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.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Jubear wrote:I think with one of the biggest pitfalls people fall into with wargaming is getting caught up in the image and narrative of the game but not actaully thinking about the rules.

For instance while playing a game of 40k a few weeks ago my opponent made some remark about how he had "flanked" my army to witch I replied something along the line of "so what show me something in the rules where thats going to help you. (all footlist)

I then cheerfully jumped on his flanking force destroyed it and just hid the rest of my units for the rest of the game and won easily on points.

... .

That is a good example of;

The strategy of the central position.
Concentration of force.
Maintenance of mission and aim.

Indeed it is but I think my point still stands when learning a new ruleset playing to the rules and objective will yeild more results then reading Sun Tzu... But everyone should read Sun Tzu incase we need to wage a gorilla war against the nazi terrorist zombie insurgents.

I am an Ork player and I like my enemy run away from my Stompa then I ambush with my 4 deffcoptas that they obviously kill but I will take a few out then my 70 Gretchin save the day by swarming then with help from my 20 boyz that tactic uses 1470pts but I just started apocolypse 40k

Without wanting to seem harsh boyd, there are quite a few points being wasted in this list.

boyd wrote:Thought about it some more on my drive to work and this list would be fun to use:


HQ
1 Haemonculus, = (Venom Blade + Liquifier Gun)
1 Haemonculus, = (Venom Blade + Liquifier Gun)

3 Kabalite Trueborn, = Blaster x3
1 Venom, = (base cost) + Splinter Cannon x2

5 Kabalite Warriors, = 5 + 1 Blaster
1 Venom, = (base cost) + Splinter Cannon x2

5 Kabalite Warriors, = 5 + 1 Blaster
1 Venom, = (base cost) + Splinter Cannon x2

5 Kabalite Warriors, = 5 + 1 Blaster
1 Venom, = (base cost) + Splinter Cannon x2

8 Wyches, = (Haywire Grenades) + Hydra Gauntlets
1 Hekatrix, = (Haywire Grenades + Phantasm Grenade Launcher + Power Weapon)
1 Raider, = + Shock Prow + Torment Grenade Launchers + Enhanced Aethersails + Flickerfield

8 Wyches, = (Haywire Grenades) + Hydra Gauntlets
1 Hekatrix, = (Haywire Grenades + Phantasm Grenade Launcher + Power Weapon)
1 Raider, = + Shock Prow + Torment Grenade Launchers + Enhanced Aethersails + Flickerfield

1 Ravager, = + Torment Grenade Launchers + Night Shields + Flickerfield

Haemonculi really don't belong in close combat, sinking points into making them less bad isn't a good idea, what ever you do, they won't be good.

Wyches already have plasma grenades, giving them a PGL ony really gives them defensive grenades and there are very few unit in the game (ie. ones that have no ranged weapons)that would rather assault wyches than shoot at them.

Hekatrix's have access to agonisers, IMO, one of the best close combat weapons around. Take them.

Shardnet/Impalers are an essential for tar pitting units (even deads) in close combat, althought they dont bring any of the offensive advantages of the razorflail or hydras, they are, IMO, the best wych weapon by quite a way.

However many points you sink into a raider, it is still only an AV10 open topped vehicle, against a half decent opponent they will all get destroyed. Flickerfields make the 33% more survivable, so they are worth the 10 points. Everything else is a waste when they inevitably blow up.

Ravagers are the cheapest way to get reliable, long range anti tank into a list, and at 115 points (with flickerfields) they are really cheap too, fill your boots.

If you have points to spare (you will if you're playing 1500 points), then my 1st advice would be to get two more Ravagers. Then tweek Boyd's list to your preference, using as much or as little of my help as you see fit

As far as target priority goes, the first thing to look at is "What can hurt me next turn" If you can stop anything shooting (stun/shake/wreck/explode) that is a real threat to your transports/vehicles before they can fire at them then you're doing well. As soon as you've stopped them firing next turn, move on to the next target, if you wreck/explode them then just think of it as a bonus, not what you're actually aiming to achive. In later turns, pour as much fire as possible into any unit within 12" of your shooty units.

Then think "Where are the objectives" and "How long will it take me to get there." If its a KP game then you can completely ignore thisand go for the throat. If not, you want to keep an eye on his troops and make sure your at least able to contest all of their objectives last turn. Being able to move 18" with most things makes this fairly easy.

The next thing to look at is "What are my enemys big hitters", do they have a deathstar unit (big nobz squad, TH/SS terminators in a land raider, Seer Council ect), if they have a unit like this, is it avoidable (if you can move 18" a turn you can avoid a foot sogging unit indefinitely, then thats ~500 points you dont have to worry about)? or is it fast enough that you will have to fight it at some point? If you can avoid it, do so until you outnumber them so much that the sheer volume of attacks means they'll have to fail some saves! Land Raiders can be popped with lance weapons, if those terminators are walking there is no way in hell they will be able to hurt your vehicles.

Dark Eldars big advantage is that they never have to sit still, Ravagers can still fire 3 lances if they move 12" so take advantage of that. Even if there is no real need, moving 7" means your opponent will only be hitting you on 6's in combat. That can be a real life saver if there is something unavoidable, or something that you miss by mistake.

I hope some of this helps

Jubear wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Jubear wrote:I think with one of the biggest pitfalls people fall into with wargaming is getting caught up in the image and narrative of the game but not actaully thinking about the rules.

For instance while playing a game of 40k a few weeks ago my opponent made some remark about how he had "flanked" my army to witch I replied something along the line of "so what show me something in the rules where thats going to help you. (all footlist)

I then cheerfully jumped on his flanking force destroyed it and just hid the rest of my units for the rest of the game and won easily on points.

... .

That is a good example of;

The strategy of the central position.
Concentration of force.
Maintenance of mission and aim.

