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.

Ailaros response to everything
"If you don't win, you did something wrong"

Not even worth arguing with him. He believes S3 footmen are an unstoppable tide.

No.

That doesn't stop me from rebuffing hypothetical that are actually very rare, or are caused primarily from player fault.

Or instead of acknowledging that 40k is a game where skill matters, you could just put wrong words in my mouth and be sarcastic about it. Snide straw man posts are always convincing...

arinnoor wrote:Hmm, I didn't think daemons would be much of a problem for this army.

Deamons seem scarier than most things against this.

Your opponent drops 16 Bloodcrushers and a Fateweaver practically on top of you... You will not win combats against the crushers and your guns absolutely won't kill enough of them in 1 (or probably even 2) rounds of shooting to stop them tearing your lines apart. If there is also a Bloodthirster involved then GG. Meltabombs don't work against him and with T6 your power weapons aren't going to do much good either (hitting on 5s wounding on 6s). If you shoot him to death then the Crushers are that much more in tact when they assault you.

2-3 Land Raiders also seem problematic as Lascannons don't really do as much work on them as they used to. TH/SS Terminators aren't much of an issue so maybe you end up ok here. Flamestorm Cannons seem like they can do pretty serious damage pretty quick though.

I can see Orks running 2-3 Battlewagons also giving you trouble. AV14 with extra armor doesn't care much about Lascannons. Sure you go simultaneous but the Orks get decent protection by T4 and will be carrying a rather decent amount of attacks into combat. A unit of Nobs can also demolish your blobs. Burnas... forget about it. If you can get your Lascannons and/or Hydras into the softer side armor of the BWs then you won't really have an issue though.

Even BA when they charge can really wreck havoc on your blobs. A 10 man Assault Squad + Librarian with Unleash Rage will win combat on the charge. Death Company are outright terrifying if they hit your blobs. DC + Chaplain = rerollable 3s to hit and rerollable 2s to wound on the charge... with 4 attacks each.

If a SW player can protect his Thunderwolves for the 2 turns it takes to cross the board then they can also demolish blob squads pretty quick. T5 is a massive problem for your blobs in CC.

You get good matchups against quite a few things that are quite strong like Mech IG and Mech SM/SW/BA, but you don't get good matchups across the board. I think if you did then you'd see everyone playing lists like this (as they've been around for a while) rather than Mechvet IG or Hybrid Mech IG.

For the above:

once you twin link all your lascannons with bring it down the vehicles are far less scary, but the rest is very true

Grundz wrote:For the above:

once you twin link all your lascannons with bring it down the vehicles are far less scary, but the rest is very true

They're less scary sure, but only 1/6 of hits will be penetrating hits and those are the only ones that will really be threatening against AV14. Extra Armor really makes almost all the glancing results useless (only a 6 is rough as it becomes an immobilized result).

Sure, but you're talking about an imbalance of points here. 4 chimera costs 200 points. 4 rhinos full of marines costs a LOT of points (unless you're just talking about storm bolters in which case they're not a serious thread).

OK there you go. 4 chimera cost about 600p (I am talking about what is inside the chimera not about the vehicle itself). But what does it matter? If your army is faster you can assure getting local superiority. This is the point about being fast.
So you have a shooting power of 40 men shifted quickly from A to B. That results in killing a blob completely. and if you keep good distance (assuming blob was spaced) you will find yourself out of reach of the second blob. So the blob will always face superior material while 3/4 of your army isnt fighting anything at all until they run into the next trap if you get flanked. And if you dont have space enough to manoeuvre you did something wrong with timing. And you should be able to push throuh the infantry wall at some points (there arent meltaguns everywhere (except you play 4'x4'...)) isolate one blob with tank shocks, pop smoke, hide behind the tanks, kill the isolated blob with shooting (perhaps a finishing assault to kill the remaining commissar and 2 sergeants or so), endure 2 meltaguns, which will most likely do nothing to covered vehicles and proceed eating.

Of course this requires skill too, but we must assume two skilled players instead of a skilled infantry player vs an unexperienced or uncautious mech player.

The goodness of mech says nothing about some imagined crappiness of infantry hordes.

It does. We have to compare with tournament standard quality. So mech guard is a good example. Of course mech guard is not unbeatable. Not at all. It has some mismatches. But footguard will have more.

Plus, there are a TON of unconsidered variables, the first of which is how long it takes to take a turn. That you don't see foot guard at tourneys I'd imagine has much more to do with time limits than the crappiness of foot armies...

Time depends on the player. If you are used to your army, you can even move footguard fast enough to stay in time limit. Here we have foot ork players who are able to move about 120 or more orks and still finish the game in time (about 2:30h to 3:00h a 1750p game). And we have mech guard players who finish 2 turns before reaching the time limit...

note on turns:
If you play a close combat army like orcs, it is in your best interest to make sure your turns are short so that you reach end-game when your units actually reach combat, if you play IG mech, its in your best interest to drag your feet and make sure that never happens, its a dick move but I wouldn't put it beyond any players.

Firstly, I'd like to note that it is plenty possible to both have your blobs close enough to support each other, and also spread out. I've done it a dozen times.

As for the rest, Nazdreg, the arguments you're making are sane, reasonable, and true in the real world. This is 40k, however, which is not a true facsimile of reality.

