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.

EVIL INC wrote:
If an enemy is throwing enough shots at the screened unit to take it out, that means they are not shooting at my other 3 or 4 units.

Or that they're the IG. Or Tau.

Or that the rest of your army is already gone.

It's more complicated that assaulting = win.

I've seen tau units assault other units. I have also assaulted units with my guard. Helped me with my final game in the tournament I wont last weekend.
of course, no one is simply saying run across the field waving your hands in the air screaming 'shoot me shoot me". Setting up terrain to help build "safe roads" when you and your opponent sets the table up, using area terrain, transports, forcing your opponent to make hard choices are all part of the game that enables either side (shooty or assault) to win based on army build, strategy, tactics and yes, the luck of the dice.
As in chess, for every move or tactic for either side, there is a counter. For every counter, there is a counter counter and so on and so forth so we could sit and go back and forth all day saying "that tactic doesn't work because I could do this. Well, if you do that, I'll just do this" back and forth. When it comes down to it, in the game is what matters and where the story is told. After you build your list, you aren't able to go back and redo it to counter a strategy or build your opponent has. Also as every table set up is different, every player is different no two games will be the same. Even the same games played twice can turn out differently as the dice rolls are different and tactics and strategies are forced to be changed (hopefully, your able to be dynamic in this to compensate). Even mathhammer can fail as one player can have a bad luck streak and roll 30 to hit dice and not hit with a single one.

The point is that shooting in 6th can still cripple your other units as well. I've had entire lists tabled in Eldar in four turns where the vast majority had a cover save AND FNP. And these units had jump packs.

Unless you fight on "LOS blocking world" you are fighting a major uphill battle.

Yes, cover helps, but it does't help enough. And just getting to HTH doesn't even matter unless the unit is an unkillable Deasth Star. Which can't be stopped from getting to HTH anywyay, because its unkillable.

Both players get to set up the terrain. If you let your opponent set up planet bowling ball without you putting anything in to use as cover or to block line of sight, of course, you will get hammered by shooting.
It all boils down to this, over the last....well ever since rogue trader, close combat has ruled the game. So much so that it is surprising they even had guns at all as the close combat armies pretty much got the autowin. Now, that they have balanced it, close combat armies need to use tactics and strategies instead of just running at the enemy.

It always annoys me when I see fantasy players say "40k has no tactics" because they are wrong. Unfortunately, I can see where they are coming from. Many 40k players have just never had to learn them. I have noticed that fantasy players are saying that less now as more and more 40k players are learning strategies and tactics. There will always be those who think shooting should not play a part, but I will always disagree with them as I think shooting should actually play a greater part than close combat. I am willing to settle for the current situation where they are about even without either one being predominantly too powerful.

EVIL INC wrote:
over the last....well ever since rogue trader, close combat has ruled the game. So much so that it is surprising they even had guns at all as the close combat armies pretty much got the autowin. Now, that they have balanced it, close combat armies need to use tactics and strategies instead of just running at the enemy.

Go ahead and pretend I'm saying irrelevant things, but this is just completely wrong. Yes, 4th had consolidate into combat which broke things, but if you think 5th was all assault all the time you're fooling yourself. There's a reason Blood Angels (an assault marine army) spammed Razorbacks, and it wasn't because they were Assault Vehicles.

It was because they were cheap las cannons without having to buy the whole tactical or dev squad. They provided a few shots that sometimes took out a tank or two. We had a few blood angels players and in earlier editions I had started a small force of them. You actually didn't see a whole lot of them used except in apoc games. One MAYBE two in a tourney (although drop pods were usually used instead of them at all.)

Your experience is very very different from the rest of the world.

Grey Knights? Razorback spam.
Blood Angels? Razorback spam.

Both massively strong assault armies that went out of their way to get lots of guns.

Sorry, just going by what is average based on the tourney circuit. Your local club games are different from what the rest of us see. Try playing in different areas and talking with the players who play in the circuits.
Grey knights players usually go the multiple teleporting dreadknight + multiple unit teleporting fast attack spam with coatez sitting with a couple units of bolter armed henchmen in chimeras in the deployment zone route. They get one round of up close template spam shooting, endure a little return fire and then assault to win the game.
Blood angels, you usually see drop pods. deploy out to get a single round of shooting in before assaulting for the win on their next turn. Again, your local club player may use razorbacks but don't judge the world on that player's tactics.
I have seen you spend page after page after page spam that close combat is dead and spam ways to counter specific tactics (assuming you were able to see my army list before building your own and getting perfect dice rolls for the entire game). Not once have you ever tried to reason through why a build or strategy or tactic would work or how to improve the tactics or strategy that you have tried or come up with any yourself. No insult intended but I think that if you put even half as much energy into trying to work out a solution instead of flaming and trying to put down and insult those who are finding (or have found) solutions to the issues of a player having trouble adapting their play to the new edition, you would have come up with a few solutions yourself as well.