Indeed it is but I think my point still stands when learning a new ruleset playing to the rules and objective will yeild more results then reading Sun Tzu... But everyone should read Sun Tzu incase we need to wage a gorilla war against the nazi terrorist zombie insurgents.

My point is that if you already know the core principles of strategy and tactics, it makes it easier to search out the bits in an individual ruleset that put them into practice.

I think with one of the biggest pitfalls people fall into with wargaming is getting caught up in the image and narrative of the game but not actaully thinking about the rules.

For instance while playing a game of 40k a few weeks ago my opponent made some remark about how he had "flanked" my army to witch I replied something along the line of "so what show me something in the rules where thats going to help you. (all footlist)

I then cheerfully jumped on his flanking force destroyed it and just hid the rest of my units for the rest of the game and won easily on points.

Why did I win because I have no illusions about the fact that its a game with its own set of rules and not a war simulator saying thing like "I anchored my flanks with some heavy armor" sounds very tactical but what does that mean In terms of game rules? The answer nothing.

Yes but the issue is not about making manouvres for the sake of moving, but making the right manouvres, with the right troops, at the right time. A flank move can be a very strong manouvre, but only if it has the level of threat to make the enemy adhere to whatever tactical or strategic plan you have adopted to exploit the flanking move.

It is fine if you don't want to explain you tactics in military terms but to try and explain it in terms of reference to the rules - list - is perhaps why the OP is posing the question.

I think with one of the biggest pitfalls people fall into with wargaming is getting caught up in the image and narrative of the game but not actaully thinking about the rules.

For instance while playing a game of 40k a few weeks ago my opponent made some remark about how he had "flanked" my army to witch I replied something along the line of "so what show me something in the rules where thats going to help you. (all footlist)

I then cheerfully jumped on his flanking force destroyed it and just hid the rest of my units for the rest of the game and won easily on points.

Why did I win because I have no illusions about the fact that its a game with its own set of rules and not a war simulator saying thing like "I anchored my flanks with some heavy armor" sounds very tactical but what does that mean In terms of game rules? The answer nothing.

Even real world war boils down to a fixed ruleset. Bombers only have so much range, soldiers can only carry so much ammunition and rations. The ruleset is certainly the most complicated by far, but military conflicts are still largely defined by leveraging what you are capable of doing against what your opponent cannot defend. Tactics are defined by equipment. Once upon a time the massed infantry charge was feasible because the slow rate of fire of firearms meant you could hit their lines while sustaining relatively light losses. Then the watercooled machine gun came into service.

A tactic can be good or fantastic against one army's set of equipment, or terrible against another. Against someone trying to outflank with light fast troops, assault armour on your flanks IS a good tactic since you can protect your softer troops by forcing the outflank to expose themselves through things they can't hurt. As an example, if someone is being silly and charging, I don't know, foot wyches from the sides at your devastators in the rear center, a Land Raider Crusader in the way force them to go around and risk getting shot to pieces by the giant tank they can't damage. Against an IG gunline, they'll just shrug and shoot past them anyways so it doesn't work.

Flanking an army is useful if that army has a ton of stuff like Predators with good front armor and soft sides. No matter which way you turn, something can shoot that side 11. Flanking is not that useful if the army is Tyranids. Opponents dictate tactics.

blackclaw1 wrote:None as of yet , this is the last 40 list i wrote

Duke sliscus

4 kabalite trueborn 4 blasters

Venom Splinter cannon


5 kabalite warriors Blaster
Venom Splinter cannon

5 kabalite warriors Blaster
Venom Splinter cannon

9 kabalite warriors Blaster
Syrabite
Blast pistol
Raider Envenomed blade
Flickerfield

Ravager Flickerfield
Ravager Flickerfield

my plan for this was use the ravager in an anti vehicle role and the blaster weapons on other vehicle and unit for the same and use them against characters as well, take sliscus with the 9 kabalite warriors and take them against the most dangerous infantry unit ,probably the one with the hq in it , if hes being run within a unit.

I haven't used this list yet due to a lack of the models required but that would be my plan if i was.

This list isn't horrible or bad it just needs some work...first off no to B.Pistol way to much. Wouldn't run the E.Blade on the raider. Might try and squeeze Ravager #3. But that's it.
Tactics wise don't try to deep strike with sliscus and you may want to swap out him and the big warrior squad for wyches and a Haemonculus. DE are a hard hard army to grasp and play well. I was in your shoes where I didn't win for about a year but I didn't give up worked and reworked my list and my tactics and now I win tourneys at my FLGS with all massacres. Basically bait a unit and wipe it out (try and let infantry get the last kill.) Destroy anything with long range first especially multi-shot stuff like Assualt cannons, Auto Cannons, MultiLasers. The less saves you have to take the less damage you take due to failed saves. Make your opponent split his force whether through deployment or first turn moves. You have the speed to relocate your force and take it all at apiece of his. Hug cover with those transports as FF only get you so far!
Make your opponent present his shooty guys (Devastators to your wyches and the CC (nobs) to your shooty just make sure you stay out of CC. Speed is you advantage so don't be afraid to Turbo to get away. In objectives wait just off of objectives and then on the last turn move 12 or turbo onto them. Even if you drop off a squad to hold yours and fly 12" to contest the other guy's. When you do split them up if you are concerned you can't keep them off of you until the part your working on is destroyed through a feeder squad at them with a Turbo behind the advancing side don't just let them catch you.
In short try different tactics if it didn't work ask why not? and then try again. Don't rush that 30 man boyz squad! Make them advance and pay for every step they take. Don't sit back on the Tau charge in! Get in there and Lock 'em up in CC even warriors should win.
"No commander was ever successful who didn't exploit his enemies weakness and did not heed his own"