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.

Revisionist history is very common here, and pretty much all over the net. This is mainly because people who have played more editions have more "street cred", so the vast majority who haven't played for long parrot incorrect information to give a certain weight to their posts.

The most frequent one I see, being a chaos player, is that IW was the most op build in the old good dex. It wasn't; siren bomb was.

4th was the last combat edition, 5th was won in the shooting phase. Assault was better, so all the best armies had serious firepower and good counter assault ability (Gk, Sw, Ig), but no mainly assault force won competitions.

Saying melee is equally viable to shooting in 6th shows reading comprehension issues. Melee is awful, outside of very few armies that spam specific units (Fmc, beasts, cavalry), while shooting is simply so much better and safer.

I don't pretend to know which is better shooting or Assualt, all I know it's more about meta and versitality. My mainly assault orks dominated my local area for weeks till people build anti melee units, then it was blob IG with masses numbers being the dominate, now it's blast template heavy weapon spam or eldar run and hide tactics that dominate.

As have been pointed out here are some very viable assault armies at the moment, but there are few of them and they are not built for friendly play. Daemons and Necron assault armies are built for winning tournaments not Friday night gaming.

As it stands the edition was build for shooting and it isn't helping that both Tau and Eldar further got shooting rules that bypassed the rulebook. The entire Tau army ignores many handicaps that would limit a shooting phase to the point most major blogs actually list bringing large amounts of LOS blocking terrain as a viable tactic. They have certainly been swung as the beginner army and its not fun bringing their obvious counters which roll them up over and over again to have to actually make close combat work.

As far as I can tell, there's no way to be sure for now. The Chaos Daemons book nerfed their assault but they also have lower points costs and that's the only assault army book (CSM is included in Chaos for all intents and purposes) to be released so far, and all the other assault books (especially BA and 'Nids both of which I use) are kind of screwed for the time being, the only viable build for 'Nids is MC and MC suck and are boring as hell to play.

JPong wrote:
I don't get this. There has been some sort of revisionist history going on here (and other places) every time this topic comes up. They all just keep swearing that Fifth was assault oriented. Even assault armies were taking troops so they could get more razorbacks or rhinos or psyweapons. There is a reason Tyranids did poorly in this "assault" edition, and it has nothing to do with their assault units being bad in the context of Fifth.

This. In fact, I think I'll sig it. I have no clue how people came to the conclusion that Transporthammer 40k was dominated by melee.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Melee combat is still definitely very much alive.

Shooting simply got better and melee got worse. That doesn't mean melee is horrible. Melee was so good in 5th it could stand to take a hit and still be decent.

All the rule shift has done is mean that its wise to bring a balanced list with both shooting and melee(if possible)

Melee was not that great in 5th either. I'm not sure what game you were playing.

Melee was worse in fifth than sixth for most units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melee was worse in fifth than sixth for most units.

 darthnatus wrote:
Melee was worse in fifth than sixth for most units.

Most units? I don't suppose you'd like to support that assertion with any examples, because I completely disagree.

Here's why I don't do assault armies anymore.

1) Ork boyz. In 5th ed, ork boyz would typically take 2 turns to reach an opponent 24" away. Turn 1, move 6, run. Turn 2, move 6, fleet, assault 6. With a couple of squads coming across the line, and taking casualties from the back, we'd get there with 15 boyz, combi-charge into a couple of units, win the combat, and have a day, allowing our nob to whack on the scary stuff with his powerklaw.

In 6th ed, it now takes 3 turns to reach that same opponent. We lose the second turn's fleet move, replacing it with a charge that doesn't have a 6 guaranteed on one die. We've also pulled casualties from the front, so that set us back a couple of inches. Because of that, we take an extra turn of shooting, at rapid-fire range, and lose an extra 6 boyz, leaving us with fewer to hit with. When we hit, we have to whether another couple of casualties, and cannot effectively combi-charge anything. Then, as another kick in the pants, our nob gets challenged out by any tough enemy, reducing the rest of the boyz to cheerleaders, and the nob gets whacked before he swings.

