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.

Did I not just say that it would be "a horrendous idea fun-wise," i.e. not fun?

I for one interpreted that as horrendously awsome.

I played against orkz tonight and yes they are a great troop choice. I played with my marines of course and did get the win. I think this is due to the fact that I was able to avoid the lootas. Lootas and boyz together in mass are a very mean force. One thing that does hurt the boyz is the size of the unit itself though, if you have speed and mass shots they have a harder time when you flank them.

But back on topic I have lately been leaning more to m a mech list of marines. I guess I just really like the predator and rhino models as well as the mobility it adds. Also the decisions that they force the other player to make, take out the rhinos? Or do I go for the predators? I like that it allows me to react to them for the interesting positions I find myself in.

10 man dev sqaud with four missle launchers and a techmarine will nock daks and other units off the board with ease. Even if you only manage to get three wounds in you will find that lone lascannon that will finish what ever you wounded off. Put them just outside of cover and watch as the gens come running up only to find themselves out of charge range.

Personally I like to run just five men and one upgrade as it builds flavor to the list and allows the chz to vanish per say. Most of the time in the las/plas squads you will find the plas a waste and the xtra guy a waste as well. This is just my 2 cents and most on these board will want to start a flame war over that topic but its just my view ( which is correct! )

Most of the items you talked about are correct but you just need to find your playing style.

Ratbarf: Yup, that's what I thought too.

Tarval: I agree. That's why I like the Blood Angel and Dark Angel Combat Squads rule, because mixing up special weapons and Heavy weapons in a squad tends to waste one, particularly if they're like the Plasmagun and Lascannon.

I'm not sure why a Devastator squad with four Missile Launchers will be useful against things like Carnifexes. They don't have the AP to really hurt them since so many always take the armour save upgrade. Still, they are pretty flexible, and cheaper than Plasma Cannons.

Most of the time you find at least two to three Daks that are just 3plus save. These are the guys you will be working on as the Fexs will be your 2 plus save units of which you AP2 weapons come into play. Techmarine with his two wargear items, auspex, signum work really well in this unit. One you have four small blast followed by a lot of ap5 bolter shoots. If needed four krak work great vs infiltrating Choas SM. Though I have had little to next to no luck with the signum as most tend not to set up that close.

I just picked up my second predator, I figure 2 lascannoned out with maybe a squad of 10 dev with 4 ML will be effective against daks either 2 or 3 save variants. Since I have the 2 predators I will need to field multiple rhinos to have numerous tanks for the other player to deal with.

To stay on topic I would like to hear what some have to say of competitive mech composition.

Woot mech marines! Everyone in rhinos and three preds, three dreads, three squads of landspeeders, mmm yummy.

Not to mention the Master in a Raider.

I'd lose the Dreadnoughts in a mechanized army, like the sort Catbarf suggests, and direct the points to more Land Raider dedicated transports.

Tarval: You could make do with Missile Launchers if you have the points (I do, though for aesthetic reasons), but if you have the extra points the Plasma Cannons would be more flexible and be able to hose all the Tyranids that might show up with 2+ saves, like Zoanthropes and Tyrants. Especially Tyrants with Tyrant Guard.

Ratbarf wrote:Woot mech marines! Everyone in rhinos and three preds, three dreads, three squads of landspeeders, mmm yummy.

I too think 3 predators with 3 squads of speeders (1 apiece ) is great support for marines in rhinos. Maybe a couple of captains with jump packs & twin lighting claws to follow the rhinos. Something different than the regular chaplain&assault squad setup.

The only problem is that they're all vulnerable to S7 weapons, so someone spamming the Plasma would be able to benefit from the flexibility against both vehicles and infantry.

Three Predators in Destructor configuration, two Land Raiders, and a couple of squadrons of Land Speeders would be require a range of weapons to efficiently defeat.

BUt you deep strike the dreads, they are more like sacrificial units. Cause the enemy has to shoot them or he'll have a CC walker in amongst his line with an assault cannon to boot. Make them Ven and it makes it even nastier....

You're gonna need a drop-pod to deep-strike the dread, and that's even more points down the tubes.

Apostolos--

Here is the formula I had a lot of success with running mechanized marines with.

Troops:
2 Tac squads, 10 men in Rhinos
2 Tac squads, 6 men in Lascannon Razorbacks

Heavy:
2 Predators (1 three lascannon, 1 autocannon/las sponsons)
1 Whirlwind

Fast Attack:
1 Bike Squadron (4 bikers, 2 flamethrowers)
1 Attack Bike Squadron (All HB)
1 Landspeeder Typhoon

Salt HQ and Elites to taste.

