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.

I shall post their full tactics here:

Vendettas, , Valkaries w/ Flamers/Melta/Veterans, and CCS.
Don't play like a complete fool.
Win more games than you lose

You should do a necron one instead. Thanks.

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
I shall post their full tactics here:

Vendettas, , Valkaries w/ Flamers/Melta/Veterans, and CCS.
Don't play like a complete fool.
Win more games than you lose

And here it is the inevitable "play Vendettas and stop being a noob" comment.

The only thing I'd note about the FW thing is that people who like FW stuff need to understand that their viewpoint isn't a universal truth, and you just need to convert the heathens to see what is plainly accurate rather than their mindless superstitions. Without a basic level of respect, it's going to be possible to understand people's frustration when you give FW advice.

Because imagine that someone needed help with guard, and the first several people to give advice was "well, you should ally in some tyranid units". That's not useful advice, because the person receiving the message can't ally in tyranid units. Regardless of what your stance on the legality of FW stuff is, if you're a person playing in a place where you can't use FW, then any advice about FW is going to be just as useless.

And annoying if the only advice being given is advice that isn't relevant to them.

BryllCream wrote: One or two questions though - why take flamer stormies in tens? Are they not just as effective in groups of 5, or are hot-shot lasguns actually capable of causing damage if you have enough of them?

Yes, in theory. I've had hellguns kill stuff on rare occasion. Most of the time, though, my opponents are going to be bringing vehicles or putting stuff into cover. The reason you bother with a squad of 10 is because you get 10 guys.

This means, for example, that when you drop and attack something, rather than getting immediately wiped out, you'll have at least a few guys left to charge something with krak grenades or to get into close combat with that unit that you ripped apart with flamers. 5 stormies, for example, can't necessarily beat 10 scouts on an objective. The stormies kill, say 3 or 4, the scouts kill 2 or 3, and then it's going to be a fight between a pair of stormies and twice their number of scouts. The strategic impact of the stormies is limited. Meanwhile, with the 10-man squad, the stormies kill 4 or 5, the scouts kill 2 or 3, and then it's 5 scouts against 7 stormtroopers - a fight that the stormies can actually win. If those scouts were the only scoring unit nearby, it's the difference between a wounded scout squad holding an objective and your opponent having lost his objective.

A suicide squad of stormies can only kill some small amount of stuff, and then that's it, they're generally wiped out. You can kind of think of them as a hunter-killer weapon where you get to shoot it once, and then that's that. With 10-man stormtrooper squads, much more likely than not someone will actually survive the drop, which means not only more damage, but a possible change in the strategic situation in the game. Drop 30 stormtroopers somewhere, and that can completely change the way the game goes, as very likely your opponent just lost an objective, and has to take it back from 30 dudes with a 4+/4 or 3+ cover save. That's rather a different story than the one told by suicide squads.

Interestingly enough, I played a game two days ago where I decided to dig out a 10-man flamer stormie squad. I was up against a tzeentch CSM list, so they basically weren't going to be killing anything. Instead, I dropped them way over on the complete opposite side of the board and then, once on foot, ran them into the corner and spread out. The only way my opponent could hurt them was by wasting time picking off a couple at a time with bale flamers (rather than attacking my much more vulnerable infantry on my objectives). In the end, he killed half of them by vector strike as the helldrakes repeatedly came back on the board, but the end result was dudes that got linebreaker. That's what won me the game.

In this case, the stormtroopers didn't even fire their weapons once in anger, but because of their special mobility combined with their extra durability of being a 10-man squad, and the strategic impact won me the game.

So, tldr, 5-man stormies are a tactical weapon, 10-man squads are a strategic one.

 Spartan089 wrote:

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
I shall post their full tactics here:

Vendettas, , Valkaries w/ Flamers/Melta/Veterans, and CCS.
Don't play like a complete fool.
Win more games than you lose

And here it is the inevitable "play Vendettas and stop being a noob" comment.

I think Faenyin's post was dripping with sarcasm rather than sound tactical advice.

AlexMako wrote:
The prime issue with tactics discussion involving FW is that for most people it's as useful as someone recommending they take a bunch of superheavies when they don't specify if a list is for Apoc or not.

No it isn't. The rules as written by GW state that you can use FW but can't use superheavies. So suggesting FW units is discussing the standard game and it's up to the person asking for advice to say "I have a no-FW house rule", just like if they had a no-flyers house rule or a no-more-than-two-dedicated-transports house rule. On the other hand superheavies are NOT part of the standard game so unless someone says that they're playing with a superheavies-allowed house rule talking about them is a waste of time.

