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.

Even if the IG are at max coherency, the second BT is going to get at least one model reacting in to him, it is mathematically impossible for it not to, given a 6" reaction move and 2" coherency on the charging unit. This means at the very least, if the guard player actually has room for max-consolidation units (very often not the case) 3 BT models will be attacking. If the guard player is not at max coherency, and you are assaulting perpendicular to the line of the guardsmen (as in the diagram, then the third model is going to get engaged as well.

Mathematically the third model in the chain is safe from base-to-base if your models are at max coherency, and if you were exactly 6" away at the beginning of the assault move.

Honestly, I don't see it working very much in real-life game situations.

Minimum 3 models engaged if you set it up perfectly... well, it reduces your chances of the assault ending on turn one, but not by much.

You can measure your own unit's coherency while moving, so that part of the plan works, but you'd have to eyeball the 6", and I think you'd be just out of assault range just as often as just inside of assault range, even if you're good at eye-balling distances.

Nurglitch wrote:Lascannons are definitely a good idea: the only problem being that Black Templars don't get Devastator squads and rely on Predators and Land Raiders for their Lascannons. Lascannons may not be Melta Guns, but they're still good for softening up the opposition because that opposition is in position, particularly if they're armed to the teeth with Melta Guns themselves.

Augustus:

Do you have the time to re-draw those diagrams to take into account the finicky details? Because there's nothing worse than a good idea that people might ignore because you forgot to dot the i and cross the t.

Sure, here is a diagram for spilling the lightbulb out of a landraider. Not entirely to scale. I have also spread the IG into more of a line.

...doing this ever since consolidation into HtH was axed by the rules. It's a rather obvious way to stay safe from being fired upon in CC.

I didn't invent prolonging CC, I just have an algorithm to use to acomplish that. Please understand I'm trying to outline a strategy and have in interesting discussion, not get any sort of "credit".

To Wildstyle, isn't some chance of insulating for a second turn better than no chance? That I think justifies the consideration of this approach.

I just don't think it's worth the chance of not assaulting at all because you have to eyeball so precisely to 6" for the tactic to work.

I think the better thing would be to stay buttoned up in the raider for one more turn. Then, assuming the raider doesn't die, you could tank shock the front unit and possibly get a much-more-reliable multi-charge, or just charge the back unit, and use the mass of the land raider to protect your squad from incoming fire after you win the combat.

willydstyle:

Regarding real-life game situations, I think you're pointing out that a player may or may not be able to pull off the exact spacing and movement required to pull this off. However, I think that is the skill of a Warhammer 40k player, being able to judge those distances. That a tactic may require skill doesn't make it a bad tactic. To my mind that makes it a good tactic.

Even a player who is skilled at eye-balling 6" can just as easily be 6 and 1/8th of an inch away, as 5 and 7/8ths.

And yes, a player who is using good sportsmanship will accept that the 1/8th of an inch means a failed charge.

willydstyle wrote:Even a player who is skilled at eye-balling 6" can just as easily be 6 and 1/8th of an inch away, as 5 and 7/8ths.

And yes, a player who is using good sportsmanship will accept that the 1/8th of an inch means a failed charge.

Don't forget that if you have you're not sure if it's exact you can always spill some more of your assault units out the backside of that bulb to ensure that less guys hit close combat in the charge and keep your lead assault unit a little closer.

Basically I see a good bit of wiggle room here.

@Augustus: Thanks for charting this. That's definitely the right way to go about the combat. Another way to think of it is that this is the formation you get lashed into when someone wants to charge + kill you with minimum fight (slightly longer lightbulb neck).

willydstyle wrote:I just don't think it's worth the chance of not assaulting at all because you have to eyeball so precisely to 6" for the tactic to work.

Having practiced it a little, I don't think its really that hard or precise. It doesnt have to be within an 1/8 inch to work, the lead models could be closer. Understand the limits of the diagram. The idea is the lightbulb cluster and the chain. One could easily shorten up the assault distance to ensure the charge.

I also don't think it is game breaking, just smart play.

There are some other tactics for templars as well, not just light bulb charge. My group has one, we know it as last to bail wins, or others I have heard call it death before dismount (which is not as accurate). Its essentially combined kamikaze rhino tactics and it applies for any melee capable army with rhinos, particularly templars, marines, chaos and Sisters also.

I don't think a discussion of how to beat IG should revolve around the lightbulb, obviously that's just one club in the bag for the short game.

willydstyle:

I would deny neither of those points. But as Augustus points out, the tactic does not require such pin-point precision. I should add that surely being able to exercise such pinpoint precision is a sign of skill in a player. Indeed, I think a player that lets you get away with 1/8" differences in movement and range does one a disservice from the point of view of developing the skills to play the game well.

Eh, I think the math shows that you do need to use pin-point precision in order for it to work well.

Humorously intended, OK you make me smile? Did you really do math?

