that role. Bikes with indeps, Beasts with indeps, 2++ rerollable cheeze, FMC/JMC or units with tough assault transports. Don't take slow footsloggers or squishy things like witches or helions.
It's also somewhat useful to take slow but very tough units. Like guo. But he's usually considered a waste cause of how slow and avoidable he is.
Here's a great example of things changing with just the new rules and not new units. Shootaboyz. I do play orkses with boyz in wagons and they do fine cause they have tough and fast transports. Boyz are ALL shootas. Cause shootas apear to be vastly superior to slugga. Cause they do way more damage with shooting on the whole and when the target gets softened - they can clear it in mellee. While sluggas take more damage, closest die, they hit less and thus do less damage in mellee. Yep, shootaboyz turn out to be better in mellee than sluggas!!!
Also, like 50% of the time i prefer not to assault with them at all even if in assault range. Firstly, random charges in difterrain are a pain and to be honest, charging someone standing in the open happens extremely rarely. Than overwatch - not very damaging usually but every few models removed from the front make it harder to assault. Than challenges. With random charges i don't know how far ahead will i move. If i roll too low - i'm just taking a few more casualties from overwatch with getting nothing in return. If i roll too much - i can move in tactically bad position and if i wipe the enemy unit in mellee - boyz will easilly get shot down next turn. Also, my nob is gona get challenged. And i do want to avoid challenges with my pk nob cause he has chances to be dead before striking and even if he wins a challenge - it's just 1 casualty vs 1 wound that he usually takes. So to avoid challenges i got to place him accurately so that he is not in striking range when he starts combat but than piles in 3' when the closest boyz die and strikes his pk. It's not easy to do when you charge. But when you stand still - just place a nob 4-5 inches away from the front models. Than if you get charged - you shoot overwatch, boyz are really good at it and have a nob striking blows without being challenged out. While the enemy has to shoot down all the closest boyz if he's up to assaulting and locking nob in challenge - thus he has to spend more firepower in this direction - which is alwayz good in this situation. And with this trick you actually make use of that 3' pile in move making it profitable to you and not damaging when u're charging.
Must note that in previous edition i ran a footslogging greentide of sluggaboyz
I'd like to see some BatReps to back up the trash-talk in this thread rather than regurgitating the same assertions over and over again and then smugly proclaiming "lulz we have successfully proven X Y and Z."
There are 10,000 BatReps on page 1 of the BatRep section alone, 10,000 tourny results showing the effectiveness of shooting armies.
There are tons of batreps with wraiths+dlords, spawns+lord/sorc, battlewagon shootaboyz, nob bikers, FMC, JMC winning strong shooty lists...all the stuff i've told about that's good and possible to work. I, myself won vs taudar with my battlewagon shootaboyz and nob bikers. It was hard but doable. IF you want, i can write a batrep some time.
Now i'd like to see the batrep where a greentide, witches or khorne zerkers did good vs competitive shooty armies. They can't even claim territory. It's an exception rather than a rule when those armies win even in semi-competitive meta. Though, i've managed to pull accident victories from time to time with my footslogga greentides...but once again - they were more like a meatshield and tarpit-upon tarpit that did 0 damage in mellee cause they couldn't get there. All they did was shooting down a few not-very tough targets with their shootas+bigshootas and just soaking fire and getting away with the relic somehow or controling more points cause an enemy makes mistakes and looses his scoring units to my long-range support, thus winning just by a point or two. But i call this victories accidents cause it mostly happens cause of luck and enemie's mistakes while i have to do everything as perfectly as possible. Also it helps when an enemy doesn't understand the true capacities of horde armies and overestimating them spending too much time at his boardedge and when the tide ends by turn 3-4 he doesn't have enough time to cleat them out completely cause they go ruin-hiding.
Thus, ONCE AGAIN. Assault is not in vain but if u're not tough, fast and hard-hitting - forget bout it.
Jimsolo wrote: It's often been said
close combat is dead
the forums repeat it en masse.
But melee's alive,
it's going to survive,
although it's a pain in the a--.
Khorne berserkers are neat
with Kharn in the lead
and Carcharodons get free attacks.
If Urien Rakarth's your thing,
you'll be wanting to bring
a boatload of Grotesques and Wracks.
Even Necrons can score
with Scarabs galore
and monstrous Spyders pooping them out.
A mindshackled leader
will make combat the sweeter
for stabbing himself in the snout.
When the ball's in their court
(and they've got Wave Serpent support)
even Eldar can manage this game!
But to be totally fair,
they've monstrous creatures to spare,
like Wraithlords, Wraithknights, and Khaine.
If you like the elite,
Grey Knights can't be beat,
with Inquisitors psyking them, too.
They've got unbelievable saves,
and as everyone raves,
they've got power weapons out the wazoo.
Have I mentioned Orks yet?
As if you could forget!
A punch-up's the thing that they love!
With big Power Klaws,
and all manner of Nobz,
they are to melee as hand is to glove!
So when they say melee's rigid,
'cause Overwatch killed it,
don't bother to call them a liar.
And don't you dare buy it,
just start up a riot!
(But watch out for Supporting Fire!)
1 Leman Russ Eradicator #1 @ [190] Pts
Heavy Bolter; Sponson Heavy Bolters; Pintle-mounted Heavy Stubber
Models in Army: 136
Total Army Cost: 1249
Was trying out different loadouts for allied leman russes. Now i'm set on an extermitarot with lazcannon, sponson hb and Pask for 235 pts. I also bring Marbo now. He's very demoralizing.
A taudar list was like:
1 Tau Commander 'Deathrain' (HQ) @ 182 Pts
Twin Missile Pod (x2); XV8-02 Crisis Iridium Battlesuit; Drone Controller
2 Marker Drones @ [24] Pts
1 XV104 Riptide (Elites) @ 190 Pts
Twin Fusion Blaster; Ion Accelerator; Early Warning Override
1 XV104 Riptide (Elites) @ 190 Pts
Twin Fusion Blaster; Ion Accelerator; Early Warning Override
1 XV104 Riptide (Elites) @ 190 Pts
Twin Fusion Blaster; Ion Accelerator; Early Warning Override
1 Farseer (HQ) (EL) @ 140 Pts
Witchblade; Shuriken Pistol; Runes of Warding; Runes of Witnessing; Eldar
Jetbike
Models in Army: 48
Total Army Cost: 1249
Standard triptide stuff. At least he din't take a wave serpent.
So the game starts with hammer and anvil(!), relic(!) and nightfighting ( ). I win a choose-side and get 1-st turn. I always insist on placing terrain before any rolls are made so that we don't know what the deployment type will be or who's gona choose the table edge. I'll describe the map from a side long edge (cause of hammer and anvil) pov that's left to me, and right to the opponent. There's some blos around the midfield, ruins close to board edges - upper left and lower right, a dangerous terrain lake on the right side, a little wood in the upper-left corner and lower right corner. And some semi-destroyed barricades like sandbags and haywire on the left side closer to the central part of the table. Also there are some crates on the left side close to a ruin.
He rolled divination and got ignore cover, twin-linked and something else, don't remember.
I take right table edge. Than i place boyz as close to the front as possible. Starting from up tp bottom: 20 boyz, Leman russ amidst the boyz, Vets with a ccs sitting in the upper right woods behind the boyz, grots on a frontline from upper part of the field and through the middle-to the lower to cover 60 boyz standing right behind the grots, 30 boyz with a wierdboy, 30 boyz, 20 boyz on the lower part of the table.
While there are ruins and a wood and some blos stuff - it's hard to find place for 120 infantry models and a tank. So i cluster them up a bit cause i got 1-st turn and could not worry bout riptide pieplates. Vets with a ccs were sitting in the upper woods and not in the lower ruins for a few reasons. I hoped that a 5+ cover would attract more attention than a 4+ later cause i thought i'd need to somehow draw fire away from the boyz. To improve the effect i placed a lazcannon further ahead with just 2 guardians in front of it
The enemy spreads riptides across the field, bikes behind blos with a farseer, pathfinders in an ruin (upper left), commander with marker drones also in the upper left - a bit beneath the ruins, behind crates to block los to drones. He infiltrates kroots behind semi-destroyed barricades close to midfield but within 22-24 of my guyz. So i thought that he plans to draw some fire from shootaboyz on them while not too much and with a 4+ coversave while moving bikes behind blos and taking a relic next turn. Also i was sure he'd move riptides forward to get some aid in stopping a tide while bikes get away with a relic - at least i'd do that.
The game starts and he steals initiative!
Joins jetseer to a riptide which is kinda wierd cause usually you can't join a MC if u're not a MC urself...but seems there's a loophole with riptides cause they can take drones. I wasn't happy with that but din't argue cause i usually try to keep it friendly and forgiving. He moved croot a bit to get them in range, and moved with jetbikes. But he didn't go forward with riptides but just moved around to get a better view on da boyz from afar.
With the first volley from buffed tides he kills like 25 clustered boyz total, then a few shots from here and there and i had -30 boyz total and a few dead grots. Most casualties suffered midfield - moving a wierdboy squad like 4 inches backwards with casualties. like 5-7 dead boyz on another 30-strong squad, and some on an upper 20-boy squad. Leman russ suffers a glancing hit - one of riptides nova-charged to become s9 ordnance.
He flat-outs jetbikes behind a blos close to a relic like i've predicted. This 12+36 moves are very annoying.
And here we go - my turn. 1/3 of the army dead before da boyz even realize who da hell shot dem! It's night and dark around and den SWOOOOSH!11 Dead boyz.
But i forced myself not to go desperate and try to do at least somethin' before a wipe-out.
So i go forward with all da boyz, grots, spreading them as much as possible to protect from pieplates. Leman russ rides in position to shoot pathfinders and shooting begins.