What you're talking about with mobility allowing you to concentrate your forces to always have local superiority is true assuming you have practically unlimited time and space. The parthians were able to destroy the romans at carrhae because they had a practically unlimited supply of arrows (as far as any given engagement was concerned), and they had the entirety of persia to retreat across, all while they had enough food to keep them well-supplied. They won by fighting with space and time, and used their mobility excellently for the kinds of things you're talking about.

40k, however, does not have infinite time and, much, much more importantly, does not have infinite space. In the reality of 40k, mechanized lists trying to shuffle tanks around will find themselves in a parking lot in an awful hurry. Likewise, forces start out so close to each other that in the time you concentrate your forces, so has your opponent, making it so that you don't have the local superiority you were relying on. By far the most important factor is that there's a board edge. You can only retreat so far. By turn 3, a foot horde will have you pinned in a corner, leaving you with no room for maneuverability.

In the limited, close confines of the world of 40k, you can't think about mobility in terms of german tanks cruising across the deserts of north africa - you have to think about it in terms of german tanks getting penned in in the streets of stalingrad.

Firstly, I'd like to note that it is plenty possible to both have your blobs close enough to support each other, and also spread out. I've done it a dozen times.

At the moment you have at a certain point a double line, you will not be supported if you are spaced. and the rapid fiirer estimates well and deploys so that he only reaches one or two models in the blob. This is just logic and math. And I want to see you moving (correct and clean) blobs deployed in each other and still spaced 2" to every model.

This is 40k, however, which is not a true facsimile of reality.

This does not mean, that certain physical laws dont work.

The parthians were able to destroy the romans at carrhae because they had a practically unlimited supply of arrows

I am not talking about a parthian strategy (at least not the whole game) It is more like mass dragoons vs line infantry. Parthians refused the offensive. I can not do this because as you say correctly, I dont have time and I will be driven off the objectives if I always retreat. I have to bombard a certain point of your line while retreating, then push forward with superior material, kill it and punch through the breach. My point is: Mech chooses where to attack, Mech can shoot while moving without losing speed, mech is superior in long range combat, Mech can block ways completely, Mech is able to throw in more men at a certain spot.
As long as you play 4'x 6' you have time until the third turn (which is the pushing time anyways).

In the limited, close confines of the world of 40k, you can't think about mobility in terms of german tanks cruising across the deserts of north africa - you have to think about it in terms of german tanks getting penned in in the streets of stalingrad.

Tanks in 40k are not RL tanks. They are too easily killed in close assault. But chimeras are rather halftracks or humvees than tanks. But you are right, if the table is only difficult terrain and no sight blocking stuff, mech will have serious issues, because the terrain will prevent them from moving freely. And an immobilised chimera is a dead chimera.
But luckily most tables are not composed like this. And as long as there is any LOS blocking stuff or impassable stuff mech can exploit it better because infantry have to move around it and will suffer from the "agincourt"-problem (moving around stuff kills speed and buys time for the enemy).

-Nazdreg- wrote:My point is: Mech chooses where to attack, Mech can shoot while moving without losing speed, mech is superior in long range combat, Mech can block ways completely, Mech is able to throw in more men at a certain spot.
As long as you play 4'x 6' you have time until the third turn (which is the pushing time anyways).

Mech chooses where to attack. This is definitely true. However, your opponent also chooses where to defend. In the real world, the whole advantage of choosing where to attack stems from the fact that your enemy is forced to defend everywhere at once, and therefore is in all specific places always weak. The thing is, though, this cannot be emmulated in 40k. Local fire superiority doesn't work when your opponent is just as fast as you are, and when they can START with their forces concentrated. I mean, imagine you're facing against an opponent who is castled into a corner. How does chimera mobility allow you to attack their weak spots?

Mech can shoot while moving. This is also very true. However, the amount of firepower that chimeras put out is negligible, as far as horde armies are concerned. Furthermore, there is finite space to move, and your opponent also gets to have a say what your movement phase looks like. 40k is not a game where you can literally fly circles around your opponent and shoot them to death for the win (unless you're perhaps dark eldar against certain armies).

Mech can block space. This is definitely true. So can hordes.

Your last point is really the point of contention here. You are assuming that because you usually move up to 12" that you will always have a local fire superiority. This would be true were it not for the fact that your opponents can start with their forces consolidated, which means that there is no way to achieve superiority (it would be, at best, a big knot of stuff attacking another big knot of stuff), and that your opponents can also move up to 12" to keep pace.

The only way what you're talking about is true is if your opponent deploys in a very spread-out fashion, and then does nothing to consolidate their forces. I don't see how a mechanized force has a particular advantage given that non-mech armies can take advantage of this situation just as easily as can mechanized ones.

You are assuming strangely here in my opinion.

1. You assume all your guys spread out 2" (no hurting blast template hits)
2. you assume your army everywhere on the field to block the ways of the opposing army
3. you assume your army starting cornered and concentrated

These are 3 different situations.

If an army is cornered I will take the field where the army is not present and decimate them using long range while doing so. The army will need to come to me -> disadvantage because they have to concentrate to be effective so it is easy to outmanoeuvre them for the faster opponent.

If the army is spread out, I will concentrate myself on one spot to gain superiority and kill one target each phase and the slower army will spend the game consolidating instead of doing damage.