EVIL INC wrote:
Sorry, just going by what is average based on the tourney circuit. Your local club games are different from what the rest of us see. Try playing in different areas and talking with the players who play in the circuits.
Grey knights players usually go the multiple teleporting dreadknight + multiple unit teleporting fast attack spam with coatez sitting with a couple units of bolter armed henchmen in chimeras in the deployment zone route. They get one round of up close template spam shooting, endure a little return fire and then assault to win the game.
Blood angels, you usually see drop pods. deploy out to get a single round of shooting in before assaulting for the win on their next turn. Again, your local club player may use razorbacks but don't judge the world on that player's tactics.

Would somebody like to post the results from some tourneys, so that we can see just how wrong EVIL INC is?
I don't actually know where to find them...

EVIL INC wrote:

I have seen you spend page after page after page spam that close combat is dead and spam ways to counter specific tactics

Having guns is the only necessary counter to your tactics.

rigeld2 wrote:

EVIL INC wrote:
over the last....well ever since rogue trader, close combat has ruled the game. So much so that it is surprising they even had guns at all as the close combat armies pretty much got the autowin. Now, that they have balanced it, close combat armies need to use tactics and strategies instead of just running at the enemy.

Go ahead and pretend I'm saying irrelevant things, but this is just completely wrong. Yes, 4th had consolidate into combat which broke things, but if you think 5th was all assault all the time you're fooling yourself. There's a reason Blood Angels (an assault marine army) spammed Razorbacks, and it wasn't because they were Assault Vehicles.

I would actually say that BA were much more effective in 5th when run as a balls to the walls assault army. 2x assault termies, 2x land raiders and Mephiston was the core of my decisively most successful BA army, I won a good sized tourney with the list, and I even won most of my games at ETC with the list. I know other players (including some internet celebs) played similar lists very successfully.

GK`s did razorspam much better because of psybolts, psychic pilots and much better units inside the razorback.

"Would somebody like to post the results from some tourneys, so that we can see just how wrong EVIL INC is? " Actually go out and take part in a few and you will see just how right I am.

"Having guns is the only necessary counter to your tactics. " This is just funny. If that were even close to being true, I would not be able to trade lists and win using either one. I can win using a gunline and I can win using assault just as easily. You appear to be so intent on being "right" over a more experienced player that you are working against your own side by blindly flaming and trolling without regard to actual facts and tactics that could actually help you win more games.

We did have a grey knight try the razorback spam. Went crazy getting assault cannons to convert onto them. As soon as he realized the teleporting army-o-doom won more games, he started using it instead. I kinda copied off of him and tried similer this past tourney and came in first because of it. Luckily he wasn't there to slap me down. lol

EVIL INC wrote:
Sorry, just going by what is average based on the tourney circuit. Your local club games are different from what the rest of us see. Try playing in different areas and talking with the players who play in the circuits.
Grey knights players usually go the multiple teleporting dreadknight + multiple unit teleporting fast attack spam with coatez sitting with a couple units of bolter armed henchmen in chimeras in the deployment zone route. They get one round of up close template spam shooting, endure a little return fire and then assault to win the game.
Blood angels, you usually see drop pods. deploy out to get a single round of shooting in before assaulting for the win on their next turn. Again, your local club player may use razorbacks but don't judge the world on that player's tactics.

In 6th that's true. We were talking about previous editions, remember?

I have seen you spend page after page after page spam that close combat is dead and spam ways to counter specific tactics (assuming you were able to see my army list before building your own and getting perfect dice rolls for the entire game). Not once have you ever tried to reason through why a build or strategy or tactic would work or how to improve the tactics or strategy that you have tried or come up with any yourself. No insult intended but I think that if you put even half as much energy into trying to work out a solution instead of flaming and trying to put down and insult those who are finding (or have found) solutions to the issues of a player having trouble adapting their play to the new edition, you would have come up with a few solutions yourself as well.

