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.

Or are there units that you just clump together because it's
easier? Are templates prevalent enough for you to force yourself
to keep maximum formation?

that really depends on the enemies firepower. No reason to break up if you're facing scatterlaser hell from Eldar. On the otherhand you might want to break up if the Chaos army with 3 vindicators or defilers is about to shoot.

...I normally wouldnt worry too much about spreading out if I'm sitting in ruins as well.

Whether I clump my models up or disperse them is almost entirely dependent on how many template weapons my opponent has.

I tend to play h2h lists, and clumping them gets me several advantages in that department, but I usually disperse my forces if if means that I can reduce the casualties from template weapons.

Templates don't scare me and don't influence my tactics.

I get my fair share of flamer death and battlecannon death tossed my way.

Woo. Lose a few extra guys, still keep with the game plan.

I mean...my Emperor's Children list in the old rules knocked out an AC with shooting. 5 S8 shots and my possessed/mutated/repairing vindictator vs 9 tanks. The templates were annoying, but...really meaningless in the end.

That might be true for things like Space Marines, but
what about more fragile lists?

Just something to know...it took me 8 years before I played marines in 40k. I mostly play non-marines, as marines are so powerful compared to my usual troops it's like taking the leg weights off and running, ya know?

Flamers don't hurt marines, but battlecannons don't hurt cheaper troops.

Hellhounds always get shot first when playing anyone though. They can really F you up.

Maybe when you're playing. I usually hit them them first with Deep Strike troops or Barrage weapons.

Hit who first? I'm confused...

Difficulty with the difference between the object of the sentence and the subject eh? No surprise.

"I only like standing in a bunch of people closely when we are all naked. If I am wearing Power-Armour, I like to stand @ least 2 inches away from my mates."
Quoted from Chapter Master Helbrecht.

malfred wrote:That might be true for things like Space Marines, but
what about more fragile lists?

My footslogging eldar are largely unconcerned about templates and blasts. You can kill 9 members of a guardian squad and assuming the Avatar is within 12" it still retains much of its ability....still, no reason to bunch up when staring down the barrels of three leman russes.

Most Fragile troopers will come in greater number than marines anyway. Guardians, Firewarriors, guard, orks....When I play orks I hardly care at all about bunching up or not...blasts dont take out that many, and statter off of the optimal mark 2/3's of the time anyway.

Nurglitch wrote:Difficulty with the difference between the object of the sentence and the subject eh? No surprise.

...that makes two of us that are confused I imagine you were talking about the marines though.

*Double post*

I'm not sure I get Stelek's point.

He bunches up and lets templates kill extra models because he's got a gameplan that transcends losing models?

His tactics are so good, he doesn't need tactics...

If you want an answer from somebody less good, I keep in mind what the enemy is bringing. If I see no pie plates or flamers across the table, I don't worry about wide formation. If I do see those sorts of weapons, I am conscious of it, and get my 2" spacing when possible, or as much as is practical while still getting cover saves.

There are a few other situations where you might spread out, such as trying to prevent Infiltrators from getting good spots during deployment.

Phryxis wrote:I'm not sure I get Stelek's point.

He bunches up and lets templates kill extra models because he's got a gameplan that transcends losing models?

His tactics are so good, he doesn't need tactics...

If you want an answer from somebody less good, I keep in mind what the enemy is bringing. If I see no pie plates or flamers across the table, I don't worry about wide formation. If I do see those sorts of weapons, I am conscious of it, and get my 2" spacing when possible, or as much as is practical while still getting cover saves.

There are a few other situations where you might spread out, such as trying to prevent Infiltrators from getting good spots during deployment.

Well, sometimes it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t really matter if you lose 4 moodels or 2 to an enemy barrage as long as the heavy weapon keeps on firing. Sometimes there are greater priorities than losing a couple more troops to barrage fire. You want to keep your units spaced well apart to avoid the enemy consolidating from one unit into the next. Spread out units can be more vulnerable to losing heavy weapons to range sniping. Powerfists are more vulnerable to being part of the troops wiped from the area of engagement if you’re spaced out and have less troops in there.

To avoid taking a second partial hit from his pair of plasma cannons, I’m not really sure it’s worth spacing your troops out. But if the other guy has two leman russ and a basilisk, it’s best to space your troops out.

It’s a judgment call, based on the template weapons in the other guy’s list and vulnerabilities of your own list.

In the past I've had a tendancy to spread out when facing blasts and have usually lost... Recently I've tried ignoring them and it actually imrooves you flexibility enough to start winning! that extra couple of inches moving forward rather than sidways helps get across the table faster and also when in combat = far more attacks. In the past I've had monsters come up the flanks, fight through whats left after the flanks units have taken heavy fire and come up the lines from the sidfes taking on half a squad at a time, by the time the turns over and I get to pile inI'm still only fighting on the origianl terms of the fight. Being closer togerther can mean potentially twice as many attacks! Same goes for using rapid fire weapons, why only have half a squad in range than a whole squad? yes you may loose an extra 2/3 models but for the other two now in range you don't loose your fire power's improoved and you get more troops fighting in any assualt. Especially good for guard, yes squads may simply dissappear but you should have overwhelming numbers, many dice=many saves=many deaths. As long as you can target anything your troops can't deal with ear;y on you're fine.

I suppose it's also good for squads with heavy weapons
since cohesion might force you to move your heavy weapon
into formation.

Never had to worry about it before what with Eldar and all.

malfred wrote:I suppose it's also good for squads with heavy weapons
since cohesion might force you to move your heavy weapon
into formation.

Never had to worry about it before what with Eldar and all.

My buddy pulls that trick on my when I'm playing guard. He range snipes you make me pick between loosing a lascannon/ plas gun or spending a turn moving into formation.

If you worry so much about your own casaulties, you're REACTING to the other guy. Surest way to lose a game of 40K.

Let him do his thing, you concentrate on yours. Even if it means you lose more models, so long as your game plan is intact and working...you have a better chance of winning.

Hell most of my games I already know what I'm going to do through turn 6, barring any craziness of my opponent.

Nurglitch wrote:Difficulty with the difference between the object of the sentence and the subject eh? No surprise.

You should indicate the antecedent to a preposition; your sentence was unclear.

Iorek-

"You should indicate the antecedent to a preposition; yours sentence was unclear."

Pure Gold.

Stelek-That must be an interesting way to play. Is it tiresome or interesting watching the cavorting folly of your opponents?-joke

I reckon you would be an interesting opponent in 40k. Do you like Apoc, or does the 'skirmish' size game appeal more to your tactics?