The fast army chooses how the fight is made. If the slower army refuses to play with them the faster army is better at reacting to what the slower army tries. The slower army must be either resilient enough to endure an unbalanced pressure or shooty enough to control the important spots on the field and pin the fast army in the unimportant ones.

Of course. In the 2 objective mission mech will have problems to win the game against a flesh wall. But the flesh wall will surely not punch through the steel wall. So mech will probably not win, but foot will certainly not win. What happens to infantry attacking a vehicle wall backed up by blast weapons is not really nice. Seen many times, always the same story. They are possibly able to kill 1 or 2 vehicles but the echo is too hard for them to take.

in killpoint missions mech will have endless time to shoot up one target each (starting with the 5 man squads) o the foot army will play upwards and it is surely not stronger in an infight the mech player chooses. It is only stronger if the mech player chooses wrong.

In more objective games foot will not be able to concentrate on one spot because they are minimum 3 spots. and mech waits until they arrive there choose the weakest spot, drive an attack, drive over it and then spreading out to contest the rest. Flesh cannot stop tanks, only meltaguns can and meltaguns cannot be everywhere.
Or mech is even able to take the field, drive over the objectives early in game and then halt making a vehicle wall which will stop the foot army from even reaching anything.

that your opponents can also move up to 12" to keep pace.

ok now we have to clarify something. Foot needs to move through terrain to survive any game opposing an army that even know the word "shooting phase". This slows them down to average 6-8" including running. This has nothing to do with a constant reliable 12" move. And foot will always march with the speed of the slowest squad if they want to stay concentrated.

The only way what you're talking about is true is if your opponent deploys in a very spread-out fashion, and then does nothing to consolidate their forces. I don't see how a mechanized force has a particular advantage given that non-mech armies can take advantage of this situation just as easily as can mechanized ones.

You spoke about spreading out 2" constantly. This automatically results in a very spread out deployment. You cannot afford to castle. The goal wont be killing the army, but winning the game. (claiming objectives or kill one more target)

Mech can block space. This is definitely true. So can hordes.

This wasnt my point...
Hordes are excellent at blocking space. Much better than mech. But blocking space does not win anything except against incoming deepstrikers or jumpers.
I was talking about blocking ways.
Tanks WILL block the way
Infantry CAN block the way (has to get past a morale check and a successful death or glory attack which must be made by a model in the vehicles way 1 likely thing will happen, 5 likely things at the same time wont happen)

-Nazdreg- wrote:1. You assume all your guys spread out 2" (no hurting blast template hits)

If the army is spread out, I will concentrate myself on one spot to gain superiority and kill one target each phase and the slower army will spend the game consolidating instead of doing damage.

I think there is a miscommunication here over this 2" thing. By spreading out, you're thinking of a bunch of marbles scattered across the floor where you can just drive around and pick up one at a time because they're too far apart to support each other. When I'm talking about spreading out, I'm talking about dispersing the unit in order to keep damage from flamer units down. I am not talking about keeping units so far apart that they can't support one another.

You can have an army whose units are concentrated, relative to each other, and within the units themselves are displaced. I know, because I do this basically every game I play.

-Nazdreg- wrote:2. you assume your army everywhere on the field to block the ways of the opposing army

I was talking about blocking ways. Tanks WILL block the way. Infantry CAN block the way (has to get past a morale check and a successful death or glory attack which must be made by a model in the vehicles way 1 likely thing will happen, 5 likely things at the same time wont happen)

With a proper horde, you'd be surprised at how much field coverage you get. Plus, there is so much redundancy that the idea of being everywhere at once isn't always as far from the truth as it seems, especially in the first couple of turns.

As for tanks always powering through, clearly you've never met an opponent who knew what a meltabomb was (or a meltagun for that matter). In any case, tanks can't tank shock when they're stunned, immobilized or wrecked. You can't assume that vehicles will never take damage when trying to absorb field position.

-Nazdreg- wrote:3. you assume your army starting cornered and concentrated

If an army is cornered I will take the field where the army is not present and decimate them using long range while doing so. The army will need to come to me -> disadvantage because they have to concentrate to be effective so it is easy to outmanoeuvre them for the faster opponent.

The thing is, I always have the choice whether to concentrate or not. If I concentrate, the local superiority benefit of mobility is neutralized and there's not a thing you can do about it.

Furthermore, just because an army stays concentrated doesn't mean it must remain immobile. Against a charging green tide, you're looking at a 2-turn assault (or even a turn 1 assault on DoW games, or against BA players). It's not like you get an endless amount of time and space to outmaneuver to your heart's content. In the world of 40k, you have precious little time and a very limited amount of space to maneuver. And that's assuming that long-range shooting hasn't turned your deployment zone into a parking lot straight away.

Yes, your opponent concentrates when they come to you, but unless you're able to turbo-boost 36" away and ignore terrain (which you can't as a guard player), there's nowhere you can maneuver TO.

-Nazdreg- wrote:The fast army chooses how the fight is made. If the slower army refuses to play with them the faster army is better at reacting to what the slower army tries. The slower army must be either resilient enough to endure an unbalanced pressure or shooty enough to control the important spots on the field and pin the fast army in the unimportant ones.

Firstly, being insanely resilient is what horde armies are all about. I'd like to see you dislodge a 20-man stubborn group of guardsmen who have had "incoming!" used on them to give them 2+ cover saves with firepower alone...