Then you've failed to actually read my posts. I've not flamed, insulted, or put down anyone. I have suggested ways to make it work.
You haven't suggested a strategy or tactic other than "use cover lol 4+ is everywhere".

We are talking about 6th edition.

If you spent even half the effort that you put into flaming, putting down and trying outrageous ways to deny tactics and strategies (through metagaming where you know your opponent's exact list beforehand, control dice roll results and so forth) into coming up with a few of your own, you would have some great ways of improving your game to wim more often. Likewise, you could actually try a few of them yourself and see that in many cases they do indeed work and devise ways to improve them for the times when they don't work. I have put forth several strategies, builds and tactics of which making use of the best cover possible is only a part (a common sense part at that) of each.


Something that players could do if they have trouble defeating a list is to ask their opponent if they would mind playing the exact same game over again but switch sides (the guard army stand at the same deployment zone and the bugs keep theirs but the players just play the opposite army). I found that this can help bring players new perspectives and it was not long before I saw that if I won the first game, I also won the second. When I lost the first game, I usually lost the second. Over time, I started to win more often using whichever side as I honed my playing strategies, tactics and overall playing skills.

EVIL INC wrote:
*snip*

I like how you're so unable to construct an argument that you had to fabricate a comment in your sig that claims that you are correct

Ummm...How is that untrue comment on topic? We are discussing close combat and was of getting there "alive".

Okay I have been watching this thread for a while and I thought it was time to join in.

First off-topic EVIL INC I am curious, would you mind naming all these tournaments that you have been to and what sort of armies you have faced? I ask because I would like to know if your tournaments are similar to the often referenced ones here and the "normal" meta" for each edition.

On-Topic:
I like assault. I have had good luck with my deathwing knights in a land raider. Its an expensive unit but it gets the job done. However I must say that shooting is the stronger method of killing in this edition. While this edition has made cover more available it is not as strong anymore with tau, eldar, and even LotD getting cover ignoring weapons.The amount of ignores cover that is now available means that true assault units must be resilient and fast to be effective. khorne dogs are a good example , the 2 wounds makes a big difference.

Going through the armies here is my take on assault for each:

SOB: can't say no local players or previous experience
BA: while they are fast they do not have the resiliency to make
CD: these guys have multiple ways to really get in your face and use cc to max effect
CSM: while they have okay units for cc the delivery issues mean that often those units will not make it to enemy lines
DA: meh the knights are good but truly terminators are not great right now even ss termies. I love using them and have good luck with them but even so just not reliable
DE:can't say no local players or previous experience
Eldar: while they have really good cc units their shooting ones are exceptionally better and kill things with fewer risks and better results
GK: very similar to eldar
IG: why assault with this army???? but really they have the blob squad power weapons
Necrons: a mid range shooting army with 1 notable assault unit mostly effective as a tarpit and not a game winner
Orks: able to do cc through mass of bodies and attrition resistance
C:SM: similar to BA in lack of resilient units. assault cents could work but have delivery issues
SW: good cc army due to counter-attack but they are good because of the shooting abilitys 5 HW longfangs, double special GH, combi termies
Tau: Assault ha ha ha good one. the only cc we have is our monstrous creature and even then you don't want a riptide in cc
Nids: similar to orks but add in the big bugs to give more of a base to work off. add even here you see temiguants not hormaguants because then you can shoot then assault instead of just assault

I'd just like to ask:

How does "covering fire" work in 40k?

If there's a hard as nails assault unit barreling down my throat, if you throw a couple of units shooting at me I'm not going to G2G and ignore the assault unit. I'm going to blast it off the table before it can even make an impact.
Even more so if that unit is scoring, or has your warlord in it.

The idea of covering fire doesn't make much sense to me. To force a unit to G2G you have to throw a lot of firepower into it. Which means you're essentially ignoring all the other units. If that unit is guard, it'll just GBITF and laugh at the attempt to force snap shots.

The tourneys I speak of range through Virginia, West Virginia and Maryland. Some of the precursors to the big name ones like Ard Boys but most of them regional ones where anyone from the tristate area is welcome and we get people who have played from other areas as well like PA, DC and DE. At each one, I make it a point to listen to and participate in conversation of players who have made it higher in the tourneys than myself and have "ranged further abroad" than I have so I base my posts on my own not inconsiderable anecdotal experience but also on that of players who are better and/or more experienced than myself in different areas. The second you close your mind, you are lost which is why I keep mine open and am willing to try different gaming methods.

