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.

Your vets should NEVER be assaulting anything. Even a unit of fire warriors have a good chance of bouncing them. And if they do get in to assault, you want them to die as fast as possible to let you cont to shoot at the target. The last thing you want is to do is feed a unit your vets and then give that unit a free D6 in of consolidation before they get to move and assault a different target. If there successful at this, now you have lost 2 kill points in the length of a game turn instead of 1. Al this to get 10 extra Str 3 non-power melee attacks (assuming the squad is full strength)

I will agree that if you want to run HWS in your vets they need to be plasma variants.

The "your tail/wing is off the table" rule was faq'd on the gw site for the skull of throne torry, this counts for stormravens too. So any trys to pull that slowed rule on you smack them with your guard pimp fist.

komosunder wrote:Your vets should NEVER be assaulting anything.

Wrong again.

There are a host of units in the game sufficiently weak to warrant an assault from IG veterans.

But that is really missing the point. Here is the scenario that matters:

Objective game. You went 2nd. Turn 5/6. Both you and your opponent hold an objective. Your opponent’s objective is held by a small 5 man squad of Space Marines. The back hatch of your immobilized Chimera is 13" away from said objective. In the movement phase, you disembark 2" and move 6". This puts you outside of the 3" contest zone. In your shooting phase, you unload with 3 meltas, 6 shotguns and 1 laspistol. Let's say 2 two Marines live and pass their LD test.

Hark! I can now assault the remaining two marines with my 10 man squad of melta Vets because I didn't listen to that inerwebs genius komosunder! Best case scenario, you wipe the last marines and claim an additional objective for the win. Equally good scenario is you beat, push, or barely lose combat and stay locked, contesting the objective. You still win the game. Worst case scenario, you lose by a small margin, flee and the game turns out exactly how it would have if you hadn't made a smart, calculated risk overwhelmingly weighted in your favor.

Before you try to save face, back pedal and say "ZOMG this never happens" - it does. Having the option to assault with Vets after a torrent of fire is one you won't use often. But when you do, it is frequently the difference between a W or an L.

With all of that being said.... like, how is this not obvious to anyone who has spent even a nanosecond thinking about this game?

You may have luck with shotty vets, go for it. This situation is just as likely as the use of FRFSRF in a mech list. I don’t need to get in to a pissing condition over this. But I’ve used both variations and I find popping flashlights to be far more versatile. I don’t think I would take the risk of charging even 2 SM with a vet squad. If it’s the last turn your better off just running to contest then charge…fail at assault.. And give the uncontested objective. If that’s how you want to do it that’s your game, I would prefer to lock in my win.

Much good discussion here even if at times blunt.

I prefer to run Mech vets with a infantry blob of 50. The blob has 5 grenadiers, 5 missile launchers, and 5 commissars with PW.
Shoot until they get there, then let them chomp on the guardsmen; the commissars swing back with 10 PW attacks--this is really neat against BA and their Bullcrap feel no pain on everyone. It always invites CC attacks from BA and wolf rider types, but it just doesn't go away. Kill 12 guard and loose combat--commissar makes them stubborn and if they fail moral he just shoots a SGT. Get it stuck on their power CC unit and the game is yours

Aren't commissars ICs? (I'm at work w/o codex) Any cc specialist will target attacks against any ic in btb killing them off quickly Any that don't aren't worth mentioning.

Thank you again to all for the help.

wanax wrote:I prefer to run Mech vets with a infantry blob of 50.

If you're running 50 man blob, you aren't running a Mech Guard list. Blob guard are an interesting/viable army, but different than what the OP seemed to be inclined towards.

komosunder wrote:You may have luck with shotty vets, go for it. This situation is just as likely as the use of FRFSRF in a mech list. I don’t need to get in to a pissing condition over this. But I’ve used both variations and I find popping flashlights to be far more versatile. I don’t think I would take the risk of charging even 2 SM with a vet squad. If it’s the last turn your better off just running to contest then charge…fail at assault.. And give the uncontested objective. If that’s how you want to do it that’s your game, I would prefer to lock in my win.

If you are playing someone that doesn't "spoke" their infantry models in front of an objective, making it physically impossible to be within 3" while remaining 1" away from an enemy model, thus forcing the assault, then your games aren't competitive.

You made an assertion that assaulting with Vets is in all cases a bad idea. That's just outrageous and it doesn't take a lot of critical thinking to understand why.

You also argue that shotguns are in all cases the suboptimal choice. Shotguns with melta is the optimal choice. Period. Full stop.

