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.

Ok will do I'll have to read all of these post a few more times and hope that some of it sinks in before I go by the shop again.

Thanks all

It might be something to find a table, pull out your army and a measuring tape, and push plastic while reading these posts. It should help you connect what you read to the stuff that happens on the table. It's always good to be able to eyeball distances when developing strategics and tactics for a game that doesn't allow premeasuring!

I think a major key to getting good at 40K is knowing what things ACTUALLY do, rather than what they're reputed to do in fluff or in the imagination of the players.

For example, when one pictures a winged close combat Hive Tyrant, one pictures it hacking through Orks in droves, winning the day, and crushing all in its path. In reality, attacking a mob of Boyz and Klaw Nob with a Tyrant is a recipe for instant fail.

That's not just a fluff mistake. I've played numerous people who I could tell were trying to escape my Hive Tyrant with units that should have been more than glad ot be in CC with it.

"Ooooh, you kill 10 Orks, then I kill your Tyrant. 60 points of boys for a 166 point Tyrant."

Don't just think "this is a CC unit, I just have to get it into CC and I'm doing good." Know what you're engaging, and be aware of places where things will go against you.

This is where Mathammer comes in.

It's not going to tell you everything, all the time, but it will give you the basics. "Ok, if I assault with my Flyrant, I get 4 hits, 4 dead Orks. He'll have 14 left, that's 42 attacks, 21 hits, maybe 4 wounds, I'll probably take a wound, then the Klaw will do another 1 or 2 wounds... Yeah, I don't want to do that."

Make sure you're doing things that work for you, as opposed to seem like they should work for you.

Tyrant against Boyz with Klaw? Terrible.

Tyrant against Crisis Suits? Great. Tyrant against Dreadnought? Awesome. Tyrant against most Independant Characters? Wonderful.

Oh, and always win combats on his turn.

Speaking of Math-hammer, I'd suggest it might be more useful to draw up some charts using Excel or some other spreadsheet showing the likelihood of each possible result, rather than supposing that you'll kill some certain fraction of a model 9/10. Sometimes it's worth taking a risk when the pay-off is big enough, if just for the meta-game effect of making a unit seem better than it is, and throwing your opponent a loop by appearing to act irrationally. Kind of like a Poker game.

Kind of like when I had a Scout Squad tie up a Deamon Prince for 4 turns it may not always happen but when you find you can't deal with something its best to slow it down... or did I miss the point

One more thing that is note worthy, if you are trying to become a better player you will need to understand that if you are going to build a list that will WAAC (win at all costs) you will definitely lose the respect of other players.

If you build a solid, balanced list ( not a one trick pony ) and pull off clever tactics for the win, you gain the respect of other players.

All games (not just 40k) involve 5, or sometimes 6 elements.

1. Players
2. Objectives
3. Assets
4. Environment
5. Mechanics
6. (not always employed) Referee

40k is not a refereed game (that's not to say you won't have them at tournaments, etc, but its not like football where referees are essential to make rules calls or an RPG where you need a referee in order to play at all) so that's one thing we can ignore.

For the rest:

1. Players - 40k is generally a 2-player game which simplifies the tactical consideration to 'your effect on the game' and 'their effect on the game'.
This may sound obvious, but what it means is that to help you win you need to look at the way you and your opponent play.
Is your opponent naturally cautious, preferring to advance steadily through cover and only committing to an engagement when they have overwhelming force? Or are they more gung-ho, sending leading elements in fast and hard and hoping they don't get isolated?
Do they prefer to outshoot you, outfight you or outmanoeuvre you?

Always play to make it hard for your opponent. If they are cautious, play quickly and aggressively. Get units in close and force the pace. If he is aggressive, back off and deny them targets, frustrate them into making a mistake that will leave their forward units easy pickings cut off from support.


2. Objectives - Its been said before, but keep your eyes on the prize. 40k has objectives, make sure you can achieve them, or failing that deny them to your opponent.
In a KP mission, take every opportunity to deny your opponents KP's. Some of this can be done in list selection, but it can influence your in-game tactics too. If a unit is close to being destroyed, look to withdraw it out of sight, forcing your opponent to either ignore it (KP saved) or pursue it. If they pursue, they have a unit that has broken formation. Have a reserve unit that can bring down such pursuers. Use your retreating weaker units to draw your opponent into a trap.
On the offensive, pick your targets carefully - especially in turns 4 and 5. Remember the game can end at any time and you need to rack up points. Look at easy to kill units or finishing off weakened units. Only when faced with a serious threat should you ignore easy KP's and if you do - make sure you kill the threatening unit! If you don't you've not got any score at all.

