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.

The Imperial Guard are one of the most appealing armies in an Apocalypse game. The massed ranks of infantry and artillery and the potential for armored spearheads blasting and grinding their way through the enemy lines. These images are cinematic, but I am participating in an Apocalypse game this weekend and was wondering what strategies some have employed.

Is it better in your opinion to mass together your tanks to concentrate your attack on a certain point on the enemy line, with a large supporting firebase of infantry and artillery? Or, is it better to create many smaller combined arms forces that can support each other and react more fluidly to the state of the battle?

I imagine that the decision will be influenced somewhat by the enemy force that the IG will happen to be facing, but what are the merits of each of these approaches? Are there any other approaches that anyone out there has tried?

ooh a great friday thread, Samwise.

My IG army has been totally shelved for 'regular' 40k games, but it seems to be the only army I play these days for apocalypse. It just plays so well in that format!

Here's what I always do (from 1,200 points to 6,000)

Take some infantry platoons. 2 of them. Become zen with the idea that 48" is 'short range' in apocalypse. Arm them accordingly. Plan to use one platoon to cover each of the 2 objective markers that will be in your deployment. They likely won't be able to start on top of both of them (unless your opponent is really nice) but can easily get to a nice piece of cover that has a clear view of the objective. Stay more than 18" away from table edges to start if you are playing against an assaulty army. Plenty of datasheets give you the careful planning flank march combo, and any jump infantry can lock you up right away if you are hanging by table edges. If you aren't going to be able to do that, buy ambush and/or bunkers to protect from getting locked into assault, or buy a disruptor beacon to split up his flank march.

Once you have this "scoring unit firebase" set up, give it a nice leadership bubble/countercharge element. then you are looking pretty good for taking your home objectives.

As for the rest. I am a HUGE fan of running 1 baneblade per 2,000 points. It's a heavy investment, but its sturdy enough and flexible enough to not be too hard to manage. The rest of my army would consist of leman russes in multiples of 3. They really get good as scoring units when you can buy the company. Until then, they are still great flexible offensive tools, and in large quantities, matched with a baneblade, they are obnoxious to kill. try to tank shock their units off of neutral zone objectives, park on them and don't over extend to their own objectives. If you make a good case for your own objectives plus neutral zone objectives, they are going to have a hard time winning.

I'm hoping you are playing on the correct sized table. If you are playing a big game and your table isn't the 'legal' size, then IG are in serious trouble, unless you just leave all infantry at home and run russes and BBs exclusively.

What size game are you playing? What teammates if any are you going to have? Who will you be facing off against?

I'd love to talk in detail more about the different elements of my typical apoc army, just let me know what in particular you are curious about.

I see the biggest issue with running giant units of vehicles (5+) is that they start to block each other's line of sight. Also, they can become road blocks real quick which makes maneuvering that much more difficult. I'd say groups of 3 with a little mobile support nearby (Baneblade, Sentinels, Hellhounds) would be the way to go.

Good point Stormtrooper....

As with everything apocalypse, it's all about table size. Running 20 tanks in a 3k game on a 4' x 8' table is no good. But if you have an idea of the size of table you'll be seeing, you can better choose how many tanks you'll be able to fit. Don't worry about blocking the infantry LOS, they aren't going to do anything unless your opponent makes a play for your own objectives. they aren't there to do any of the big killing.

but the vehicles blocking eachother is the real concern, as stormtrooper said. i have played with "too many tanks" in a game and it really hurts to be locked out of good LOS.

As far as maneuvering goes. that is less of a problem for my style. I never go for the enemies home objectives unless they are unguarded. i usually drive my tanks up and line em up on the neutral zone line, and jut start blasing away shoulder to shoulder. the infantry platoons are waitintg in my backfield to kill flank marchers/deep strikers or just people who slipped past the tanks to try for my home objectives. When my tanks start to die, they are all parked on top of objectives, so hopefully they'll cause enough maneuver difficulty for my opponent, but shouldn't for me, i got to the goal early, and I'm just waiting for the game to end usually.

I'm planning on playing a 5000pt per side game on a 6' by 8' table with an additional 2' x 4' extension on both short table edges. So I think I'll try to set up with three Infantry Firebases that house artillery and counter assault elements, along with a few 3-4 tank armored groups that can work together and grab objectives.

What about strategems or whatever they are called? Any suggestions?

If your group allows Flank March without any alterations, your assets will need to deal with that before anything else. You're playing IG, so opponents will be trying to tie you up. While Disruptor Beacon is a more thorough denial tool, I like Ambush because it's still useful in the rare event that your opponent doesn't take Flank March. Your mileage may vary- search the threads for more advice on dealing with Flank March.