(notice how all FW lovers seem to be IG? Hmmmmm....)

Oh good, this old myth. I play Tau and I love my FW units. For example, I get a decent flyer instead of the codex garbage. Same with Eldar, and Necrons just got some really nice stuff.

It would be similar to every discussion of 2000 point lists going one way or the other on the double force org chart, when it's still something that many players don't even want to deal with.

You're right, it's like that. Every discussion of 2000+ point lists should involve double FOC (or at least the possibility of using it if it benefits the army) unless it is specifically stated that there is a "no double FOC" house rule in effect.

They still have a specific rule in their rulesets that means you need to ask permission, a rule that isn't in any codex or official GW suppliment.

No they don't. It says you SHOULD tell your opponent in advance, to be polite. It does not say that you MUST do it.

I like forgeworld but to make your advice be use forgeworld isnt very good, some people dont have access to forgeworld, some people want just what is in their codex and not try to deviate too much cause thats that much more memorizing. Forgeworld is never a mandatory option and should never be, to me its kinda like apocalypses, its an add-on, a supplement. not to be mistaken for a must have codex expansion.

Now onto vendettas, i am an IG player, i dont like vendettas. It seems like every other IG player calls players like me trash for not taking one, and thats a pretty sad narrow view point. i hear all the time "wanna win with IG always use vendettas, you cant win without them!" yeah i get it they are good, but not a must have, nor should ever be. I personnally dont like fliers, not enough armies have been updated to 6th yet to give a fair advantage to everyone. As of right now fliers are horribly unbalanced in the game cause not many older armies have a counter. My local area doesnt use fliers unless they go to a tourney in another town cause around here we all agreed that they throw the balance off and it doesnt make for fun, hard fought games. Now when every army gets their new codex in 6ths and has options to fight fliers without taking them, then yeah ill run vendettas, but until then i just dont see them as a must take unit.

IG can still be a dominant force without vendettas, my mvp unit seems to be my CCS, his orders swing the tides of battle. Might not be a monster beastly unit that single handily wipes units, but life is about inches, and my CCS gives me those inches, from the astropath making sure stormtroopers drop, the Officer of the fleet stopping my opponents drops, to issuing bring it down to help take out a landraider or first rank fire second rank fire to cut a swath into a tyranid zerg rush. I play hybrid IG and that CCS and my lord commissar are the real winners of my games.

 Solosam47 wrote:
I like forgeworld but to make your advice be use forgeworld isnt very good, some people dont have access to forgeworld, some people want just what is in their codex and not try to deviate too much cause thats that much more memorizing. Forgeworld is never a mandatory option and should never be, to me its kinda like apocalypses, its an add-on, a supplement. not to be mistaken for a must have codex expansion.

GW disagrees with you. FW is part of the standard game of 40k.

Now, you can obviously choose whether or not to use them, but that's no different than a personal preference to use storm troopers instead of Marbo. Obviously Marbo is not mandatory but if you don't want "take Marbo" as advice then you need to say that you don't like Marbo and won't use him.

Now onto vendettas, i am an IG player, i dont like vendettas.

Solution: every time you start an advice thread say "Vendettas are too powerful for my opponents so I don't want to use them". This is the tactics forum and it's assumed that your goal is to maximize your chances of winning, if you want to play with self-imposed limits to help your opponents then you need to make those limits clear.

A note to all about the thread. I metioned I would include Forge World however I won't be basing the entire thred on winning with Forge World. I want to go through as many different ways to play guard as possible. That includes ways to play and win with guard that doesn't include Forge World. Personally I feel.the Vendetta with a cheep scoring unit on board is the most usefull unit guard have and guess what its codex not forge world. Does that mean it will be a tactics thread on the Vendetta. No I will include all the options from the fast attack section as well. Most people realise that there there are other options in there as well right?

It its going to be a long thread and a real head ache fo write and will be written in pieces. I will start with Allies as several people have mentioned that interests them. I will then proceed to write about unit overviews, tactics and army builds. I should be finished just in time for a new guard codex realese to invalidate everything.