Warphead rolls for a deepstrike - which i totally don't want to happen, there are too few of us but too little effective space on the board and even if we manage to ds and not mishap - we'll get shot to pieces, so i reroll and get a head kaboom It's good i alwayz keep a 2' gap from a wierdboy so he only inflicts 1 wound on himself (there are no exact rules on where to place wounds from a wierdboy'z explosion so i assume that it's something like a blast with wounds resolved from a firer so i start spreading wounds on a warphead and if there's literally anyone within a blast range - the wierdboy just dies so i have to keep a 2' distance, also not sure bout deny the witch roll in this case but i don't roll it cause it's somewhat wierd that he managed to kaboom da head and then say: "Naaah it just din't happen").
Comsquad issues vets to shoot kroots - the only thing they can see with nightfight - note that i can't use flashlights before orders, so i decided to go this way cause the lazcannon guy couldn't see markers anywayz and that's the unit i was gona flashlight with my tank. Vets miss. Leman russ can see pathfinders with 2 hb and a main cannon - shoots them, kills 3 with a main cannon cause they're spread out and the shot scattered and din't manage to do no damage with bolters cause of a 2+ cover save. Than comsquad's master of ordnance tries to call for some big gunz assistance vs pathfinders but they totally miss the target and hit nothing.
Upper shootaboyz run forward to close the distance with kroots but roll poorly and don't go too far ahead. Warped'z shootaboyz run forward and another big squad shoots kroots killing like 6-7 of them - not bad. Lower boyz run forward.
And grots roll good for a run move and go 6' forward so they're now very close to a relic-like 2-3'. I have no hopes of them capturing it but at least they'll be a mild distraction.
Kroots fail morale and run backwards.
Next turn he moves close to a relic with jetbikes and takes it. Kroots regroup, other kroots move forward to back-up the bikes.
He shoots and kills off most of the grots including a runthread with his bikers and some boyz but the overall effectiveness of shooting is a bit reduced thanks to decreased number of pathfinders and snapfiring kroots. Though the full strength kroot squad kills like 5 boyz and that's assuming cover! Total losses are like 20 boyz - thanks to some more cover saves and spreading. But the losses pushed boyz further away from the midfield.
All was gona be just as i have planned and even better cause he didn't push forward with riptides. But i din't know that bikes can battle focus with the relic! Now that's even more annoying than a 36' move. The rule for relic clearly states that you can't run...but as it turned out - battle focus is not exactly a run move. Which i think is another bad loophole like farseer + tide. And than he battlefocused 6' trying to hide them behind blos from at least one shootaboyz squad. That was something done on instinct - reduce incoming fire...but what he should have done imo is just go backwards to close with the kroots so that they can capture the relic next turn with some aid of riptides who are closer to kroot rather than that blos spot. And a farseer would go join kroots and eat up some fire. Anywayz the farseer should have been with bikes in the first place.
Even if he looses 15 kroots - he still has 9 remaining.
Remaining few grots fail morale and run away.
So here goes the key turn.
I move lower boyz just as close to jetbikes as possible while remaining in a line not to suffer too many casualties from a lower riptide that could see them without cover. And they're the main contestors of a relic and my only real hope of pushing a victory. But to do so - they need a distraction. So i marched my midfield orkses forward without further spreading and joined a second midfield squad with a wierdboy. The upper squad of boyz moved forward in the direction of midfield kroots. Leman russ rolls a bit forward and aims the same kroot cause they're the enemie's key to victory if i manage to kill the jetbikes.
Wierdboy rolls +1 attack in mellee and i'm happy cause it's not another 'ead explosion or deepstrike.
Company commander orders vets to "Fire on my target" vs a commander with marker drones that both barely see. It's the best vets could do cause they din't see the jetbikes or kroots. And they kill a marker drone thanks to a reroll. Than commander orders his own squad to "Fire on my target" vs bikes. Master of ordnance shoots and rolls hit! So that blast scatters only 2d6 and not 3d6 and with his awesome bs 4 it just scatters a bit and does 3 hits with 1 casualties - eldar rolled good even with rerolls for sucksessful covers. Than lower boyz shoot at bikers and kill 3 of them including a relic bearer. Was actually better than average but taking into consideration his awesome rolls vs a barrage - it lines up. The damaged squad that no longer has a warphead shoots bigshootas at the only jetbike they see and kill it. So there's just 1 biker remaining.
Leman russ and upper boyz shoot the hell out of 15 kroots. Kroots go to ground to minimise casualties but still suffer heavy losses with just 2 or 3 kroots remaining.
And here's what i have by then: half da boyz by the end of turn 2, running away grots, Leman russ eradicator with an opened-for a riptide side armor (did it on purpose to somehow distract his upper riptide from the midfield, cause if i opened the back armor - i'm afraid he'd get it and ). The enemy has full-str riptides, jetseer, shooty commander with a marker, 2 pathfinders, 1 jetbiker. With this forces he can easilly beat mine. But he made a mistake keeping riptides backfield and wasting his kroots in the middle of the map just to kill a bunch of boyz. That could have been fixed by a 2-d turn distraction farseer rushing towards the lower boyz or joining bikes. Or at least moving jetvikes backwards and not behind blos that din't actually do much.
So i decide to run forward with the squad of boyz with a wierdboy closing midfield. I rolled 5.
Only at the beginning of his 3-d turn an enemy realises that he NEEDS that riptides at the frontlines. And he needs a farseer not only buffing riptides. But he still ahd chances with that one jetbike. He moved the riptides forward but still was too far away. Jetbike picked a relic, farseer moved towards kroots while they tried to go towards the relic but were slowed a bit by defterrain and opened themselves to midfield boyz.
He shot down like another 20 boyz with riptides and commander but the jetbike moved just 4 inches with the relic So that it remained ~ 12' away from the lower shootaboyz that suffered just 1 loss from a riptide due to scatter - he had twin-linked and the first shot scattered a bit and hit 4 boyz. He wanted more, rerolled and it hit 1 - and ~20 away from the midfield boyz that were gona intercept the riptides allowing the lower boyz go in for the relic.
I moved forward and called for the WAAAAAAAAGH to gain fleet and reroll running moves - i needed every inch to intercept the tides and gain relic. And thanks to WAAAAAGH i got very close to it - and my opponent gave up. Though i do believe he had great chances of killing the relic-wielders. Even so, by turn 3 he realised how many tactical mistakes he had done and that they cost him a sure victory.
So my assault-oriented boyz didn't participate in a single mellee. And it would only have happened if the opponent wanted it or he had no other choice. Cause without speed and worse saves and the ammount of firepower the oponent has - all that footslogas can do is beigh tactical and kill what the opponent throws at them. If i had bikernobz - i'd go forth and fight the jetbikes cause i had a chance of catching them. I'd go backfield and kill a riptide or two and distract alot of firepower on my bikers. If i had wagons i'd push forward faster and ended up controling the midfield and slowly bringing a relic on my side forcing an opponent to go offensive thus having options on what to do myself. And fighting riptides with worn-down boyz even with a pk nob alive ain't really gtear. Though they have an upper hand in mellee.
While with such low mobility all i could do is use distraction upon distraction - this grots and midfield boyz did attract enough firepower to allow downfield boyz do the job, though vet distraction din't work - though i supposed them to start doing something around turn 3 where they were supposed to rush forward and help da boyz.
I didn't play on my own terms but rather used opponent's mistakes as much as could. And i see no other way how it might work now. But that's not how a true-winner army works.
The big Eastern November Tourney, I came in first place. My army, grey knights/guard.Cant remember the exact list as i change it every game. No static list for me, I take what I think is cool at the time i put it together.
It was something like this-Coatex attached to 6 monkeys and a couple crusaders+ chimera, Unit of crusaders, unit of odd acolytes and a monkey, shunting dreadknight and shunting 10 intercepters. Comissar lord attached to harkers camp mob with a las cannon behinf the ADL/quad gun, camo manticore
Game 1- Vs necrons and dark angels. Opponent got first turn and set up VERY aggressivelyout in the open as close as he could get to me (ignoring everything we talk about in using close combat effectively. Had I not stolen the initiative, he would have hosed me. As it was, I took out almost half his army on my first turn and spent the rest of the game mopping up. A lot of t in assaultwith my dreadknight. End of game all that he had left on the board was a ruined, barely holding on fortress of redemmption.
Game 2.- Right now, I'm having a brain fart and cant remember who I played but I do remember I won handily.
Game 3- I played an eldar wave serpent list. He got first turn. and didnt accomplish much beyond getting very close to me. I popped his transports and started hosing down his troops that rolled out right in front of me. My shunters jumped forward to engage a flank full of warp spiders/banshees. over the rest of the game, the flank fought hidious close combat where all that was left at the end was a single banshee. the center was a huge short ranged firefight where both sides hurt one another a lot but I came out ahead. My other flank was a not so hidious close combt but it was the game decider as my acolytes fought tooth and nail against a unit of dire avengers over several turns. While this was going, I moved a chimera behind it between it and the objective. On the LAST turn of the game, my last acolyte fell and the eldar rolled for consolidation and because ofthe chimera, they were not able to reach the objective to claim it. The one I held in my center won me the game and the tourney.
This last tourney (I didnt place. My list- Coatex + a few monkeys/crusaders in a razorback, a couple crusaders, a acolyte squad, 2 shunting dreadknights and 2 full 10 man intercepter squads plus a vindicare.