Secondly, you're once again misconstruing mechanized as "fast". They move the same speed as foot armies, except they get to shoot their guns when they move. Their mobility gives them more firepower, not more overland movement.

-Nazdreg- wrote:Of course. In the 2 objective mission mech will have problems to win the game against a flesh wall. But the flesh wall will surely not punch through the steel wall. So mech will probably not win, but foot will certainly not win. What happens to infantry attacking a vehicle wall backed up by blast weapons is not really nice. Seen many times, always the same story. They are possibly able to kill 1 or 2 vehicles but the echo is too hard for them to take.

If you throw penny packets of troops into assaults with vehicles, then yeah, it will end poorly for the horde player (I can assume this is predominantly what you've seen so far). However, horde players can play in such a way to get out of this terrible "echo". For example, two powerblobs with meltabombs and eviscerator priests can multicharge and wreck almost every vehicle you can bring in a single go if the vehicles are concentrated (and if they're not, then the foot player has local superiority over the mechanized player, which defeats the point of being mechanized), and that's before you look at all the cheap BiD melta. Likewise a turn 1 drop pod assault with BA can easily wreck groups of vehicles.

If you're assuming several vehicles nearby to only a single squad of a horde, then yeah, you're point is taken, but against a competent horde player, you're going to see several vehicles against several units, all with the ability to kill vehicles.

-Nazdreg- wrote:in killpoint missions mech will have endless time to shoot up one target each (starting with the 5 man squads) o the foot army will play upwards and it is surely not stronger in an infight the mech player chooses. It is only stronger if the mech player chooses wrong.

Once again, you're making the mistake I've been alluding to this whole time. Mech lists do not have an endless amount of time to shoot things up. They have the amount of time before your opponent starts killing your stuff. This really means just a turn or two. Of course, you could extend this amount of time by keeping out of the range of your opponent's stuff, but that once again requires infinite space which you don't have, and is patently absurd against armies that use long-range firepower of their own, are also mechanized, or use drop pods or outflankers.

-Nazdreg- wrote:

that your opponents can also move up to 12" to keep pace.

ok now we have to clarify something. Foot needs to move through terrain to survive any game opposing an army that even know the word "shooting phase". This slows them down to average 6-8" including running. This has nothing to do with a constant reliable 12" move. And foot will always march with the speed of the slowest squad if they want to stay concentrated.

If you're going to talk about terrain impeding foot armies, then you need to talk about terrain impeding treaded armies. Yes, infantry move slower THROUGH cover, but tanks can get immobilized on the spot (and that's not moving much faster than infantry, is it?). As such, most mech commanders move AROUND terrain. This means that their end point isn't 12" away from their start point. Terrain slows both down.

Of course, this once again is made moot by the question of what does it matter how fast you can flee if there's nowhere to run to?

You can have an army whose units are concentrated, relative to each other, and within the units themselves are displaced. I know, because I do this basically every game I play.

I do not doubt this. I know what you are talking about. But that is not my point. Remember: The second blob has to cover 3" to replace a single lined killed first blob (which is impossible keeping 2", because it results in a 40" conga line), so if the enemy keeps 10" from the first away, second unit will not support in a helpful manner. So it is possible to avoid the support even if they are placed in themselves. And all guys standing 2" apart is not what I call concentrated. They cover much space of the board, and can not concentrate on each spot of their extent. So to mech player: Watch for meltas and bombs and attack at a different spot. It IS possible, as this stuff is not everywhere.

Plus, there is so much redundancy that the idea of being everywhere at once isn't always as far from the truth as it seems, especially in the first couple of turns.

First turns are not so important. If the deployment zone is spammed for 4 turns it is not important.

As for tanks always powering through, clearly you've never met an opponent who knew what a meltabomb was (or a meltagun for that matter). In any case, tanks can't tank shock when they're stunned, immobilized or wrecked. You can't assume that vehicles will never take damage when trying to absorb field position.

No I dont do this. But I assume the possibility to break through enemy units at all. Infantry is completely unable to push through. It can assault a 12" driven wall and most likely nothing happens and if they wreck the vehicles they are still heavily bunched up unless you estimate exact 6" and assault with only one model^^
This males them vulnerable to templates and blasts. So you exchange perhaps 3 transports to 1 or 2 blobs and a big hole is left. Believe me I have seen a seer council bouncing off a vehicle wall, I have seen ork hordes bounce off vehicle walls. BT hordes bounce off. Close combat vs 12" vehicles is most likely to be ineffective. Meltaguns are not, but again if you concentrate meltaguns on one spot to make them effective at all ( i dont care about 2 meltaguns with bs3 if I can pop smoke) I drive around them attacking another spot of the bunch.

The thing is, I always have the choice whether to concentrate or not.

Yes. But as you make the choice I can react accordingly very fast.

there's not a thing you can do about it.

How about spreading out and wait for your decision where to attack? Then I choose when to attack where. with how much material.

Against a charging green tide, you're looking at a 2-turn assault (or even a turn 1 assault on DoW games, or against BA players). It's not like you get an endless amount of time and space to outmaneuver to your heart's content. In the world of 40k, you have precious little time and a very limited amount of space to maneuver.