My orks rely on shoota boys entirely now.

2) Eldar. I used to run banshees in a wave serpent. And Harlies in a Falcon. They'd fly up and get in position, and then the next turn, hop out and unleash hell. Can't do that anymore, now they need to disembark the turn before they charge. It's not hard to shoot down T3 models sitting on the table. The few that do survive get to face another round of overwatch fire before they stick in. The Banshees used to be able to mince up anything, but they've got no game against terminators anymore.

3) Genestealers. These guys used to outflank, and then show up and charge a unit, almost a guaranteed unit kill. See anyone run genestealers in 6th? Oh, no, because you're not allowed to assault without giving your opponent two chances to shoot you in 6th ed, and 5+ save models just can't take that sort of punishment, even bolters ignore their saves.

That's three. I cannot name a single assault unit that is better off with 6th ed rules over 5th. But, I'm open to the possibility - whatcha got?

I'm still running my nids assault based, they do fine still. Yeah overwatch sucks, and no assaulting out of deepstrike, but with so many people focused on ranged they tend to not bring enough choppy to protect themselves once i get into cc.

. I cannot name a single assault unit that is better off with 6th ed rules over 5th. But, I'm open to the possibility - whatcha got?

Blood Angel Death Company and CSM Spawn. But that is mainly because of the changes to the "rage" rule. Does that count?


I'm not seeing the huge swing in favor of shooting, but that is mainly because of my local meta-game being heavy on the assault armies.

TR

Aren't spawn in the same FA slot as helldrakes?

Makumba wrote:
Aren't spawn in the same FA slot as helldrakes?

They are.
I don't use them, but I'm not your usual Chaos player.

But the guy asked for examples of assault units that have improved under the new rules. I gave him two. He didn't ask for "assault units that got better under the rules and are the optimum choice for the hyper-competative player"

TR

Redbeard wrote:Most units? I don't suppose you'd like to support that assertion with any examples, because I completely disagree.

Here's why I don't do assault armies anymore.

To which I'd add power blobs. And the entire BA codex that doesn't have the "fast" rule. And purifier spam for GK, and trukk rushes for orks. And the entire DE codex (no assaults from a WWP? oops).

In fact, I, too, am having a hard time thinking of an army that got BETTER at assault because of 6th ed. Arguably, demons are better now, but that's because they got a new codex.

 Brother SRM wrote:
It isn't the deciding factor in 40k anymore but it's still viable. Overwatch is a joke unless you have some serious buffs to it via psychic powers or some kind of army abilities.

And that's a good point Paradigm - a lot of assault heavy armies haven't even been redone yet. I guess Chaos Marines are an assault-heavy army, but they're having a bit of trouble.

I used to think this way, but consider that the overwatch doesn't need to make a serious dent in the unit's numbers, it just needs to kill the one or two guys who actually ended up being in charge range. This alone can completely screw a unit that depended upon making that charge to survive...units like Wyches that are pretty worthless standing out in the open.

Trench-Raider wrote:

. I cannot name a single assault unit that is better off with 6th ed rules over 5th. But, I'm open to the possibility - whatcha got?

Blood Angel Death Company and CSM Spawn. But that is mainly because of the changes to the "rage" rule. Does that count?

I guess that counts, although they're not better because of assault, they're better because they're not easily misguided anymore. In terms of what they do in combat, they too are worse off under 6th ed rules.

 Valkyrie wrote:
Since the arrival of 6th Edition, the general consensus on 40k has been that it is game suited to ranged combat, and good ol' melee has been nerfed to the extreme. I'm still struggling to see why this is the case, as so far it seems that the only major nerf we've had to assault is Overwatch. Yes, there are minor quips as well such as transports too but is it really fair to assume that an army based around melee combat is automatically destined to lose?