@peregrine yeah ok FW is part now I get that (as much as I still am on the boarder with it) but yeah this is a tactics thread and its about winning, but it also means that we discuss tactics to win without vendettas. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's tactics right? To just say to win is to take vendettas is like saying my tactic is to chuck my rock at them. Is that your kind of tactics? Use what is best so you don't have to think? Cause wow that is an amazing tactic. Lets all just use the best thing at the time and not actually try to out think someone. No offense but I like to play with a little more thought process and that is what I believe tactics forums are for. How to make best use of what you want to use. Not of what others say is good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not trying to start anything but there are other ways to maximize your chances without just taking the best unit.

*Sigh* So, we've hit the FW debate as soon as the second page. How long until someone brings up Marbo? or AC vs Lascannons?

 kestril wrote:
*Sigh* So, we've hit the FW debate as soon as the second page. How long until someone brings up Marbo? or AC vs Lascannons?

@kestril lol just give it another few days and i can bet that you'll have your answer

Anyways for the OP, once again as Solosam47 said, this is a game of tactics and strategy. Yes you will inevitably run across those " Win At All Costs!" kinds of players but if you do find a gaming group that works for you then I envy you all the more. as far as FW, I'll say this. If you wanna play it and no one bothers you for it, that's great. If you want to avoid it, be my guest. No one is screaming in your face that you, "Have to take this unit or you suck", so when in doubt, do as they say at Mcdonalds... Have it YOUR way.

For me, I tend to look at the Codex and take everything I can find, in terms of help and tactica, and apply a pinch to half a bucket of salt to it while searching for tactical advice on my IG. The only true way for you to know what is a solid unit, and what fails in the face of adversity is to try it out yourself. Sure it seems like a daunting task but you have to remember that NOT every single unit or strategy need be tested. Only those that either appeal to you, or provide the support you need when needed in your grand master plan you have boiling in that evil mind of yours.

Also if you are able, look to some batreps that have said unit and use that to "help" base an idea off of how a unit performs in actual combat. with this process you can help yourself to the wealth of knowledge granted by some of the more level-headed veterans while filtering out the stuff that is based merely on poor attitude or an unsound tactical mind.

Either way, I look forward to an IG tactica thread.

@kestril your right sorry bout that, lets get back on track!

Since you mentioned Marbo ill just start with a quick deal on him.
I love me some Marbo, he is one of the most unique units in any codex I think, both background and on the table. I use a converted necron as mine. Lol he is like the t1000 from terminator.
Before I used to never run him and I'd use the 65 points elsewhere but now I always run him, he usually dies but I have never played a more fun model. His det pack, his no scatter, and his 4 attacks/5 on the charge with a poisoned knife are so fun. I am not sure on a lot of people's stance on him but if due to him I lose more games I'm not worried, I dig him.
When running him I usually drop him behind a troop choice that most relevantly threatens one of my chimeras. I have read where people like to take him to hunt hqs and warlords but I need them vets to survive till they get in position.
On another note, do you guys prefer carapace armor or camo cloaks for your vets?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@cyrus_stormshadow well said. Kinda what I was thinking but I can't help but sound argumentive sometimes.

Playing with the unit is a hell of a lot better than listening to most threads. I use the forums as a base then build my decision off that. It's nice having a group too that will let you proxy bigger stuff like LRBT or basalisks before you get one. The forums help for sure but your meat and potatoes comes from good ol battles. Since one persons meta is different from another's you never really know what will bring home the win before you try it. It's like flayed ones from necron, I see a lot of people saying they are bad but I have been tore up by a few before and not ashamed to admit it. My opponent was a good player and knew how to work the field to his advantage.

 Solosam47 wrote:
@kestril your right sorry bout that, lets get back on track!

Since you mentioned Marbo ill just start with a quick deal on him.
I love me some Marbo, he is one of the most unique units in any codex I think, both background and on the table. I use a converted necron as mine. Lol he is like the t1000 from terminator.
Before I used to never run him and I'd use the 65 points elsewhere but now I always run him, he usually dies but I have never played a more fun model. His det pack, his no scatter, and his 4 attacks/5 on the charge with a poisoned knife are so fun. I am not sure on a lot of people's stance on him but if due to him I lose more games I'm not worried, I dig him.
When running him I usually drop him behind a troop choice that most relevantly threatens one of my chimeras. I have read where people like to take him to hunt hqs and warlords but I need them vets to survive till they get in position.
On another note, do you guys prefer carapace armor or camo cloaks for your vets?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@cyrus_stormshadow well said. Kinda what I was thinking but I can't help but sound argumentive sometimes.