A charging green tide is a different story. A green tide is much more difficult to deal with than foot guard (more bodies, harder bodies, better in assault, faster the only con is the lack of meltaguns, but lootaz and claws will do the job pretty well). It has waaagh, so I cannot outrange them with focused rapidfire, I still get the charge in my face due to fleet. So I have to keep sitting and wait for the charge moving around and dismount after receiving the charge. Green tide is a mismatch for mechguard. BA is difficult too. But both are not autowins against a good composed mechguard. Ravenguard however is. But this is the only thing I can think of. Perhaps daemons. But I have seen mechguard tie fatecrushers.

I'd like to see you dislodge a 20-man stubborn group of guardsmen who have had "incoming!" used on them to give them 2+ cover saves with firepower alone...

I would like you to issue an order in turn three with a ccs which is 5 men strong, deployed at the beginning, primary target and your blob did not run. Ah And I want to see you assaulting after this. Ah yes the CCS is still alive after issueing the order so it can put them to life again and of course I am in charge range...

If you throw penny packets of troops into assaults with vehicles, then yeah, it will end poorly for the horde player (I can assume this is predominantly what you've seen so far)

What is a penny packet for you? I really dont see how 3 blobs at the same time engage any vehicle against a mech player who knows anything about tank warfare. Everything below can be handled. I have had many infights with infantry equivalents. OK I play hybrid guard you know my list you commented on it^^ but still a vehicle infight is mostly devastating against the infantry unless heavily superior in material.

For example, two powerblobs with meltabombs and eviscerator priests can multicharge and wreck almost every vehicle you can bring in a single go

OK first: How likely is this, that 2 blobs MULTIcharge vehicles? if the vehicle player went into such a position he either wants it so you fight units that are treated as expendable or you wont see such an assault because the mech player actually attacks you. If he does I seriously doubt that 2 blobs will stand there ready to charge.
Second: How likely is it that you do anything useful? You have 6 s6 attacks hitting twice due to reroll so one result is to be expected. 6 meltabombs hit twice too for 2 results. so we get one (!) destroyed vehicle at the cost of 2 bunched blobs. You know what happens now?

Mech lists do not have an endless amount of time to shoot things up

They have more time than you think they have. Even foot armies can refuse to get attacked decisively almost the whole game. You did not seem to have engaged competent defenders yet.

and is patently absurd against armies that use long-range firepower of their own, are also mechanized, or use drop pods or outflankers.

Again different story. We are talking about foot armies not about pods and opposing mech or something else are we?
And the more footguard invest in heavily inferior long range, the less he will have on the assaulting part. This is why I think footguard has to either play 4'x4' low point games with blob only or 4'6' with many points (2000+) and blob + long range to be able to get past lower midfield in tournaments.

Ailaros wrote:The thing is, I always have the choice whether to concentrate or not. If I concentrate, the local superiority benefit of mobility is neutralized and there's not a thing you can do about it.

When you write things like this, Ailaros, it makes me think you aren't grasping standoff tactics. I realize we've had this discussion before, but I'm willing to try again.

If you are more mobile and your opponent concentrates, then you can stand off outside the range of the majority of his weapons while still having most of your own weapons in range of something at the edge of the concentrated force. Then the mobile force can chew through selected vulnerable units that are just barely in range with impunity, while moving to maintain the standoff distance. A non-mobile opponent who can't move & shoot can never get decent return fire. The mobile standoff force gets localized fire superiority by simply outranging the non-mobile force.

So, for example, you can creep your tank-mounted Eldar missile launchers to just within range of that one Heavy Weapon Squad that's huddling behind the blob and knock them out with one turn of fire, then not take any return fire because you're out of range, then creep up and nail the next-closest heavy weapon, and so forth until there aren't any long-range weapons left covering the fire lanes you want to drive into during the last couple of turns.

Yes, you don't have all of Persia to retreat across, and you're not going to be dislodging entire horde units with standoff fire--especially if they're in cover. But you don't always need to, if you're playing the mission. Knocking out a couple of key units and then grabbing objectives, or scoring 1-2 KPs above your opponent and then hiding to run out the clock will still win you games, even with the majority of your opponent's horde intact.

It's bread & butter for mech Eldar armies to play this way.

Grundz wrote:

4. any walker in close combat will lock up the squad for the entire game, walkers absolutely must be cut down before they reach CC

Krak Grenades kill Walkers nicely.

Krak Grenades kill Walkers nicely.

I never saw this actually happen. If you have somehow useful walkers, they are AV11+ You need to hit on 6 and pen on 6, so one of 36 grenades scores a pen. so 1 of 108 grenades will kill the walker. Do you get the possibility to put 108 grenades on a walker in a game at all?
If it is a AV12 walker it is next to impossible because you have to glance it to death. With grenades hitting on 6 glancing on 6. Have fun

I never saw this actually happen. If you have somehow useful walkers, they are AV11+ You need to hit on 6 and pen on 6, so one of 36 grenades scores a pen. so 1 of 108 grenades will kill the walker. Do you get the possibility to put 108 grenades on a walker in a game at all?
If it is a AV12 walker it is next to impossible because you have to glance it to death. With grenades hitting on 6 glancing on 6. Have fun

QFT

Krak won't do anything to an armored sentinel, 6 to glance meaning you can't wreck or explode it. You can't imobilize it in assault either its attacks just drop to 1 and as it has only 1 attack who cares. Weapon destroyed does nothing, can't stun or shake it. It will just slowly kick you to death.

and with the advent of blood angle steamengine dreads you are going to lose the whole squad pretty much.

giving your commisar melta bombs are about your only option, and in my experience takes about 2-4 rounds of close combat before you get that 6 and blow it up.

if it was a unit of armored sents, you are screwed XD

This is why armoured sents are actually getting popular. Finally.