In objective missions, keep in mind which your scoring units are. Its impossible to win without at least one still alive and on an objective (although you can still get a draw). Protect your scoring units and target your opponents. If the objectives are well dug in, get scoring units in there early with good support and force your opponent to take you on. If the objectives are exposed time your run. Too early and you'll lose the unit to enemy action, too late and you may not get there in time. Be aware of the distances involved.


3. Assets - Your assets in a game of 40k are, of course, your armies. Unlike a game of chess or an historical recreation where the forces are pre-selected, we have an astonishing range of options to choose from. So much has been said about list building I'll skip over it except for the following points:

Have a plan FIRST! The 'classic' power-gaming approach to army list selection is to find the best unit you can and spam the hell out it (eg the Kantor/Sternguard army).
The problem with this approach is that you end up with any army that may or may not suit you. Instead, decide how you want to approach the game, then find the best units to do the job and spam them!

Second is to have the courage of your convictions. You need (particularly for a tournament) to have elements of your army that can threaten light infantry hordes, elite heavy infantry, transports/light vehicles and main battle tanks. What you can do is restrict your opponents ability to do damage by focussing on one or two of these types of unit to build your own army.
If you do this (and I'd advise it) stick to it. If you want to go all infantry so as to waste your opponents anti-armour, don't be tempted to chuck a couple of vehicles in there for the hell of it. They'll die quickly and you'll be at a disadvantage.

Only include units that have a purpose, that fir your plan - and that don't give your opponent an easy time.


4. Environment - Its tempting to think of the board as your environment in 40k, but don't be fooled! Both ON and OFF the board become part of the environment thanks to reserve units (especially ones which can deep strike or outflank).
Take a moment before every game to study the board. Look at which terrain elements will block LOS, which have objectives (if applicable), where are the obvious firelanes? Some parts of the board should present themselves as obvious no-go areas because they are on obvious enemy firelanes. When you deploy you can create your own such areas for your opponent, but be clear of your purpose.
If you put 3 devastator squads in buildings overlooking an open plain, don't think your opponent will deploy or move within it - you can't rely on them being stupid and handing you victory. Deploy like this so as to force your opponent to deploy and move elsewhere on the board - in terrain that suits you.
Remember also that your own movement can create zones of threat (especially when moving tanks or assault troops). If your opponent enters these areas, punish them, but rely rather that they will skirt them to try and preserve their own force. In effect, use your movement to shepherd you enemy to where you want, setting them up for a later attack.

You can combine these ideas with reserve units, so be aware of where they will arrive. Units which come on as normal reserves are reliable. You can pick any point on your board edge and they don't scatter - the only downside is not knowing when they'll turn up. Doubling up on such units is a good idea, because you can increase your chances of the reserve ding what you need it to do (for example, a Tau player could keep two Railheads off the board when facing SM LR's. When they become available, put them on where they can get a clear first shot, preferably out of range of return fire).
Once again, know your reserves and have a plan for them.


5. Mechanics - these are the rules of the game. Know them and use them.
As a simple example, SM assault troops move 12" and assault 6". If you can remain over 18" away from them at all times, then the points your opponent spent to get them are a waste. Throw Shrike into the mix and they can fleet, giving them an extra d6" movement. Its much harder to keep your distance, so they move up the priority list for shooting.
'Mathhammer' things. Not obsessively, but give your self an idea of how things work. Eldar Starcannons and Scatter Lasers have the same range and strength but different AP's and ROF's. Against basic marines, a starcannon will kill 0.833, a scatter laser will kill 0.556. Against tau both will kill 0.833 firewarriors with a single burst. Against orks the starcannon still kills 0.833 but the scatter laser has gone up to 1.667.
You can use this to give yourself an idea of which attacks have a better mathematical chance of succeeding. Of course luck and dice play a part but such things average out over time. Good target selection will increase your success in the long run.

