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.

I excuse myself by claiming that I'm playing in keeping with my army (Khorne CSMs), but I get too fixated on killing the other guy and don't devote enough to taking and holding objectives.

Maelstrom seems silly to me. Why worry about capturing that bit of ruined building this turn, when there's the HATED IMPERIAL FILTH over there to kill???

I'm bad at focusing squads to death.

Not tanks and MCs, those I'm just fine at pouring fire into until they're totally dead. But with squads themselves I'm very bad about spreading my fire too thin so that it all has the most effect and not 'wasting shots', but as a result my enemy often ends up with a lot of wounded but still functional squads.

As an Eldar player: Sicarians.

Crispy78 wrote:
I excuse myself by claiming that I'm playing in keeping with my army (Khorne CSMs), but I get too fixated on killing the other guy and don't devote enough to taking and holding objectives.

Maelstrom seems silly to me. Why worry about capturing that bit of ruined building this turn, when there's the HATED IMPERIAL FILTH over there to kill???

That's why you make objectives out of things your army would want to get. All mine are gretchins stealing really sweet gubbinz. Yours could be a chaos icon, an awesome daemon weapon, a desecrated Astartes symbol, etc...

I also have the issue of focusing too much on killing and not scoring/denial. I had a game the other day where I could have won if I had denied him at least one objective (and if I hadn't rolled two 1's for two separate D3 objective cards.)

Also, anything that denies cover screws me over, so Tau.

Not tactically redeploying my Bloodthirster through the use of his wings and glide, in favour of killing something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or scouting with Khorne dogs. That literally makes them useless for a full turn.

My problem is mainly lack of high strength ignore cover outside lucky roll on Divination psychic table. As marines, the only reliable ignore cover fire power is flamer weapons and TFC, while they are dangerous to Nids little bugs and Ork boyz, most MCs could shrug off with no troubles, those MCs would also easily stopped plasma fire or grav fire without psychic support (perfect timing) by gaining the 4+ cover or 2+ cover.

As a noob, doing battle with other noobs, I tend to have an interesting issue: I'll wipe out most of the enemy team by the end of the game, however my opponent always manages to have gotten more points via objectives.

The most dramatic example was when my Imperial Guard forces had reduced the enemy team down to a damaged broadside, half a squad of Fire Warriors, and an injured Crisis Suit Commander (my Guard still had two tanks, artillery, and numerous infantry left) but the game ended before I could finish them off. My opponent earlier in the game had been more successful with point holding and completing tactical objectives than I, so I technically lost (though both I and my opponent joked about how hollow a victory it was for him.)

eldar anf farsight enclave lists aggrivate me too much, i often go out of my way to not even play them. this is rather harsh but i feel that the rules list you need to account for with both armies is far too high and the number of things individual units can do that are just devestating to our army is overwhelming. its like playing against grim patron in hearthstone, its not one or two bad cards in the deck its the fact that the whole list is way to overwhelming and often you find yourself starring at what looks like a stacked deck and just give up and defeat yourself. though objectively with the eldar its just your defeated anyway you just dont know it yet so yeah. i dislike them to the point where i dont bother and will go out of my way to avoid them

with 4th edition my biggest issue was that i had trouble with picking when i would abandon holding objectives when scoring points in objective missions. and would pick all the wrong time to give them up

As a Necron player, I mainly struggle with 2+ Sv armies. The only AP2 weapons I even consider bringing are Triarch Stalkers w/HGC or Szeras. I don't run Wraiths either. I rely on Volume and there are times where it gets me. I rolled over 120 Dice the other night against 1 DreadKnight, putting over 40 Wounds on it. He limped away with 1 wound left.

Other than that, it's usually Tau players in general. It's always a really difficult game, and I feel like Im fighting up a cliff compared to other armies. It's always after the game, that I learn that they were playing some rule wrong that made it really difficult.

Losing track against Hull points. Lost a game against a Knight list in a tournament because I thought I had shot at a Knight previously but was a different Knight I had shot at. Cost me the game.

I struggle with the above and deployment. That and I have always loved Assault Marines and Jump Packs even if they aren't as competitive as there Bike partners.

I also struggle because I try to build competitive fluffy list. Hard to do in today's meta.

I struggle against very mobile and shooty armies with my Orks as I don't go for a speed freak style army nor a green tide. I've been lucky so far at my FLGS by not facing eldar yet but soon that luck runs out. For my wolves I struggle against lots of bodies tying my guys up. I don't have a lot of TWC and run a good amount to of infantry without drop pods. They also had trouble against deathstar units like ravenwing and demons with 2++ from psychics. But fortunately lately I have not run into those recently and have been winning as well.