Not automatically, but there is a big disadvantage now. I played my friend at the week there down at the store and it wasn't fun for him. He has to remove models left right and centre while my Tau shot at him. On the other hand in the afternoon an assault force did beat me and my apocalypse partner, but then one guy was running Monsterous creature daemons with ironarm on them, so when your T10 you can pretty much do what you like anyway and when your other monsterous creatures are T6-9 and flying then it is a big advantage. However not everybody gets to have T10 creatures in their army list.

Overwatch: Sure, it can hurt in some cases, but the odds of you taking massive losses to Overwatch really that high? A Tactical Marine trying to kill a Chaos Marine via Overwatch has a 1/36 chance of actually doing any damage. In such an assault with 10 guys charging, then yes, you may take 1, maybe 2 casualties occasionally. Unless you're against Tau, which to be fair, suck in melee anyway so this is their compensation, Overwatch really shouldn't put much of a dent in your assault.

Remember that Tau have supporting fire, markerlights also work in overwatch, you can buy systems to increase the ballistic skill of your overwatch, they a system for interceptor (my favourite), etc, etc. As good old Boromir would say "One does not simply charge into Tau".

Varying charge range: Bit annoying I know, but it's a double-edged factor. Yes you might roll 2" for assault, much shorter than you could in 5th, but likewise you could roll for a 12" charge, double what you could previously do.

Don't forget the models removed from the front as well from overwatch will increase your charge range.

Transports: I can see how this would be annoying. Not being able to assault from a transport even if it's stationary is rather messed up, but there are other ways you can get around this such as Deep Striking, using faster troops, or even using transports anyway and shielding them from return fire before they assault.

Low armoured transports usually die first turn and give away first blood pretty easily.

I've just listed a couple of reasons why I've heard that Assault is dead. I'm not claiming those counterarguments as fact, I just want to start a discussion, because as I see it, assault really isn't as bad as it's made out to be.

One other thing you forgot to note is that is that models are removed from the front which then increases the distance between you and your enemy. It's foot assault lists that are affected the most in this edition. i.e. Blood Angel Assault Marines.

Considering I even get to assault from time to time, and I'm the one army not supposed to (tau), I'd say its not dead.

Just no longer brain-dead simple as it used to be and requires some effort.

 Paradigm wrote:
Redbeard, a lot of the things you mention don't ruin assault, just add an element of change to it. For example, challenges just mean you have to be more careful about keeping more characters in the squad, and the AP changes to power weapons just means you can't take on TEQ with impunity now. But frankly, killing 2+ save models in CC was rarely the best idea in 5th anyway.

The thing to bear in mind was that in 5th, assault was the dominant force, thanks to rapid-fire weapons being less useful, guaranteed charge ranges and no penalty for multi-assaults. While it's now less good, it's still a significant force, just more balanced than it was previously.

Yes but those AP3 power weapons don't kill Riptides or Broadsides. Not all 2+ armour saves are Terminators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ailaros wrote:

Not to mention the codices that have come out since 6th. Eldar and especially tau make a mockery of assault. Or, really, any game mechanic that isn't rolling dice to see if you damage something.

I agree and I play Tau. In the morning game every week down at my store I just blow my opponent off the table and thats it. It is really only in the apocalypse game where things are a bit different and thats because players are taking FMC, Caestus Assault Rams, etc, etc.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Considering I even get to assault from time to time, and I'm the one army not supposed to (tau), I'd say its not dead.

Just no longer brain-dead simple as it used to be and requires some effort.

Assault armies had to cross an entire field of battle, running from cover to cover, denying LOS, and stripping off layers of unimportant units to get to the meaty bits, all while hardly doing any damage themselves with their mediocre supporting fire. Gunlines sit in one spot and point at things until they die. Which one is brain dead?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

JPong wrote:
I don't get this. There has been some sort of revisionist history going on here (and other places) every time this topic comes up. They all just keep swearing that Fifth was assault oriented. Even assault armies were taking troops so they could get more razorbacks or rhinos or psyweapons. There is a reason Tyranids did poorly in this "assault" edition, and it has nothing to do with their assault units being bad in the context of Fifth.

