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

I'm just beginning to develop a IG Drop Troop list, and after much debate I went with the Harakoni Warhawks Doctrines (with a slight modification).  Basically, the army is made up of 2 tanks, a basilisk, (8) 6-man suicide squads (3 melta or plasma in each), and the regular 60 troopers.

Anyway, the question came up as to whether or not Carapace armor is worth it on IG Drop Troops.  It seems that if you have a 6-man suicide squad loaded with Special Weapons, you'd want to try to give them a chance to stay around for at least two turns.  And if you want them to stay around for at least 2 turns, you should be giving them an armor save against most enemies. 

As I play SMs and Tau most often, a carapace armor doctrine gives me an armor save that I normally wouldn't get against regular small arms fire.  Am I crazy thinking the carapace armor doctrine is decent?

Here is the basic problem with carapace: 6 man marine squad with plasma gun double taps a vet squad:

With carapace= 4 dead, and a moral check vs a 7. If you fail they run off the table. Oh yeah, did I mention that it cost 20 points to upgrade the 6 guys? You must upgrade every squad at 20 points a pop, and you run into a huge point sink. Points that can be better used to buy more guns. Remeber the best defense against that 6 man squad is to blow it off of the table.

Its one of those cost vs reward things. How many guys can you give armor to for the price of another squad? If you can cover 6 squads for the price of one then maybe its worth it. Anything more and its probably not worth having.

yes, i agree, i find that more troops for IG is more advantagous than better armored IG. The points are better spent elsewhere. for a good point investment, take cahmeleoline. The increased cover save ona shooty army is very effective.

I'd say that Carapace, while useful, is not worth it in larger armies. Two Infantry Platoons are going to each eat up 60 points worth Carapace (20 for PHQ and 40 for the two 10-man's). Those 120 points could have gone into getting 20 more alblative Guard wounds, which will die without a save against a bolter nonetheless, but since there are (70) 5+ saves, rather than (50) 4+ saves for the same cost.

CK

Carapace Armour is a bad idea in 99% of armies. For starters, the cost is prohibitive - 20 points per squad and you have to take it on every squad. By the time you've given your army the armour, you could've spent those points on more squads, and more men with a 5+ save is better than less men with a 4+ save.

Next, if you're taking a suicide drop army, then your men are going to die anyway. A 4+ save isn't going to help you there. You're better off spending the points to bring more suicide squads.

Finally, and this applies to all the sh**ty Doctrines in the Guard Codex (Hardened Fighters, Cybernetic Enhancements, etc.), you'd be attempting to make up for a weakness (low durability of Guard troops) by throwing points at the problem. That doesn't improve your army, it just makes each of your squads worth more VPs when the enemy slaughters them and ignores their expensive 20 point 4+ saves with Heavy Bolters. You should not be attempting to fix your armies weaknesses by throwing points at them. What you should be doing is spending points on your army's strengths.

With Guard your troops are either in cover, and getting a cover save, or they're suicide drop units who will die in a turn anyway. Neither of these two roles require an armour save. Cameleoline is good for the first one (you're in cover anyway, so might as well make it better - plus it's 1/2 the cost of Carapace Armour), and it doesn't matter what armour a suicide unit has.

BYE

what about taking the grenadier doctrine ?

Posted By shrew on 10/04/2006 5:37 PM
what about taking the grenadier doctrine ?

Grenadiers have all of the costs of a Storm Trooper unit, but none of the utility. They can't Infiltrate, they can't Deep Strike, and their transports is an expensive IFV. No, if you want Stormies as Troops, take Inquisitorial ones, specifically Orod Malleus ones. Atleast with Malleus Stormies you can turn what is otherwise a group of over-priced Guardsmen into a makeshift counter-assault unit (give the Vet Sergeant a Thunder Hammer!!!) - and they get a cheaper transport for drive-by shootings.

Don't waste your time with Grenadiers unless it's a really small game and you can't afford a 2nd and 3rd Platoon.

BYE

Carapace Armour is a bad idea in 99% of armies.

Do you mean 99% of Guard armis or 99% of all armies (Tau, etc.). If it's just IG, what incredibly rare situation do you think would actually lend itself to the carapace doctrine?

99% of Guard armies. Most other armies don't have a choice.

And as for the times they can be useful? When you're dropping an entire Guard army onto someone. There you can spend the 20 points per unit to give your troops a better save out of cover (as they won't always drop in cover), and also reduce your numbers so you're not clogging your DZ with men.

Rare situation, but if you play like that, that's where Carapace can be useful.

BYE

I will say I like grenadiers in small point games like kill team/patrol.

The mobility of the chirmera, and taking two assualt weapons is nice... and it fills a troops choice.

When you are playing 250-500 point games, infantry platoon limts your options...

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 10/10/2006 4:47 AM

99% of Guard armies. Most other armies don't have a choice.