You don't need to be a picky 'rules-lawyer', but knowing the rules will let you better assess situations. Use this knowledge to determine which enemy units pose a higher threat and destroy them first unless you have a good (objective-driven) reason to go for something different.

I definantly want to win with respect and tactics not cheese which annoys me to no end and hopefully my list indicates that though admitally Marines don't really have a major "cheese" factor IMO, so I do hope this thread will guide me along the way to my given objective of play style.

Thanks again to everyone who has posted all this great info the more info the better and it just keeps getting better and better. keep it going

Apostolos wrote:One more thing that is note worthy, if you are trying to become a better player you will need to understand that if you are going to build a list that will WAAC (win at all costs) you will definitely lose the respect of other players.

This depends entirely on your play environment. Here in Austin 'Ard Boyz lists are quite common and a player that puts together a "WAAC" list gains the respect of his peers. Many players like to bring their "A Game" even to casual play and expect no less from their opponent.

All this doesn't stop us from having the best fluff/campaign gaming enviornment in the country as well - as fans of BoLS can attest.

Be careful not to mistake your personal beef with certain aspects of the game with a community-wide attitude.

Ok, here are another couple of concepts.

These are the basis of a book called 'Strategy' by Sir Basil Liddell Hart, probably the best book on military (and general) strategy that I've read.

He says that there are two overriding rules to follow in strategic planning.

First, is that you should strive to take an indirect approach that offers you the possibility of multiple objectives. The main reason for this is to keep your options open, and to keep your opponent off-balance.

Note, these aren't "objectives" in the sense that you need to troops to capture them, but in the more general sense.

This can apply to 40k in a number of ways. In missions where you have to take game objectives, positioning a unit between two objectives means that your opponent has to be ready to contest both of them. That's the simplest explaination, but the concept can be applied to other things. A unit that can shoot down two firelanes has more options than one that tries to contest one.

The opposite to taking this indirect approach is, naturally, to take a straightforward approach that has one obvious objective. And, throughout history, this approach has either failed, or has cost far more than the gains have been worth. Only with extremely decisive force (which you don't get in a game with balanced points) can you afford to engage your opponent head-on, where they expect to be engaged, and expect to win decisively.


His second point, and perhaps the more easily applied to 40k is the importance of setting your objectives within your means. "Adjust your ends to your means."

This is something that you should do every turn. Before a game even begins, you need to honestly assess your chances of:
a) winning by tabling your opponent
b) winning by achieving the game objectives
c) getting a draw by denying the game objectives to your opponent

Often enough, you won't have the perfect tools to deal with the army you're playing against. This is especially true when a balanced army comes up against an army that is overly heavy in one aspect. (If my balanced army plays a tank company, I might not have enough anti-tank to handle them all. If my balanced army plays a horde I might not have enough anti-horde to kill them all, etc).

Right from the beginning of the game, you need to set your expected win condition, and make your plans (and therefore deployment and early moves) with this win condition in mind. And, your win condition doesn't have to be win the game, it can be simply to prevent your opponent from winning. (This is often the best approach to take if you feel that your force doesn't match up well with your opponent's, as outright winning may be out of your means).

Each turn, you need to take stock of what has happened to your army, and re-evaluate what your achievable ends are. If your scoring units are either killed, or pulled out of position early, claiming objectives goes out the window as an achievable objective. Rather than continue with a plan that is bound to fail, you need to adjust your goal to this new reality. Maybe you cannot win, but you can prevent your opponent from winning, thereby scoring a draw.

This basic principle can be applied on a smaller scale as well. If you have a unit with a lascannon, and an opponent has a land raider and a razorback, even though the land raider is the bigger threat, it's an unrealistic expectation to think that the lascannon will stop the landraider, whereas, it has a significantly better chance of harming or killing the razorback. If you adjust your goal to the realistic capabilities of your tool, your overall position is improved, whereas watching lascannons bounce off the landraider does nothing for you.

If a couple of those vets that take over your game are your friends play a game against one of them, while the other watches you. Ask them to play a non-scoring game.. i.e. where the point isn't the final win/loss outcome, but a teaching game.

When your opponent does anything, have him teach you why. Ask him why he did X, what options Y and Z and beyond might have been, and why he decided X was better.

