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.

Way to distort reality. I have ALWAYS said I target walkers with my greater daemon and crushers first. What I did say is that people like you say that Crushers are helpless versus walkers which is not true... And you really need to check your math. It is also bullocks to say walkers can take a stroll through the park and will always charge Crushers.

At Capn K - I don't know anyone who takes three landraiders and two dreadnaughts in an 1850 point list. Care to post yours up?

G

I'm not familiar enough with the stat lines of BT models to get a hard number, but assuming they get rerolls to hit due to Preferred Enemy and are S4, they will kill the Bloodthirster at I1 of the second assault phase, but lose about 4 Terminators in the process. The Bloodletters on the other hand will kill about 3 of the LC Terminators and 2 of the TH/SS Terminators while losing about 8-9 models, then another 2 or so models due to Fearless wounds. The Terminators will then kill off the last two, who will also get between 1-2 Terminators, leaving 1-2 Terminators alive in the squad when all the BLs are dead. Overall BT Termies are better off going after the big pointsink targets like the Thirster, but are at a loss against the lower point models due to power weapons and elite stats.

I'll give you the stats and you can get a better figure. Like I said, I never have had a problem charging a thirster with these guys...and only 12 bloodletters per squad doesn't scare them a whole lot either IMHO. YMMV.

LC guys on the charge: WS4 (re-roll) S5 (re-roll wounds) 16 attacks at INIT 5

TH/SS guys on the charge WS4(re-roll) S9. 12 possible attacks at INIT 1

My Crusher squad ate one of these squads in the batrep where you complained about the BT list. You can bat stats around all you like, it's important to understand the odds but when the numbers people are throwing around don't add up it's time to take a step back and re evaluate.

So K how about showing us your 3 landraider 2 dreadnaught list?

G

Way to distort reality. I have ALWAYS said I target walkers with my greater daemon and crushers first. What I did say is that people like you say that Crushers are helpless versus walkers which is not true... And you really need to check your math. It is also bullocks to say walkers can take a stroll through the park and will always charge Crushers.

Firstly, how are they really consistently doing this when your opponents get first reaction to your deployment? If you are going to target walkers how are you getting there first before other units in the army intercept them? Also who says I'll always charge crushers with my walkers? Sometimes it my be to my benefit to charge Bloodletters instead. In my experience playing vs. KDA armies, walkers have always given my opponent problems one way or another.

At Capn K - I don't know anyone who takes three landraiders and two dreadnaughts in an 1850 point list. Care to post yours up?

Re-read what I said. I said most of the time you are taking 2 of one type or another...OR both in bigger point levels (ard boyz, etc). I have to dig up my 1850pt list when I get home. It's been about 6 months since I last played at 1850pt level...and played it competitively. I can tell you this though...it does have 2 LRCs in it at least. I don't recall what else was in it with any great certainty. I may have swapped out the assault marines for a ven. dread at one point. I don't remember.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Your squad ate this because he deepstruck them....and it was all LC's...and it was only 5 models. When this unit is in the safety of a AV14 assault transport, I get to better pick where they are going to do their fighting and leave less to chance.

Don't worry, I'll be posting it when I get home and pull it from my case.

Green Blow Fly wrote:My Crusher squad ate one of these squads in the batrep where you complained about the BT list. You can bat stats around all you like, it's important to understand the odds but when the numbers people are throwing around don't add up it's time to take a step back and re evaluate.

So K how about showing us your 3 landraider 2 dreadnaught list?

G

I think anyone following this post who understands the game knows why a walker can't just walk up and charge a squad of Crushers everytime.

You keep avoiding my question. Post up your list and stop going on with general discussions. I want to see if you can put it all together.

G

GBF - I would love to hear why Sourclam's math is incorrect. I got the exact same numbers he did, and its quite clear your math is wrong just by the 4 attacks, 3 hits thing.

I have explained my math versus his and the reasons for the difference in results. You are free to go back and read that.

G

Uhh, I read the entire topic again, and no you didnt. You are putting numbers in that no body understands and you have not explained it. He's already told you youre wrong twice and all youve said is something about having a degree and distribution. Then it's just been you saying youre right and he's wrong...if I've made a mistake I would like to know why (though Im pretty darn sure I didnt).