Game one- Vs space wolves close fought. Had i been able to pop his land raider, i would have tabled him before he got a turn I feel.I took over his ADLHis drop pods coming in meant that he was able to unload a lot of shots into me. We fought a LOT of hand to hand (stupid me forgot my dreadknights were character or i would targeted the power fist sarges a few times and won more easily. We ran out of time and the other guy called the game rather than start another turn that would went over to where others woulda waitid on us. I madesure to ask him if that was what he wanted. Another turn would have won the game for him. I think he gave me a gimmie game. But he was an old buddy I hadnt seen in a long whie and he did not expect to do anything. I had aso explained a few things to help him out during the game that he could use in the rest. So he shoulda won but i did.
game 2- Played new tyranid codex. I got tabled. gribblies ate me in close combat.highlights of the game included a dreadknight killing a whatever the huge bug with guns is. not the loadout that craps termigants but the one with gun, while in close combat with it, old one eye and hive tyrant. and the last single intercepter kiling off a floating psychic guy inclose combat and facing a swarm single handed in a heroic last stand. The rest either got swamped or chased down.
Game 3- black templars, 3 land raider list, land raiders dont like close combatwith dreadknights and turbo penetrate shots. idid get lucky on his failing a lot of armor rolls on his terminaters that came out of a LRC. Or course, having to roll as many dice as he did, i reckon it wasnt to much luck as odds. Had 2 heavy incineraters on them, a normal one, a psycannon and 8 psybolt stormbolters. The templars put up a much harder fight before being tabled than my own guys did in the previous game.
Sorry been too long since the games so cant give fully fleshed out and detailed batreps. But they are more than enough to show that close combat is alive and well and that even the lowliest guys can win you a game in close combat (a small unit of 4 point acolytes).
Okay, close combat is not dead, but neither is it restricted to an elite few. close combat is not all about tabling your opponent every game as it was in earlier editions. as has been shown, even a lowly unit of 8 models that consist of 4 point models can win you the game through close combat.
Close combat is not always about killing the other unit. it can be able tying up a unit to prevent it frm taking part in the rest of the game, it can be about getting in to contest an objective, heck, it can even be able blocking off areas of access to other units. For example, there is an alley where a vehicle could normally drive through to deliver a payload of troops on the last turn to get line breaker. A close combat in the end of the alley can block it so that the vehicle cant get through.
The strategic and tactical uses of close combat are nearly endless so the use of it is indeed perfectly viable. we dont need any extra power.
having a few or at least one unit that is decent at close combat makes these countless applications easier to accomplish..
So really, we can answer the OP in the negative, CC armies aren't viable. However, armies with CC elements can do well even in a heavily shooting biased edition.
A cc army is difficult in this edition but good cc units ghave their place for sure. I played a dark harvest list on Wednesday with a D=lord and nine charnel scarbs. They were the MVP unit downing a WK and hunting down squads. They were a buzzsaw. But I would not use two of them. In a DE list you might take two cc units (beastmasters/grots) but agin just the one lrge beastpack usually makes for a better list. Daemons are a cc army only because FMCs will eventually assault and khorne dogs and daemontttes are not afraid of assault.So they might be the best example of a current cc army that is competitive.
grrrfranky wrote: So really, we can answer the OP in the negative, CC armies aren't viable. However, armies with CC elements can do well even in a heavily shooting biased edition.
Especially the ones that magically warp 30", shoot a bunch of psystormbolters, and then still have jump packs. The GK and Eldar can both go fall off the same cliff. I hope the new Ork codex kills you all with mega choppas.
grrrfranky wrote: So really, we can answer the OP in the negative, CC armies aren't viable. However, armies with CC elements can do well even in a heavily shooting biased edition.
this is a given. We have been advocating taking guns and shooty elements to supportand work with the close combat elements all along. when you go whole hog 100% one way or the other you are crippling yourself. Exclude tau from that as we all agree they are broken. lol
I am perfecting a Night Lord army at the moment and feel I am growing very close to making it work. In ALL armies, you must have shooting. it is simply unrealistic, now AND before, to win without some shooting and no modern war is going to end better without shooting. It just isnt..
Even though that's true, the core of the army can definitely be melee oriented. Against 4 very hard core shooting lists, my Night Lords design has slowly been going from "Wah crap" to "Okay I get how I have to do this".
The tactics for using them is a little different than it used to be. For example in this Night Lords list:
1. "False Chargers" are now a consideration and target saturation is now important. If you want melee to work, this is an ingredient you need. Not just in the general sense of "I have more units than you" but in the sense of being able to bring them all to bear safely the round before the charge. Speed, deep striking, outflanking and transports all contribute to this, but to have a cc army, you need to have false chargers and saturation which ARE doable if you craft the list for it.
2. Dirge Casters, a 5 point upgrade, means that in 6E, I get to charge up to 12" instead of up to 6" (terrain always being an issue) and the enemy gets no overwatch. Good times. If you told me that in 5E, what do you think I'd say? Yippee! So the much maligned state of armour now has me taking cheap armour again, but for entirely different reasons.
3. I get to re-roll charge distances with Khorne Raptors. This in no way sucks. So the Marks you use on units is important to their function. With that ability, it's hard to miss even the longer charges. It does happen (and was a source of much sadness as I worked on this list) but not very often. I'll take it.
4. Terrain is important. it always was. but now, the terrain dictates your deployment to a great extent. Not entirely an awesome thing but consider this: Knowing that it does, I dont feel as if I am as disadvantaged by going first (which I nearly never do by choice). Moreover, going first suits a close combat army. So while I am very comfortable going second, I now feel an added advantage when going first that I didn't feel before.
Some of this is experential. There are Generals who HATE going second, but I think they are missing the boat.
Close Combat armies are fun to play and they are viable.
The Mechdar enemy that I regularly play against is a serious load and the Night Lords all but wiped his force in a loss last night. Came down to first blood in a Kill Point Mission. Brutal fight and he was a wound away from a tie. He had his 2 HQ's and a Dire Avenger left that I couldn't get through because Asurman had the Warlord Trait that he re-rolls save rolls of a 1. That made him effectively a 2+ re-rollable save. Yeesh. Quite difficult to kill, even with a land Raider and 15 marines trying. Nonetheless, a good fight and one of my Raptor units Hishap'd and died too! Had they been around for the fight, the tabling would have been a done deal. Ah well. Such are the vagaries of war.
The Mechdar enemy that I regularly play against is a serious load and the Night Lords all but wiped his force in a loss last night. Came down to first blood in a Kill Point Mission. Brutal fight and he was a wound away from a tie. He had his 2 HQ's and a Dire Avenger left that I couldn't get through because Asurman had the Warlord Trait that he re-rolls save rolls of a 1. That made him effectively a 2+ re-rollable save. Yeesh. Quite difficult to kill, even with a land Raider and 15 marines trying. Nonetheless, a good fight and one of my Raptor units Hishap'd and died too! Had they been around for the fight, the tabling would have been a done deal. Ah well. Such are the vagaries of war.
I'm going to keep being grumpy, but if he's paying for Asurmen he's not playing an optimal list. 200+ points for an Infantry beatstick in an army with no delivery options other than either walking or waiting until at earliest turn 3 is... well, bad.
I started to respond to the other stuff you said, but honestly that doesn't matter. What does matter is your statement above (emphasis mine) as we are now to the heart of the matter. The original question was "Are CC armies viable?" I assume by "Absolutely" you have now agreed with the rest of us here in that, yes CC is "viable" regardless of definition. Thank you.
Whether there are potentially better choices than an melee-centric list within a given codex is immaterial.
Nope. In theory, I could win every single event at the next Olympic Games. That does not mean that I'm a viable Olympic athlete. Granted, the comparison is a tad extreme, but it gets the point across.
CC armies (excluding Daemons) are not viable because they cannot reliably, on a regular basis, beat the strongest shooting lists of Tau, Eldar, Space Marines, Imperial Guard, and so on when played to the full potential of their lists. As such, whether or not there are potentially better lists make all the difference. If someone starts breezing through the tournament scene with a Grey Knights CC list or a Dark Eldar murderstabbing list I'll stand corrected, but when seven out of eight of the most successful armies primarily rely on shooting it's folly to argue that assault-centric lists in general are somehow "viable".
If you won't take it from me then take it from grrrfranky. He's saying what I've been saying all along, except he's not me.
Assuming that whatever is shooting at you doesn't have AP6 or better. It helps against explosions, yes, but then you're stuck on foot halfway across the board.
this is true. Fleet can help with that a little bit, but only a unit or two at most will have to worry about it. the rest get through unscathed and untouched.
Assuming you don't get pinned, in which case you're stuck up Gak Creek without a paddle.
This is where the mobility comes in. Some of the faster vehicles are able to flankve faster than the average infantry can wal. Even if an eney tau player is able to get a couple of kroot between me and a unit I want to assault, all I need to do is fire a tamplate weapon at the uit i want to assault covering a few kroot and make sure to hit the target unit. the fire the rest of my shots at the target unit (with them getting a 5+ cover save) and assault them anyway through the hole burned throughthe kroot line. depending on the size of the target unit and my own, i may even do disordered charge and pop both units in one go.
So, assuming that your opponent is inept enough to not see that coming, you can burn through an intervening unit by shooting the one behind it. Could that happen? Absolutely. You are, however, assuming that you have a template weapon in the first place, and that you're more mobile than the enemy. Bikes, Jetbikes, FMCs, Jetpack Infantry/MCs and the like will be able to move away. Kroot will be infiltrated in a manner preventing you from just burning your way though to the units behind. Even if they aren't you're taking Overwatch from more than one unit.
Still, this is an improvement. If you'd actually been arguing your point like this instead of painting yourself like a martyr before the argument even began we might have gotten somewhere a lot sooner.
Read through the thread. it is in almost every post. I have provided MY proof (if you refus to admit it's existanc, that is on you. just dont try that when stepping into something physical that is just as "in your face", like for example, a train, it wont go as easy for you as it does when ignoring black and white words.. Now it is time for you to provide yours. oh, wait, you seem to have finally let your strawman go. Dont worry about i your concession is more than enough.