Speaking of which, Flank March would be a good idea for your armored groups. Comboed with Carfeul Planning as mentioned above, it's a game winner. It's also pretty well known, and likely to face counters as mentioned above. Plus it's one of the only things that seems cheesy in an Apocalypse setting.

If you're facing multiple opponents who haven't talked much about the battle to each other yet, Jammers is very useful. You do need to be pretty vigilant in making sure they don't communicate _at all_ if you use this. Personally, I think it makes the game less fun. But it is definitely very useful against multiple opponents who haven't had time to discuss strategy much beforehand.

Hold At All Costs would work well with your strategy of using your infantry to hold your own objectives while armored groups grab one or two of the others. Plus, Armored Fist units would suddenly be much more useful. Combined with the leadership boost from one of the Baneblade upgrades, this is even more powerful.

As for the less-desirable stuff:

Supreme Headquarters will make at least one of your objective-holding teams as hard as rocks. However, it's not as powerful overall as Hold At All Costs.

Strategic Redeployment isn't going to be terribly useful with largish armies on a linear table like that. I'd stay away from it.

Minefields look good at first, but static defenses aren't a very good idea in Apocalypse. High-maneuverability enemies will just go around them, or will go elsewhere while their shooters putt at you across the mines. If you see an excellent chokepoint in the terrain where 1 to 4 layers of mines could really ruin the enemy advance, go for it. Otherwise, stay away.

Vital objective could encourage overly defensive play. Maybe in combo with Hold At All Costs it might work well, but I'm skeptical.

Blind Barrage is a BAD idea for IG, obviously.

Anti-plant barrage is great if you're facing JSJ Tau with tons of Kroot, or 'Nids on a wooded table. Otherwise, no dice.

Camouflage just does something you can already do with terrain.

Guard are lots of fun in Apoc. I've got a 25000 point Guard army, and have got a lot of good use out of all of it since Apoc came out. Nothing quite like fielding 3 Armoured Companies, an Arty Company and 6 Super-Heavies at once backed up by 400 Infantry.

However, as things just die in droves in Apoc, you do have to go 'all out' with certain things. Taking the Emperor's Fist Tank Squadron is nice if you're playing, say, 4000 points per side. But if you're nuts like our group is, and are playing 20,000-30,000 points per side (about 10-15,000 points per player), you'll need more than 10 tanks.

I have defence and attack companies for my tanks. My two attack companies consist of a 4 Vanquisher/6 Russ Company, and then a standard company with 9 Russes led by an Executioner (just 'cause I love the model). The defence company is an area denial tool and stops people coming towards me. It has a Russ Annihilator (again, 'cause I love the model), 3 Exterminators and 6 Demolishers. Combine this with 6 Cyclops vehicles and you have a good deterant against assault units.

The Atry Company has so far proven to be the most effective choice. 4 Basilisks, 3 Manticores, a Bombard and 2 Griffons for close-in arty have scored more kills than anything. My Bombard has accounted for more enemy vehicles than my Stormblade or my Baneblades.

The Manticore is also a fantastic unit. Most Apoc games don't get past turn 4, so their limited ammo really isn't a problem. In their IA Apocalypse rules they've been given the 7" blast, meaning that their S9 AP2 can wipe out even more. They're best for hunting big groups of Terminators (which actually exist in Apoc).

Just focus on the biggest guns you can get and take them in excessive numbers. That's the way Guard work in Apoc.

BYE

So we finished the first Apocalypse battle. The report is posted here

http://zombievisions.blogspot.com/

I'm definitely glad of two things. The first is that I managed to get the first turn, even though I lost the choice of side. Secondly, Disruption Beacon really saved my bacon, and even though Ambush never came into play, it made it so that I could focus my fire on the front and not worry so much about him coming up behind me.

The Baneblade is rock hard and can really put the hurt down on Marines, so I'm glad that I got that painted up, but the other thing that really helped me was how the no-man's land corridor stretched right across the most open part of the board. Still, I love it when the Imperial Guard can form a solid firing line and really lay waste to an attacker. It's one of the reasons I love 40k.

I still have yet to finish my apoc list. I backed up for months on building and painting. Cant wait though. HOpe its still popular when I am finished.

There's really no reason for apocalypse to become unpopular unless people dislike team games or large games. Adding the apocalypse "template" to a standard 3 or 4,000 point game is really just a way to make it much faster and furious, with bigger guns and more abilities to make the game go quicker.