Since you also commented on my (hypothetical) 2.68 hits, I would like to hear how it's worse than changing numbers by your discretion, which completely change the end results. I would like to hear how it's a bad thing period actually.

In my vanilla SM list I run a LRC with libby and 7 assault terminators (as low as 1500 point battles). This squad has no fear of deamons due to nullzone. I use it as a spear unit with the rest of the army backing it up with some decent firepower.

I also just noticed that the topic title was changed from "Close combat oriented marines vs KD" to "SM armies must go shooty vs KD".

That's not very mature, and makes you sound like youre angry over the replies to your question. In my opinion, you shouldn't ask questions if youre afraid of the answers. There was no need to change the topic.

I think anyone following this post who understands the game knows why a walker can't just walk up and charge a squad of Crushers everytime.

I think that anyone following this post who understands the game has already poked enough holes in your reasoning. All you are doing at this point is defending your position and not the topic. Would you rather us just say: "dude your army is the roxxor and nothing can beat it?" because the way you are defending your position you are making it seem that nothing can stop your army...which we both know is false.

You keep avoiding my question. Post up your list and stop going on with general discussions. I want to see if you can put it all together.

I haven't avoided anything, and I've already said I'll post my list when I leave work. There really is nothing for me to put together. I've played against this list enough times to know exactly what my Templars need to do to win. It isn't like your list is any big mystery to solve....LOL.

I was attempting to accomodate people like you.

G

Yeah I noticed that too. Pretty lame GBF.

Night Lords wrote:I also just noticed that the topic title was changed from "Close combat oriented marines vs KD" to "SM armies must go shooty vs KD".

That's not very mature, and makes you sound like youre angry over the replies to your question. In my opinion, you shouldn't ask questions if youre afraid of the answers. There was no need to change the topic.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I was attempting to accomodate people like you.

G

Ok? So to summarize this topic:

-You say BAs and BTs, because they are close combat focused, cannot shoot, and they must assault (and lose to) Khorne Daemons

-If someone were to say they shot the daemons, they fall into a "marine shooty camp" and "admit that they cannot win without shooting"

-If we take a certain strategy, you will just come out and say "X kills A, Y kills B, and Z kills C, your strategy sucks".

-If we take a unit that is a good counter and a reasonable choice, you will give us math that is wro--....uhh "questionable", and will not explain it.

-If no one agrees with you or gives you an answer youre looking for, you will change the entire topic title to prove....what exactly?



I must say, this has been a very weird thread. I thought there was decent contribution until the above started happening.

never said can't shoot as that is silly and we all agree shooting is integral to SM. however people such as yourself have stated their tactic is based primarliy on shooting. Two dreadnaughts is not going to beat KDA. seven assault terminators in a crusader with null zone standing by is the first good idea I have heard and it actually addresses the OP.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Way to distort reality. I have ALWAYS said I target walkers with my greater daemon and crushers first. What I did say is that people like you say that Crushers are helpless versus walkers which is not true... And you really need to check your math. G

Well, my math is correct. I've double checked it twice, and have already called you out on your errors.

And I've put it down in type on this very thread that nobody says Crushers can't hurt Walkers, simply that it's a tactic of desperation, dependent on being able to roll a bunch of sixes on a small number of dice -- which is perfectly true.

I have ALWAYS said I target walkers with my greater daemon and crushers first.

Targeting the Dreadnought with your Crushers is exactly the problem that many have brought up.

How many times do I have to say it? I am not counting on crushers to take out dreadnaughts BUT mine can.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote: Two dreadnaughts is not going to beat KDA. seven assault terminators in a crusader with null zone standing by is the first good idea I have heard and it actually addresses the OP.

G

Presumably TH/SS Assault Terminators actually aren't that great a choice. Defender Reacts should be able to base up the Librarian (and kill him) and the majority of KDA units, like Blood Letters and Crushers, are going to be able to do enough wounds at initiative to cripple the Assault squad without giving a great return for the points.

