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.

Davicus wrote:As for Illuminati, I see your last post as a joke (on yourself) rather than a platform for discussion.

He does have a point though!

Davicus wrote:

Jackmojo wrote:If it worked against the player in question clearly it was a good tactic at the time, any other judgment introduces too many variables to give any credence to.
Jack

So I see, if this tactic works against a newbie, it is a good tactic?

The fact that this tactic have had its success against some IG static gunline players does not mean anything. You might not even be playing against the right person. Winning or bullying a newbie means nothing to me. I have had success and failure with this tactic, and the determining factor was my opponent. I would not consider a tactic as a good one if it cannot work on a more competitive player.

By your logic then all tactics are noobish, as all tactics run a risk of success and failure, and all tactics use the opponent as a determining factor.

Gunlines have been around since the begining of this game, and some of the time they fail, and sometimes they work. If my opponent knows how to break the line then he can do it, it is up to me to adjust my tactics to counter him. Rhino Rush is another proven tactic that might fail if your opponent is prepared.......but the trick is to use tactics that your opponent ISNT prepared for.

The Ork-ga Line can work on a more "competitive player" just fine. Can it work everytime? No. Should you rely on this tactic everygame? No. But if the opponent built a list for a Tournament, then we can assume that he doesnt have the perfect defense to it as he would have brought an "all-comers" list, not just an anti-ork. Most lists are anti-MEQ and anti-mech, and neither are ideal for dealing with Orks. I would assume that there is going to be at least 1-2 players at any tourny that built lists that the Ork-ga Line would work great against.

Instead of just randomly claiming that a "better player" would shut this tactic down, try to remember that no list can be prepared for every possible action....and if an opponent is weak against a fast moving infantry with a decent cover save that he cant get a solid blast template on, then that sounds like a tactic that might be worth considering.

I beg you Davicus....tell me of a tactic that is flawless and cant be stopped by my opponent, I would love to see that.

DJ Illuminati wrote:By your logic then all tactics are noobish, as all tactics run a risk of success and failure, and all tactics use the opponent as a determining factor.

Don't you even read? The key point was "tactic that seems to work ONLY on the noobs". Your reading ability is definitely as limited as the soundness of your arguments.

DJ Illuminati wrote:No. But if the opponent built a list for a Tournament, then we can assume that he doesnt have the perfect defense to it as he would have brought an "all-comers" list, not just an anti-ork. Most lists are anti-MEQ and anti-mech, and neither are ideal for dealing with Orks. I would assume that there is going to be at least 1-2 players at any tourny that built lists that the Ork-ga Line would work great against.

I was right you werent cut out for a tourney. Any list that isnt build to be prepare against orks are going for a suicide mission, especially with the prevalence of ork players around for almost every tourney. oh, and please don't (in case you do) assume an anti-MEQ list cant be made to be prepared for orks.

DJ Illuminati wrote:Instead of just randomly claiming that a "better player" would shut this tactic down, try to remember that no list can be prepared for every possible action....

Are you even talking sense? Lists, at most, are prepared for against other lists. Lists, are never prepared for against possible actions. You, react to possible actions right during the game itself after seeing what opponent's army and deployment is all about.

Davicus, I know you are new here, but please go and read the rules

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

Davicus wrote:

Jackmojo wrote:If it worked against the player in question clearly it was a good tactic at the time, any other judgment introduces too many variables to give any credence to.
Jack

So I see, if this tactic works against a newbie, it is a good tactic?

See that's what I meant, you're introducing information not in evidence (the the IG player was a 'newbie') which leads to a circular argument:

You say this can only work on a new or inexperienced player and the only evidence you have to offer to that is that it apparently worked on this player...

A tactic can only be fairly judged in the exact circumstances of its use, and 40k is too variable to know everything about that game from the shots we have. So if this tactic worked at that time (and any others) then those times were good to use it.

Jack

Jackmojo wrote:So if this tactic worked at that time (and any others) then those times were good to use it.

o.O Apparently, there wasnt many others to begin with. Even for this game, it was a failed attempt.