This. In fact, I think I'll sig it. I have no clue how people came to the conclusion that Transporthammer 40k was dominated by melee.

I don't know. There have been numerous examples of armies that did well in 5th listed in this thread. There are still people coming in saying assault was OP but have yet to list one strong 5th assault list. I can think of maybe 2, both orks. Speed Freaks and Biker Nobs from early in the edition. They were all but phased out competitively after IG hit.

Just that some of these people lost to assault in 5th, which none us are claiming was impossible. Quite the contrary. As an assault army in 5th you were fighting an uphill battle both ways, but atleast you could have fun because you were doing something. Now all you do is struggle hard to kill one unit and die. It's no longer fun to play assault armies because every rule in the book works against them.

 DarthOvious wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
Redbeard, a lot of the things you mention don't ruin assault, just add an element of change to it. For example, challenges just mean you have to be more careful about keeping more characters in the squad, and the AP changes to power weapons just means you can't take on TEQ with impunity now. But frankly, killing 2+ save models in CC was rarely the best idea in 5th anyway.

The thing to bear in mind was that in 5th, assault was the dominant force, thanks to rapid-fire weapons being less useful, guaranteed charge ranges and no penalty for multi-assaults. While it's now less good, it's still a significant force, just more balanced than it was previously.

Yes but those AP3 power weapons don't kill Riptides or Broadsides. Not all 2+ armour saves are Terminators.

But the point still stands, trying to kill a Riptide in CC with anything less than a TH/SS termie squad is probably futile anyway, better to drop them at range with plasma/LC and the like. And as for broadsides, they were a unit that, thanks to their huge range, were rarely assaulted in 5th anyway. All that has changed by the AP changes is that a small subset of 2+ sv units are more survivable, and half of them are not targets you'd want in CC anyway. Where is does have a noticeable effect is that 2+ HQs are now even harder to crack, which is certainly a setback.

However, there are also positives to the changes, most notably the power maul, which, as a +2S at initiative weapon, is against many targets a fair trade for AP. It allows you to hurt tanks and increase your wound output, hence forcing more saves to make up some of the difference from lost AP, without sacrificing initiative.

I guess that counts, although they're not better because of assault, they're better because they're not easily misguided anymore. In terms of what they do in combat, they too are worse off under 6th ed rules.

They also got better due to the changes to "fearless" that prevented extra wounds from losing combat. In fact alot of units could make the same claim.

TR

 Paradigm wrote:
But the point still stands, trying to kill a Riptide in CC with anything less than a TH/SS termie squad is probably futile anyway, better to drop them at range with plasma/LC and the like.

So what you're telling me here is that Assault Marines with Jump Packs can't even kill Tau units in close combat. Thanks for playing.

I play Tau and in one game my Riptide killed a Daemon Prince with the Black Mace IN CLOSE COMBAT and then went on to ID Kharn the Betrayer. Don't get me wrong, I know that won't happen too often but it is a bit ridiculous that half my opponents can't even get into close combat with me to begin with and if they do I still have a chance to kill some of their best assault units.

Armies that do get into close combat with me are sometimes so depleted that they don't do very much. I had a squad of Tau fire warriors hold up a tactical squad one time. That wouldn't be much of a problem if it wasn't for the fact that I outgunned tacticals completely before they got a new codex.

At the weekend there my friend took Moloc with an honour guard in a landraider in his list. I blew the land raider up first turn with Longstrike and ignoring the big cover save he did have for placing it behind a building. I then killed some other marines of his and the next turn when he drop podded a unit of sternguard in I intercepted them and wiped them out before they even did anything. 3 Broadsides with HYMP & SMS all with Early Warning Overide Systems cause a lot of damage, even when intercepting.

And as for broadsides, they were a unit that, thanks to their huge range, were rarely assaulted in 5th anyway. All that has changed by the AP changes is that a small subset of 2+ sv units are more survivable, and half of them are not targets you'd want in CC anyway. Where is does have a noticeable effect is that 2+ HQs are now even harder to crack, which is certainly a setback.