Yup IMHO power blobs should have melta bombs, yeah you need 6 to hit the walker still but at least you can hurt it.

-Nazdreg- wrote:This is why armoured sents are actually getting popular. Finally.

Yep! And with creed on board to power up your blobs you can supprise a group just as easily.

IMHO this thread needs more on how to overcome adveristary with infantry or infantry/light mech guard and less "MECH AM BETTER"

Ive been tempted to include some valks in my infantry army to scoutmove -> -> melta ccs suicide and nuke any vehicles of opportunity if I get the first turn.

-Nazdreg- wrote:

Krak Grenades kill Walkers nicely.

I never saw this actually happen. If you have somehow useful walkers, they are AV11+ You need to hit on 6 and pen on 6, so one of 36 grenades scores a pen. so 1 of 108 grenades will kill the walker. Do you get the possibility to put 108 grenades on a walker in a game at all?
If it is a AV12 walker it is next to impossible because you have to glance it to death. With grenades hitting on 6 glancing on 6. Have fun

Sentinels are armor 10 or 12. Dreadnoughts are 12 or 13. Ork walkers are similar to the Sentinel.

Those are the armies that use the most of them. Krak grenades can do it, and meltabombs throw in can seal the deal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SpankHammer III wrote:

I never saw this actually happen. If you have somehow useful walkers, they are AV11+ You need to hit on 6 and pen on 6, so one of 36 grenades scores a pen. so 1 of 108 grenades will kill the walker. Do you get the possibility to put 108 grenades on a walker in a game at all?
If it is a AV12 walker it is next to impossible because you have to glance it to death. With grenades hitting on 6 glancing on 6. Have fun

QFT

Krak won't do anything to an armored sentinel, 6 to glance meaning you can't wreck or explode it. You can't imobilize it in assault either its attacks just drop to 1 and as it has only 1 attack who cares. Weapon destroyed does nothing, can't stun or shake it. It will just slowly kick you to death.

1 weapon destroyed + 1 immobilized + 1 additional of either = wrecked.
Not that hard, especially when ALL of the Guardsmen have the grenades. It's a lot of attacks.

OK I usually play hybrid guard, I am not a mech only player (and actually I hate pure mech it looks rather like a rush hour traffic than like an army...)

I use my infantry there as dirty light infantry like desert warriors. screening, harassing, pursuing retreating enemies, outflanking.
They do the dirty footwork and fight only very selectively. But I am not a good comparison though, because the backbone of my infantry is desert militia (count as penal legions). They found to be superior to blob infantry against any guard I played before but this has nothing to do with any blob weakness (which is not the case, blobs are solid infantry squads), it rather has something to do with an army composition in their favour and with experience with them.

I actually like sneaky infantry more than big resilient infantry. But this is philosophy.

SpankHammer III wrote:Krak won't do anything to an armored sentinel

No, but meltabombs and eviscerators will. And that's assuming, of course, that your opponent let you charge them with a walker.

-Nazdreg- wrote: Remember: The second blob has to cover 3" to replace a single lined killed first blob (which is impossible keeping 2", because it results in a 40" conga line), so if the enemy keeps 10" from the first away, second unit will not support in a helpful manner.

I think we're having some confusion over the idea of "support" here. When I'm talking about support, I mean that a two units are able to move and attack the same target at the same time, or if one unit gets charged, the other unit will be able to countercharge in the next player turn.

-Nazdreg- wrote:But I assume the possibility to break through enemy units at all. Infantry is completely unable to push through.

I don't understand. Once you get into close combat with a blob, the ONLY way you can push through it is to kill the blob. Needless to say, this usually takes awhile.

As well, I don't see how tanks stop people from advancing through. They can't lock you into close combat.

Also, I don't see how tanks can always push through. They can't tank shock something in close combat, and your opponent always has the choice of death or glorying with a melta weapon, making tank shocking dangerous, at best.

-Nazdreg- wrote:So you exchange perhaps 3 transports to 1 or 2 blobs and a big hole is left. Believe me I have seen a seer council bouncing off a vehicle wall, I have seen ork hordes bounce off vehicle walls.

Then your opponents have either been unlucky, bad at list building, or poorly co-ordinated on the field. Done right, vehicles are VERY vulnerable to assault, especially multi-assaults.

-Nazdreg- wrote:Close combat vs 12" vehicles is most likely to be ineffective. Meltaguns are not, but again if you concentrate meltaguns on one spot to make them effective at all ( i dont care about 2 meltaguns with bs3 if I can pop smoke) I drive around them attacking another spot of the bunch.

Let me repeat something again, as it doesn't seem to be taking. You do not have the leisure of always driving as fast as you want wherever you want.

In the world of 40k, you only have a turn or two of mobility before things get packed into a small space and you can't just maneuver wherever you want without skimmers.