So I see, if this tactic works against a newbie, it is a good tactic?

i believe any tactic that wins you the game, is at the time, a good tactic. i played magic competitively for over 5 years and new players can come up with some surprising innovations, also some people are born naturals.

I think its im portant to concentrate on why the player employed this tactic:

1. he was facing a very shooty army with little to no counter assualt. He really didnt have much to fear if he could survive getting shot at for a turn or 2.
2. he needed to reach his opponent intact, so he found a way to take cover while reaching the enemy.

This tactic could be used in a variety of ways i think, it doesnt nescessarily mean it has to be in the shape of a conga line. It seems what the player was going for, was to hug cover and live long enough to punch those tanks.

Maybe I'm just ornery, but I'm still waiting for what part of DJ's argument was unsound.

Were the premises untrue? Or does his conclusion not follow from his premises?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Just for fun I convinced my friend (Frank) who plays Orks to try the tactic out last Saturday......

We went to our LFGS and just hung out until we saw a guy who was bulling some of the newer players (he was a good player, just TFG) with a Mech-SM army. So I told my friend about this little debate and how it shouldnt work on anyone but noobs (we both laughed) and decided to call the bully out. Frank challenged him to a blind-build (no idea what the other person is bringing) and agreed on 1500 points........

So with 5x30 (150 orks) man squads of boyz with a PK Nob leading the Conga line, a 15 boy Loota squad, and a Big Mek at the center of it all giving a 5+ cover to anything that didnt have cover at the time...........On turn 3 his entire army was in combat with troops and vehicles. He raped the SM player so bad that the bully just packed his stuff up on turn 4 and walked out. He refused to finish the game......

Seemed pretty effective still, and we all (everyone in the store) had a good laugh.

Now come the part where Orkish or Davicus will claim that this guy is a noob to fall for such a tactic, and that no one in the state of Florida is skilled enough to ever go to a tournament since the guy we played consistently gets 2nd-5th places at most of the RTTs and Ard Boyz games in our tri-county area.

For the rest of you reading this, I thought you might like to know that it not only works, but sometimes it puts a TFG in his place....and that makes it priceless....lol

DJ Illuminati wrote:Now come the part where Orkish or Davicus will claim that this guy is a noob to fall for such a tactic, and that no one in the state of Florida is skilled enough to ever go to a tournament since the guy we played consistently gets 2nd-5th places at most of the RTTs and Ard Boyz games in our tri-county area.

For the rest of you reading this, I thought you might like to know that it not only works, but sometimes it puts a TFG in his place....and that makes it priceless....lol

o.O So by the same logic, I could just post 10 other stories to justify that it actually didnt work out, and therefore the tactic is trash?

LOL, you are such a joke. I am indeed amused. Good effort.

Davicus wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:Now come the part where Orkish or Davicus will claim that this guy is a noob to fall for such a tactic, and that no one in the state of Florida is skilled enough to ever go to a tournament since the guy we played consistently gets 2nd-5th places at most of the RTTs and Ard Boyz games in our tri-county area.

For the rest of you reading this, I thought you might like to know that it not only works, but sometimes it puts a TFG in his place....and that makes it priceless....lol

o.O So by the same logic, I could just post 10 other stories to justify that it actually didnt work out, and therefore the tactic is trash?

LOL, you are such a joke. I am indeed amused. Good effort.

Actually no. The logic employed was.

Your argument: This tactic will only work against new players

Evidence presented: This tactic has been used sucessfully against a veteran player of the game.

Conclusion: This tactic will NOT only work against new players

Also maybe you should learn basic courtesy before you start referring to other posters as jokes and bragging. At the moment you come across as a perfect blowhard. I'm sure you're not really.