2+ HQ's with a good invulnerable save are hard to crack. Not many of those going about. Dante can be instant killed by a railgun, heavy rail rifle or Fusion Blaster (Which Tau have a ton of), Mephiston doesn't have an invulnerable save so lots of fusion and plasma will take care of him.

However, there are also positives to the changes, most notably the power maul, which, as a +2S at initiative weapon, is against many targets a fair trade for AP. It allows you to hurt tanks and increase your wound output, hence forcing more saves to make up some of the difference from lost AP, without sacrificing initiative.

Doesn't mean very much though when there is a list as long as my arm of ways in which 6th ed nerfed assault. Some of things mentioned were not present in last edition in any form so of course they nerfed assault.

I didn't play 5th edition, but I recall many posts lamenting how all marine builds were Rhino Rush....wasn't that an assault based army build or were they just rushing forward to shoot melta guns (which seems like a waste to me)?

Anyway, to me, assault isn't dead entirely, just a heck of a lot harder to pull off. It can really only be done well by dedicated assault ARMIES, with the exception of really expensive units like TH/SS termies coming out of a landraider, and even those have to be very selective with their targets. I run a horde multi-deity daemon list with lots of large blocks of daemon infantry, along with some beast and cavalry units (I use them more for screening), and I've had a lot of success with it. Is it easy to use? No way, but it is fun and tends to be pretty effective simply because people are rarely ready for it, as they think Chaos Daemons=Flying Circus, so they don't bring the volume of fire that's really needed to thin the ranks before the assault hits.

This edition really does favor shooting over assault, that's pretty much impossible to dispute. That being said, assault is still one of the best ways to dislodge large blocks of troops such as Necron Silver Tide blocks and Tau Castles, so it has its uses. It seems that 6th edtion is really going the route of specialized armies, and if you are not running a dedicated assault army, chances are you won't be doing anything during the assault phase.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I didn't play 5th edition, but I recall many posts lamenting how all marine builds were Rhino Rush....wasn't that an assault based army build or were they just rushing forward to shoot melta guns (which seems like a waste to me)?

Let me quote myself for you. Rhino Rush was not a thing. Rhino parking lots were. Tactical marines are just not good enough at close combat to even consider it a thing.

JPong wrote:
I don't get this. There has been some sort of revisionist history going on here (and other places) every time this topic comes up. They all just keep swearing that Fifth was assault oriented. Even assault armies were taking troops so they could get more razorbacks or rhinos or psyweapons. There is a reason Tyranids did poorly in this "assault" edition, and it has nothing to do with their assault units being bad in the context of Fifth.

Assault armies weren't taking those vehicles to deliver pizzas. They were taking them to deliver lead. 5th and 6th is about putting as much lead in the air as you can and seeing what sticks.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Anyway, to me, assault isn't dead entirely, just a heck of a lot harder to pull off. It can really only be done well by dedicated assault ARMIES, with the exception of really expensive units like TH/SS termies coming out of a landraider, and even those have to be very selective with their targets. I run a horde multi-deity daemon list with lots of large blocks of daemon infantry, along with some beast and cavalry units (I use them more for screening), and I've had a lot of success with it. Is it easy to use? No way, but it is fun and tends to be pretty effective simply because people are rarely ready for it, as they think Chaos Daemons=Flying Circus, so they don't bring the volume of fire that's really needed to thin the ranks before the assault hits.

This edition really does favor shooting over assault, that's pretty much impossible to dispute. That being said, assault is still one of the best ways to dislodge large blocks of troops such as Necron Silver Tide blocks and Tau Castles, so it has its uses. It seems that 6th edtion is really going the route of specialized armies, and if you are not running a dedicated assault army, chances are you won't be doing anything during the assault phase.