I like your take and agree with most of it.
BA out of pods can be deadly and I have see them force shooty armies to choose who/what they shoot at well enough to ensure they make to combat. of course this is variable depending on build.
CSM, have you tried the slingshot tactic? One of the guys that comes around to our tourneys is on of the placers from the wider circuit and "national level" tourneys. He is the one who taught me the slingshot method of lord delivery that now works better than ever before. He used it to great effect to win all of his games but one I think. Sometimes he brings it, sometimes his orks and other times his grey knights. Each time he comes you can bet on him winning or placing.
Orks rolling out of trucks and battlewagons who get to enemy lines through use of the av14 and the mech save can do some damage
Bugs I have seen these players abuse sticking the very tip of a base into area terrain to give the huge monstrous critter poopers cover saves. Those huge critter poopers sitting on an objective as a troops choice sending an unending stream of bodies out to help hold. wee hoo.

This being said, one of the tactics of getting into combat is the use of shooting and the synergy of combining shooting as one of your tactics to use while assaulting. Without shooting and making use of it yourself, your guys are far less likely to make it to combat.

EVIL INC wrote:
We are talking about 6th edition.

If you spent even half the effort that you put into flaming, putting down and trying outrageous ways to deny tactics and strategies (through metagaming where you know your opponent's exact list beforehand, control dice roll results and so forth) into coming up with a few of your own, you would have some great ways of improving your game to wim more often. Likewise, you could actually try a few of them yourself and see that in many cases they do indeed work and devise ways to improve them for the times when they don't work. I have put forth several strategies, builds and tactics of which making use of the best cover possible is only a part (a common sense part at that) of each.


Something that players could do if they have trouble defeating a list is to ask their opponent if they would mind playing the exact same game over again but switch sides (the guard army stand at the same deployment zone and the bugs keep theirs but the players just play the opposite army). I found that this can help bring players new perspectives and it was not long before I saw that if I won the first game, I also won the second. When I lost the first game, I usually lost the second. Over time, I started to win more often using whichever side as I honed my playing strategies, tactics and overall playing skills.

The context of his razorspam quote was in relation to 5th editon BA and GK tactics and army builds.

A brief history of competitive gaming over the last 5 years.....

5th edition started out reasonably balanced between melee and shooting, with Nidzilla, Nob bikers, and the Chaos Lash lists were all bigger melee builds. Once 5th rolled around in earnest the first handful of codexes were Space Marines (shooting, and a good book), Imperial guard (shooting, and STILL a solid book), Space Wolves (remember long fang spam? Pretty balanced between shooting and melee actually, THE top tier book), Tyranids (killed monstrous builds pretty bad, poor book), then Blood Angels (balanced and solid book) and Dark Eldar (solid book, extremely shooting heavy).

Around the release of the Dark Eldar book, mech was pretty main stream with parking lots everywhere, what the DE book did though was popularize the Darklight/double cannon Venom spam. It has so many poisoned shots and S8 AP2 shots that anything not in extremely heavy cover or a vehicle was annihilated off the board by the end of turn 2. I'm talking 30+ Lance shots and 100+ poison shots per turn.

Following that debacle was the GK codex about 5 months later....and we all know what that book was about. Basically wall to wall psycannons everywhere and troops that were solid enough to deter ANY attempt to dislodge them in melee.

For the remaining year and change of 5th edition GKs pretty much swept up tournaments with some SW, IG and the odd "other" popping up here and there. Necrons were regarded as a solid army, but nothing top tier.

5th edition was the "Vehicle spam edition" with shooting being more effective than melee. As an example of a top end player's winning list, I submit Tony Kopach's dominating Space Wolf list from 2011http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Tony-Kupach-Space-Wolves-1st-Seed.pdf. He basically swept tournys in 2011 one after another with that list or a similar derivation of it. It's rhino and/or razor borne grey hunters with combi-melta wolf guard, max long fangs with missiles and Njal leading it. Very troop heavy and build to break vehicles by the dozen....which is what did well in 2011. His troops were also extremely solid in melee, which made his opponents unable to rush headlong into close combat for an advantage.