No. No. No. No. Read what I said again. Please. POINT OUT WHERE I SAID THE THINGS YOU CLAIMED I SAID. For the love of God, I've asked you repeatedly to back up your claims, all you say is "oh, it's in the thread, you should go read it". That's not how arguing works. You make an argument, you have to back it up (and not just by saying "oh, but it's all there, just go and look). Every time I've asked you about the proof you've said "oh, it's there" and then refused to show where. If you don't understand how basic argumentation works, why are you in a discussion forum?
"3. I get to re-roll charge distances with Khorne Raptors. This in no way sucks. So the Marks you use on units is important to their function. With that ability, it's hard to miss even the longer charges. It does happen (and was a source of much sadness as I worked on this list) but not very often. I'll take it. "
Okay. Does this mean you think the Raven Guard chapter tactic has some merit then? Even though the ASM can't benefit from scouting?
grrrfranky wrote: So really, we can answer the OP in the negative, CC armies aren't viable. However, armies with CC elements can do well even in a heavily shooting biased edition.
Especially the ones that magically warp 30", shoot a bunch of psystormbolters, and then still have jump packs. The GK and Eldar can both go fall off the same cliff. I hope the new Ork codex kills you all with mega choppas.
Although interceptors are a shooting unit not cc. They're super mobile, but it's being able to move around and shoot what you want to that makes them good. Often my dreadknight does more damage with shooting than in assault as well.
grrrfranky wrote: So really, we can answer the OP in the negative, CC armies aren't viable. However, armies with CC elements can do well even in a heavily shooting biased edition.
Especially the ones that magically warp 30", shoot a bunch of psystormbolters, and then still have jump packs. The GK and Eldar can both go fall off the same cliff. I hope the new Ork codex kills you all with mega choppas.
Although interceptors are a shooting unit not cc. They're super mobile, but it's being able to move around and shoot what you want to that makes them good. Often my dreadknight does more damage with shooting than in assault as well.
Well, I'd argue that as well, but I'm giving the GK guy in this thread the benefit of the doubt. He's arguing that because he cleans up with CC it's a CC unit. Or list. Or something. All I know is that interceptors are cheese and other meqs books have nothing like them so that particular tactic doesn't mean anything to the rest of us.
If I could reliably teleport my BA ASM 30", I might view Taudar differently as well. Instead, I eat 2-3 turns of shooting and nothing makes it to my destination. Feth GK and Feth Eldar.
So a game of warhammer is now the olympic games? Huh, whoda thunk it. lol still have to disagree with you. Armies with units within them that are competant at close combat ARE viable. this has been proven a million times within the thread yet some strill disagree with it. It has also been proven through at LEAST on real life in-game example that even a lowly non-"CC oriented" unit can literally win a game through the use of...wait for it....assault and close combat.
True, pinning can cause a fleet unit to not be able to effectively use their fleet ruleLikewise, pinning can also cause a 'shooty" unit to not be able to shoot as well. that is a two edged sword that cuts both ways . GASP!! I used a close combat weapon phrase. It isnt a viable figure of speech to use (joking, someone has to try to keep this good natured and polite)
You do not have to burn through an entire uit to be able to assault the one behind it. You only need to make room enough to move a few models through. What armies have template weapons? pretty much all of them. Whic players use them? pretty much all of them.
Your own words "close combat is dead", "assault is dead" inthis and many other threads
if you are finally willing to admit that close combat is viable since you are unable to provide the proof I had asked for. Good for you. If your going to claim that you nevr said that, the rest of us who have been reading through the threads will just laugh and move on. Everyone makes mistakes, not everyone is willing to admit when they do and we understand.
intercepters are a close combat unit that happens to shoot well. any unit with that kind of mobility and the ability to load up on extra close combat weapons, halberds and hammers with every single one being a force weapon? those are DEFINATELY close combat troops. CC troops that shoot well, but still CC troops.
.
yes, as blood angels are starting to be one of the 'older' codices, they are starting to be left behind. When it came out they were the all OP flavor of the month and now that creep has left them behind, we are starting to see a lot of people complain that they arent the super power anymore. I'm sure this might change when the cycle gets back around to them. i have always chosen the army I play based on what I liked about them regardless of their "power" because i was more worried about enjoying every game rather than winning every game.
intercepters are a close combat unit that happens to shoot well. any unit with that kind of mobility and the ability to load up on extra close combat weapons, halberds and hammers with every single one being a force weapon? those are DEFINATELY close combat troops. CC troops that shoot well, but still CC troops.
They really aren't. Just like every other grey knight unit (actual grey knights, not henchmen/dreadknights) they are first and foremost a shooting unit. They aren't bad in combat due to the force weapons, but that's more to mop up what remains after they shoot. At under 24" GK are probably the most lethal shooting army out there due to stormbolters with psybolt and multiple psycannon in every unit. If you can keep them at arm''s length, ie more than 24" then they struggle, hence why interceptors are so useful. With that 30" shunt and then the jump move they can get to where ever they need to be, rather than having to footslog around the board trying to chase people down and get into range.
The greatest strength grey knights have is their close combat ability. for example, it only takes a single wound from a force sword to kill a huge hulking monstrous creature.it takes how many from a bolter? or even how many from a psycannon? add in the mobility of the shunt and jump pack.
Yes, they are VERY good shooters and can do a lot of damage through shooting. They can do a lot more in close combat.
Of course, this is one of those arguments that isnt really an argument. You claim its a shooty unit thats just as good as assault, I say its an assault unit that just as good at shooting so its a "tom-ay-to, tom-ah-to" situation lol. Either way, we can both agree that in terms of a (whatever) unit, they DO do well in close combat and that there are MANY situations where they would want to assault a target unit or be able to at least hold it's own in an assault (in most cases).
anecdotal data- personally, my grey knights do about equal in usefulness of shooting and close combat.
EVIL INC wrote: The greatest strength grey knights have is their close combat ability. for example, it only takes a single wound from a force sword to kill a huge hulking monstrous creature.it takes how many from a bolter?
How many of your 25+ PPM MEQ models are you going to lose assaulting a MC, and how soon are you going to be able to engage it with shooting compared to melee?
EVIL INC wrote: So a game of warhammer is now the olympic games? Huh, whoda thunk it. lol still have to disagree with you. Armies with units within them that are competant at close combat ARE viable. this has been proven a million times within the thread yet some strill disagree with it. It has also been proven through at LEAST on real life in-game example that even a lowly non-"CC oriented" unit can literally win a game through the use of...wait for it....assault and close combat.
Who is disagreeing and where? Actual quotes, please.
Your own words "close combat is dead", "assault is dead" inthis and many other threads
Citation needed, although I'll happily admit that's what I said. It's just that you seem incapable of accepting that it doesn't mean what you're arguing that it does, as I've clarified repeatedly.
True, pinning can cause a fleet unit to not be able to effectively use their fleet ruleLikewise, pinning can also cause a 'shooty" unit to not be able to shoot as well. that is a two edged sword that cuts both ways . GASP!! I used a close combat weapon phrase. It isnt a viable figure of speech to use (joking, someone has to try to keep this good natured and polite)
Being polite in an argument is best achieved through actually arguing your points as opposed to claiming proof without producing it when asked.
if you are finally willing to admit that close combat is viable since you are unable to provide the proof I had asked for. Good for you. If your going to claim that you nevr said that, the rest of us who have been reading through the threads will just laugh and move on. Everyone makes mistakes, not everyone is willing to admit when they do and we understand.
Yes, everyone makes mistakes. I'm starting to think that my mistake is trying to engage in meaningful discussion with someone unwilling to provide quotes when asked. Just for the record, do you mind clarifying what proof you're asking of me and I'll see if I can dig it up?
intercepters are a close combat unit that happens to shoot well. any unit with that kind of mobility and the ability to load up on extra close combat weapons, halberds and hammers with every single one being a force weapon? those are DEFINATELY close combat troops. CC troops that shoot well, but still CC troops.
You're able to load up a Command Squad in Codex: Space Marines with multiple Thunder Hammers and Storm Shields as well, as well as give them an Apothecary. That does not mean that using them for CC is the most optimal idea. Interceptors with Halberds cost 31 PPM (33 with Psybolts assuming a 10-man squad). They are T4, have a 3+ armour save and ONE attack base. Meanwhile, they've got an S5 gun with 24" range and 12" mobility every turn, with the option to Shunt. That sort of firepower is completely wasted if you're going to start assaulting stuff with units that don't even have an extra CCW. That is not to say that there aren't moments where charging isn't the right thing to do, but you're not using them to their full potential if you're using them primarily for melee.
How many of your 25+ PPM MEQ models are you going to lose assaulting a MC, and how soon are you going to be able to engage it with shooting compared to melee?
I dont have a dark eldar codex on me. What units do they have hat are 25 poins per model with a 3+ save and how are they armed? As for how many die killing the Mc, it depends on what the MC is, what it is armed with, how many points it costsand so on and so forth to decide how many makes it worthwile In the right situation, it might be worth sacrificing some MEQ dark eldar if i tkeeps the MC from stopping me from winning. heck, it it is the last turn and I'm in the enemy deployment zone, it doesnt matter how many it kills so long as i have one left strong at the end of the turnbecaue then i would still have linebreaker.
please, learn to do your own legwork. You typed it, you said it, we have all seen it. If you refuse to admit it, so be it. the evidence is there. Trust me, you'll look a lot better if you just admit you are wrong. you have already been proven so.
Again, do your own legwork.
take your own advice. i have provided proof while you keep repeating the same thing, "changing goalposts, tossing up strawmen anything to try to get out of admitting you are wrong.
Your mistake was making claims you could not support and then trying to back out of it.
again, to-may-to, to-mah-to. A 50/50 unit that is just as good at one thing as another. If it makes you feel better, go ahead and call it a shooty unit that is good at close combat. Regardless, it still proves you wrong. I have been able to use them effectively in close combat to help win games. idont use them primarily for shooting OR melee. I use them primarily for what they are needed to do in the given situation.