Wow if you think the SM player is going to get an assault off, and doing so position the libby to take max attacks you are far off. Assaulting out of a LRC generally means I can all but dictate exactly where all the models end up in b2b through some good maneuvering. Either way, Pure TH/SS termies are a waste without Vulken (i don't use him). I run them as 3 LC and 4 TH/SS. Defender reacts only matters if he has more models than I can base. For crushers, I can b2b them all. For letters, they will either be softened enough to allow little or a single B2B with the libby, or he will just stay in the LRC.

Mahu wrote:GBF, so your argument is that because Space Marine can't out assault you they loose by default.

Any assault based Space Marine army has elements of shooting in it, just like your particular version of KDA has shooty elements to it. Just because you dominate one aspect of the game doesn't mean a good Space Marine army will have trouble fighting you on their terms.

The weakness of the KDA armies is apparent:

1. They might not get their preferred wave.
2. They have to sit a turn.
3. Few of their models move over 6"
4. Their troops only have a 5++ save, and can only improve that by going to ground which stops them from doing anything the following turn.
5. They only have limited shooting, and most of their anti-tank is in assault.

Keeping that in mind, the Space Marine player can use good target priority with the shooting they do have, and use good target priority with their assaults to be able to handle the KDA.

KDA is a mid tier army at best.

While it's true that even some of the best KDA lists are only a mid-tier army, a smart player will avoid losing all of their good units on turn one because of some roll. Most KDA lists have redundancy of some kind, right? You have to. There needs to be at least two squads of bloodletters and at least one HQ, so you already have some redundancy there. A good Principal with any mono-Daemon army is to divide the kinds of units evenly (or with at least a few of a certain type) per wave. Is this as effective as getting all your best units on the preferred wave? No. Is this an effective way to ensure you get some of what you want? Yes. One of the more interesting KDA lists I've seen had a common denominator of 2 for each squad type, 4 squads of 15 bloodletters, 2 squads of 4 bloodcrushers, 2 bloodthirsters, 2 soulgrinders. No matter what he would get his preferred wave. It's not the 'solution' to the problem, but it's an effective comprimise.

Now, Most of their anti-tank is in assault, but most of their anti-tank is in assault with winged MCs, too. If a properly mechanized Assault BA army were to move and remain able to shoot effectively, They wouldn't move much faster (or any faster at all) than a winged MC that just Deep Striked in behind you. Assuming you're not taking Land Raiders (I think we've decided that is the bane of any Daemon army), a Bloodthirster (one of the ONLY two MC options) could easily munch them to death with 5 S 8 attacks on the charge.

I've never taken statistics, and I'm no expert, but wouldn't a bloodletters (without the charge) get a 25% kill rate per attack against assault marines? And isn't that with, what, two attacks? A common amount of bloodletters per squad is 15, so 25% of 30 attacks is 7.5 wounds even if they don't get the charge. Can someone do the Mathhammering on charging bloodletters vs. Assault Marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Night Lords wrote:-You say BAs and BTs, because they are close combat focused, cannot shoot, and they must assault (and lose to) Khorne Daemons

It's not that they can't assault, but if they remain in pistol range, they WILL be assaulted. A Bolt Pistol is 12", which is also assault range (Move 6", Charge 6", 6+6=12, 12 shooting range =12 assaulting range) so it's only to soften them up at best. I'd rather get the charge against bloodletters than take it.

Anyways, as usual this is just the 2 cents of a guy who started this summer.

I guess if he wants a straight marine beat down of daemons he wants his list to square off against the grandmaster some gk termies outta a landraider.. Aside from all the crunching of number why would any sane sm player want who are a combo troop to mix it up with a cc army? Even more so against the cc armies best cc.. I mean I'm sure I could find combo of sm/ba/bt/da/sw that could fight daemons just fine. As far as the combo of ficticous scenarios and "concrete" numbers is sorta now leaning away from fact to idk a less sound arguement.

I like seeing some objective thinking. That is what it's all about really.

G

Here are two 1850 lists I have run in the past in tournaments. Not that it matters, but I have won multiple RTT's with these lists several times. Lastly, matched up against a daemons army, both lists handled KDA builds with no real troubles. These lists have a much harder time vs. mixed daemon armies, since the variety of units makes the daemon numbers swell more.