-Nazdreg- wrote:

The thing is, I always have the choice whether to concentrate or not.

Yes. But as you make the choice I can react accordingly very fast.

there's not a thing you can do about it.

How about spreading out and wait for your decision where to attack? Then I choose when to attack where. with how much material.

React how?

You have basically two options, bunch you yourself, in which case you don't have local superiority, because your opponent is also bunched up, or spread out, and then you definitely don't have local superiority as all of your opponent's forces attack only some of yours.

-Nazdreg- wrote:A green tide is much more difficult to deal with than foot guard

But the guard player also brings a melta hedge and eviscerators and can outflank with lots of stuff. Honestly, I'd rather take on a mech list with a guard horde than a green tide, given how many meltabombs and meltaguns I can bring.

-Nazdreg- wrote:I would like you to issue an order in turn three with a ccs which is 5 men strong, deployed at the beginning, primary target and your blob did not run. Ah And I want to see you assaulting after this. Ah yes the CCS is still alive after issueing the order so it can put them to life again and of course I am in charge range...

Fine, then they'll be a 20+ man blob with a 3+ cover save. I'm still not scared.

As for assaulting, if it's an objectives-based mission then the horde doesn't need to. It runs in and camps the obejctive. If you want to take or contest it, you've got to get close, and then I'm not going to ground. Same is true of KP games.

-Nazdreg- wrote: How likely is this, that 2 blobs MULTIcharge vehicles? if the vehicle player went into such a position he either wants it so you fight units that are treated as expendable or you wont see such an assault because the mech player actually attacks you

If you're keeping your vehicles concentrated all right next to each other, highly.

Also, it's a mistake to say that the mech player is in the position because they want to be. With only so much room to maneuver, your opponent always has a say over where there are safe places to be and where there aren't.

-Nazdreg- wrote:

Mech lists do not have an endless amount of time to shoot things up

They have more time than you think they have. Even foot armies can refuse to get attacked decisively almost the whole game. You did not seem to have engaged competent defenders yet.

And can they WIN games where they only retreat?

The more a player retreats, the fewer options they have, especially with regard to mobility which means the attacker gains more and more control over the situation on the field. The only way to prevent this is to keep on retreating, but, yet again, there is neither infinite time nor space to do this, and it won't help you a whit on objectives games.

Flavius Infernus wrote:If you are more mobile and your opponent concentrates, then you can stand off outside the range of the majority of his weapons while still having most of your own weapons in range of something at the edge of the concentrated force. Then the mobile force can chew through selected vulnerable units that are just barely in range with impunity, while moving to maintain the standoff distance. A non-mobile opponent who can't move & shoot can never get decent return fire. The mobile standoff force gets localized fire superiority by simply outranging the non-mobile force.

Yes, this would be true with infinite time and space.

So, turn 1, sure, you get to do exactly this. Your opponent then moves up to 12". Turn two, you can keep it up and sneak away while your opponent gets closer. By turn 3, you have nowhere else to run, and your opponent is upon you. The fact that you are giving away a lot of easy KP in transports starts to hurt. Turn 4, you're backed into a corner. There's nowhere to run and your opponent has everything in range.

And then you have up to 3 more turns of carnage as your army that you spent all those points on mobility that you're no longer using gets hacked to pieces. And this is assuming that the horde player didn't bring any special mobility of their own (like outflankers or a mechanized wing or something).

The only way what you're talking about will work is if your opponent spreads out and remains completely immobile. Of course, NO army should have a problem dismantling that kind of opponent.

Flavius Infernus wrote:It's bread & butter for mech Eldar armies to play this way.

Yes, because Eldar have skimmers and autarchs, so actually stand a chance.

Grundz wrote:
IMHO this thread needs more on how to overcome adveristary with infantry or infantry/light mech guard and less "MECH AM BETTER"

I agree, although I think Ailaros has already provided a lot of good information on the subject.

One of the Cold Steel Mercenary teams at Adepticon last spring had all-infantry IG armies and did quite well. Those armies had around 200 models each (in 1000 points) and consisted only of infantry blobs with meltaguns & meltabombs backed up by heavy weapon squads. They also used Straken to increase the HtH capability of the armies, but he's not absolutely vital. A pure blob army like that, with no vehicles to draw antitank fire, just nerfs a lot of things opposing armies might be planning to do, and they just swarm forward and camp objectives, meltagun tanks, and absorb enemy assaults. Here's what I got from them about the army's strengths and weaknesses:

-Against flamers and blasts, you just spread out. Having seen it in action, I can testify that it really does work. Spreading out causes area effect weapons to have minimal effect on Ld9 stubborn infantry blobs.
-Armies that can tank shock the infantry models into tight clumps and then flamer them are a potential problem. So that's why the meltaguns and meltabombs, which need to be positioned correctly within the blob, are there for Death or Glory attacks when tanks try to do that. Of course, the long-range fire from the HWSs ensures that a lot of tanks don't get close enough to tank shock.
-Lash of submission is the biggest weakness of the infantry blob army. I assumed it was because the infantry can be lashed into clumps and then hit with templates, but then Alex said no it was something else, and then somebody interrupted him so I never found out why.
-It plays very slowly unless you know what you're doing. The CSM guys were using movement trays, and had practiced playing at tournament speed.
-It's an army that tends to be stronger in the mid- to late-game, so if your opponent plays slow and/or the tournament has an inadequate time allowance for rounds, you might lose mission points you otherwise would have had in the bag just because the clock ran out.
-You sometimes get chipmunked on comp or sportsmanship in tournament play (happened at Adepticon), because some people think IG infantry hordes are cheesy.