They are not dark eldar though. Try to get back on topic. The OP asked about Dark Eldar. instead of focusing on attacking me in an impolite fashion, try to answer the OP.
To the OP, as you can see, a few posters have taken the thread WAY off topic. You have gtten all the info you need here. CC units canbe usefull in a dark eldar army. I would suggest going to the army list section for advice on details.
So...any examples of viable cc oriented army that's not based on FMC/JMC, bikes/jetbikes, beasts, av14 assault transports? Try playing without a dreadknight and see what happens to your 'awesome ccgk'.
Automatically Appended Next Post: It's often been said -
Assault's not dead.
But when you field horde
U're blown off the board.
No chaos berserkers,
Commandoes outflankers -
Just shooty space elves.
Put hordes on the shelves.
Assault marine
Starts loosing urine
When he has to fight
A tau riptide.
Buzzsaws used by koptaz
And boyze'z cool choppaz
Are thrown in the piles
And swarmed by the flies.
To fight in mellee
U both got to be
Tough and mobile -
Or just do no try.
please, learn to do your own legwork. You typed it, you said it, we have all seen it. If you refuse to admit it, so be it. the evidence is there. Trust me, you'll look a lot better if you just admit you are wrong. you have already been proven so.
Again, do your own legwork.
take your own advice. i have provided proof while you keep repeating the same thing, "changing goalposts, tossing up strawmen anything to try to get out of admitting you are wrong.
Every time I ask for proof you say "oh it's in the thread" or some variation thereof. Every. Single. Time. I'm going to ask you again, please, can you back your claims up with quotes from this thread? More specifically, the claims that:
I, and other people claiming assault is not viable, are "liars"
Spoiler:
EVIL INC wrote: Well said. As we and a few others have been saying you put it well. It proves the lie that these others have been spamming about that close combat is dead and no longer plays any part in the game at all.
Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks.
(A personal attack would be pointing out that the second quote in your signature, reading "Exalt!"., is fabricated. Anyone can still click the quote time stamp and get directed to the REAL quote, which is not so flattering to you as you make it out to be.)
Just for the record, way back on page 2 I said that:
First of all I don't think you should make a Dark Eldar assault focused army, but you can take one or two assault units for the purposes of counter-assault or flanking or somesuch, remember that when non-fearless units are fighting assault can completely obliterate an unit, none of that "yay I gots me one troop model left from your shooting he's holding an objective" thing. But, I don't think Dark Eldar have the necessary toughness to focus on assault as assault units do nothing unless they're in combat and are wasted points if they just get killed off by shooting.
Secondly, who even cares about the differences of this and the other editions, apparently seventh is coming anyway, but now we're playing 6th. It's simply not true that assault was dominating post-3rd, somebody has got their editions mixed up or are thinking of some weirdo cases like first turn assaults on an IG army (an army that was commonly said to win as massacre if they could tie). Fourth was very much a shooting edition other than some incredibly broken stuff like the siren princes. Not saying that the games where a chaos army first-turn assaulted with infiltrating raptors weren't stupid but best tournament armies thorough fourth usually shot. Useless to argue about it now though, after all it's an entire edition worth of changes too so it's not smart to say "well it was just this".
This edition I haven't even seen other assault armies than Demons, because that's a completely assault based book. It's a very good assault army though.
This. There are a few CC units that are still viable, mostly FMCs or Beasts. Even the Daemons, the supposedly "assault-based" book, though, have stuff like 6D6 S6 shots, whips on Slaanesh princes and the like.
Ultimately, I think part of the disconnect is that we're talking about different things. When I say CC is dead, I'm talking armies focussed on assault as their primary means of damage. In 5th you could, even if not as strong as a shooting army, concievably stand up to shooting armies with an army built mostly around melee. If you build an army around mostly melee today, you'll not be as successful as if you played a shooting army. The top 8 armies, accoring to TorrentofFire, have one melee-centric army, Daemons, in it. If that doesn't tell you that shooting is more dominant then I'm interested to hear how you came to that conclusion.
And this isn't even taking Str D shooting into account...
If I've been arguing the same thing since page 2 (which I demonstrably have, as evidenced by the above quote), I feel pretty safe to say that claiming that I'm moving goalposts is demonstrably incorrect.
There, I provided actual quotes for you, again. Your turn to do the same for your claims.
xxx - Close combat is dead cause you can only run fmc, jmc, bikes, bests and nothing else.
yyy - Close combat is great cause you can run fmc, jmc, bikes, bests but don't run anything else.
xxx - Close combat is dead and u're a !@#$
yyy - Close combat is great and u're a !@#$
xxx - Close combat is dead cause you can only run fmc, jmc, bikes, bests and nothing else.
yyy - Close combat is great cause you can run fmc, jmc, bikes, bests but don't run anything else.
xxx - Close combat is dead and u're a !@#$
yyy - Close combat is great and u're a !@#$
No, as you may have noticed I've been trying to get Evil to provide quotes of where I've allegedly said things since page 2. The difference being I provide quotes of where things were said, while he expects us to be able to read his mind and find the subjective insults ourselves.
To sum up:
Evidence against melee-centric armies
7 out of the 8 most winning armies according to TorrentOfFire are predominantly shooting armies.
The winner of NOVA 2013 was Mechdar with allied Riptide and Broadsides (who fought Quad-tides for the title). The winner of Feast of Blades was a double Wraithknight Eldar player. The winner of the BAO 2013 was a Daemons player using the old White Dwarf Screamers and Flamers, AKA two of the most horrificly broken shooting units in quite a while. The winner of Adepticon 2013 played Necrons/Grey Knights, fighting against CSM/IG for the title. The four biggest tournaments in the US (correct me if I'm wrong), all won by shooty lists.
This excellent post by Ailaros, combined with the fact that shooting was already stronger in 5th edition:
- Your charge distance is at the mercy of the dice. I have seen several assaults that would have been in range in 5th fail in 6th.
- You can no longer run and assault with Fleet.
- Grenades got nerfed for assaulting through terrain.
- Assault grenades no longer hurt vehicles.
- Overwatch
- And, because it really needs to be mentioned twice given the scope of the rule, transported units can overwatch if their transport gets charged, walkers can overwatch, and flamers are overwatch BEASTS. There is now literally no point in attempting to assault a unit of burnaz.
- A unit type that IS IMMUNE TO CLOSE COMBAT was born and became a staple in many lists (fliers)
- You can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle ever and that includes when it is destroyed on you
- Multi-charges were nerfed
- Challenges killed a lot of the potential of combat beast characters
- You can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves
- You can't assault if you Infiltrate or Scout and go first
- The distance from which an assault vehicle brings you closer to the enemy is reduced
- Some random objectives half your assault range
- Furious Charge got nerfed
- Wound allocation forces you to take the models from the front as casualties, this makes an assault unit take an extra turn(s) of being exposed to gunfire before they can get stuck in.
- Wound allocation means that hidden weapons upgrades are no longer hidden. You only need to kill a squad to the point where the upgrade model is the closest to something. This is very easy to achieve with deepstriking.
- Loss of by-unit cover in favor of by-model cover destroys the ability for foot hordes to advance upfield.
- Addition of focus fire
- Addition of Precise Shot.
- Worsening of cover. Intervening units only give 4+, hills no longer area terrain, etc.
- Power weapons got screwed up. Either Ap3, or I1, take your choice...
- You can no longer disembark after moving more than 6" in a transport (killing mech assault units).
- grenades can now be thrown.
- walkers can no longer tie up squads in close combat.
- grenades now work against monstrous creatures in close combat. This hurts dedicated assault units relative to basic infantry that have no desire to be in close combat.
- pre-measuring makes it much easier to make sure shooting weapons are in range, while not helping assault units make it into assault more reliably.
- rapid fire now puts more shots out on the move.
- you can now move and fire heavy weapons. This and the above change to rapid fire mean that you can now back up away from assault units while still shooting.
- parts of a squad can now move without affecting the accuracy of heavy weapons.
- old wound wrapping gotten rid of. I'm glad, but for the purposes of this discussion, it is a boost to shooting more than assaulting.
- pile-in moves reduced to 3" from 6".
- unengaged models in a unit that is locked in close combat must now move closer to the enemy units. Used to capture objectives far away while in close combat with this one in 5th.
- barrage weapons may now fire within their minimum ranges.
- barrage weapons no longer lose strength against vehicles from off-center scatters.
- artillery units got MUCH more survivable.
- models with two pistol weapons can now fire them both.
- vehicles can shoot all weapons at cruising speed.
- in order to charge a vehicle, you must have some way of damaging it.
RELATIVE BUFFS FOR ASSAULT
- hypothetical increase of maximum charge range from 6" to 12". Given that assault range is no longer reliable, I still consider this more of a nerf than a buff. I mean, if you're 12" away, are you really going to attempt to charge? The most likely result is that your opponent will get some free overwatch, and you're still not making it into close combat.
- hammer of wrath.
- assaulting vehicles now gives you much better chance to hit.
- rage rule change
- gets hot now affects those rare vehicles that have it
So, some of these changes are more important than others, and you can uselessly nit-pick them all you like, but the fact is that there were 39 rule changes to make shooting better, and arguably up to 5 rule changes that make assault better.
Put another way, for every rule that made assault better, there were EIGHT rules that make shooting better.
6th ed is a shooting edition. End of.
And that's just the changes in 6th ed. 5th ed also whacked assaulty armies a lot, what with the introduction of real transports acting as automatic speedbump, the lack of consolidating from one close combat into another, etc.
One could make the argument that close combat was overpowered in 4th edition, but assault needed in that case to be toned down a bit, not had its manhood chopped off with a pair of rusty pliers and being forced to watch romantic comedies.