Melta units are mobile. While mobile, shotguns have the same threat profile as lasguns and, because they are assault weapons, have the additional benefit of leaving a conditional assault on the table. If FRFSRF is your only answer to that argument... well... I can't really help you. You are talking about an additional 6 strength 3 shots (19 with lasguns vs 13 with shotguns) IF your CCS a) HAPPENS to be in command range (highly unlikely as melta should be roving around the enemy lines) and b) doesn't have a better order to issue (Hmm, melta. Let's see... Oh wait! Fire on my Target? Bring it Down? Hello????)

This isn’t obtuse.

As I said before if you want to continue to use shotys, go for it. My flashlights have treated me well thus far and I don’t plan on changing them. Players tend to think twice before they “spoke” there troops when playing IG, as it gives the best def of an objective. It is the worst Def on pie plates, of witch IG has plenty.

By the way, don’t try and pretend I don’t know what I’m talking about. I’ve put my time in GT. And pulled top 3 in enough to make me smile. So I would say my competition is competitive.

EDIT- i never said FRFSRF was better, just stating you have about the same % chance to use it.

If your running a blob, your not running vets. And if you have heavy weapons in your blob, your not moving.

'Deep Striking Tanks' is slightly taken out of context... your rear artillery in a list above is exposed to a lone drop pod with something like Sternguard, which can combat squad in the pod... allowing them to fire on two units. OotF can't stop Drop Pods, and if your opponent has one pod, it is coming in, no matter what. If it is a walker, even a rifleman build, all your AV 10 armor is facing him and he will crush your stuff till you can kill it.

Blood Angels can also DS Land Raiders, but that is not what the term ment.

This is why Barber feels OotF is a must, because his list is extreamly vulnerable to Outflanking/DSing units because everything is moving forward and the onlything hanging back is his artillery.

Don't worry Barber, you and Unbeliever should be great friends, but an antagonistic attitude to people will not help or keep you here for long. I mean, two warings from Mods in one thread... your on the fast track already...

Besides, the guy is a first time player... you need 3 things to win in 40k, a good list, use it well, and good dice.

I have seen terrible lists win when played by good players and have good dice (use last Adepticon as an example). This guy is going to have growing pains, no matter what.

It quite literally only makes sense to take shotguns if your special weapon upgrades are also assault weapons. Why? If you are shooting a squad of infantry with your vets armed with assault special weapons, you will be able to bring more firepower to bear on your target with the shotguns firing and still retain the option to charge your enemy in the assault phase.

See, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Stupid tactics that makes no sense.

Why would Veterans want to charge anything? Let's go through the scenarios:

1) They're charging into something they can kill, such as Fire Warriors or a smaller GEQ squad. They'll win combat anyway by simply having more numbers, so you probably don't even want to shoot at them beforehand just in case you kill too many and feth up your own assault range. This is particularly true if you want force the coombat to last two rounds so you don't get shot to gak in your opponents shooting phase.

2) They're charging into something they cannot kill, pretty much anything MEQ/TEQ. Why would you willingly charge into a squad knowing they're going to die? Better yet, why would you give your opponent a free d6 consolidation at the end of your turn? Because Imperial Guard like their opponent getting closer? Here's a nice little tactic for you: instead of charging in, spread your veterans out and bubblewrap the opponents infantry squad. Run if you cannot make the distance with your normal move, or rapid fire if you can. Guess what? That Infantry squad can't move next turn and is pretty much forced to spend a turn killing your Veterans before they can even move, which gives you a whole turn to ignore that unit and concentrate on the rest of his army. The Veterans are going to die anyway, you may as well make as much use of them as possible before they go.

Let's recap. Either you're going to win combat anyway, so no need to shoot beforehand, or you're going to die anyway, so you may as well die a slowly as possible to help out the rest of your army. Makes sense?

PS: On further review of this conversation it's obvious you have a good understanding of the game (such a rarity around here), but you need to look past the obvious "hurr they're assault weapons so I can assault afterwards!" stage and think about the bigger picture, and how the army operates as a whole. If it's turn 5 and you've left a 5 man combat squad alone holding an objective the whole game then something else has gone wrong. Why don't you have another Chimera available to tank shock over the objective? Why don't you have enough firepower elsewhere to take down 5 marines? All these questions and more can be answered by poor deployment, poor tactics and, more likely than not, a poor list.

In your little scenario above, which is awfully specific, the shotguns are not going to make any noticeable difference. At the very best you're going to cause one additional wound. If your opponents marines are spiked (as you put it) around the objective, guess which casualties he is going to pull out first? The ones closest to you. The ones at the back are still contesting, whilst more than 6" away from you and thus safe from assault. Well done, in your little scenario you just handed your opponent the game!

I’ll say you do put up a good argument, ill give the shottys another try on my melta squads. See if I can find a tactical difference. I feel this is a rare occurrence, but when do you really use flashlights anyhow right?