Caffran9 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:What massive buff? They are slightly harder than their 3rd edition selves, which is what they still play like. Get in close and murderize 'em its whats for breakfast.

Except that they now have options that grant them high mobility, something they've never had before. This is an extremely potent asset in 5th edition, and it alters the potential and threat range/threat type of the army in a big way. They're only about 1/2 like 3rd edition Guard at this point.

High mobility in an eminently killable skimmer vehicle.

Frazzled wrote:

Caffran9 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:What massive buff? They are slightly harder than their 3rd edition selves, which is what they still play like. Get in close and murderize 'em its whats for breakfast.

Except that they now have options that grant them high mobility, something they've never had before. This is an extremely potent asset in 5th edition, and it alters the potential and threat range/threat type of the army in a big way. They're only about 1/2 like 3rd edition Guard at this point.

High mobility in an eminently killable skimmer vehicle.

A bit OT sorry:

There are also the Hellhound variants, its surprising to see tracked vehicles move 24, they are FAST. They make awesome tank shock, are great for last turn contestation of objectives and are much better platforms for the awesome weapons they carry.

Beating some IG armies may require a scenario to take these things down as well.

Unless they're on a road, tracked fast vehicles may only move 18".

However, that's still plenty fast enough most of the time.

Guilty, 18. Thanks, still fast.

Augustus wrote:
Beating some IG armies may require a scenario to take these things down as well.

****For fun smack talking included below*****

Hey Augustus, shouldn't you have to actually have beaten a new 5th ed guard list to be able to give advice?

****end completely, just for fun, smack talking*****


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Helmann what kind of guard army are we talking about. Fully mech'd, foot with tank's, mixed gunline, etc?

The different lists are going to have different weaknesses.

willydstyle wrote:Eh, I think the math shows that you do need to use pin-point precision in order for it to work well.

Oh man. This guy is hilarious.

Seriously, are you going to do two shows a night?

Wow, you did a great job of shutting down my argument!!!

Come on guys, we are all friends here...

Also,

warmaster wrote:Hey Augustus, shouldn't you have to actually have beaten a new 5th ed guard list to be able to give advice?

I actually did beat IG in the round one Hardboy, game 1. I also think my losses to IG help to qualify me as a source,...

<Joke>

besides, I INVENTED prolonging assaults!

</joke>

EDIT: (Warmaster kicked my butt a couple of times with his mech IG army)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another simple tactic to use against IG, when playing as Marines I call pinwheel smoking.

The idea is to make sure your transports loaded with assault units all have a 4+ cover same all the time.

The execution involves using a single vehicle in a group per turn to smoke, and using it's hull to obscure the remainder of the vehicles 50%.


In subsequent turns use the smoke launchers on the other vehicles.

The 'pinwheel' part comes in because the vehicles essentially form the same pattern every time and spin, presenting the next vehicle with smoke each turn.

In this way a player can get N turns of cover saves for all his transports (assuming predominately one direction of incoming fire a turn) where N is the number of vehicles in the group.


These are effective tactics for any armies with rhinos in them.

Shouldn't the one in the first diagram be flipped sideways as well? Leapfrogging is definitely a viable tactic for rhinos. Ask any mech sister's player, they've been doing it for an extremley long time.

It's also a good use of a cheap throwaway predator. And of course landraiders are great for spearheading the assaults.

Warmaster wrote:Shouldn't the one in the first diagram be flipped sideways as well?

Yes, I suppose it could be.

Warmaster wrote:Leapfrogging is definitely a viable tactic for rhinos. Ask any mech sister's player, they've been doing it for an extremley long time.

It's also a good use of a cheap throwaway predator. And of course landraiders are great for spearheading the assaults.

Indeed the lead vehicle could also NOT be a rhino. There are also a large amount of permutations for less or more vehicles and multiple angles of incoming fire, or for using a building or hill as obscuration on your way somewhere.

This is just another standard tactic that a marine player should have in mind.

Gah!

NO PERSONAL ATTACKS!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

Seriously, stop.

Augustus, I was just thinking about that Rhino-smoke tactic lastnight (since I've decided to go multiple 5-man squads in rhinos). It might be an old tactic, but I've never heard of it before, and I thank you for adding it to the thread (any tactic is pertinent, since I want this to be a compendium of anti-5th ed-Guard tactics/strats, old or new).

I'm glad we've moved on from ole 'lightbulb', since I'm sure there are many other good ways of prolonging combat. By going 5-man only squads, I think I've solved half the problem. My 1000pt list has 4 x 5-mans in rhinos with meltas and power fists, and one 5-man on foot (thinking of giving it a lascannon, not sure if it's worth it) and a landspeeder tornado. At 1500pts, I expand this by adding 2 x 5-man assault squads with melta bombs, 5-man Terminator squad, and I give my Marshal a teleport homer.

