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.

Dashofpepper's guide to strategic objective placement has gone live on our blog!

Feel free to give it a read and leave a comment for him there. You can find the article here:

http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com/2011/06/dashofpepper-on-objective-placement.html

Oh man this is going to be good.

Some stuff to add to that guide.

As an Mech IG player against powerarmor varients, you probably want the objectives(sieze the groud) away from terrain so that your lascannons/meltas/plasmas will efficiently eat through them without fearing them going to ground. Keep all objectives within LOS of 90-100% of your biggest guns.

If your opponents has outflanking units, you should ofcourse place objectives as far away from the board edges.

Here's another idea ,

My bro would pull this one on me every time i played him w/ my

all bike Ork list .

Place the objectives on the upper floors & watch as your opponent runs around in circles !

My only counter to this was to try to table him , which proved to be extremely difficult.

It's a good guide, and one of the most difficult topics to write on. The concept is one of the most simple concepts in the game; when a player chooses where to place objectives the objectives should be placed in a location that hurts the other side more than their own side. There are a ton of factors such as turn order, army, opposing army, firepower, durability, and deployment type that make what should be simple decision very complex.

delkwon wrote:Here's another idea ,

My bro would pull this one on me every time i played him w/ my

all bike Ork list .

Place the objectives on the upper floors & watch as your opponent runs around in circles !

My only counter to this was to try to table him , which proved to be extremely difficult.

Well, if you place an objective next to a multi-level ruin, then he can't place another one within 12" of it...including on the upper floors of it. There aren't many three story ruins floating around on tabletops for competitive gaming, and if an objective is on the second floor of a ruin (3" up) your nob bikers are 2" tall - and if you're underneath one, you're only 1" away from it, where you only need to be within 3" to contest or control it.

My personal objective placement 'method' wasn't really in there. When I'm playing my Tau I'm putting objectives in as open places as possible. I don't 'take' objectives like many other armies. I have to shoot opponents off them, then walk/skim onto them. So naturally, the less cover saves my opponents have the better. Using objectives as lures to kill units has been quite useful.

So your Tau strategy is to provide open fields of fire to enfilade enemy lines when placing objectives, playing to your army strengths?

WarOne wrote:So your Tau strategy is to provide open fields of fire to enfilade enemy lines when placing objectives, playing to your army strengths?

Lol ya pretty much, imagine that.

Interesting read. I enjoyed it. I'm going to have to pay closer attention to objective placement and see if my observations match yours.

Welcome back, by the way.