Beaten to the comment about basic courtesy. Took to long to type...hehe

As for the topic at hand a tactic is something that wins you a game. It doesn't matter if it should only work on "noobs". If it works and wins a game for you then it's a solid tactic. I personally only have the broadest outline of how my actual tactics will shape up before I am deployed. But my tactics change from turn to turn sometimes if it's needed. Basically don't knock a tactic if it works. Only knock it if it doesn't

Davicus wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:By your logic then all tactics are noobish, as all tactics run a risk of success and failure, and all tactics use the opponent as a determining factor.

Don't you even read? The key point was "tactic that seems to work ONLY on the noobs". Your reading ability is definitely as limited as the soundness of your arguments.

DJ Illuminati wrote:No. But if the opponent built a list for a Tournament, then we can assume that he doesnt have the perfect defense to it as he would have brought an "all-comers" list, not just an anti-ork. Most lists are anti-MEQ and anti-mech, and neither are ideal for dealing with Orks. I would assume that there is going to be at least 1-2 players at any tourny that built lists that the Ork-ga Line would work great against.

I was right you werent cut out for a tourney. Any list that isnt build to be prepare against orks are going for a suicide mission, especially with the prevalence of ork players around for almost every tourney. oh, and please don't (in case you do) assume an anti-MEQ list cant be made to be prepared for orks.

DJ Illuminati wrote:Instead of just randomly claiming that a "better player" would shut this tactic down, try to remember that no list can be prepared for every possible action....

Are you even talking sense? Lists, at most, are prepared for against other lists. Lists, are never prepared for against possible actions. You, react to possible actions right during the game itself after seeing what opponent's army and deployment is all about.

1. He has evidence that the tactic works against an experienced player. Your premise is flawed ergo your argument is flawed.

2. A tournament list will generally contain some method of dealing with an ork horde as it is a popular list in the meta-game at the moment. The IG player presumably thought that shooting them with tanks would do the trick. The ork player discovered a tactic that allowed them to engage the tanks with minimal shooting losses. It worked, against a similar IG army it would presumably work again. You argue that any smart IG commander would include counter attack flamer squads. I could equally argue that a smart IG player wouldn't run a gunline in the first place but would max out on vets in valks and vendettas. There is more than one way to run every army.

3. Lists factor in both tactics and organisation. A list made without consideration as to the tactics that will be used with it or against it is a poorly made list indeed. Lists are a seires of units that the players assumes he can combine with tactics to defeat a broad strategy i.e. he assumes that in a tournament setting he will encounter a mechanised army, a dual lash, a nidzilla, an ork horde etc. He develops his list to contain tools to deal with all of them. But is he developing his list to fight the list or the associated strategy with the list? If I know that castling or a refused flank will work well against an ork horde am I fighting the strategy of the horde or simply the mechanical elements of the horde? I am fighting both and make my list accordingly.

I can make assumptions about common lists and how they will typically be played. I cannot possibly predict every single strategy that might be employed against me and so I cannot design my list to account for them all. If you can I strongly advise you to join military intelligence and cease wasting your time playing WH40K.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davicus wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Soundess is easy to judge.

1. Are his premises true?
2. Does his conclusion follow deductive from his premises?

If the answer to both is "yes", then the argument is sound. If the answer to either is "no", then it is unsound.

hmm ok, thank you. In that case, I conclude that it is unsound.

Btw, if I had not misread, the discussion HAS ALWAYS been on playing against static gunline

Which is false?

Hulksmash wrote: It doesn't matter if it should only work on "noobs". If it works and wins a game for you then it's a solid tactic.

Cool, then by your definition, I cant deny it's a good tactic, as well as the fact that there are also tons of fantastic tactics around - that fulfils your criteria. Afterall, I might not even need any tactic to win a noob.

However, I am not interested in any tactic that I cant reliably bring to a tournament.

bravelybravesirrobin wrote:
Evidence presented: This tactic has been used sucessfully against a veteran player of the game.

I didnt know a random story of a big bully would make good evidence. It has, at the very most, amused me.

If your tournament scene is so static that any Tactic can be thought of as reliable I feel bad for you and your pool of opponents.