Playing with the unit is a hell of a lot better than listening to most threads. I use the forums as a base then build my decision off that. It's nice having a group too that will let you proxy bigger stuff like LRBT or basalisks before you get one. The forums help for sure but your meat and potatoes comes from good ol battles. Since one persons meta is different from another's you never really know what will bring home the win before you try it. It's like flayed ones from necron, I see a lot of people saying they are bad but I have been tore up by a few before and not ashamed to admit it. My opponent was a good player and knew how to work the field to his advantage.

@solosam47 no worries bro, we all sound like that some days. (Even if it is to the mirror. I swear that took the last Kit-Kat bar) And as you say, let's get back on topic!

As solosam47 has shown, it's not merely about what the stats show, or even how the current meta is. It's all about What/When/Where/How something's applied in regards to your overall strategy or grand scheme. If you play test something and find that it doesn't bring to the table what you were hoping for, then no worries! look for something different that does what you want it to accomplish and try it out and see if that is what you feel better with. This is especially helpful as Solosam47 has said, ( nice idea btw ) if you have a group of fellow gamers that are able to help you out with proxy stuff to see if something is worth investing in.

@Solosam47 as far as camo or carapace, I tend to lean more towards camo-cloaks then carapace for a few things but on vets it's a close choice. mostly depends on if I am running and gunning or sticking them in cover.

 Solosam47 wrote:
Not trying to start anything but there are other ways to maximize your chances without just taking the best unit.

And all of them work just as well with a strong list as with a weak list. There isn't some bizarre choice between Vendettas or good strategy, and a player with Vendettas and good strategy will beat a good player with a weak list.

 Solosam47 wrote:

On another note, do you guys prefer carapace armor or camo cloaks for your vets?

I prefer camo cloaks, they allow a potentially higher save in ruins (3+). Plus, a cover save is harder to get rid of at range, so you still get a save vs AP 4 and below weapons, which is pretty big. And, if the enemy was close enough to nullify my cover save with a flamer, those guardsmen would probably be dead soon anyways. I find vets arn't really an offensive weapon, and the only way I've consistently snagged an objective with them is by infiltrating onto it at the start, or dumping them out the back of a Valkyrie.

Furthermore, you gain infiltrate, which is very useful during deployment.

 kestril wrote:
Furthermore, you gain infiltrate, which is very useful during deployment.

I wish camo cloaks gave infiltrate, but they don't. You either need to take Harker or Stormtroopers to get infiltrate.

Derp. I always use them with harker. That could be the source of my confusion.

Hey thx for the advise! Yeah usually I run mine with the cloaks for the slightly better save but I sometimes find my chimeras getting blown in the open, and well vets are not the best foot sloggers.

Right now my fav vet loadout is with the two flamers and one heavy flamer. I get them up a little in mid field, drop em in cover and use them to fry infantry that comes my way. If vehicles come by the vets usually have cover fire from my H. Weapons teams or LRBT. I know the saying is you buy vets for the BS 4, and I used to run em for that but idk maybe it's luck, but I just have better results.

One thing that probably helps tho is my meta loves urban setting lol. Every now and then me do a board that is rolling hills but for the most part we love ghost towns and overgrown cities

step one: buy 3 vendettas
step two buy an aegis
step three put some guard behind it, spam plasma

you now have 90% + of all guard builds


personally i run CC orientated guard, just to be different.

or run with no flyers, and no aegis, again, just to be different.

pretty bored with my guard army ATm, but i have been playing them for 14 years or so.


only so long you can drop shells on the enemy before you want to choppy choppy them

@easysause so how are you running your cc IG? i recently started using black templar to carry my cc half but im always curious to hear new ideas.

 Solosam47 wrote:


Right now my fav vet loadout is with the two flamers and one heavy flamer. I get them up a little in mid field, drop em in cover and use them to fry infantry that comes my way. If vehicles come by the vets usually have cover fire from my H. Weapons teams or LRBT. I know the saying is you buy vets for the BS 4, and I used to run em for that but idk maybe it's luck, but I just have better results.

That only really works if the enemy charges headlong into your vet squad. Many opponents I know would rather stay back and deal with seven lasgun shots rather than charge forward into flamers. In any case, I'd drop the heavy flamer and just stick another regular flamer on if you're dead-set on running midfield flamers. The HF is waaay overcosted and you could put the points somewhere else.