“spiked” thank you spell check……

Moopy wrote:Aren't commissars ICs? (I'm at work w/o codex) Any cc specialist will target attacks against any ic in btb killing them off quickly Any that don't aren't worth mentioning.

Thank you again to all for the help.

No commissars are squad upgrades and therefore can't be singled out! That's the beauty of it

I know this isn't strictly "mech", but trust me when BA are floating around power weaponing everything in sight including chimera rear armor you'll wish that blob was there. With such a blob you can still run 5 or 6 vets with chimeras and meltas--just not heavy weapons, xtra armor, etc. Just tossing in an alternative FWIW.


On shotguns and flashlights. Are you guys really making these stringent appeals to coach a newbie on the difference? Take either one, it doesn't matter. all those guys with shotguns or flashlights are there to die horribly for the emperor so that the guys with meltas and plasmas can burn down the BAE (blood angel equivalent). This is, currently the litmus test for offensive power: BAE. power armor or better with feel no pain. You chances of rolling enough 5s to wound and make it hurt are minimal with a 10 man anything IG squad using shotguns and/or flashlights.

On hydras: What? 2 shot ap4 for 75 points. No thanks. Only value is shooting flyers down and with 2 shots and BS3, you aren't going to worry anyone with less than 3 of these dogs. Sorry.

[b]For a new player, you want tanks[/b]. If you are going to run straight vets in chimeras, the only thing you need to add are tanks in abundance. AV14 and pieplates that ap BAE are what keep the vets alive that extra turn.

Sure, advanced players can oink away about nuances of hydras and vendettas, and the finer points of bum rushing SM with IG [snicker], but this is way beyond the pale of this thread's purpose. no one here has said anything stupid or unplayable, it just isn't going to keep the new guy playing IG very long trying out the un-obvious.

@ wanax: just wanna to get it straight, and real soon, that a hydra has FOUR str7 shots, ap4, twin-linked (it has 2 of those tl 72" autocannons, so even a weapon destroyed result only takes it down to 2 shots).
So, 75pts for a av12 tank with 4 TL Str7 shots? Hmm yes please. Though I know there are other - about as good - IG heavy choices, only speaks to the quality of the IG heavy section.
In almost ANY other codex a hydra would be auto-include if they could buy it in their heavy section!

other than that i agree with you that the dicsussion on lasguns vs shotsguns isnt very important, i would think, for the OP or for a new (IG) player. Still, maybe it is, im in no way a new player myself, but im only building my first IG army - renegade militia ftw! - and i know i found the shots/las discussion enlightening - although the bashing is unneeded, but typical.

The discussion as made me consider building 1-2 of my melta-vets squads with shotguns. Would look cool too to have some of those renegades tossing shotguns (or maybe give em eldar catapults, god knows i have hundreds of those lying about)

BUT, in the big picture of things concerning Mech IG im pretty sure it does mean a big lot if your men have lasguns or shotguns. I know when i have played, often, against mech ig, my concerns sure have been about which squads had shotsguns

But i agree in the analysis of vets with meltas+shotguns! And gotta build myself a squad!

And btw: it goes without discussion that ANY squad in the game WILL sometimes need/ought to, charge something, or at least it will often be the best option IF given the choice to both shoot and charge. Say to not let THEM charge you afterwards, or your more important friends, or MORE importantly, as stated to reach an objective. Charging a squad will also sometimes, if done right, and in the right circumstances, allow for you to drag that enemy squad off the objective as all models in the charged squad have to move 6" pile in move to get the most models to contribute in the CC.

dinnermeat wrote:The "your tail/wing is off the table" rule was faq'd on the gw site for the skull of throne torry, this counts for stormravens too. So any trys to pull that slowed rule on you smack them with your guard pimp fist.

You got a link to that

LordofMuck wrote:@ wanax: just wanna to get it straight, and real soon, that a hydra has FOUR str7 shots, ap4, twin-linked (it has 2 of those tl 72" autocannons, so even a weapon destroyed result only takes it down to 2 shots).
So, 75pts for a av12 tank with 4 TL Str7 shots? Hmm yes please. Though I know there are other - about as good - IG heavy choices, only speaks to the quality of the IG heavy section.
In almost ANY other codex a hydra would be auto-include if they could buy it in their heavy section!

I stand corrected! I hadn't thought to look at the cost entry as well as the description. I will now consider these myself


And yes you could possibly benefit from having shotguns is some very select situations. How often? Meh, not enough to consider this a valid argument. However, if modeling them because they are cool is your take, then by all means this IS a valid argument for inclusion.

Yes, the issue of "lasgun or shotgun" is one that exists at the margins. In the distinct majority of your games, whether you took lasguns or shotguns on your melta Vets will have absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the game.