How does Tau not bring the volume of fire to kill a daemon dedicated assault army. They don't even have to change anything they do, they just get the volume of fire. The best way to take out their ranged units is to take your own Tau army and go first. Even if you get enough men there to beat them in combat, you still have to continuously get shot. And they still move as fast away from you as you do towards them.

No, I'm not saying ASM can't kill tau units, I'm saying ASM can't kill Riptides. There is a world of difference. If I have ASM, I'm going after the fire warriors and pathfinders, rather than a T6 MC. What I'm saying is that for killing models with a 2+ save, then killing them with ranged AP2 weapons is a better option. Just because a unit that was never meant to take on hard targets can't take on said targets (in a single army), this doesn't invalidate an entire phase of the game. Getting into CC with tau SHOULD be hard as once you do reach them with a significant part of your force, it's almost a given they will be destroyed.

2+ HQs are often hidden in squads, and kitted for CC, hence why I mentioned them. Of course, your lascannon/railgun can kill that Chaos terminator lord, but can your LC/Railgun kill his 30 cultist bodyguards? No, so he's going to get into CC, where the best way to beat him is a challenge, and this is where the loss of AP2 on power weapons does hurt, and I freely admit this. Dante and Mephiston are bad examples as they are both rarely seen and rather overcosted. Conversely, a Hive Tyrant with a 2+, Chaos termies lord/sorcerer, or a terminator libby/chaplain/captain all have access to either wings and high T for the Tyrant, or good invulns in the case of the others.

I'm not trying to say assault is as good as ever it was, and I accept it has been nerfed, but not into playability. It is still viable, you just have to think more carefully and what, when and how you assault.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I didn't play 5th edition, but I recall many posts lamenting how all marine builds were Rhino Rush....wasn't that an assault based army build or were they just rushing forward to shoot melta guns (which seems like a waste to me)?

Anyway, to me, assault isn't dead entirely, just a heck of a lot harder to pull off. It can really only be done well by dedicated assault ARMIES, with the exception of really expensive units like TH/SS termies coming out of a landraider, and even those have to be very selective with their targets. I run a horde multi-deity daemon list with lots of large blocks of daemon infantry, along with some beast and cavalry units (I use them more for screening), and I've had a lot of success with it. Is it easy to use? No way, but it is fun and tends to be pretty effective simply because people are rarely ready for it, as they think Chaos Daemons=Flying Circus, so they don't bring the volume of fire that's really needed to thin the ranks before the assault hits.

This edition really does favor shooting over assault, that's pretty much impossible to dispute. That being said, assault is still one of the best ways to dislodge large blocks of troops such as Necron Silver Tide blocks and Tau Castles, so it has its uses. It seems that 6th edtion is really going the route of specialized armies, and if you are not running a dedicated assault army, chances are you won't be doing anything during the assault phase.

Rhino rush made a lot of sense in 5th even if you weren't assaulting. Your troops were in a mobile bunker and safe from pie plates. Even if all you did was shoot plasma you still could sit on top on an objective and claim it while still inside the vehicle. Because of the lack of hull points your opponent couldn't depend on glances to take out rhinos so the enemy would have to expend their heavy weapons against it if they wanted to be sure to crack it open. This took the heat off of your 2+ armor units and over whelmed anti vehicle firing if you went full mechanized.

You're playing demons which are one of the best assault armies currently and you're saying that you have difficulty. Other armies not fully specialized for assault but are considered fluff assault armies are having a much harder time (Black Templar, Orks, Blood Angles, hoard nyds).

The best way to i've seen to dislodge castled troops are drop pods with heavy flamers and barrage pie plates. Trying to assault is one of the least effective things for a majority of armies out there.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I didn't play 5th edition, but I recall many posts lamenting how all marine builds were Rhino Rush....wasn't that an assault based army build or were they just rushing forward to shoot melta guns (which seems like a waste to me)?

3rd ed was Rhino rush. Blood Angels Rhinos could move 18", squad disembark, and assault all in the same turn. This was when assault was overpowered in relation to shooting, but note this was absolutely years ago.