Going for fluffy forces when i'm taking on quite serious opposition and not bringing enough scoring units. Recent rulebooks have helped mitigate the second one a bit, but my former is definitely getting worse!

I have a bad tendency of going for the killing blow and under committing the combat power needed to kill off the truly important target. That kind of aggression usually tends to bite me in the butt. Need to maintain that tactical patience.

I don't do close combat at all as sm player I try to avoid it all cost even thou I use a assault squad with flamers. I just can't get it out my head that close combat sucks and you should stick with shooting. Fun thing is my brother is their person I play the most and he uses tau old dexs still but still

 Cothonian wrote:
As a noob, doing battle with other noobs, I tend to have an interesting issue: I'll wipe out most of the enemy team by the end of the game, however my opponent always manages to have gotten more points via objectives.

The most dramatic example was when my Imperial Guard forces had reduced the enemy team down to a damaged broadside, half a squad of Fire Warriors, and an injured Crisis Suit Commander (my Guard still had two tanks, artillery, and numerous infantry left) but the game ended before I could finish them off. My opponent earlier in the game had been more successful with point holding and completing tactical objectives than I, so I technically lost (though both I and my opponent joked about how hollow a victory it was for him.)

I had that same issue, and I use infantry guard so I didn't want to try fixing it with lots of chimeras. What I did do was transform my big infantry platoon into a close combat beast.

I took a Priest, a Primaris Psyker with a Force Axe, and added Inquisitor Coteaz and another Inquisitor with Rad Grenades. I run a small line of conscripts out in front of them so I can Go to Ground for a 4+ cover save. Then I just run them up the field while my tanks and artillery pound away.

It's actually surprisingly hard to take these guys on in close combat, even for stuff like Ork green tides, because they have to get through the conscripts to get to me and if I get the charge they eat 5 flamers and FRFSRF lasguns (I can usually get the relentless warlord trait or the Biomancy power that gives it and 4+ Feel No Pain) and then 120+ attacks rerolling to hit and to wound with -1 toughness.

It's not impossible to shoot them all to death, but it takes a bloody long time and the rest of the list is a dedicated gunline.

From a list-building standpoint:

-trying to build TAC lists in a rock/paper/scissor tournament environment, although I am getting better at that
-faithfully sticking with my fluff CT options (IF/Sentinels) over the much better WS CT (somewhat debatable, but with Kauyon it's hard to NOT pick WS these days)

From a game-play standpoint:

-keeping track of objectives and scores, there are plenty of times where a game could have been won or at least tied if I had kept closer track of "table-quarters" or "line-breaker" or kill-points
-first turn. What I mean by that is that I can usually retrace my game-losing moments to a deployment mistake, or a wrong decision (going first/second), or an early mistake in target-priority

Since my main army is IG, I rely heavily on cover. unfortunately my main opponent is Tau. I struggle against extremely maneuverable armies like my wife's DE or my buddy's Tau assault move shenanigans too. I just don't have enough ignore cove orders to pass around or the maneuverability to draw LOS without putting myself in lanes of fire. These and my dice hate me except for the few times when they love me and I consecutively roll 5s and 6s.

I can usually back up my IG with AM the toughen up my forces but I still hurt in the maneuverability department.

I struggle against high-firepower long-range armies. Against enemies who like to get up close like Orks, I do well. Against low firepower armies like Space Marines (outside of grav), I also do well. IG with lots of high strength low AP blasts, Tau, Eldar... Those are my bane.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SirDonlad wrote:
Going for fluffy forces when i'm taking on quite serious opposition and not bringing enough scoring units. Recent rulebooks have helped mitigate the second one a bit, but my former is definitely getting worse!

Also this. Hooo boy, this.

My biggest flaw is that I play Orks. The internet keeps saying that Orks are bad and I can see it but all the other factions just aren't Orky enough for a proper scrap. Its truly isn't easy being green. Unfortunately I tend to enjoy taking the less optimal units like Battlewagons, Flash Gitz, Weirdboyz, Nobz, and even...... I'm afraid to say it..... Killa Kanz . If I really wanted to up my game then I would play a top tier army but then I would be an unorky git. Oh yeah I also play Tau. Even with the blue gitz I tend to stubbornly play the units I like instead of the optimal net lists. Fire Warriors, Pathfinders, Hammerheads, Ethereal, and Crisis Suits are my jam and up until now I have never used a Riptide (Retaliation Cadre looks like too much fun despite the Riptide).