Here is the thing: When it matters, it usually matters big for the reasons I have repeatedly articulated in this thread. But more than that, I came out hard on this issue because I literally can't stand when people assert categorical arguments that are absolutely idiotic and more importantly dead wrong. I feel a responsibility to call out utter nonsense where I find it. You should too, otherwise everything is just noise.

Examples of dead wrong categorical statements in this thread:

1) Imperial Guard Vets should never under any circumstance charge anything.
2) Lasguns should always be taken over shotguns.

LordofMuck wrote:And btw: it goes without discussion that ANY squad in the game WILL sometimes need/ought to, charge something, or at least it will often be the best option IF given the choice to both shoot and charge. Say to not let THEM charge you afterwards, or your more important friends, or MORE importantly, as stated to reach an objective. Charging a squad will also sometimes, if done right, and in the right circumstances, allow for you to drag that enemy squad off the objective as all models in the charged squad have to move 6" pile in move to get the most models to contribute in the CC.

QFT. Which brings me to this gem of a post...

unbeliever87 wrote:

It quite literally only makes sense to take shotguns if your special weapon upgrades are also assault weapons. Why? If you are shooting a squad of infantry with your vets armed with assault special weapons, you will be able to bring more firepower to bear on your target with the shotguns firing and still retain the option to charge your enemy in the assault phase.

See, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Stupid tactics that makes no sense.

Why would Veterans want to charge anything? Let's go through the scenarios:

1) They're charging into something they can kill, such as Fire Warriors or a smaller GEQ squad. They'll win combat anyway by simply having more numbers, so you probably don't even want to shoot at them beforehand just in case you kill too many and feth up your own assault range. This is particularly true if you want force the coombat to last two rounds so you don't get shot to gak in your opponents shooting phase.

2) They're charging into something they cannot kill, pretty much anything MEQ/TEQ. Why would you willingly charge into a squad knowing they're going to die? Better yet, why would you give your opponent a free d6 consolidation at the end of your turn? Because Imperial Guard like their opponent getting closer? Here's a nice little tactic for you: instead of charging in, spread your veterans out and bubblewrap the opponents infantry squad. Run if you cannot make the distance with your normal move, or rapid fire if you can. Guess what? That Infantry squad can't move next turn and is pretty much forced to spend a turn killing your Veterans before they can even move, which gives you a whole turn to ignore that unit and concentrate on the rest of his army. The Veterans are going to die anyway, you may as well make as much use of them as possible before they go.

Let's recap. Either you're going to win combat anyway, so no need to shoot beforehand, or you're going to die anyway, so you may as well die a slowly as possible to help out the rest of your army. Makes sense?

PS: On further review of this conversation it's obvious you have a good understanding of the game (such a rarity around here), but you need to look past the obvious "hurr they're assault weapons so I can assault afterwards!" stage and think about the bigger picture, and how the army operates as a whole. If it's turn 5 and you've left a 5 man combat squad alone holding an objective the whole game then something else has gone wrong. Why don't you have another Chimera available to tank shock over the objective? Why don't you have enough firepower elsewhere to take down 5 marines? All these questions and more can be answered by poor deployment, poor tactics and, more likely than not, a poor list.

In your little scenario above, which is awfully specific, the shotguns are not going to make any noticeable difference. At the very best you're going to cause one additional wound. If your opponents marines are spiked (as you put it) around the objective, guess which casualties he is going to pull out first? The ones closest to you. The ones at the back are still contesting, whilst more than 6" away from you and thus safe from assault. Well done, in your little scenario you just handed your opponent the game!

Protip: Read the entire thread before you post something.

My hypothetical is awfully specific you say? STOP THE PRESSES! The "little scenario" I describe is an entirely plausible one (I would know, I've done this before). You know why I used a hypothetical? Listen carefully kids: When some extremely ill advised person makes a really, really bad categorical assertion, you auto-destroy their argument with a single instantiation of what they proclaim is an impossible event. They call that refutation by counterexample at some of our finer institutions of higher learning (re: the public library).

You had a really, really great idea though. Take my thoroughly valid counterexample and then alter the terms so it is no longer applies. Wow! Genius!

I mean, really? The example assumes that even if 4 of 5 models are removed the proximity is such that you have a charge. You also dismiss the at most one additional wound done from incoming shotgun fire in advance of a charge. One less marine attacking at WS4, STR4, INT4 could VERY WELL be the difference in a combat pushed or lost. This is all beside the point.

The part where you tell me all the reasons why the scenario I give indicates a lack of tactical acumen or a bad list is my favorite. When you play top tier competitive games, they SHOULD be close. Truly gifted 40k players playing other truly gifted 40k players have games that are won at the margins, where every KP or objective is fought for tooth and nail with a last reserve of energy and opportunity, not LOL I TABLED YOU IN 3 TURNS.