I used this general outline for years at Dakka in the competitive league before I went to college and had excellent results. The key becomes massing your fires and making sure you have good targeting priorities. The Razorbacks and your Predator Annihiliator become your main AT firepower and the Whirlwind, Typhoon, and Attack Bikes form the core of the anti-troop punch. Your tactical squads and the Predator Destructor can shift fires as needed.

Hope this helps,
Mike K.

Min/Max: Not to mention the fairly random process of Deep Strike. Sacrificial Deep Strike units are usually just that: sacrificial. You need lots of them to insure against them showing up in dribs and drabs, and get cut up piecemeal. Maybe Dreadnoughts in Drop Pods supported by Assault Marines and Drop Pod Tacticals, but that eats too much into the army's Armour.

@PanzerLeader, I like the way disperse the troops and I could see the predators being a great shield for the whirlwind, the only problem I would have with the list(not that it is a problem, good list) is that i would run more LSTs because of the way that they can deal with multiple units, well in this edition just about anything. But like with your bikes the rhinos/(razorbacks maybe) are great walls of protection.

@PanzerLeader, please share some of the ways/tactics you used when running the list.

Apostolos,

The first thing I would do is look at the terrain and the mission. Since most of my units needed to be stationary to get the best effects from their weapons, I'd have to be pretty careful with my deployments in a quadrant based mission to make sure that I could contest at least three quadrants with only one or two turns of movement. Then I would try to figure out, before deploying my first heavy, which side of the board I would attack on if I was my opponent. Once I had that figured out, I'd start deploying to get the bulk of my firepower concentrated on that area, but in positions from which they could cover the rest of the space on the board.

My general strategy was to let my firepower shape the battle for me. I would deploy two mini support by fire positions (SBFs). Each area would include one of the bigger tac squads, one of the smaller tac squads, and one of the predators. The whirlwind would be somewhere back and centered so that it could support each side equally. These two SBFs would each be able to focus all of their firepower into one area but then shift fires out to cover the flanks. The attack bikes and the typhoon would be placed on one of the flanks and use their speed and cover to snipe at enemy infantry formations from a distance and try to remain out of assault range. The bikes and the commander would be placed last, once my opponent has committed the bulk of his forces and I have a good idea about where he plans to make his main assault. Both of them would be deployed behind cover and out of LOS.

For the first two turns, my army remaind mostly stationary. I would use my fires to target my opponents biggest threats. The first turn I tended to shoot at his long range firepower (enemy predators, Leman Russes, Battlewagons, etc) and the second turn I would focus on any PCs that were bringing his assault elements forward. Since every game is different, my targeting priorities were never set in stone. I shot the most immeadiate threat first. The idea was to use my firepower to reduce my enemy's assault elements.

In the third and fourth turn, I'd start moving my assault pieces (Commander, Bikes) to the leading elements of my opponents army. At this point, they would usually be reduced to about 50% or less so that I could use the Bike's flamethrowers and Veteran plus the Commander's powerfist to finish them off. Once the biggest assault threats were gone, I'd start moving my shooting pieces into the attack to seize quadrants or terrain as needed.

Thats a more or less general idea of how I play. Hopefully it helps. Feel free to ask any questions you have.

Take care,
Mike K.

tegeus-Cromis wrote:
Your last sentence ought to be taken out back and shot. It sounds nice, but says nothing meaningful. Good units aren't so good if you use them stupidly? Wow, you don't say.

My point was more that the less useful units can still be useful if you use them correctly. I say this because people generally discount a unit that isn't immediately recognized as amazingly good. Because of this you don't see such units often, which is yet another reason they can be reasonably effective.

Sure, but a less useful unit used correctly will still be less useful than a more useful unit used correctly. Yes? No?

I think it's pretty obvious that when people say something's "useless" or whatever, they're being hyperbolic. Almost nothing is literally useless. What the term usually means is simply that when it comes to certain units, you're always better off taking something else instead. (Chaos Spawn come to mind.)

You do have a point about uncommon units surprising some opponents, but the usefulness of that point is directly proportionate to how clueless you consider your opponents to be.

This puts me to mind of the the evolving "meta" theory. That when certain units are largely played, what used to be rarely seen counter units become more played. That is certain "cheese" one trick ponies will have units that will be best suited against them and they become part of the meta scene.

I do agree that solid point for point units that are played "correctly" are going to appear more so in the meta game and are at the heart of why I started this thread to discuss.

@PanzerLeader, I find you SBF concept to be quite interesting. From the models that I own (have put together) I could run maybe not quite the same list as yours but in principle a similar one. What I am discovering about marine armored units is that the predator is very effective against armor whereas the LST is very effective against massive light infantry. As well that both can be good against everything in between.

As touching on your SBF concept I would run the a predator with a Lazorback and a sqaud of 2 LST sitting behind them to get the jump once the guns were taken out that would be too strong for the LST to fly without concern.