Riptides and Wave Serpents exist, as do Revenant Titans, Warhound Titans, and Transcendent C'tan.
It's not really important. The main thing is what the op asked. Is cc good for dark eldar? And he wants to take witches.
And we all agreed on the same thing that withches ain't good as a cc unit and the only real use to them is haywire-vehicle hunting. Which they're also not great at cause of fragility of their transports. And that beast packs are not bad and when lead by a 2++ unit are nice.
koooaei wrote: It's not really important. The main thing is what the op asked. Is cc good for dark eldar? And he wants to take witches.
He asked about the state of CC in general as well. When someone's arguing that it's just fine by preemptively calling anyone who disagrees with him part of a "loud vocal few" pointing out that his arguments are flawed is very much important.
I mean, let's say that I was arguing that Grots were the best melee units in the game and trying to back that up by saying that I've managed to sweep Riptides with them. It's entirely possible to do, but at the same time it's unlikely that it'd work reliably over a period of time. Would it then be irrelevant to point out how this Grot-based army would fall apart when matched up against more powerful lists? I disagree that such is the case.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
EVIL INC wrote: Walrus has been sniping and trolling through this thread and many others before making wild claims and accusations. yet despite me being able to support my stance with evidence and quotes, he continues. I have own tired of sifting and quoting and am now waiting for him to do a little of the work himself. In his inability to do this, he has conceded his "point".
I just posted yet another massive post with quotes to back up what I was saying. You haven't actually showed anything, and repeatedly refuse to post quotes where you back up your claims. You keep claiming that I lie, snipe and troll, and whenever I ask WHERE I did that you claim that it's "somewhere in the thread". You haven't actually quoted a specific place in the thread where you feel this to be the case, despite me asking you to do so repeatedly.
I'll ask you again: where in the thread have I lied or personally attacked you? You haven't actually responded to this question with a quote so far in the thread, so the claim that you have is, in fact, a lie.
Walrus, feel free to use the PM function if you wish to continue the personal vendetta or if you cant interact politely, use the ignore button.
On topic-
To the OP, as you can see, a few posters have taken the thread WAY off topic. You have gtten all the info you need here. CC units canbe usefull in a dark eldar army. I would suggest going to the army list section for advice on details.
EVIL INC wrote: if you insist on continueing your little vendetta, try using the PM function so you can stop spamming up random threads with it. be sure to get actual evidence and quotes when you do so. Till then, try to join the rest of us in staying on the topic at hand.
You don't get to decide what is off topic or not, and as I've pointed out it's not a personal vendetta. Further, I've pointed out that discussing CC in general is on topic, and provided the OP as quote to back it up. The fact that you refuse to read my posts don't change this.
Well, OP, here it is. After six pages, EVIL INC won't give any substantial examples. He also makes completely erroneous statements about 5th edition 40K.
And the other "CC" champion is pimping a list that utilizes 30 models unique to GK that shoot the bejeezus of out Xenos before they mop up the unlucky survivors.
Visit other tactics threads for a bit and draw your own conclusions.
- Your charge distance is at the mercy of the dice. I have seen several assaults that would have been in range in 5th fail in 6th.
- You can no longer run and assault with Fleet.
- Grenades got nerfed for assaulting through terrain.
- Assault grenades no longer hurt vehicles.
- Overwatch
- And, because it really needs to be mentioned twice given the scope of the rule, transported units can overwatch if their transport gets charged, walkers can overwatch, and flamers are overwatch BEASTS. There is now literally no point in attempting to assault a unit of burnaz.
- A unit type that IS IMMUNE TO CLOSE COMBAT was born and became a staple in many lists (fliers)
- You can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle ever and that includes when it is destroyed on you
- Multi-charges were nerfed
- Challenges killed a lot of the potential of combat beast characters
- You can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves
- You can't assault if you Infiltrate or Scout and go first
- The distance from which an assault vehicle brings you closer to the enemy is reduced
- Some random objectives half your assault range
- Furious Charge got nerfed
- Wound allocation forces you to take the models from the front as casualties, this makes an assault unit take an extra turn(s) of being exposed to gunfire before they can get stuck in.
- Wound allocation means that hidden weapons upgrades are no longer hidden. You only need to kill a squad to the point where the upgrade model is the closest to something. This is very easy to achieve with deepstriking.
- Loss of by-unit cover in favor of by-model cover destroys the ability for foot hordes to advance upfield.
- Addition of focus fire
- Addition of Precise Shot.
- Worsening of cover. Intervening units only give 4+, hills no longer area terrain, etc.
- Power weapons got screwed up. Either Ap3, or I1, take your choice...
- You can no longer disembark after moving more than 6" in a transport (killing mech assault units).
- grenades can now be thrown.
- walkers can no longer tie up squads in close combat.
- grenades now work against monstrous creatures in close combat. This hurts dedicated assault units relative to basic infantry that have no desire to be in close combat.
- pre-measuring makes it much easier to make sure shooting weapons are in range, while not helping assault units make it into assault more reliably.
- rapid fire now puts more shots out on the move.
- you can now move and fire heavy weapons. This and the above change to rapid fire mean that you can now back up away from assault units while still shooting.
- parts of a squad can now move without affecting the accuracy of heavy weapons.
- old wound wrapping gotten rid of. I'm glad, but for the purposes of this discussion, it is a boost to shooting more than assaulting.
- pile-in moves reduced to 3" from 6".
- unengaged models in a unit that is locked in close combat must now move closer to the enemy units. Used to capture objectives far away while in close combat with this one in 5th.
- barrage weapons may now fire within their minimum ranges.
- barrage weapons no longer lose strength against vehicles from off-center scatters.
- artillery units got MUCH more survivable.
- models with two pistol weapons can now fire them both.
- vehicles can shoot all weapons at cruising speed.
- in order to charge a vehicle, you must have some way of damaging it.
RELATIVE BUFFS FOR ASSAULT
- hypothetical increase of maximum charge range from 6" to 12". Given that assault range is no longer reliable, I still consider this more of a nerf than a buff. I mean, if you're 12" away, are you really going to attempt to charge? The most likely result is that your opponent will get some free overwatch, and you're still not making it into close combat.
- hammer of wrath.
- assaulting vehicles now gives you much better chance to hit.
- rage rule change
- gets hot now affects those rare vehicles that have it
So, some of these changes are more important than others, and you can uselessly nit-pick them all you like, but the fact is that there were 39 rule changes to make shooting better, and arguably up to 5 rule changes that make assault better.
Put another way, for every rule that made assault better, there were EIGHT rules that make shooting better.
6th ed is a shooting edition. End of.
And that's just the changes in 6th ed. 5th ed also whacked assaulty armies a lot, what with the introduction of real transports acting as automatic speedbump, the lack of consolidating from one close combat into another, etc.
One could make the argument that close combat was overpowered in 4th edition, but assault needed in that case to be toned down a bit, not had its manhood chopped off with a pair of rusty pliers and being forced to watch romantic comedies.
I agree with almost everything except for:
- Grenade - i actually see them helping mellee rather than ruining it.
- Vehicles still can't shoot all at cruising unless they're fast - though most top-used vehicles are fast, tough and shooty.
- I disagree that mech-based mellee is not viable. Though it's limited to some specific and rare builds like battlewagon rush which works relatively fine. Actually, i think that turn 2 assaults with battlewagon sluggaboyz that we saw in previous edition were a bit too much. So it's probably a good nerf.
Death of the closest ones is realistic and it's great. Ofc i hate it as i love greentide and massed infantry on the whole but that's how it should actually be.
Don't know about overwatch - on one hand the closer an enemy gets the easier it is to shoot him down - on another hand irl there are grenades! For this exact reason. If you have to assault - you throw a grenade and enemy has to stop shooting and get to cover. Grenades should stop overwatch and not dirge casters.
The thing that really should have never happened is challenge system. Espetially it's penalties. I think it shouldn't disable a character that forfeight the challenge but probably just impower a challenger a bit. Like +1 attack. But nothing more. War is not a place for some stupid heroism. Imagine a situation where Abbaddon charges a guardsmen platoon. What he does first? Riiiight - chops them all down a few per hit. And what happens tabletop:
Abbaddon: "I am the mighty Abbaddon! I challenge someone! Come here, fight one on one in an honourable duel! Btw, i've got primarch's weapon, one of the mightiest daemon swords ever and a terminator armor, also >10000 years of fighting experience...".
Random sergeant: "OK".
*having killed a serg in 1 strike*
Abbaddon: "Is that all you got, pesky wardogs of the false emperror?! I challenge someone once again...cause for some reason i can't just chop you all down untill there are no more commanders around".
Another random sergeant: "OK".
First of all I don't think you should make a Dark Eldar assault focused army, but you can take one or two assault units for the purposes of counter-assault or flanking or somesuch, remember that when non-fearless units are fighting assault can completely obliterate an unit, none of that "yay I gots me one troop model left from your shooting he's holding an objective" thing. But, I don't think Dark Eldar have the necessary toughness to focus on assault as assault units do nothing unless they're in combat and are wasted points if they just get killed off by shooting.
Secondly, who even cares about the differences of this and the other editions, apparently seventh is coming anyway, but now we're playing 6th. It's simply not true that assault was dominating post-3rd, somebody has got their editions mixed up or are thinking of some weirdo cases like first turn assaults on an IG army (an army that was commonly said to win as massacre if they could tie). Fourth was very much a shooting edition other than some incredibly broken stuff like the siren princes. Not saying that the games where a chaos army first-turn assaulted with infiltrating raptors weren't stupid but best tournament armies thorough fourth usually shot. Useless to argue about it now though, after all it's an entire edition worth of changes too so it's not smart to say "well it was just this".