Also, you sacrifice a lot of flexibility by taking flamers. Lasguns already are good against light infantry at BS4. Flamers are good against light infantry, so that veteran squad has very little flexibility in what it can damage. Plasma or melta, however, allows the vets to perform against heavy infantry, vehicles, and light infantry. They are way more flexible for a mere 15 more points (for X3 melta), and have about the same effective range.

This means if your HWS are taken out early (which they can be, easily at T3, thanks to all this STR 7, AP 4 that everyone has), your flamer vets are pretty screwed if you needed those lascannons/autocannons to take out anything that's not light infantry approaching them.

I usually use my flamers on things that I can get close to use those flamers, rather than relying on my opponent to get in range. Stormtroopers, outflanking sentinels, or a fireball PCS are all options.

 Solosam47 wrote:
@easysause so how are you running your cc IG? i recently started using black templar to carry my cc half but im always curious to hear new ideas.

rough riders and lots of infantry.

it doesnt do well competitively

 easysauce wrote:

 Solosam47 wrote:
@easysause so how are you running your cc IG? i recently started using black templar to carry my cc half but im always curious to hear new ideas.

rough riders and lots of infantry.

it doesnt do well competitively

+1

Sounds hilariously fun.

hmm valid point @kestril we play alot of urban tables in my group so i can usually get behind a builfing i know my opponent has to walk by lol. but yeah so i think i will try dropping the heavy flamer for maybe plasma, altho never have too good luck with gets hot.

@easysause do you run orgyn in your cc list? i have been looking at them lately and really wanting to try them lol.
A little cc adds alot to IG i think and im loving allying them with my BT over my DA now lol even tho i doubt its as "competitive" by forum standards.

I like carapace a little better than camo cloaks, personally. If all you're wanting to do is plant a scoring unit somewhere, you can already get a 2+ or 3+ cover save by going to ground in ruins, or behind a hill/aegis. Furthermore, camo cloaks don't help you against those kinds of things specifically designed to take out units like vets hiding on an objective (like heavy incinerators, bale flamers, etc.).

Meanwhile, the carapace upgrade means that you are proofed against a small class of said weapons (regular flamers, mostly), but, more importantly, that you're not so beholden to cover. With the ability to save against bolters and the like, it means that your vet squad isn't stuck being an expensive, immobile lascannon platform.

With carapace, you can still get the 2+ or 3+ cover save, but you also get the flexibility of being able to move around outside of said one piece of cover if you need to.

@ailaros I brought up which is better specifically because of the bolters, I had a game the other day where I was caught slippin out in the open and being shot at by basic bolters... Which made me realize they really do eat thru my guard unless I'm well protected. I usually have em in good cover with the cloaks but you know what they say, once bitten, twice shy. So now I'm at a kick ass delema of which to use.

I have ogryns just because they are cool models to pain (i have the OOP ones)

they are decent, and if you are going to make a non competitive CC orentated guard army, then GO FOR IT!

maxxed ogryns, with a couple 50 guardmens blobs running cover, and some rough riders, might actually win a few games for you.

It really lets you heroically sacrifice wave after wave of your own men until the enemy gives up.

that being said, my competitive guard list has basically no CC, just a few rough riders to counter charge should some marines or somethign get too close.

AlexMako wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
The point is that an all encompassing IG tactics article would have to include every option available to an IG player. Said article would have to discuss every possible ally and what units to bring from that codex based on what units the IG player is bringing, and it would have to include FW units to discuss the possible combinations from those books.

The article would not only have to point out how to best use each unit, but which units fill the best roles and in their corresponding slots.

FW is an option for many players, and it should be discussed in any respectable tactics article.

Except the vast majority of tournaments don't allow FW, so including those options isn't very useful.

1. Just because it's not very usefull to you doesn't mean it's not very usefull at all.

2. Not all players participate in tournaments

I mean even in my post where I specified "No FW suggestions" I still had people going "you can't say that!" and suggesting FW anyway.

I used to be like that where I would want one thing and one thing only in the thread but this is a online community it's not about what 1 person wants. If you don't like the idea of FW units being covered then either don't read those parts or don't read the thread. Don't throw a fit because it isn't usefull to you.

If people are not to offended I'd like to contribute my (so far terrible) experiences with my DKoK assault brigade. I'd be interested in standard codex tactics as well particularly strategies to deal with new army books and common builds. I'm happy to use either list to build an army and interested in both the 'core' game and FW lists.