In my own opinion, it's also important to go either 100% infantry, or to have enough vehicles (I'd say five or more) to spread enemy antitank fire and be a real hybrid army. If you try to run all-infantry with, say, three tanks, those tanks are just a KP gift to your opponent.

From my experiences so far, I'd agree with all of the above. I'm also curious, though, what said person fears more than lash.

I suppose, too, it would be helpful if I expounded more on what I thought mech lists were about than merely saying how infantry would handle things.

Mech guard aren't a lot of things. They're not faster, they're not more durable for their points, and they don't have more firepower for their points. As Nasdreg said, there is basically one big strength to mech: they may not have longer overland movement reach, but they DO get to shoot their weapons after they move 12", unlike infantry.

This means that you can do very well in the 12"-24" range, because your opponent can run towards you and still be just out of melta range, and then you can drive forward 12" and nail them with flamers or plasma, or whatever. What they lose in durability and raw firepower, they make up for being really tricky with what they have in the first few turns of the game.

Basically, it comes down to if you'd rather take extra casualties while running across the board, but be able to take more guys to compensate, or if you'd like to be stronger in the first couple of turns, but lack staying power towards the end. That and, of course, the two army types have peculiar weaknesses that the other doesn't have (no parking lots for troops, for example, and less vulnerability to small arms for the mech).

Otherwise, the two play styles are basically equal, and are basically able to handle most things equally well. It's more of an aesthetic choice than one necessarily dominating the other.

Ailaros wrote:
Mech guard aren't a lot of things. They're not faster, they're not more durable for their points, and they don't have more firepower for their points. As Nasdreg said, there is basically one big strength to mech: they may not have longer overland movement reach, but they DO get to shoot their weapons after they move 12", unlike infantry.

(snip)

Otherwise, the two play styles are basically equal, and are basically able to handle most things equally well. It's more of an aesthetic choice than one necessarily dominating the other.

Gonna have to disagree here (missed my chance to disagree when it came up on an earlier page). I realize this thread isn't about mech armies, but just two quick comments.

Mech armies are faster in the sense that they can always *reliably* move 12". If they can move at all, that's how far they can move. So unlike having to depend on running, where you might move as little as 14" over the course of 2 turns or as much as 24", but will most of the time get about 19", you can always count on 24" from a vehicle. That 5" can make the difference between contesting and not contesting something, being able to melta or assault something...five inches at the end of the game can make the difference between winning and losing. Predictability is key to mobility, and running is too random to get the job done reliably.

A pure mech army plays as an MSU army. MSU has superior "survivability," not in terms of survival of individual units, but survival of the army's ability to achieve objectives in spite of losing units--because there are still more units there to do the job. An MSU army plays radically different from an infantry horde, and I'd argue that, right now, the evidence from tournament wins suggests that MSU armies do better.

Ailaros wrote:From my experiences so far, I'd agree with all of the above. I'm also curious, though, what said person fears more than lash.

Have to admit, I'm a bit curious about that myself... Though with the DH "allies" available at the time perhaps the psychic defense from that was what he counted on... Now? Pretty sure a lash list would do horrible things to an Infantry horde if they built it (the Lash list) right with flamers and Ord templates... But I could easily be missing a trick there...

Flavius Infernus wrote: that they can always *reliably* move 12". If they can move at all

Heh, sometimes they get immobilized and sit around in a clogged up parking lot, but otherwise, they're very reliable

Yes, they do move slightly faster, but to say that tread lists always move 12" is false. Tank commanders drive around terrain rather than risk getting immobilized, and they have no choice but to drive around close combats, impassible terrain, and other units (including their own). In a race over open terrain, then yes, the mech list would win the proverbial drag race, but that rarely happens (and I would say basically never as far as an entire army is concerned).

Flavius Infernus wrote:An MSU army plays radically different from an infantry horde, and I'd argue that, right now, the evidence from tournament wins suggests that MSU armies do better.

In TOURNAMENTS, yes. Tournaments aren't regular 40k games, though. Tournaments have things like time limits and, from what I keep hearing, this nasty tendency to pretend like the annihilation mission doesn't exist.

Regular 40k and tournament 40k are very similar, but also critically different (not terribly dissimilar to how 40k and apocalypse are nearly but not exactly the same). As such, he who wins tournaments is not necessarily the best 40k player, so much as the best tournament player (at least, when we're talking upper-eschelon events, here). Were I to ever compete at a high level, I would definitely arrange my army to win given a different set of parameters than the regular 40k rules.

1 weapon destroyed + 1 immobilized + 1 additional of either = wrecked.
Not that hard, especially when ALL of the Guardsmen have the grenades. It's a lot of attacks.

If i recall correctly you can't get an imobilized result against a walker in assault, all it does it drop the numer of attack to a minimum of 1. The only way to stop them is wreck or explode which you can't do with Krak

No, but meltabombs and eviscerators will. And that's assuming, of course, that your opponent let you charge them with a walker.

Not arguing with you, I always give my power blobs melta bombs.