Have the second Vet do the same thing to you, probably providing Y, Z and beyond and asking you if you'd thought of them, and why you ruled them out.

Democratus wrote:

Apostolos wrote:One more thing that is note worthy, if you are trying to become a better player you will need to understand that if you are going to build a list that will WAAC (win at all costs) you will definitely lose the respect of other players.

This depends entirely on your play environment. Here in Austin 'Ard Boyz lists are quite common and a player that puts together a "WAAC" list gains the respect of his peers. Many players like to bring their "A Game" even to casual play and expect no less from their opponent.

All this doesn't stop us from having the best fluff/campaign gaming enviornment in the country as well - as fans of BoLS can attest.

Be careful not to mistake your personal beef with certain aspects of the game with a community-wide attitude.

I suppose I did open myself up for this, so let me start by explaining to Ferik if he hasn't came across this yet, that in this game there exists two camps. Think of them as the two extremes like left and right wing. On the hand you have people who play to win, they take a codex and/or all the codexs read and study them to know each and every unit in the game and find the units that are the best in the game and build lists that can win. Is this wrong? NO! There is nothing wrong with trying to win.

On the other hand some people look at this as cheese, or an exercise that takes the fun out of playing. I've seen a guy blow up over this and cuss a guy out because his list was very powerful.

Me personally I can see both sides of the debate as should everyone ( in my opinion ). A few things that might help would be when you play go into the with the understanding of what type of game you are playing, competitive or for fun.

I don't like the idea of someone telling I can't play a unit in my codex because it is just too good, but at the same time I am not a fan of some one asking for a friendly game after seeing my grey knights and bringing the tournment winning list without letting me know what I am facing.

Understand that this game is going to take 2-4 hours to play and if someone is just getting stomped the whole time, they aren't have fun. I have played and lose a lot of games (grey knights ) but I have learned a great deal the hard way and this is how you will learn, by losing and making mistakes, but if you are facing a list where you have very little chance of victory it doesn't matter what you do, you will still lose.

@ Democratus - I actually like to watch tournament lists face each other but there just needs to be an understanding that yes, it's "A Game" time. I just want Ferik to understand the difference between winning with smart play and winning with a tournament list. I have no beef with a person who understands how to make a powerful tournament worthy list, that would be silly. I will say that I am more impressed with a person who can beat that list with a "lesser" one with smart play

@ Ferik - As someone pointed out eariler, have fun! If you like competition and so does the rest of your gaming group then you better bring a strong list and learn how to use it! Don't kid yourself and weenie down the list because you don't want to be called a cheezer, because no one else will.

If you just like some models better and want to play them the best you can and learn to use them effectively because that is what makes the game fun, dont' listen to people when they tell you, "your gonna lose" or "that unit sucks".

This topic is one that I have run into time and time again in 40k. I think it can be avoided if people would just be upfront as to what their playstyle is. My advise is never think that one style is better than the other, just play and let people know what your style is.

I hope that this thread doesn't take turn in the wrong direction. But I do feel that if the subject is addressed early on, it can be a factor that doesn't pose a problem later.

"The bottom line" - I believe that if you beat someone because you are a good player they will be LESS mad than if you beat them with a strong list

Phryxis wrote:I think a major key to getting good at 40K is knowing what things ACTUALLY do, rather than what they're reputed to do in fluff or in the imagination of the players.

... Know what you're engaging, and be aware of places where things will go against you.

So true, I was playing chaos vs tyranids, my enemy had a winged tyrant deep striking into battle, he failed on a mishap and I was allowed to place it wherever. I thought to myself, "shooting this thing would be awesome." Unfortunately, most of my units were already in CC, so I placed the tyrant near a squad of 5 terminators. Really close. My enemy and his ally started laughing, thinking that I was going to be wiped out in CC. It didn't happen, they had forgotten that assaulting from deep strike, doesn't work. Next turn, I shot him with my terms, assaulted and killed it right out.

I would suggest that you keep some mental notes (or even physical ones) during your games. After the game, review what happened, and what you could have done differently to produce a better outcome.