Here are the central questions:

Are there scenarios in which it makes sense for a player to assault with his IG Vets?

Yes.

Does having the option to shoot before an assault create a marginal advantage for the ensuing assault in some cases?

Yes.

Does the synergy between assault shotguns and assault meltas grant the player the option to create that marginal advantage in advance of an assault?

Again, yes. Obviously

Does the exchange of lasguns for shotguns introduce a disadvantage that outweighs the advantages enumerated above?

No.

There is absolutely nothing left to say about this. This is also why the majority of the thinking people reading this thread now agree with me.

wanax wrote:And yes you could possibly benefit from having shotguns is some very select situations. How often? Meh, not enough to consider this a valid argument. However, if modeling them because they are cool is your take, then by all means this IS a valid argument for inclusion.

This is what kills me about the internet. With all due respect, and I say this with every ounce of kindness I can muster, do you know the definition of logical invalidity? This argument is absolutely valid (it is also sound for any of those logic nerds that might be interested).

The thing about this entire conversation that is the most frustrating to me? This isn't a difficult or controversial issue. How in the name of god can we possibly expect to have any illuminating conversation about questions that merit real debate if we spend 2 pages talking about something this obviously cut and dry. It does not bode well. And for those of you that think I'm a jerk, I'm sorry - I straight up refuse to let it slide when people say ridiculous and indefensible things. It muddies the waters for anyone interested in getting to the bottom of issues, be they big or small.

Hm. He's blunt, but I like this Barber guy. I may give shotguns on my vets a whirl.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dinnermeat wrote:The "your tail/wing is off the table" rule was faq'd on the gw site for the skull of throne torry, this counts for stormravens too. So any trys to pull that slowed rule on you smack them with your guard pimp fist.

Can anyone provide a source for this?

You had a really, really great idea though. Take my thoroughly valid counterexample and then alter the terms so it is no longer applies. Wow! Genius!

The example assumes that even if 4 of 5 models are removed the proximity is such that you have a charge.

Read through your post again, I followed your scenario and tactics word for word, literally:
You claimed that the immobilied Chimera was 13" away.
2" disembark + 6" move = 5" away from the objective.
You claim that smart opponents will 'spike' (your term) units on an objective so opponents cannot move flat out/run within 3" of the ojective to contest it. I'm making the assumption that your opponent is indeed smart and this 5 man squad is indeed 'spiked' in some sort of star formation to cover all angles.
Your Veterans shoot Meltagun + Shotguns at the Tactical Squad, killing 2 or 3.
Your smart opponent will take away casualties from the front to avoid being charged, leaving your Veterans 5" away from the objective and nothing in assault range. Because the marines leftover holding the objective are 2-3" behind it.

All I'm saying is your example is gak and proves nothing. Not because of the Shotguns, but because you never wanted to shoot in the first place. I couldn't care less about the shotguns vs lasguns debate, do whatever the feth you want, just don't give out terrible advice involving charging GEQ into things and fething themselves over in the process.

unbeliever87 wrote:All I'm saying is your example is gak and proves nothing. Not because of the Shotguns, but because you never wanted to shoot in the first place. I couldn't care less about the shotguns vs lasguns debate, do whatever the feth you want, just don't give out terrible advice involving charging GEQ into things and fething themselves over in the process.

He never advised anyone to charge models with guardsmen under normal circumstances. It was a hypothetical intended to demonstrate, when all other things are equal, shotguns could have a tactical advantage over lasguns in some scenarios. Less e-peening, more discussion, please.

unbeliever87 wrote:

You had a really, really great idea though. Take my thoroughly valid counterexample and then alter the terms so it is no longer applies. Wow! Genius!

The example assumes that even if 4 of 5 models are removed the proximity is such that you have a charge.

Read through your post again, I followed your scenario and tactics word for word, literally:
You claimed that the immobilied Chimera was 13" away.
2" disembark + 6" move = 5" away from the objective.
You claim that smart opponents will 'spike' (your term) units on an objective so opponents cannot move flat out/run within 3" of the ojective to contest it. I'm making the assumption that your opponent is indeed smart and this 5 man squad is indeed 'spiked' in some sort of star formation to cover all angles.
Your Veterans shoot Meltagun + Shotguns at the Tactical Squad, killing 2 or 3.
Your smart opponent will take away casualties from the front to avoid being charged, leaving your Veterans 5" away from the objective and nothing in assault range. Because the marines leftover holding the objective are 2-3" behind it.

All I'm saying is your example is gak and proves nothing. Not because of the Shotguns, but because you never wanted to shoot in the first place. I couldn't care less about the shotguns vs lasguns debate, do whatever the feth you want, just don't give out terrible advice involving charging GEQ into things and fething themselves over in the process.