Anyway, to me, assault isn't dead entirely, just a heck of a lot harder to pull off. It can really only be done well by dedicated assault ARMIES, with the exception of really expensive units like TH/SS termies coming out of a landraider, and even those have to be very selective with their targets. I run a horde multi-deity daemon list with lots of large blocks of daemon infantry, along with some beast and cavalry units (I use them more for screening), and I've had a lot of success with it. Is it easy to use? No way, but it is fun and tends to be pretty effective simply because people are rarely ready for it, as they think Chaos Daemons=Flying Circus, so they don't bring the volume of fire that's really needed to thin the ranks before the assault hits.

Daemons turned out OK, but they had a new codex. Space Marines are still to be tested. In terms of assault marines with jump packs, especially Blood Angels then you're pretty much done.

This edition really does favor shooting over assault, that's pretty much impossible to dispute. That being said, assault is still one of the best ways to dislodge large blocks of troops such as Necron Silver Tide blocks and Tau Castles, so it has its uses. It seems that 6th edtion is really going the route of specialized armies, and if you are not running a dedicated assault army, chances are you won't be doing anything during the assault phase.

Assault is very specialised now. Only certain things work. i.e. FMC, Caestus Assault Ram Terminators, perhaps Lamnd Raiders as well. But foot slogging troops going across the board have no chance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paradigm wrote:
No, I'm not saying ASM can't kill tau units, I'm saying ASM can't kill Riptides.

Riptide being a Tau unit.

There is a world of difference. If I have ASM, I'm going after the fire warriors and pathfinders, rather than a T6 MC.

And they don't survive to get into combat with them.

What I'm saying is that for killing models with a 2+ save, then killing them with ranged AP2 weapons is a better option.

In other words, shoot them. Which I think is the point being made here.

Just because a unit that was never meant to take on hard targets can't take on said targets (in a single army), this doesn't invalidate an entire phase of the game.

You mean assault marine? Those guys who are meant to be good at assault? Those guys who come in the Blood Angel codex in abundance and are supposed to be what the Blood Angels are all about and what they are supposed to enter CLOSE COMBAT with.

Getting into CC with tau SHOULD be hard as once you do reach them with a significant part of your force, it's almost a given they will be destroyed.

And you say this while telling me that assault marines are not supposed to charge the Riptide. You getting the picture yet? Tau will shoot all the big stuff and kill it and when you're lowly assault marines charge the Riptide they then die in CC.

2+ HQs are often hidden in squads, and kitted for CC, hence why I mentioned them. Of course, your lascannon/railgun can kill that Chaos terminator lord, but can your LC/Railgun kill his 30 cultist bodyguards?

You're talking to a guy that runs Farsight Bomb in his apocalypse games. You can ask Lysander next time what happened to him and his 5 Terminator bodyguard.

No, so he's going to get into CC, where the best way to beat him is a challenge, and this is where the loss of AP2 on power weapons does hurt, and I freely admit this.

While you're at it you can ask the wolf lord what happened to him and his terminator bodyguard.

Dante and Mephiston are bad examples as they are both rarely seen and rather overcosted.

Yes, so two of the best BA HQ's don't even get used. Considering that Mephie was pretty much one of THE BEST CC CHARACATERS under 5th edition and now he doesn't even get used should tell you something.

Conversely, a Hive Tyrant with a 2+, Chaos termies lord/sorcerer, or a terminator libby/chaplain/captain all have access to either wings and high T for the Tyrant, or good invulns in the case of the others.

Invulnerables are pretty rare and on normal units are overcosted. and even then that doesn't mean much to me. My Tau army pump out that many shots that you WILL ROLL THAT MANY ONES. In one shooting phase my Broadsides (HYMP & SMS) removed A WHOLE GREY HUNTERS UNIT off the table in one turn. It even included a wolf guard in termie armour in the unit has well. They just failed that many armour saves. I usually don't care what invulnerables you have.They weren't even anywhere near me while I did this as well. They were pretty much the full 30" away from me.