Good tournaments with good players ought to force you to find new plans frequently.

Jack

EDIT: for clarity

Jackmojo wrote:
Good tournaments with good players ought to force you to find new plans at every turn.
Jack

I am surprised you can't even tell the difference between a 'tactic' in mind before the game begins, and reacting differently each turn AFTER you have executed your tactic. If thats the case, I feel sad for you.

bravelybravesirrobin wrote:At the moment you come across as a perfect blowhard. I'm sure you're not really.

Come on, don't contradict yourself

Pardon for the confusion, I was not meaning game turns. Just a turn of phrase (ha!).

Jack

Mod:

OK, everyone, let's remember Dakka rule no.1

Address the argument, not the man. No personal attacks.

Refer to my sig for a link.

I would say no "tactic" should be something you can reliably bring to a tournament. Like I said earlier I change my tactics sometimes twice in a turn. Based on how things develop and how the dice fall my tactics are constantly shifting.

Now if you meant strategy they that is different as most people build their lists around an overall strategy using tactics in game to accomplish their overall strategy.

If you think of your tactics as a toolkit that you use to accomplish certain strategic goals, then clearly there is no "Super Tactic", but just a collection that you pick and choose from when the time is right.

Wouldn't it be simpler to keep the Nob and rokkit boyz in the middle?

Since I was the one who posted the pictures and report orginally, I am hesitantly going to respond to some of the posts here. Granted I did eke out a win, but it was challenging in the extreme. Also, please realize that my army was built to handle orks by removing handfulls of them each turn. Yes, I didn't have much in the way of Counter assault units, but what good would one or 2 counter assault units have done? Take a look at the pictures and you will see just how many guys he had on the board.

Also, this tactic is not only for noobs. Its not a tactic I would personally run with orks, but I had never seen it employed beyond talk before I played it. The catch a guy off guard factor was high. I don't want to toot my own horn, but I am far from a newb player. I started in 1994 and have played ever since. I play tournaments regularly (I have won enough of them, but that is irrelevent) and know how to counter orks with guard .... shoot the crap out of them.

The problem here with this string approach of guys is one no one is seeing. If you have your guys all mobbed up and I drop 5 templates on them, I reduce that single unit down to a size where I could weaken resolve and flee them off the board. By him having them strung out my template only catches a few guys in the mob and keeps its number above 12, so it remains fearless. There is the advantage of this setup!

The major reason I had difficulty with this mission was that it was dawn of war! He got to go first and placed his first two conga lines to the middle of the board. With my deployment further back, it meant that it wasn't a minimum of 2nd turn charges for his first two mobs. One of the mobs also had a warboss on a bike set up with them, so again, another charge waiting to happen. With my guard shooting I was able to kill the boss and one conga line before it did much damage, but the 2nd was on my lines and I had to play damage control while the other 4 mobs of 30 advanced across the board.

@kilkrazy: LMAO!! love that pic. that chic looks tough!

@Drk-oblitr8r: it could be simpler depending on your formation, the terrain your playing with etc. sometimes its much simpler to use a mech with KFF, especially if your footsloggin thru morre open terrain. I myself really get a kick out of outflanking and shooting tanks in the butt when I can. I think in the situation described by the OP, the conga line thingy was a good move.

I was just thinking it would be easier to keep the PK Nob closer to the enemy, should they come close enough to assult, it would finish combat quickly, depending on who was assulting.

Application is the key. Any strategy is a good strategy if you apply it at the right time, and the right place.

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:Application is the key. Any strategy is a good strategy if you apply it at the right time, and the right place.

i heartly agree

So I tried this strategy a few times since it was brought to my attention and it is definitely an effective tactic. I will say no tactic is super effective in every situation but the truth is by having my orks conga line I can either tie up something big or take out something small with more models than I normally would have by then. It makes the mob more survivable by both minimizing template splash and providing themselves cover while at the same time providing cover to the rest of my army. I say 7 out of 9 thumbs up.