Sigh.

First of all, it is a "spoke" deployment. Like a wheel.

Literally can't believe I have to do this. Such a sad commentary on game comprehension.

I made every effort to be illustrative with measurement. If you at any point doubt the accuracy, please make my day and replicate this yourself.



The weapons team is the objective. The "Space Marines" are deployed in a "spoke" pattern at the leading edge of the 3" capture zone to prevent any infantry units from getting within the 3" contest zone of the objective. Each "Marine" takes full advantage of the 2" coherency rule to maximize the coverage of the spoke. This is a classic denial deployment for objectives.

The Vets disembark from the immobilized Chimera, which is exactly 13" away from the objective. Keep in mind that the BRB on pg. 67 indicates that only the leading edge of a base has to be within the 2" disembark bubble. Functionally, this equates to an additional 1" of movement because of base size.



The Vets move 6" or as far as possible while maintaining the requisite 1" from enemy models.



The Vets open fire. To illustrate how wrong you are, let's say they kill 3 and the controlling player leaves only the furthest placed models on the table.



What's that you say? There is ample distance in their charge move to engage with the remaining models? Well, who woulda thunk.

Before we waste more time, yes, damaging the unit would have forced a morale check on a Space Marine unit that could then fail its morale, run a short distance, and automatically regroup in the next turn, recapping the objective. Consider, though, the result if you didn't take this course of action... the bad outcome is guaranteed.

Seriously, give it up.

JB_Man wrote:

dinnermeat wrote:The "your tail/wing is off the table" rule was faq'd on the gw site for the skull of throne torry, this counts for stormravens too. So any trys to pull that slowed rule on you smack them with your guard pimp fist.

Can anyone provide a source for this?

http://www.ageofstrife.com/40k-rules/flying-stands-rules-for-throne-of-skulls-t5432.html

As you will see, the article has since been pulled from the GW website. Mike Brandt with the NOVA has adopted this interpretation. As there are now a host of "NOVA style" tournaments cropping up that use Mike's format and FAQ, expect to see this ruling more often.

Lol. Assuming this scenario is in a vacuum with no other units around (because this is competitive gaming and we're totally equal).

Following your example, why would the Space Marine player knowingly put his unit that far forward? Because he's an idiot and likes being assaulted? Come on, this is supposed to be a competitive game where opponents think ahead and don't make mistakes like that.

Let's assume the Space Marine player isn't an idiot, and knows the assault range of your Vets. Why wouldn't he deploy in a tight star formation around the objective? With the forward most model 1.1" forward. I'm at work so I can't provide pictures, but imagine a small five-pointed star with the 'tip' facing the Veteran squad. They're still blocking any infantry from getting with 3" of the objective, but aren't putting themslves neededlessly close to the Vets either. That's the kind of formation a good opponent would put their squad in.

You kill 3 models in shooting, your opponent takes away the tip and 'outer' two models, leaving two marines at the base more than an inch behind the objective. Yes, I didn't bother pointing out that the combat squad could also chose to fail their morale check and auto-group in their turn - I didn't think I needed to, pretty obvious if you're running vanilla marines.

You have the models there, do the scenario again; but this time make a small star with the combat squad with the objective in the centre instead of having them all spread out forward like that.

Is this what you mean by 'game comprehension'?

discountbarber wrote:

wanax wrote:And yes you could possibly benefit from having shotguns is some very select situations. How often? Meh, not enough to consider this a valid argument. However, if modeling them because they are cool is your take, then by all means this IS a valid argument for inclusion.

This is what kills me about the internet. With all due respect, and I say this with every ounce of kindness I can muster, do you know the definition of logical invalidity? This argument is absolutely valid (it is also sound for any of those logic nerds that might be interested).

I understand what you are attempting to prove, but voicing an opinion stringently doesn't make it any more weighty. the argument is invalid in the context of the OP. Rather than commenting on the guy's list and how to make a noob understand basic IG tactics through BASIC list development, you've highjacked the thread for your own personal soapbox on the value of shotguns---shotguns for gods sake--over flashlights. Having played this game for 10 years now, and having played more IG games than I can count, I tell you the difference is marginal at best. If you play in the margins for the win, then you can't simply assert this make it a game at high levels. Most GT games I've been part of are won outright due to critical deployment errors, bad dice at a critical combat, failure of reserves to show on time, or failure to fully read the scenario rules. Close games are close games, but even GT winners make mistakes. This is a game of dice, so we should always remember it is about numbers not bodies.

The thing about this entire conversation that is the most frustrating to me? This isn't a difficult or controversial issue. How in the name of god can we possibly expect to have any illuminating conversation about questions that merit real debate if we spend 2 pages talking about something this obviously cut and dry. It does not bode well. And for those of you that think I'm a jerk, I'm sorry - I straight up refuse to let it slide when people say ridiculous and indefensible things. It muddies the waters for anyone interested in getting to the bottom of issues, be they big or small.