I'm not trying to say assault is as good as ever it was, and I accept it has been nerfed, but not into playability. It is still viable, you just have to think more carefully and what, when and how you assault.

Not all assault is impossible granted, but a lot of it is. Footslogging units just doesn't work and light transports will be blown up before they even get to me. It really only leaves Land Raiders, Stormravens. Assault Rams, FMC, left. So if you don't have high armour or you don't fly, expect to be shot to pieces by Tau.

I'm hoping the Space Marine chapter traits actually help some armies out. Khan being able to scout I think may help out against Tau.

Rustican wrote:
You're playing demons which are one of the best assault armies currently and you're saying that you have difficulty. Other armies not fully specialized for assault but are considered fluff assault armies are having a much harder time (Black Templar, Orks, Blood Angles, hoard nyds).

The best way to i've seen to dislodge castled troops are drop pods with heavy flamers and barrage pie plates. Trying to assault is one of the least effective things for a majority of armies out there.

Since I tend to play against shooty Eldar and Necron armies the most, of course getting into assault is going to be tough. It shouldn't be easy to get to assault, even for a dedicated assault army, because once the assault actually lands (typically on multiple fronts), it can completely derail a shooty army.

Those other armies you listed can perform assault reasonably well, its just easier and more effecient to just go shooty. The fact that Chaos Daemons are the only assault themed army with a new codex is pretty much the reason they are the current best assault army. I have a feeling Nids will take their place very soon, as they will be able to provide far more reliable supporting fire than non-allied Daemons can, and will have even cheaper assault troops and bigger unit size.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Rustican wrote:
You're playing demons which are one of the best assault armies currently and you're saying that you have difficulty. Other armies not fully specialized for assault but are considered fluff assault armies are having a much harder time (Black Templar, Orks, Blood Angles, hoard nyds).

The best way to i've seen to dislodge castled troops are drop pods with heavy flamers and barrage pie plates. Trying to assault is one of the least effective things for a majority of armies out there.

Since I tend to play against shooty Eldar and Necron armies the most, of course getting into assault is going to be tough. It shouldn't be easy to get to assault, even for a dedicated assault army, because once the assault actually lands (typically on multiple fronts), it can completely derail a shooty army.

Not when the threat is on a T6 2+ monstrous creature that will likely just punch you back and have most of your attacks bounce off the armour save. it shouldn't be easy for a shooting army to just point/click away units at a time without having to move either, and yet it is.

Yes, Riptides are tau units, but they are hardly representative of the codex. Most of a tau army will consist of T3 WS2 FW with a 4+ save, which even a damaged squad of ASM will destroy if they reach CC, and with a good amount of terrain, multiple targets being offered, and if used properly, they are probably going to reach them.

I'm not trying to point out that assault is the be-all-and-end-all of 40k. Shooting and CC are balanced, and the Riptide is one of the units you are better shooting. On the other hand, there are a lot of targets that you are better off assaulting than trying to shoot down, like fire warriors in cover.

ASM have never been good at taking on dedicated CC units, they are designed to use their mobility to avoid the dangerous units and kill weak, shooty troops. It makes sense that you're not going to go for CC units with CC units, you're going to shoot them, but the inverse is also true, and CC against shooty units is the best option.

Farsight bomb is one list in one codex, and against other lists, that aren't tau, then the likes of Lysander+termies is a unit that will do well. not every player is a tau player, and not every army is tau.

The problems with BA are really more to do with changes to do with reserves and low model count than changes to assault, that is why you don't see Dante or meph because they can't afford to drop 200+ points on Characters when their troops are too expensive across the board.

And yet again the example with the GH goes back to tau, and while I appreciate that they are your army and therefore a good example for you to use, there are plenty of armies who can't put out that much firepower. Tau are the best army at shooting these days, as they should be. One army does not mean that suddenly any models on the board will be blown away T1, any more than one army having heldrakes means MEQ might as well not show up, or that Vendettas mean no one should bother bringing fliers.