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.

Hi, i wanted to canvas opinion about this, though im sure people have thought of it before....

...When you have a unit of Troops I believe that it is better to field an odd number rather than an even number, e.g. 5, 7, 9 etc. This is because it takes the same amount of troops to reduce a squad to half strength (and from then on only contest objectives) than a squad that is made up of an even number of troops (e.g. 6,8,10).

For example, say I have 6 Grey Hunters (90pts) on an objective. My enemy kills three of my men. I am therefore now at half strength and can only contest. But if I have 5 Grey Hunters (75pts), it has cost me 15 points less and my opponent still has to destroy 3 of my squad for it to be at half size and only contest. Finally, lets say with the extra points I saved I bought a Power Weapon for one of the Hunters in my 5 man squad. I would take that squad any day over a naked 6 man squad as it has the versatility to kill ICs.

Does anyone else approach building squads like that?

It should also be noted that while it takes the same amount of deaths before an odd or even numbered unit can't contest, it'll require one less kill for the whole of the odd unit to be killed.

You also have to keep in mind that tac squads only get access to weapons with 10 men, DE warriors can only take heavy weapons after 10 (and unless on foot they're limited to 10 guys max), BA assault squads can only get their second special after 10 men, imperial guard have mostly fixed unit numbers and so on...

While it might be useful, I personally don't want to make it easier for my opponent to get a kill point or lose out on special weapons.

Thats my opinion at least...

fluffywyvern wrote:...This is because it takes the same amount of troops to reduce a squad to half strength (and from then on only contest objectives) ...

I think your premise may be flawed. Maybe I'm missing something, but my rulebook doesn't say anything about squads being unable to score if they're below half strength.

@Wizard12

Okay, so would you say that, generally speaking, 10 outweighs 9 in terms of advantages, but 5 outweights 6?

@Redbeard

I believe that a 50% or less Troop unit can only contest not actually score. Haven't got rulebook to hand though unfortunately.

fluffywyvern wrote:
@Redbeard
I believe that a 50% or less unit can only contest not actually score. Haven't got rulebook to hand though unfortunately.

I believe you're wrong. I suggest you check the definition of a scoring unit on page 90 when you get the opportunity, and then perhaps revisit this topic.

Argh. Yes, you're right, I just asked a friend to check for me. Remove this article! It doesn't make sense!

It still matters for VPs. It takes 3 kills to score the vps on a 6 man unit, same as a 5 man unit. And the 5 man unit gives up fewer VPs. But VPs aren't a big part of the game anymore.

That was a 4th Edition rule of thumb. I originally thought that this thread (by the title) was from three or four years ago.

It might matter for purposes of falling back due to shooting.

If you have 4 models in a squad, you need to lose 2 of them before you have 25% causalities.
If you have 5 models in a squad, you need to lose 2 of them before you have over 25% causalities.
If you have 6 models in a squad, you need to lose 2 of them before you have over 25% causalities.

In this example, both 5 and 6 models have the same number they can lose before making that LD check. This is useful with low LD units like lootas that can run off the board easily.

If you want to come at it from a standpoint of having to take leadership checks. It works out that there are certain numbers that are more efficient than others

4 man loses 1 check 25%
5 man loses 2 check 40%
6 man loses 2 check 33%
7 man loses 2 check 28%
8 man loses 2 check 25%
9 man loses 3 check 33%
10 man loses 3 check 30%
11 man loses 3 check 27%
12 man loses 3 check 25%
13 man loses 4 check 30%
14 man loses 4 check 29%
15 man loses 4 check 27%
16 man loses 4 check 25%
17 man loses 5 check 29%
18 man loses 5 check 28%
19 man loses 5 check 26%
20 man loses 5 check 25%
21 man loses 6 check 29%
etc

So the efficient number in terms of minimizing leadership tests are 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, etc

Lorek wrote:That was a 4th Edition rule of thumb. I originally thought that this thread (by the title) was from three or four years ago.

3rd edition, actually. In 3rd you always fielded odd numbers where possible because a unit had to be above half starting strength to Score. You also scored half VP for them when they were reduced to half strength or below, so starting at odd numbers were always best for the owner.

In 4th they fixed that, and made it so that a unit BELOW half starting strength was non-scoring. You still got half VPs once they were down to half, though, so it was pretty even. Get 'em to half and at least you get the VPs. Kill one more to make them not score.

As noted, in 5th even the last surviving model of a scoring unit is still scoring.

It was why I used to field my dark eldar warriors in groups of 13 on foot.

Yup. I'd field units of 9 Guardian Defenders or Dire Avengers in 3rd for the above reason and for resistance to the initial 25% casualties test. 5, 13, and 17 were also numbers some folks used for different units for the same reason.