Again, stop railing. You make sensible arguments and everyone is listening, but you don't have to spout off and rant. The additional emotional content clouds rather than enhances your argument.

Yeah, I've used shotguns on many occasions. What I've learned is that in 5th edition, IG out of their vehicles have a short life regardless. That is cut and dry. If you like shotguns, bully for you. Make your case, then move on. Either the OPer will listen or not. Others may make counter arguments, but they aren't personal attacks, just opinions. lets move on, please.

This is comical. Sorry, got nothing else to add

Moopy: bringing people together since 2011.



Now I just have to afford all the forgeworld krieg upgrades and tank kits + Manticores. Arrrrrrrr...

As a guard playing self-confessed noob, with only a basic understanding of tabletop tactics, I genuinely feel like I've learnt a hell of a lot from this thread. Keep it going!

This thread rules. The scissor guy came in here and threw down on a bunch of handicaped children.

So, I'm down to less than 100 pts in my revised list.

Revised to (All chimeras = ML turret, HF hull):

HQ Squad- 4 meltas, Master of the Fleet, Astropath, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 plasma, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 plasma, chimera
Vendetta
Vendetta
Vendetta
Manticore
Manticore
Hydra

This leaves me 50 pts, and.... not sure what to do with those. I could take a Techpriest (as silly as that sounds) since I'm looking at only HQ and Elite slots available to me.

or

I can drop the Astropath and by a 2nd Hydra in a squadron. However squadron rules are horrible so this choice has drawbacks.

Any last advice?

I'd like to preface this by saying that this is all good discussion. A couple of people here have already said they've learnt something from this thread, so that's good enough for me.
When you said 'spoke' I assumed you meant some sort of star formation, not what you had in your pictures. Perhaps that's where all of this confusion has come from. Here is what I was talking about:


Immobilised Chimera 13" away. Combat Squad on the objective.


Your shooting kills 3, leaving you out of assault range.


Terrible quality photos, but you get the point.
Each marine is just over an inch from the objective, which still allows them to block other infantry from getting within 3", while minimising damage from blasts and limiting their overall size. Ignoring combat tactics, see how if your shooting kills 3 you autolose? I'd rather not take the risk and just assault, or at the very most most fire two of the Meltaguns so even if you roll well, you still won't feth yourself over.

Tell me how wrong I am again though, please. This is fun.

Edit: The new list looks fine. I'd still rather drop the Plasma Vets and take a PCS + 2 Infantry Squads in Chimeras for more bodies and mech saturation. That would also give you more throwaway bodies for setting up deep strike defences (aka castling up and bubblewrapping your tanks with cheap infantry squads). I would spend those 50 points on giving your Veterans Autocannons, more long range shooting is good yeah?

Moopy wrote:So, I'm down to less than 100 pts in my revised list.

Revised to (All chimeras = ML turret, HF hull):

HQ Squad- 4 meltas, Master of the Fleet, Astropath, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 meltas, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 plasma, chimera
Vet Squad- 3 plasma, chimera
Vendetta
Vendetta
Vendetta
Manticore
Manticore
Hydra

This leaves me 50 pts, and.... not sure what to do with those. I could take a Techpriest (as silly as that sounds) since I'm looking at only HQ and Elite slots available to me.

or

I can drop the Astropath and by a 2nd Hydra in a squadron. However squadron rules are horrible so this choice has drawbacks.

Any last advice?

It is hard to understate how much better this list is than the first you posted. Bravo.

A few thoughts:

1) Absolutely drop the Astropath for an additional Hydra.

I understand why you're inclined to bring the Astro - getting those outflanking Vendettas in on a 3+ for your turn 2 reserves and having a little bit more certainty about the edge of entry. Here's the thing: You will only be reserving your Vendettas in games where you have 2nd turn. Right out of the gate, at least 50% of the time you're wasting 30 points. I am also of the mind that the general inclination to reserve your Vendettas if you have second turn is often not correct. Unless your opponent has an overwhelming ability to shred AV 12, three Vendettas that scout move prior to turn one and therefore benefit from a 4+ flat out cover save are not easy to bring down. Additionally, the fact that your opponent is pouring twice as much firepower into them to get past the cover save inherently means less pressure on your frankly more critical mech gunline. I view it as a gift if my Vendettas are still alive on turn 4. Lastly, while bringing on the Vendettas from reserve guarantees an Alpha strike, it is a pretty pathetic one. The size of the model forces your move to be greater than 6" (unless you're playing at the NOVA) , allowing you to fire just a single TL BS 3 lascannon. After that less than impressive volley, your opponent gets to shoot at a Vendetta that doesn't have a flat out cover save in his next turn.