My plan is basically a cautious rhino rush, where everyone hides until in position to attack at multiple points. Question: In this scenario, is it better to leave my squads in their rhinos and pop smoke, or get out and shoot? (The idea being that since I can't charge the turn I disembark, I may as well stay inside, then disembark/charge next turn). I'm thinking the former.

My regular opponent uses mostly foot troops (plenty of lascannons) with tanks (usually 2-3 x Battletanks/Demolishers), with counter-charge units consisting of a command squad in Chimera and a Hellhound variant (a bloody Banewolf... I hates them). The thing is, since we both play Guard, and since I'm a good sport, I allow him to use my models, so he has a lot of options (read, can put together an uber force).

The leapfrogging smoke trick is useless against most strong armies in 5th, although it was great before the metagame caught up with it.

Why? Mobility.

The trick does nothing against fast moving Vendettas, WSs, Prisms, MM Speeders, Koptas, Raiders/Ravagers, or Outflankers of any sort. Pretty much every competitive build will have an answer to the smoke screen, with a a way to get around it. Usually, all the tactic leaves you with is a bunched up army that is waiting to be multi-charged.

Every once in a while you will run into an skilled opponent who it will work against; however, it is far from being the grand tactic that it once was.

Well, I havent been having much luck against mech IG either. But, i am also guilty of using the "uber squad" that i use against other armies.

What has been pleasently distracting the Mech IG players i play (3 of them in my group, FML) is drop podding a ven dread with tank killer on their table edge. It is resilient enough to survive a few rounds of punishment, it comes with 4+ cover/sight blocker (hide behind the drop pod and give it smoke), and once that first round goes by it has the umph to eliminate a squadron per assault phase with the +1 from tank killer. Its even better if they havent moved... yay auto-hit!

/2 Cents

Augustus -- the lightbulb a brilliant tactic.
Thanks for posting.

I also agree that the smoke rhino tactic is not as useful against highly AT mobile weapons -- such as gunships.

I think the OP disappeared...

I'm with Warmaster... tell us the IG list archetype you are losing to.. there are at least 4 differrent ways to run a winning IG list, and they each have their own vulnerabilities.

I'm still here. New posts just seemed to have dwindled for a while.

Shep, I'm pretty sure I listed almost exactly the units my regular opponent uses, it's in my last post, however I wish I could rename the thread into 'General anti-5thed-Guard Tactics/Strategies', since I want this to be a compendium on how to beat any and every Guard build, with whatever type of army. Everyone feel free to post your experiences with new Guard, and any tips for combating them.

I have yet to try the advice given so far in the field, hence I have posted anything new yet. I should be having a few games tomorrow, so I'll be sure to post my findings.

tekk_45, I had been tossing up the idea of drop podding a dread, but thought it'd just get blasted to pieces. I still have reservations about using this tactic (I still think it's a useful, but expensive distraction), but I think I'll get a good idea of how effective dropping units is tomorrow...

I'll be trying out my mono-Slaanesh daemons (the beautiful Diaznettes, not the hideous new plastics) as well, but I have a feeling Guard is possibly the worst army to go against... Low T and Sv, no shooting attacks to speak of, and I can only rely on my KoS for anti-tank... but then I do like a challenge.

Against the experienced IG players, the vertical charging arent going to work. I know this because I have been doing that since 5th Ed rules came in. I play orks, I assault most of the time, so yeah it didnt take me too long to figure out that this might be one good way to be locked in combat for an xtra turn.

However, do note that there is a serious problem to this way of assaulting. To execute this properly, you always have to make sure that you get the minimum number of orks (or models) engaged as you do not want to win the combat, forcing the IG guards to fall back. As a result, you should lose the combat most of the time (on some occasion, you will be able to get a draw if you are lucky).
Now the problem comes. As an assault army, you want to assault with all your troops all at one instance (if you assault in 2 waves, you are giving the IG another round of free shooting). Thus, your all out assault will involve multiple squads charging into ONE troop of IG Guard. They are going to die no matter what :-). This is how an experienced IG will deploy.

btw the below diagram is wrong. The guards pile in to the next unengaged model (yes they ARE within range). So dude, the minimum is 4 to engage, not 2.

[quote=Augustus


Moving the entire light bulb formation 6 inches leaves only 2 engaged models, even after the counter charge.

Orkish wrote:However, do note that there is a serious problem to this way of assaulting. To execute this properly, you always have to make sure that you get the minimum number of orks (or models) engaged as you do not want to win the combat, forcing the IG guards to fall back. As a result, you should lose the combat most of the time (on some occasion, you will be able to get a draw if you are lucky).
Now the problem comes. As an assault army, you want to assault with all your troops all at one instance (if you assault in 2 waves, you are giving the IG another round of free shooting). Thus, your all out assault will involve multiple squads charging into ONE troop of IG Guard. They are going to die no matter what :-). This is how an experienced IG will deploy.

Cool analysis. It happened to me as well. With only one squad of guards for me to charge, there was no way they can survive pass one turn.