Apostolos,

Definately a viable plan. The important part with mech marines is being patient long enough for your firepower to shape the battle for your assault forces. You simply do not have enough models to fight a sustained assault. Once you commit to close combat, it needs to be over in a turn or two at the most. A predator and two LSTs working in tandem with a squad in support is a good SBF position that can easily support the rest of your army. Try it out and let me know how it works for you. I might have to adjust my list some then.

Take care,
Mike K.

Apostolos:

This puts me to mind of the the evolving "meta" theory. That when certain units are largely played, what used to be rarely seen counter units become more played. That is certain "cheese" one trick ponies will have units that will be best suited against them and they become part of the meta scene.

Two problems with this.

1) The cheesiest units/weapons aren't one-trick ponies, but are instead insanely flexible. See: nidzilla, assault cannons, old Chaos dex DPs.

2) Which seldom-used weapons hard counter anything good? What do Repentia, Assault Termies, Scouts, Chaos Spawn, Ogryn etc. do against the dominant builds? Nothing. To counter top-tier builds, you need top-tier units, not units so crappy no one expects you to field them. A Falcon is not going to crash out of surprise nor a dakkafex keel over in shock.

I wish what you were saying was right--everyone wants a balanced game, and I'm no different--but the facts do not back it up.

I was merely trying to get the point across that say I do create a marines list of assault cannon "spam" as some refer to it, that possibly units that are good at dealing with this mess will start to be played that people weren't playing before. Sort of a rock scissors paper sort of thing, adding to what you were discussing about nothing being "useless". Merely what seems to be "popular" at the time.

I do agree that the game is a hard shot at being balanced, the reason being this not chess we are not all playing the same pieces trying to use strategy alone. This game has flavor. Different flavor for different armies.

I still like the flavor even though it may not be as balanced as chess.

@tegeus-Cromis, it appears you have played this game longer and know more of it than I do, so by no means am I arguing the points you have made, if anything I was agreeing with you. I would much like to hear what you think of PanzerLeader's ideas on the SBF concept.

@PanzerLeader, I would be outnumber. That is definitely something to keep in mind. I guess my strategy for a mech list is to be able to hit hard, move fast and keep the marines alive. It may sound silly but when I play I would much rather lose armor than marines!

Well, it's certainly true that some units that are perhaps less generally useful come into their own due to the dominance of other units. No one would have been all that excited about Lootas in 3rd ed, for instance, but skimmer dominance makes them great.

I don't know if there's much to say about "PanzerLeader's ideas on the SBF concept." It's sound, but it's really just a fancy way of talking about what is already common knowledge, i.e. that you should deploy such that units can always support each other with firepower and reactive fast elements can cover both (bearing in mind where the enemy will probably come from). If thinking about it in the terms he uses helps you, then great.

Tegeus--Its not just fancy, its doctrinally correct. I kinda do this stuff for a living. I also believe in assigning each unit a specific task and purpose to help develop my overall scheme. Its something that all decent wargamers probably develop at an intuitive level but I would say it goes a long way from common knowledge since some of the most common mistakes in beginners and even some more experienced players is to take a powerful unit and try to make it stand alone.

Apostolos--Yeah, thats a good way to some it up. Like I said, let me know how it works out for you.

Take care,
Mike K.

"Doctrinally correct" is just a fancy way fo saying "it works," and I never disputed that.

Can't say I've ever seen an experienced player (at least, an experienced good player--there are terrible players who've played since RT) throw powerful units out alone unless it can't be helped.

hate to tn, but this IS the right place for it so, here goes.
I run a custom chapter off that chart in the Marine dex. I have trust your battle brothers (gives all units in squad counter attack and true grit at 3pts a model) and cleanse and purify for divergences, Have pride in your colours and eye to eye as drawbacks. after playing a game and having my 10 man purgation squad kill a hell of a lot of orks in cc after just 2 shots from their flamers, i figured that the idea had payed off. Reading through 5th ed, I noticed that jump infantry get RElentless now, letting them shoot rapid fire weps and still assault... so I did my math, and figure... 2 shots per bolter, rapid fire before assault (16 shots) plus flamer (1 to 5 enemies, depends on placement) and whatever I give sarge, then I assault, still getting 3 attacks on the assault and 2 every turn until one side is the winner of the combat = I win. Am i right? is this a good idea? Should I do this in my next assault squad?

As an asside, does counter-attack still let you use Furious Charge, cuz the rules are ambiguous about that, if so, I could give my non power wep. Elites regular bolters as well...


Once again, sorry about the thread necromancy

It's "JETpacks" that get relentless, not "JUMPpacks". JETpacks are what Tau crisis suits have.

Also, say goodbye to your cleanse and purify in the new codex.