This edition I haven't even seen other assault armies than Demons, because that's a completely assault based book. It's a very good assault army though.
This. There are a few CC units that are still viable, mostly FMCs or Beasts. Even the Daemons, the supposedly "assault-based" book, though, have stuff like 6D6 S6 shots, whips on Slaanesh princes and the like.
Ultimately, I think part of the disconnect is that we're talking about different things. When I say CC is dead, I'm talking armies focussed on assault as their primary means of damage. In 5th you could, even if not as strong as a shooting army, concievably stand up to shooting armies with an army built mostly around melee. If you build an army around mostly melee today, you'll not be as successful as if you played a shooting army. The top 8 armies, accoring to TorrentofFire, have one melee-centric army, Daemons, in it. If that doesn't tell you that shooting is more dominant then I'm interested to hear how you came to that conclusion.
And this isn't even taking Str D shooting into account...
And we all agree on this! Even Evil said that there is a limited number of viable cc options from what codexes propose us to be mellee-oriented. Which we all agree, right?
U ain't telling that spawns + lord/sorc are bad? They don't have shooting at all And they're so cheap they ain't even a deathstar. But they work even vs shooty armies.
Being shooty-oriented is an easier victory in MOST cases. But there are some things that just can't be shot down and must be faced in mellee. For example, i can't deal with serpents other than catching them with bw boyz or bikers. I can't shoot down a wraithknight but i kill it with pk nobz or better bikerboss with some nobz around...
Though if u're considering what to take - witches or sebarite warriors - go for sebarites. Choppas or shootas - go shootas. Bikernobz or something from range support?.. Well, you can take either bikes or ranged support - they can all work.
Being shooty-oriented is an easier victory in MOST cases. But there are some things that just can't be shot down and must be faced in mellee. For example, i can't deal with serpents other than catching them with bw boyz or bikers. I can't shoot down a wraithknight but i kill it with pk nobz or better bikerboss with some nobz around...
Exactly, although I'd argue that there's very few if any units where you have to get into melee, whereas there's some units that can't ever die to melee. Although I'd argue that Lootas do just fine at shooting at Serpents, and that you're not going to catch a Wraithknight with bikers, though. And even if you catch the Wraithknight, it'll strike first with enough strength to turn your Warboss into paste (or are Warbosses T6 on bikes? Can't remember). A better solution would probably be to ignore them and go for the Serpents.
koooaei wrote: And we all agree on this! Even Evil said that there is a limited number of viable cc options from what codexes propose us to be mellee-oriented. Which we all agree, right?
U ain't telling that spawns + lord/sorc are bad? They don't have shooting at all And they're so cheap they ain't even a deathstar. But they work even vs shooty armies.
Being shooty-oriented is an easier victory in MOST cases. But there are some things that just can't be shot down and must be faced in mellee. For example, i can't deal with serpents other than catching them with bw boyz or bikers. I can't shoot down a wraithknight but i kill it with pk nobz or better bikerboss with some nobz around...
Though if u're considering what to take - witches or sebarite warriors - go for sebarites. Choppas or shootas - go shootas. Bikernobz or something from range support?.. Well, you can take either bikes or ranged support - they can all work.
This is what I have been saying all along. In past editions, all you had to do was walk in and say i have an assaulty army and the other guy would lose without you even having to take your models out of the case. yes, extreme example but close.
Now, the current edition has actually brought guns into the game where they play a part.
this has caused a lot of the players who relied on the old broken rules to win games now find themselves at a disadvantage when trying to assault. of course, this does notmean they are bad players or are stupid or anything like that. it is just a skil that has to be learned. Part of this skill is learning troop choices, terain set up and a whole list of other things.
To prove that the majority of this is a skill is easy. You find that the tournament winners andchampions can beat you using a shooty army and you using an assault army. Then they can switch armies and STILL win using the assaulty army against a shooty army. proof that some seem to want to ignore.
The current ideal (except for tau of course, is to not go 100% one way. You can still win with a 100% one way army but it is harder. Now it is usually better to use an army that has componants of both elements or at LEASt componants that are decent or capable of both elements.
Of course, as you have seen in this thread and many others, there are some that disagree with this.
We've been running a Crusade of Fire campaign at my local shop and as I'm new to Dark Eldar I've been playing them to get a better feel for them. Lately I've been running a lot of Coven based list and focusing on the CC side of things. I wouldn't say its the most OP list out there but if you can get the Grotesque and HQ's into CC it can be pretty brutal. And on top of that, its really fun.
Here's what I've been running at 1500:
HQ:
Archon
-Venom Blade, Huskblade, Soul Trap, Combat Drugs, Phantasm Grenade Launcher, Shadow Field
Haemonculus Ancient
-Liquifier Gun, Agoniser
Elite:
Grotesque x 4
-Liquifier Gun, Aberration with Scissorhand
-Raider with Nightshields, Flickerfield, Dark Lance
Troops:
Kabalite Warriors x5
Wracks x5
-Liquifier Gun
-Venom with Nightsheilds and Dual Splintercannon
Wracks x5
-Liquifier Gun
-Venom with Nightsheilds and Dual Splintercannon
Wracks x5
-Liquifier Gun
-Venom with Nightsheilds and Dual Splintercannon
Wracks x5
-Liquifier Gun
-Venom with Nightsheilds and Dual Splintercannon
Heavy:
Ravager
-Nightshields, Flickerfield, 3x Dark Lances
Ravager
-Nightshields, Flickerfield, 3x Dark Lances
Ravager
-Nightshields, Flickerfield, 3x Disintegrator Cannons
I just load the 2 HQ's up with the Grotesque and try to hit them hard and fast and hope the cover fire and cardboard armor holds up long enough
koooaei wrote: And we all agree on this! Even Evil said that there is a limited number of viable cc options from what codexes propose us to be mellee-oriented. Which we all agree, right?
U ain't telling that spawns + lord/sorc are bad? They don't have shooting at all And they're so cheap they ain't even a deathstar. But they work even vs shooty armies.
Being shooty-oriented is an easier victory in MOST cases. But there are some things that just can't be shot down and must be faced in mellee. For example, i can't deal with serpents other than catching them with bw boyz or bikers. I can't shoot down a wraithknight but i kill it with pk nobz or better bikerboss with some nobz around...
Though if u're considering what to take - witches or sebarite warriors - go for sebarites. Choppas or shootas - go shootas. Bikernobz or something from range support?.. Well, you can take either bikes or ranged support - they can all work.
This is what I have been saying all along. In past editions, all you had to do was walk in and say i have an assaulty army and the other guy would lose without you even having to take your models out of the case. yes, extreme example but close.
What edition would that be, just out of curiosity?
Lately I've been running a lot of Coven based list and focusing on the CC side of things. I wouldn't say its the most OP list out there but if you can get the Grotesque and HQ's into CC it can be pretty brutal. And on top of that, its really fun.
Here's what I've been running at 1500:
I've been running something similar but with more warriors and fewer Wracks plus a cheaper HQ and additional Grots. How have the Wracks been performing for you?
I've found that DE mobility combined with the fact that almost everyone is loaded onto open topped assault vehicles gives me ways to get into CC a lot more reliably than with my other armies. I still tend to lose my shirt getting there and heaven help me if I'm lined up against a ton of SMS but yeah, it's about the only "CC" list I'm confident in right now (read "confident" as in "sometimes it actually gets into combat ... sometimes ...").
Read through the older rules sets and see for yourself if you were not around for them. However, that is off topic as we are talking about THIS edition.
as a guard player, ive faced a few darkeldar players. Not a lot because there just arent a lot in my area. I found that wyches ate through my units fairly fast, but then again, so did the other types. against someone who has better troops than myself, I can see where the heavier hitters would be more useful.
Read through the older rules sets and see for yourself if you were not around for them. However, that is off topic as we are talking about THIS edition.
It's not off-topic because it lets us make arguments from the changes since the editions. For example, in 5th edition (the most recent one) shooting dominated, but melee was still good. You could play a multitude of majority-melee armies and still have a decent chance, even if it wasn't as strong as shooting.
- Your charge distance is at the mercy of the dice. I have seen several assaults that would have been in range in 5th fail in 6th.
- You can no longer run and assault with Fleet.
- Grenades got nerfed for assaulting through terrain.
- Assault grenades no longer hurt vehicles.
- Overwatch
- And, because it really needs to be mentioned twice given the scope of the rule, transported units can overwatch if their transport gets charged, walkers can overwatch, and flamers are overwatch BEASTS. There is now literally no point in attempting to assault a unit of burnaz.
- A unit type that IS IMMUNE TO CLOSE COMBAT was born and became a staple in many lists (fliers)
- You can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle ever and that includes when it is destroyed on you
- Multi-charges were nerfed
- Challenges killed a lot of the potential of combat beast characters
- You can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves
- You can't assault if you Infiltrate or Scout and go first
- The distance from which an assault vehicle brings you closer to the enemy is reduced
- Some random objectives half your assault range
- Furious Charge got nerfed
- Wound allocation forces you to take the models from the front as casualties, this makes an assault unit take an extra turn(s) of being exposed to gunfire before they can get stuck in.
- Wound allocation means that hidden weapons upgrades are no longer hidden. You only need to kill a squad to the point where the upgrade model is the closest to something. This is very easy to achieve with deepstriking.
- Loss of by-unit cover in favor of by-model cover destroys the ability for foot hordes to advance upfield.
- Addition of focus fire
- Addition of Precise Shot.
- Worsening of cover. Intervening units only give 4+, hills no longer area terrain, etc.
- Power weapons got screwed up. Either Ap3, or I1, take your choice...
- You can no longer disembark after moving more than 6" in a transport (killing mech assault units).
- grenades can now be thrown.
- walkers can no longer tie up squads in close combat.