Ignoring my unit/army selection "problem" I tend to focus too much on killing everything over working towards objectives. With the Orks its because I think most of my units can't survive weathering the shooting so I need to get stuck in ASAP and worry about objectives later (this is even on maelstrom). With my Tau I often feel like I'm too passive in my movement because I don't want to get my units in close combat. I let my Crisis Suits deep strike behind enemy lines but rarely will I send my Fire Warriors forward until most of the enemy has been obliterated or too far away to be a threat. Rarely will I risk a unit in the early game for an objective but I often find myself in a points hole by turn 3-4 as I have scored very little while my opponent is up by a decent amount. For the Orks I think maybe having more mobile objective grabbers in the list who I can spare to focus on objectives while my heavy hitters work on crushing the enemy. For Tau having a few suicide Piranhas in my lists might be a good thing as they can get the early objectives and then let my Fire Warriors and Crisis Suits grab objectives when the opponent's army is less alive to contest.

Wraithknights. As chaos with a love of spawn, princes and jugger lords it just counters everything I have at half the price.

My Achilles' Heel?
Not telling the spectators to STFU when me or my opponent is thinking on what to do. Already cost me basically 2 games, since I was against 3 persons debating EVERY.SINGLE.TURN. what was best for the other guy.
After that? Not jinking enough for fear to lose too much firepower and relying too much on HIt and Run to escape hairy situations.

As a Necron player:
- being slow. I find I cannot ever get to where I need to be in enough time to make a difference, whether that be scoring an objective or being close enough to make that key assault.
- lack of high strength weapons with an actual ap value. Against (G)MCs & multiwound characters I struggle to chip them to death relying solely on weight of dice.

As a marine player:
- not supporting my forces poroperly. I end up having units stuck in a certain area and being slaughtered because they're on their own.
- Being elitist. I find I spend too much on my squads. every loss I take I can feel in every unit.

 Vankraken wrote:
My biggest flaw is that I play Orks. The internet keeps saying that Orks are bad and I can see it but all the other factions just aren't Orky enough for a proper scrap. Its truly isn't easy being green. Unfortunately I tend to enjoy taking the less optimal units like Battlewagons, Flash Gitz, Weirdboyz, Nobz, and even...... I'm afraid to say it..... Killa Kanz

I'd fight you. It'd be a mosh pit worthy of legend.

My biggest weakness is my love of special characters and relics and my "toys before boys" attitude {maybe not the right wordage as i don't play orks but you get the gist). Why have a whole other unit when I can have a leader that can punch something in the face really hard or have that one unit really do a number on my opponent.

One of my favorite units are the Dark Reapers and I kit them out with the missiles and the exarch with his toys, so my 10 man squad comes out to 357 pts, then I throw in Eldrad and Mugan Ra for another 400 points and it may or may not be (definitely is) a little overkill.

I play in an assault heavy meta, and I favor alpha strikey shooty units.
I also favor heavy weapons over much more practical special weapons.

Most games I blow my alpha strike on the wrong thing, or on the bait, and then get wiped up by fast moving assault forces.

I need to consider deployments and force selection for a longer game. Greater maneuverability with heavy weapons to draw in and whittle down assault units would work better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IHateNids wrote:
As a Necron player:
- being slow. I find I cannot ever get to where I need to be in enough time to make a difference, whether that be scoring an objective or being close enough to make that key assault.

I played a Guard Heavy weapons army for a long time before I realized sometimes you need to run. You need to run instead of shooting if it will mean making an assault or taking an objective later in the game. Boy is that hard to do with a lazcanon squad. Mybe this doesn't help you precisely. I was under the impression that Necrons had some great maneuverability options.

I don't have a whole lot of bodies on the field. I have a total of 43 bodies(Pedro, 7 Honour Guard, 20 Sternguard, 10 Scouts, 5 Devastators). I also have a lot of points tied up in one spot (Pedro, 7 Honour Guard, Land Raider Redeemer = 690 pts). So if that unit gets obliterated, I lose a third of my points. Also, that unit is geared toward assault, so if it doesn't get into assault, it is pretty ineffective.

I am also pretty sure I could smash those 690 points fairly reliably in melee with 450 points of my own.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am also pretty sure I could smash those 690 points fairly reliably in melee with 450 points of my own.

Spoiler:

Lorgar.

Most of the Primarchs do fine in melee against non-Primarchs. I could try to overwhelm him with attacks (that squad has 50 attacks), but they are probably going to lose.

Lorgar's trick is his very reliable casting of Precognition on himself, granting himself rerolls to hit, to wound, and to save.

While he only has 5 attacks, he is not going to die any time soon with WS6 T6 W6 2+/4++, both rerollable.

Anyway, I also struggle with other LoW. Lorgar fares well in melee but against actual D my army falls flat, and fast.