Also, work to limit your opponent's options and increase yours. Think of it being something like chess. If you walk one pawn across the board at a time, you're going to keep losing pawns and not have done much else. If you move a bunch across the board, along with some other pieces, losing one piece won't cripple you as badly. And, if you can set it up so that your opponent can only drop one piece, but you have three in position to deliver checkmate - you're going to win. I think a lot of newer gamers rely on doing X (whatever that is - shooting the other guy off the board, getting an assault unit across the board, whatever) for the win. And X doesn't work, so they lose. They have no other plan.

The opposite to taking this indirect approach is, naturally, to take a straightforward approach that has one obvious objective.

What's interesting aboot this point, is that while it's generally a decent idea in game, it's less so in listbuilding. For the most part specialization in your units is a good decision. You don't want to spend points on a Power Fist in your Devastator squad, for example. If the unit is for shooting, pay only for what they need to shoot. Even more specifically, don't put two H Bolters and 2 Lascannons in the same Dev squad (Combat Squads aside). Not only should a squad be specialized at shooting, it should be specialized at shooting the big stuff or the small stuff.

Redbeard makes a lot of other good points, but what really stands oot is that you need to be thinking of what the objectives are, and how you're going to win. Don't just be haphazardly killing off his models, and trying to keep yours alive. Know which of his models matter to the objective, and which of yours don't.

Fire Warriors may not seem like much of a threat, but if they're the only models he has that can control objectives, they're a priority.

Conversely, your squad of Terminators might be very expensive, and the core of your list, but if they can't hold an objective, you can afford to take risks with them, and can even throw them away late in the game if they're not near any objectives.

Anecdote: The other day, I played a guy with my Tyranids. He had a pretty rough day with the dice and mission choice. Despite all that, when we rolled to see if there would be a 6th turn, we were in a draw. There was a sixth turn and I tabled him, having lost maybe 175 points of my 1750 point list. As bad as his luck was, and as lopsided as the kill count was, he was keeping himself in the game, and ultimately had a 1 in 3 chance to pull a draw on the roll for 6th turn.

Conversely, I once lost a tournament game in which my Blood Angels rampaged over the other guy's Ultramarines, killed probably 1250 of his 1750, and lost 500 themselves. But all his surviving units were on objectives, and he pulled a win. I didn't even notice until the last turn that I was losing the whole time.

I shot him with my terms, assaulted and killed it right out.

Even if the big bug seems to do well, never forget the cost. For example, I managed to run my Hive Tyrant into a squad of Chaos Terminators. He ripped them up pretty good, before the ones with Fists managed to finish him off. Ultimately he probably killed 3-4. And guess what? At 30 points each, that's still less than the 166 the Tyrant cost. To make matters worse, that was a KP mission, and while he got the KP for my Tyrant, one lone Terminator went off and hid behind cover for the rest of the game, and I never got that KP. So, basically, I gave up my Hive Tyrant for nothing.

So, again, always know what you're playing for. In a KP mission, you're not playing to "kill some of his Terminators" you're playing to kill all of them, or not to even bother.

I would suggest that you keep some mental notes (or even physical ones) during your games.

This is a fantastic, if somewhat impractical idea.

One thing I think would be a major a benefit is to take some notes on decisions that pained you at the time, and their ootcome. "Charged 6x Terminator (2x PFist) with Tyrant. Expect to wipe the unit." Play it oot. "Tyrant died, one PFist lived." Later you can even run the numbers with Mathhammer and see if you were right in your expected result or not.

What's maybe a bit more practical, is to take a digital photo of the table after each player turn, or better yet, after each player phase. It might not have all the details you need, but if you look at the shots soon after the game, you'll probably be able to recall what happene with each phase. You can even post battle reports, which can be fun.

Another tip: Get together with a friend, some terrain and some models. Take turn setting stuff up, and then guessing ranges. Measure the range while your friend is looking away, then have him guess. In charge range? Within 12? Within 18? Etc. etc. This is a hugely critical skill, especially in 5th.

Take the Dakkafex. With an 18" range, these guys can really kill, but you have to get close. If you elect to try to shoot, you can't run, and vice versa. So, if you measure range, and it's 19", you could have run, gotten to a little better position, and then shot next turn. By measuring and coming up short, not only do you lose that move, but the other guy now knows exactly where you are, and he may opt to move back 6" to save himself, etc. etc.