First list:

HQ:
Marshal with 2 LC's, termie honors, frags
EC with Accept

TROOPS:
5man Crusader squad with 2 BP/CCW's, 1 Bolter, Flamer, Multimelta, RHINO with smoke.

5man Crusader squad with 2 BP/CCW's, 1 Bolter, Flamer, Multimelta, RHINO with smoke.

8 Man Crusader squad with 2 Neophytes BP/CCWs, PF. Mounted in LRC with smoke

ELITES:

7 man Assault Termie squad with 4LCs, 3 TH/SS, Furious charge mounted in LRC with smoke.

Venerable Dread with Assault Cannon, ML, Tank Hunters

FAST ATTACK:

5 man assault squad with Meltabombs, PW, 2 SS

Second List:

HQ:

EC with Accept
Marshal with 2LC's
9 man command squad, with BP/CCWs, Apothecary, SGT w/ PF, furious charge mounted in LRC

TROOPS:

5 man crusader squad with 2 BP/CCW 2 Bolters, Flamer (rides in the HS landraider)

8 man crusader squad with 1 neophyte, Meltagun, PF mounted in LRC with smoke.

5 man crusader squad with 2 BP/CCW, Lascannon, 2 bolters mounted in Rhino

ELITE:

Dread with CCW, Multimelta

HEAVY SUPPORT:

Landraider with smoke

FAST ATTACK:

2 attack bikes with HB

I want to redo my math hammer as requested by Night Lords. So here we go:

Crushers charge dreadnaught
Herald -> 5 attacks, 3 hit - 50% chance to rend
S7 + 6 + d3, auto pen - 33% chance to wreck/destroy
50% * 33% = 16.5% chance to wreck/destroy overall

+ Crusher with Fury -> 4 attacks, 2 hit - 33% chance to rend
S6 + 6 + d3, auto pen - 33% chance to wreck/destroy
33% * 33% = 11% chance to wreck/destroy overall

16.5% + 11% = 27.5% to wreck or destroy total

So if the Crushers charge it would require 3-4 rounds of close combat to kill a dreadnaught without the Venerable upgrade. That equates to at most two full player turns. The dreadnaught would rack up a total of 8 attacks and four hits.... I'll assume that all the hits wound. The Crushers make one invulnerable save and spread the other three wounds throughout the complex unit. I am not taking into account wounds due to No Retreat which would at most rack up 3 more wounds and another failed.

Dreadnaught charges the Crushers
Herald -> 4 attacks, 3 hit - 50% chance to rend
S6 + 6 + d3 = auto pen, 33% chance to wreck or destroy
50% * 33% = 16.5% chance to wreck/destroy overall

Crusher with Fury -> 3 attacks, 2 hit - 33% chance to wreck/destroy
S5 + 6 + d3 = 67% * 33% = 22% chance to wreck/destroy
22% * 33% = 7% chance to wreck/destroy overall

7% + 16.5% =23.5% chance to wreck/destroy total

So again at most 4 rounds of close combat to kill the dreadnaught without the Venerable upgrade.

While my original math hammer was incorrect It's actually not that bad actually when you add it all up assuming the dreadnaught is not Venerable. The main conclusion for me is that it's best not to tackle a Venerable dreadnaught but not that daunting of a task versus a vanilla dreadnaught. There are factors I left off such as the other effects from the armor penetration table when a 5 or 6 is not rolled. Obviously a weapon destroyed result would lessen the number of failed saves netted by the Crushers but I think that's academic at this point.

G

The bottom line G is that can your army manage without the Crushers doing anything for 4 rounds of combat (two game turns)? That's a lot of points stuck in a combat that isn't contributing to the battle elsewhere...especially since a basic dread is like 115pts. For a marine player, that is a good trade for taking a big block of your points out of the game for 2 turns...possibly more depending on the dice gods.

Yeah no kidding. I would gladly sacrifice my 105 point model to keep those crushers in combat so the rest of my army could focus on the remainder of yours.

Crushers might be able to take on a dreadnought. But if it comes to that you are probably in a bad spot already.

KDA might be strong, but it is by no means unbeatable.

I have played enough games that there are times when I don't get the preferred wave. You just have to deal with it. It can be handled.

G