Running vehicles in squadrons is something you have to reconcile yourself with in an Imperial Guard army. Yes, it creates disadvantage. But in order to squeeze out all of the utility of the critical heavy support section in Imperial Guard lists, you have to bring them together in some instances, particularly as the games get larger. I run them in a squadron all the time. Trust me - between the Vendettas, Manticores and nasty melta Chimera's, your opponent is probably doing you a favor by shooting at squadroned Hydras that should always have a cover save.


2) Swap melta for plasma in your CCS and plasma for melta in one of your Vet squads.

Plasma in this list is functionally for one thing. Lighting up power or terminator armor dudes or MCs that threaten your parking lot at close (re: rapid fire) range. Generally, the threat that I'm describing comes in via deepstrike or outflank. Your plasma defenders need to be held in the back field to serve this function. This is well suited for the CCS for three reasons. First, the CCS can issue orders and the utility of this is usually better exercised from the back as opposed to the front of the parking lot. Second, melta armed squads are put at more risk because of their role as roaming death dealers. Simply put, the CCS is more valuable than a Vet squad so don't give it the more dangerous of the two roles. Third, generally speaking 3 BS4 meltas is enough to get the job done against enemy vehicles - you can pretty much assume you will destroy of sufficiently delay your target. 4 meltas in one squad is slightly cost inefficient because of the overkill. Plasma is a different story. When a unit of terminators deepstikes in your face, every plasma shot counts. As the CCS can have four special weapons and should be in your backfield, this loadout is more efficient.

3) Consider a Psyker Battle Squad.

I am a PBS evangelist. When most people read the entry for the first time, they focus on Soulstorm and ignore Weaken Resolve - I know I did. Don't get me wrong - Soulstorm is great. 50% of the time you are launching a large blast template with an AP sufficiently low enough to prevent MEQ from making armor saves. 33% of the time it's the same story for enemies in terminator armor. Weaken Resolve is where the unit really shines though. Doing just enough casualties to force a morale check and then decimating the targets leadership is a devastating one-two punch that has won me more games than I can count. The first time you fear a Long Fangs squad or some deathstar unit (nob bikers anyone?) off the board, you will thank me. If you decide to bring them, make a squad of 7 (1 overseer, 6 psykers) and put them in a Chimera. This is just enough to wound T4 models on a 2+ and most units testing at -6 LD are going to fail.

In the context of your list, I'd drop one melta Vet squad to take the PBS. You have more melta than you probably need and this will diversify your threat portfolio, giving you another tool in your toolbox.


If you take all of this advice, I believe you'll have 20 points left over. I'd put a plasma pistol on the Company Commander and the Vet sarge in the remaining plasma Vet squad.

unbeliever87 wrote:
Tell me how wrong I am again though, please. This is fun.

I'd like to preface this post by saying.... are we still talking about this?

If there was a thesis to my long explanation of shotgun utility, it would read something like this:

"Though rare, there are circumstances under which bringing to bear the entirety of a squad's firepower on a target unit before launching an assault creates a statistically indisputable game advantage. Because of the synergy among assault weapons that preserves the option to assault even after every model in a squad fires, exchanging lasguns for shotguns in a Veteran squad armed with meltas is an optimal choice."

I then gave a perfectly valid illustrative example of one of these "rare circumstances".

By your own admission, you misunderstood my example. With greater clarity, I assume you now accept its validity.

But then you do something that just boggles my mind and the minds of all rational people following this thread: You give your own hypothetical illustrating one of the many circumstances under which a preassault shooting barrage makes bad sense. Do you really not understand how irrelevant that is? I, too, can think of a host of examples like yours. And every one of those examples would have absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking nor would they in any way diminish the the truth of what I'm saying.

Do you want another illustrative example that makes my point? Would that make you shut up? All evidence points to the contrary, but I'll give it anyway because I can. This one is perhaps the simplest of scenarios.

You're a killpoint down. You went second and it is your player turn in the final game turn. After your movement phase, you have a melta Veteran squad in shooting and assault range of a squad of Marines that has a single model left. Despite your best efforts, the entire weight of fire from your remaining units didn't bring the Marine down. You shoot your melta Vets and because of bad dice luck/[insert whatever reason], the Marine lives. Your last recourse is to assault the remaining Marine and, because of assault weapon synergy, you still have the option.

This is another simple example of the statistically indisputable game advantage I reference above.

Please, please, don't waste any more of our time.

MOF is totally worth it, deamon dark eldar nid and alot of surpise marine lists hate him so much. 30 points for what he does is stuipd cheap, considering other armies need 100p plus characters to have a similar benifit. I work him into all my lists 1000 plus.