I have no real problem with the "cheese" list it is just frustrating for me at the moment when there is nothing my particular list can do to compeate with said list, so I am trying to better myself in the way of tactics which is the way I would preferred to play is all, so i ment no offense

Ferik, play the said list again, AFTER the game is over write down a play by play of what happened. Also make sure you write down exactly what his list was. I say do this after the game is over because if you are doing during the game that could be a distraction to the other player.

Once you have it all written down post a link in this thread of a battle report. As you wait for people to post feedback on what tactics or strategies you could have used, go back and reread some of the advice in this thread and see if you followed it during the game.

guh! not looking forward to doing that but I can see were that would deffinantly help to see were I am going wrong I might get a tape recorder to do so during my next game which will hopefully be today.

40k is a skirmish based games, and so is similar to modern combat and some modern combat tactics can be used/ adapted to play the game.
The US military teaches that there are three basic elements to staying alive on a battlefield (note that they didn't say winning): SHOOT, MOVE, and COMMUNICATE.
I’ll start with Communication, as this is the most abstract one in 40K. You, as the “general”, will rarely have another player on your side. (Although, on a personal note, I think “doubles” is an extremely fun way to play 40k!) The way in which we move and control the models directly means that there is “perfect” communication between squad mates, squads, and all the way up the chain of command. The game play effectively eliminates the chain of command, because you, the player, are the soldier with the gun, the sergeant, the tank, and the commander. Plus, with a birds-eye view of the battlefield, you know everything that is going on. The “communication” aspect of 40k is more like army list construction and deployment. In this respect, you are coordinating your forces, deciding (before the engagement) what equipment and troops to allocate to the mission, just as a real commander would do. Then coordination of where to position your forces on the battlefield; utilizing terrain to your advantage, as well as (if possible) knowledge of the enemies’ troop positions.
Movement. Many other posters above me have talked about the importance of movement, and they are entirely correct. There are only four (or five, depending) different ways to move on the battlefield. Hold Position; this is what you might want to do if your unit was surrounded, needs to fire heavy weapons, or remain in control of an objective. Advance towards the enemy; if your unit is best at close combat (this is to be avoided in modern combat btw), or you need to capture an objective. Laterally (right or left of the enemy) if you need to avoid enemy assaults or fire, or adjust your fire position.
Withdraw (they don’t call it retreat anymore, it’s bad for moral!) when you’re faced with overwhelming force, sometimes to withdraw is the best option. This doesn’t have to be a bad thing, you can draw the enemy in with a weaker unit like bait, and then assault/crossfire the enemy, spring your trap! The key is What to move, Where to move it, and When is the right time. Remember; Any action now is better than the right action too late!
Shoot something! Shooting in 40k now uses true line of sight, so lets hope that you either deployed somewhere with good lanes of fire of moved into a good position. Identify targets of A: priority, and then B: opportunity. This means that you need to know what you want to shoot at before you shoot at it (duh!) ex; your tactical squad of 10 marines has 8 bolters, I melta gun, and one missile launcher. The missile launcher can only kill about 1 thing a turn, but it’s handy, it will really kill it! One the other hand, those 8 bolters can deliver up to 16 kills a turn, but only against lighter infantry. Your targets of priority should be light infantry; you will kill a lot of them at every turn. If some tank should roll up on a flank or from behind, that’s the target of opportunity. This means each of your units should know what their priority target should be when you deploy them, not on turn 3. Do what it is that you do best, leave everything else to the rest!
When you combine all three of these basic elements, then you have tactics. Now let’s talk about tactics specific to 40k. 5th edition puts more focus on basic troops, as they are the only scoring units. With two out of three missions based upon having scoring units controlling objectives, troops should be your focus too (deployment and movement)! You should be taking enough troops in your army to control the majority of objectives. You need to have enough so that even if your opponent eliminates one or two squads, you can still win the game (army selection). Your main targets of priority should be your enemies’ troops. If you focused all your firepower on eliminating all of your opponent’s troops, you will deny him the means to a win, making a draw the best he can hope for. Your targets of opportunity are enemy units that pose the greatest risk to your troops (shooting).
In summation, tactics is a plan for winning: Pick the right units to control objectives and take out the opponent. Deploy your forces according to the mission objectives, utilizing terrain. Stay focused on completing your mission and deny your opponent the means to complete theirs.
Oh, wait, the purpose of 40k is to have fun!

