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.

In 4th, it was well known that you took even numbers because of the way scoring worked. What about fifth? Since every last troop member is scoring, it seems any number of models works now. However, that only works if the unit is fearless. Here is out of fantasy's playbook:

US 5 is the magic number for table corners, removing ranks, and getting rear and flank bonus. So at least 5 models. For units not immune to panic or are especially weak to panic, the magic number is divisible by 4 plus 1. So 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, and 25. Why? Because if you have 8 models, losing 2 is a panic test. If you have 9 models, losing 2 is NOT a panic test. The only exception comes to units with rank bonus, where 10 guys and 9 are vastly different. This was even more pronounced when rank bonuses were from 4 across.

While US 5 doesn't matter in 40k, and panic tests are ignored if you're fearless, if you're playing tau, or eldar, or some other army that could potentially panic and ruin your day, there is no reason NOT to do divisible by 4 + 1. What do you get with 10 models that's different than 9? However, there's a huge difference between 8 and 9. It's different for marines and regular chaos marines because they get extra bonuses when they hit 10 models, and the cult marines are fearless.

I'm certain I'm missing something in my mathemagics, I mean mathematics, but I sure didn't miscast.

Divisible by 4 +1 is a great way to min/max in 5th.

I am just going the route of max squad size. This way you have fewer KP's and your squads are the most resilient that they can be. I am working on armybuilding in 5th with this axiom "If the unit is useful enough to take, I will take the most models that I can in the unit." It seems to wrork for me.

I agree, 10 marines (especially with the custom chapter traits i took) are infinitley better than 9 (i did the dice math before and after losses in an assault, it saddened me how many attacks the loss of two regular marines with bolters cost)

also, units need to be at half strength to score, so more is better, it alows you to take you "toys" out of the proverbial box and play with them, you dant have to start running from fights with your troops just because 1 or 2 guys died from some lame-arse target of opportunity put shots from a heavy squad, I mean, the difference between "this squad can lose 2 guys and still score" and "this squad can lose 5 guys and still score" is pretty freakin big, even moreso with larger horde squads, as they take heavier losses.

Units do not need to be at half strength to score. You only need 1 model. This is only really useful for a select number of units. Stormtroopers, dire avengers, fire warriors, that kind of thing. Like I said, marine and chaos marines either get special benefits when they hit 10 models or are fearless.

I think the squad size magic numbers are pretty much decided in 40k by getting the highest ratio of heavy weapons in squads.

I disagree, heavy weapons are still important, but in 5th ed squad survivability is more important.

Number of troops and volume of fire are the 2 most important things about troops in 5th from what I can tell. Since you have to kill every last scoring model to prevent coring the more models the better. Because of the prevalence of cover the larger the volume of fire the unit can dish out the more failed saves you can expect and the larger the chances you will nail a special weapon or sarge due to the new wounding rules.

The decision has become a lot more list dependant.

As has been said (and fom the sound of it especially when new SM Codex comes oot), some squads will be no brainers for 10 men. Free heavy weapons for 10 man squads is the rumor.

For something like Necrons, where you just want as many Troop choices as you can get, with as few Warriors as you can manager, min sized seems more obvious.

For Orks (maybe Gaunts too), it's not necessary to max the squads, but it is necessary to keep them big. You want as many Troops choices as you can get, but not at the expense of falling below 10 models. A midsize squad is probably what you want, probly 20 for Orks, and only going full size if you've got 4+ Troops choices in.

An interesting question is Devestator squads. Used to be that it was 2 models per heavy weapon, and I think that's probably still a good bet. It's not just aboot max HWs per min points, there comes a point at which you want to get some wounds around those HWs too.

8 for a Dev/havok squad is still right. I have never understood why someone would take a dev squad and put less than 4 HW's in it in the first place. Seeing a dev squad with 3 HW's set up accross from me has always been a good tell that my opponent is not a toprank player. Since the dev squad will probably not be used to contest an objectives, 4 extra wounds and proper initial setup will be enough to keep the squad alive.

Well, in 4th ed, a dev sqaud with few heavy weapons and a vet w/ powerfist could be a gambit in those missions where you could 'push back' the other player's deployment. Because I had to deploy a heavy support choice first, but I didn't want to over-expose a valuable asset, taking a cheap (no-heavy weapon) dev squad cost no more points than a tac squad, and gave me the opportunity to drop it early, forcing you to deploy further back in your quarter, compacting your deployment.

That's not going to happen in 5th, so I agree, there's probably not a good reason to take a dev squad unless you're using all their guns. But there was a reason before.

---

Orks are dependent on 10s, at least in their boyz squads, in order to get their heavy weapons. But, for grots, 29 beats 30, because the 30th grot costs you one more slaver, who is expensive. It's so unit-specific now, I don't think there is a generic rule that applies.

Devs in 5... I see 10 man squads with mixed heavies being possible due to combat squading. Break them down into two different HWx2 squad with three bolters for ablative wounds

I don't think there is going to be one magic number. The amount of guys you want in the squad is going to be dictated by both what the squad is and what you want the squad to do. Objective holding troop units should be on the large side, but not so large that they can't fit in transports. Back field long range units should be on the small side so long as they can pack in heavy weapons. Assault units should be 8+ guys.

Here's a related question: Now that we know that Crimson Fists will (er, can but most likely will) have scoring Sternguard squads, what numbers would function best for them? If one were definitely taking them, and using them for anti-troop function with their special ammo etc., how many would be optimal for both scoring and damage output/points balance?

To keep this question basic, let's forget both: A- the possibility of combi-weapons for anti-vehicle function, and; B- The possibility that they might not be worth the points at all.

Your opinions appreciated (as I consider going Imperial).

Seeing a dev squad with 3 HW's set up accross from me has always been a good tell that my opponent is not a toprank player.

It's not as bad as all that, is it? 6 models with 3 HWs is still the same density of weapons per points, and sometimes you just don't have room in the list for the extra models.