- grenades now work against monstrous creatures in close combat. This hurts dedicated assault units relative to basic infantry that have no desire to be in close combat.
- pre-measuring makes it much easier to make sure shooting weapons are in range, while not helping assault units make it into assault more reliably.
- rapid fire now puts more shots out on the move.
- you can now move and fire heavy weapons. This and the above change to rapid fire mean that you can now back up away from assault units while still shooting.
- parts of a squad can now move without affecting the accuracy of heavy weapons.
- old wound wrapping gotten rid of. I'm glad, but for the purposes of this discussion, it is a boost to shooting more than assaulting.
- pile-in moves reduced to 3" from 6".
- unengaged models in a unit that is locked in close combat must now move closer to the enemy units. Used to capture objectives far away while in close combat with this one in 5th.
- barrage weapons may now fire within their minimum ranges.
- barrage weapons no longer lose strength against vehicles from off-center scatters.
- artillery units got MUCH more survivable.
- models with two pistol weapons can now fire them both.
- vehicles can shoot all weapons at cruising speed.
- in order to charge a vehicle, you must have some way of damaging it.
RELATIVE BUFFS FOR ASSAULT
- hypothetical increase of maximum charge range from 6" to 12". Given that assault range is no longer reliable, I still consider this more of a nerf than a buff. I mean, if you're 12" away, are you really going to attempt to charge? The most likely result is that your opponent will get some free overwatch, and you're still not making it into close combat.
- hammer of wrath.
- assaulting vehicles now gives you much better chance to hit.
- rage rule change
- gets hot now affects those rare vehicles that have it
So, some of these changes are more important than others, and you can uselessly nit-pick them all you like, but the fact is that there were 39 rule changes to make shooting better, and arguably up to 5 rule changes that make assault better.
Put another way, for every rule that made assault better, there were EIGHT rules that make shooting better.
6th ed is a shooting edition. End of.
And that's just the changes in 6th ed. 5th ed also whacked assaulty armies a lot, what with the introduction of real transports acting as automatic speedbump, the lack of consolidating from one close combat into another, etc.
One could make the argument that close combat was overpowered in 4th edition, but assault needed in that case to be toned down a bit, not had its manhood chopped off with a pair of rusty pliers and being forced to watch romantic comedies.
If shooting was already better in 5th edition (and it was, everyone was taking Razorbacks and Vendettas and Long Fangs and Psyflemen and...), and the transition to 6th edition nerfed melee severely (which, as you can see above, is rather difficult to argue against), the next edition is going to be one of shooting dominance.
Furthermore, it is on-topic because you claimed that melee was too strong in earlier editions, whereas it's on an adequate power level in 6th. If we cannot examine past editions then this argument is null and void. I'm using the past, when melee was stronger and still weaker than melee, to argue that melee in 6th edition is not in a fine spot right now.
Third edition was probably the last edition where assault really was king, so not for quite a while now.
Evil, if you are going to reference past editions by saying that assault was better, you can't then turn around and say that it's off topic to talk about them.
I'm going to keep being grumpy, but if he's paying for Asurmen he's not playing an optimal list. 200+ points for an Infantry beatstick in an army with no delivery options other than either walking or waiting until at earliest turn 3 is... well, bad.
I really cant agree. Asurman is a bad ass beat stick. And who cares if he doesn't strike til turn 3? Trust me, turns 3,4,5,6 and 7 are no fun for the enemy once he's involved. Also, I'm an assault army, so I was coming for him. Obviously his need for a transport is pretty much nil when that happens.
You gotta keep things in perspective. I am never disappointed in the production Asurman brings. he's so undeerrated.
Yes CC armies are still viable. There are just less of them due to new rules inside assault, assault from reserve and, assault from NON-assault vehicle rules.
It's just as well, you ever heard "don't bring a knife to a gunfight?"
...of course, even though I don't play Daemons, they really should have better close combat killing potential as befits their nightmarish, unreal nature...
It doesnt matter. Walrus has already conceded the point anyway.
To return to the ACTUAL topic...
To the OP, as you can see, a few posters have taken the thread WAY off topic. You have gtten all the info you need here. CC units canbe usefull in a dark eldar army. I would suggest going to the army list section for advice on details.
Lately I've been running a lot of Coven based list and focusing on the CC side of things. I wouldn't say its the most OP list out there but if you can get the Grotesque and HQ's into CC it can be pretty brutal. And on top of that, its really fun.
Here's what I've been running at 1500:
I've been running something similar but with more warriors and fewer Wracks plus a cheaper HQ and additional Grots. How have the Wracks been performing for you?
I've found that DE mobility combined with the fact that almost everyone is loaded onto open topped assault vehicles gives me ways to get into CC a lot more reliably than with my other armies. I still tend to lose my shirt getting there and heaven help me if I'm lined up against a ton of SMS but yeah, it's about the only "CC" list I'm confident in right now (read "confident" as in "sometimes it actually gets into combat ... sometimes ...").
I'd say it does pretty well. We've been running the campaign as kinda "fluffy" so I haven't really been running the list against full Serpent spam and 4 Riptide armies. That said however I don't usually have a problem getting into CC. I usually get to my opponents side of the board with the Grotesques at least turn 1 and then either weather the fire or get assaulted. I terrain is in my favor I can usually launch an assault turn 2 with them. Same for the Wracks. I just focus fire all the venoms until a unit is gone and that usually keeps the venoms alive long enough to deliver them. And like you I often drop a Ravager and a squad of Wracks to up the Warrior squad to a full squad with a Dark Lance and a Raider with Splinter Racks with a 10 man squad just for some more dakka and maybe a 3 man Trueborn squad with 2 Dark Lances. That seems to be a good balance of support fire and CC units to make sure they're delivered safely. Well, relatively safely.
Martel732 wrote: "3. I get to re-roll charge distances with Khorne Raptors. This in no way sucks. So the Marks you use on units is important to their function. With that ability, it's hard to miss even the longer charges. It does happen (and was a source of much sadness as I worked on this list) but not very often. I'll take it. "
Okay. Does this mean you think the Raven Guard chapter tactic has some merit then? Even though the ASM can't benefit from scouting?
RavenGuard are the only Space marine Chapter that interests me. Don't misunderstand that to mean I dont like the other chapters, but none of the other chapters really sound as fun.
As for analysing the tactics, they made a big mistake with RavenGuard. Should have just given the army the darn infiltrate rule instead of stealth. Then they wouldn't have had to worry about Bulky or not Bulky. Its dumb. I mean the Vehicles can scout but the jump packs cant? Its absurd. Land Speeder Storms already come with Scout as do scouts. So the Ravenguard list allows you some silly fun things that dont really "fit"
1. 3 Scouting Vindicators. Yes please. totally out of character and totally awesome.
2. NON Jump pack Assault Squads in Rhinos pushing the field hard.
Now these are not sucky things. I'm not a Hyperbole machine like a lot of posters are. But are they really the essence of Ravenguard? an armoured column? These are the two biggest beneficiaries of the rules when you look around a bit.
So the ideal force for Ravenguard is this essentially:
185pts Shadow Captain Shrike
Tactics? Everything is literally within striking distance in round 1. Everyone piles out and takes cover as they can. We bomb the piss out of things with vindicators and multimeltas, Shotgun fire, HK missiles and so on while Shrike and his "bodyguard" provides the threat the enemy needs to focus on if they want to avoid a nasty charge... which protects the otherwise exposed other units from taking as much damage.
Shrikes bodyguard probably becomes not a body guard anymore as the enemy pummels it. And in round two, you're charging with everything that remains. which is a lot of Marines on you. Anything that excapes the attentions of the Marines gets bombed again by Vindicators if they didn't get popped. Tank shocks for everyone.
I found that allies helps different armies cover their weak points. No, I'm not talking about cheesy battle brothers combos, I mean in general. For example, I can use guard manticores, a wall with harker's mob in camo and a lord commissar to provide a lot of the 'covering fire while a different army can provide the up ose and personal stuff like short-midrange shooting and close combat. Whereas a grey knight army might not have much effective barrages, I can let both specialize in what they are BEST at. In a lot of mono armies this isnt as possible. Dont know offhand who Dark eldar can ally with beyond normal eldar but that alone can give some options.
I have a few marine scouts that came in a space wolf set I havnt put together yet. I saw you use shotguns. I had someone telling me how effective shotgun scouts were when mounted on the land speeder troop varient. have you tried that? Did it work well?
Tigurius buffs them with 4++ or fnp or both when possible so they're durable.
Inquisitor grants grenades that make them frightening in cc. -1 toughness, random debuff goodness with psychostroke nades. + Prescience or hammerhands if needed. Liber heresius gives a free 6' scoutmove on a ld check of 10 for guards or conscripts.
Krak nades help alot vs mc. Those 30 points are well-worth not stucking in a wraithknight for the whole game.
While guards and conscripts are great shooters combined with orders and prescience - i almost alwayz prefer to charge with guards if possible. But mobility is a huge issue. Generally an enemy outmaneuvres them but a 100-man wave slowly marches towards to victory.
This mass is really fearful in mellee even to such strong cc dedicated units like bikers or mc-s. I had a game where they killed Be'Lakor before he struck blows.
Though, it's mostly possible cause of inquisitor's nades and psychic powers abuse.
3 Scouting Vindicators. Yes please. totally out of character and totally awesome.
You can't scout the Vindicators. They don't have chapter tactics so cannot benefit from it. Only Iron Hands get an exception to that rule on one of their traits.
3 Scouting Vindicators. Yes please. totally out of character and totally awesome.
You can't scout the Vindicators. They don't have chapter tactics so cannot benefit from it. Only Iron Hands get an exception to that rule on one of their traits.
Ah. Loop hole. Okay. Too bad. That would be awesome. Most of the rest of the army would still be cool.
). I win a choose-side and get 1-