Again thanks for all the great info.
I was now wondering if someone can give me a summery of the various tactics used in 40K, as well as how to set them up and exicute them, so I can try them out and find out what suits my play style.

Thanks

Anouther question has come to mind on this topic.

What is considered the best overall stratagy and or tactic to use in
a game though admitably this depends on a players style I would still
like to get some opinions on this.

Any takers?

Ok I'll bite. The best overall strategy is simple: listen to the vets, learn from your mistakes, and have fun. If you have fun then it increases the chances of the other player having fun which means you will get more games which to become a great player you will need to play as many games as possible. If you are not having fun playing this game I bet you won't play it anymore. So having fun is very important, again to both you AND the other player.

This thread is full of the various tactics so just take the time to reread it, it's not too long. That's why I'm not writing you up a summary.

Target priority and "thou shalt remember the mission objective and keep it holy" are two big things that will help you out.

I have played 40k for years and knowing what stuff does can help out a whole lot.

What I want to know is what some of the vet players do when their opponent sets something crazy down on the table...especially when it comes to armor like 3 monoliths or 3 land raiders? Do you focus on the said units, ignore them, or a mixture of the two? Also with units like seer council and nob bikers do you make them a priority or ignore them and focus on other items?

Just curious...playing nids against heavy armor is touch when they don't get close and seer councils (eldar in general) is the one army I always seem to do bad against no matter what army I am using.

Drummerboy wrote:I have played 40k for years and knowing what stuff does can help out a whole lot.

What I want to know is what some of the vet players do when their opponent sets something crazy down on the table...especially when it comes to armor like 3 monoliths or 3 land raiders? Do you focus on the said units, ignore them, or a mixture of the two? Also with units like seer council and nob bikers do you make them a priority or ignore them and focus on other items?

Just curious...playing nids against heavy armor is touch when they don't get close and seer councils (eldar in general) is the one army I always seem to do bad against no matter what army I am using.

I don't know too much about the game so I have no suitable answer for it but I do feel this is a valid point that should be addressed in this thread especially by those with the know how.
Any takers?

Apostolos wrote:This thread is full of the various tactics so just take the time to reread it, it's not too long. That's why I'm not writing you up a summary.

Yep being doing that and actually printing off copies so I can read and re-read at home and hopefully it will all sink in... eventually

I agree almost entirely with Democratus in his various posts. The tactical depth of 40k is roughly equivalent to a game of tag on the playground.

Flanking, an actual tactic that always has and always will be used, is only applicable to the few realistic-ish vehicles in 40k that have weaker side than front armor. To illustrate this in 40k, you can put a target squad in an L-shaped ambush (see FM 7-85 Chapter 6 for details), totally encircle them, or any other situation where the target unit would be screwed hardcore, but mechanically, it will be exactly the same as if the target unit was being fired upon from the front. Thus, use of tactics to gain a supposed tactical advantage results in no mechanical effect.

Warhammer Fantasy takes flanking into account with various mechanics; moral penelties to the target unit, decreased attacks, and the like. Thus, someone who actually uses tactics to gain a supposed tactical advantage is rewarded with a mechanical effect, as it should be.

I could keep on a'rantin', but I have to write a paper, so I'll leave you guys with a pair of remarks.

-Democratus is right. (Me)
-No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. (von Moltke the Elder)

Democratus wrote:List building is the dominant factor in 40K. The game simply doesn't have enough tactical depth to offer much else once the dice start rolling.

Get a good list and then play the way your list demands.

That's a simplistic point of view.

Let me give a counter-example: Suppose you have a drop pod army and face an Ork horde in a battle say with quarters. How to deploy the pods? I'd use to limit the movement of the Orks by providing a wall of pods so that the Orks have either to destroy them (not too easy with AV 12) or to get around them. Both options give you time to redeploy and react.

Start simple:


HOW AM I GOING TO WIN?

-Look at your units aND make a mental plan of who will capture objectives, who will shred the enemys units, who will dominate firelanes.


HOW AM I GOING TO NOT LOSE?

-Look again. Which units will contest enemy objectives, which will be speedbump for that awesome enemy unit and who will counterattack it, who can be decoys and distract the enemy units.

All is done while making the armylist and again when you see the enemy army.

Start simple.

Hope it helps.