And as for the times they can be useful? When you're dropping an entire Guard army onto someone. There you can spend the 20 points per unit to give your troops a better save out of cover (as they won't always drop in cover), and also reduce your numbers so you're not clogging your DZ with men.

Rare situation, but if you play like that, that's where Carapace can be useful.

BYE

Ironically, that is exactly the situation that the original poster had queried about.
I'm still not sure that it isn't better to have more squads, especially considering that you won't be bringing them all on in one turn.

There is a practical reality here as well. While carapace is useful for saves against bolters et al, on a real world basis it provides an alternative-slightly less troops having to paint with moderately similar effectiveness. If you are runnign a troop heavy formation (drop troop being one variant), it may be efficacious to take the save to paint a few less troops. While not the most tactical factor I know that is a real-world factor for many players.

I really don't see the tradeoff being useful. You are focusing on the drop troops, which if you could only upgrade them, then your idea would be tactically feasible. But its a -20 points for each squad which can be better spent for other things, more firepower, more tanks, or more IG.

HBMC from what I have seen has pretty sound understanding with regard to the IG, and I'd give value to what he says. I guess if you dropped the ENTIRE army this doctrine would make much more sense. However, doing this for a 6man suicide run doesn't seem tactical. I might suggest instead putting some guys in a transport, some meltas or grenade launchers and then shotguns. When the transport drops its payload it ends up being a pleasant surprise against your opponent.

A friend of mine in the UK used this tactic (transport with some guys, and a full compliment of special weapons and shotguns). I originally thought to myself, "Self, he's using shotguns, what a lame tactic they are only strength 3." Well it ended up being very devestating even for MEQ's. there is something to be said for causing lots of wounds and forcing lots of saves even with only Str 3 shotguns. Perhaps if you find dropping IG's to be unfeasible you can try this tactic (I figured your major point was getting your IG up close and personal against Tau and SM). Getting a transport close enough may be easier against SM than Tau, but the Shotgun strategy will work better against Tau vs SM.

Posted By The Happy Anarchist on 10/10/2006 9:52 AM
Ironically, that is exactly the situation that the original poster had queried about.

Not really. He was asking about multiple suicide units. Suicide units, by definition, require no form of enhanced defence, especially not of the 20-point per unit variety, so taking Carapace Armour in an army structured in such a way would be a waste.

BYE

Sorry, I misunderstood HBMC.

In regards to shotguns vs lasguns
Shotguns at 12" - 2 shots. Lasguns at 12" - 2 shots.

The only bonus shotguns have is that you can charge. That would mean either taking flamers or meltas as your special weapons.

Maybe shotguns + flamers might have some use against anything nonMEQ. But with all the other good stuff you can put out, I don't think I can vouch for that.

From what I've witnessed, as absurd as it looks, shotguns tend to be better when in close range because of the ability to assault after shooting. I think the only bonus you give for a shotgun, being able to charge, is the only bonus a shotgun has over a lasgun. But in context of what the OP is looking for, the shotgun may be preferable over the standard issue lasgun.

The problem with a lasgun is that if you fire it you lose your assault power, obviously. In the kind of mission the OP pointed out he wants a suicide run, and a suicide run should incorporate more than just getting close to your opponent and firing death at him/her. A suicide run should be there to distract an opponent's unit by tying them down. Assault is critical to tie an opponent down for a couple of turns. The only weapon you can use to fulfill a full role would be to convert to shotguns to give your guys an assault. Thus in this kind of situation I would prefer a shotgun over a lasgun.

There is statistically ZERO advantage of shooting a shotgun over a lasgun. They have the same STR and I think neither has an AP. However, the assault ability puts the shotgun at a higher priority if you are transporting your guys up close and personal into enemy lines.

However, special weapons aren't limited only to flamers and melta's; grenade launchers as well are assault weapons that can do damage to MEQ's.(At least that is what I know about grenade launchers) The strategy entirely relies on two factors, pushing a lot of str 3 shots at higher toughness models forcing saves, (the purpose of shotguns) and forcing some higher firepower assault weaponry like meltas, flamers, or grenade launcher. Then when the squad is finished shooting, it assaults a unit tying them up for a turn or two which if aimed at a high valued unit, say a devestator squad, is very useful for synergy on the rest of the field.

I've seen it work consistently against multiple kinds of units MEQ's and non-MEQ's alike and its brutal when 10 guards tie up a much more valuable unit. Sure death is assured, but the tie down can be more than worth it.

"grenade launchers as well are assault weapons that can do damage to MEQ's.(At least that is what I know about grenade launchers) "

No. It can't.

For two points less than a Grenade Launcher you get a gun that has +1S and -1AP, and it never misses. For two points more you have a gun that is +2S and -3AP, and kills MEQs, Terminators and vehicles.

Grenade Launchers are junk. They are a compromise weapon in an army that can afford to specialise. And not only are they junk, they're also overcosted junk. They're worth 5-6 points at most.

BYE

I think Grenade launchers should be free, and can replace a heavy weapon or special... then I might use one.

As HBMC states, plasma or flamers are always better and a more effective weapon for the points spent.

I'm just sayin, there are three assault weapon options available to the tactic above. I don't know the stats on a GL. However, I would have to agree, either flamer or melta gun is much more worth points. (Flamer if you are running into cover, melta's if you just need to kill MEQ's and vehicles)

HBMC do you think the tactic described above would work better for a suicide mission?

The main problem with your tactic ATI is that you used the words "power" and "guard assault" in the same sentence with out laughing. A full 10 man squad charging marines only inflicts 1 casualty on the charge. Oh yeah, the marines strike first so a 6 man devistator squad will put down two of your guys before they even swing. That same 10 man squad double tapping with a plasma gun thrown in will at least drop two marines and you still have a full 10 man squad after they shoot. (of course after this they are bolter meat)

Add to the fact that you can not charge after dropping and the chances of getting an ig assault squad are slim at best.....

Oh you are absolutely righ foil, I have NO misguided belief that those soldiers are going come back home for dinner after the battle is done. I know you can't go in right after moving a vehicle, the strategy generally gets the transport really close, pop smoke then move out and assault next turn. (which is inefficient, but on the other hand, its all glances from there and if a devestator squad wants to fire they have to stay put, if they want to move away they can't fire, its a double trap of DOOM! [right])

From what I gathered from this strat it was mainly more important to get in to tie a unit down. Thus even though you might only kill2-3 devestators (at best!) you are stopping their shooting for maybe 2 full turns, in exchange your other vehicles and units are helped out. The synergistic tactic is what this is all about. Also, if the squad is armed with a melta and some shotguns there is a decent chance that 2 or 3 MEQ's might die (melta hits, almost guaranteed death, then the shotguns are just lots of shots but they can do damage then again this is best case scenario). Does the squad make up its points, maybe it can under ideal circumstances, but the true value is tying something down for several turns allowing your other units to move around at least less molested by your opponents fire.

So shotguns are better in an extraordinarily unlikely situation that can easily be defeated by your opponent.

The problem with your tactics are

a) Side Armor on Chimera is 10. Any random squad with nothing better to do can blow it up with ease.
b) Heavy weapon toting squads are either mobile, or behind your lines. You have to get all the way to the back of their lines with a transport that only moves 12" a turn.
c) To prevent your cunning plot of tying them up, all they have to do is break that armor of 10, entangling them for a turn for you to pick off at leisure.
d) If you deploy, you can't charge anyways, and even when you can charge you will only tie them up for two turns at most. Very inefficient use of over 150 points.

Well okay, i've seen it work successfuly, again its either the people this person played were poor players, or there was something else added into the mix I didn't observe. On the other hand, you aren't much better off deep striking 6 guys either, 5+ or 4+ save. They are stuck where they are, they can't shoot a whole lot. They don't have a Drop Pod to block LoS to the unit. They also can't assault that turn, plus it forces the rest of your army to pay 20 points per squad for 4+ saves. I guess both strats are equally poor choices for the job required.

All though, assuming you get past problems A B and C, tying a unit up for two turns is inefficient? Do you mean full turns or just players turns (one full turn). I think D largely can only be evaluated by what you rush, (if its a high value target, even one turn can be game saving). Then again if you charge a group of trash models, then you've wasted all that time getting past the first 3 problems to blow your shot on a crap unit. Also, D assumes you move the chimera in a turn you want to also charge. If you don't move the chimera that turn (again making this exceedingly difficult, I acknowledge that) you could still move in and shoot.

So I'm shot down here, I was wondering what is a good make up for the strategy the OP is looking for (suicide run IG)

The OP idea you wouldn't want Carapace. You probably wouldn't want carapace at all.

The problem is, it takes you at least two turns of prep, once you are in range to be able to tie up the enemy units for two turns. For this you either have to worry about the unreliability of deep strike or paying 90 points or so for the Chimera.


The idea behind dropping guard is that you have 11-15 squads of guardsmen dropping, each worth minimal points, doing some damage and then either dying or contesting objectives. A veritable rain of guardsmen. Plus as many command and vet squads as you can fit.

Ya, I don't know, i guess this strategy also depends on who you are fighting as well. Doing this against nids, well seems like its heavy on the suicide and light on the tactics.

You're right about the Chimera its a 90 point use which may or may not work. Also, I guess I should just come out with it, I've only been playing for 7 months, maybe once a week, so my strategy is more of what I've seen work from my shop at this point not so much what works at a tourney.

WOW.  I go away for vacation, and you guys cover all of the bases... thanks a bunch for all of the advice. 

now I have to rethink the entire army concept I had...there goes a full week of thinking and planning.