The start of 6th edition was....chaotic, and that's not a pun on chaos being good or anything either. Vehicles took some huge nerfs, melee was weakened further and allies were thrown in. The first few months of 6th saw an evolution of the top 5th edition lists (SW, IG and GK) adding in allies and still doing solid. 2012 Nova was won by a SW/IG list actually, with a huge 50 man IG blob with power axes. Necron flier spam/wraith wing was then on the rise, and they proceeded to do extremely well in late 2012 and early 2013, with the new chaos codex making a splash with the helldrake in several allied formats. Early 2013 was also a bi-monthly meta shift, with DA, then Demons, Tau, Eldar and Space Marines being released in rapid succession. DA didn't make a peep at all, beyond some interesting theory crafting around the banner of devastation. Demons were regarded as weak and random as hell when the book first hit, and it took 2-3 months and a couple of top tourny placings for the Khornedog and Screamerstar to be taken seriously. Tau were also regarded as mediocre/marginally above average at release, but they quickly started sweeping competitive matches, which is pretty much the same thing that happened to Eldar. When people started using Eldar and Tau together they found the new meta champion. Space marines haven't been very loud in the competitive environment from what I've seen so far, but they've had a few top 5 finishes and stomped a few smaller RTTs out there though, time will tell, but I don't see C:SM being more than "slightly above the middle of the pack".

At the moment the absolute cluster-feth of supplements and codexes are stirring the meta pretty crazily, but Eldar/Tau are consistently coming out on top, with demons hanging out close behind.

Here's the Nova 2013 results starting with army representation;

Players - 223

Blood Angels - 7
Daemons - 37
CSM - 16
DA - 14
Dark Eldar - 7
Eldar - 28
Grey Knights - 12
IG - 15
Necron - 22
Orks - 5
Sisters of Battle - 3
Space Marine - 4
Space Wolves - 9
Tau - 37
Tyranids - 7

Players - 223

That's right. . . 44% of the field was primary detachment of Tau, Eldar or Daemons

And the top 30 finishers....

Top 30
Eldar
Tau
Tau
Eldar
Tau
IG
DA
Tau
Grey Knights
Tau
Tau
Necrons
Daemons
Necrons
Eldar
Daemons
Eldar
Daemons
Eldar
Eldar
Eldar
Daemons
Daemons
Daemons
Tau
Blood Angels
Daemons
Daemons
Eldar
Tau

I think that paints a pretty solid picture of Tau, Eldar and Demons being your top armies ATM.

Look, I'm not saying melee is dead, or that it's awful, but the top armies ATM are super shooty. Any melee they take is to deter their opponents from getting into melee with them, not as a primary way to accomplish their mission.

I don't think melee is "dead", but "melee units" are largely dead, with only a few exceptions. Khornedogs, monstrous creatures and a few other select units are still solid as primary melee units, the main problem is that most melee units are 10-30% over priced in comparison to their shooting counterparts as GW just doesn't get the balance of melee and shooting ATM. A good player can easily overcome a 10-25% handicap against a mediocre opponent, which is why you see some people pop up and say "Melee is still awesome! I win all the time with my assault marine BA list!", but then you are playing someone every bit as good as you are, even a 5% handicap in army list power is going to be rather telling. The top end of the bigger tournaments are pretty uniform in their army representation, so these armies and lists are showing what works well for their points, and there's only 1 melee heavy army in there....and that's demons.

EVIL INC wrote:We are talking about 6th edition.

Really? So you this quote is incorrect?

rigeld2 wrote:

EVIL INC wrote:
over the last....well ever since rogue trader, close combat has ruled the game. So much so that it is surprising they even had guns at all as the close combat armies pretty much got the autowin. Now, that they have balanced it, close combat armies need to use tactics and strategies instead of just running at the enemy.

Go ahead and pretend I'm saying irrelevant things, but this is just completely wrong. Yes, 4th had consolidate into combat which broke things, but if you think 5th was all assault all the time you're fooling yourself. There's a reason Blood Angels (an assault marine army) spammed Razorbacks, and it wasn't because they were Assault Vehicles.

You started the discussion, I replied. In the context of the discussion you started, we were not talking about 6th edition.

If you spent even half the effort that you put into flaming, putting down and trying outrageous ways to deny tactics and strategies (through metagaming where you know your opponent's exact list beforehand, control dice roll results and so forth) into coming up with a few of your own, you would have some great ways of improving your game to wim more often. Likewise, you could actually try a few of them yourself and see that in many cases they do indeed work and devise ways to improve them for the times when they don't work. I have put forth several strategies, builds and tactics of which making use of the best cover possible is only a part (a common sense part at that) of each.

No, you haven't. You've put forth a mysterious 4+ cover save and refused - despite being asked politely - more information on how to achieve that. I've put forth my ideas on assault in 6th. And I win plenty of games, thanks. I don't have to tailor my lists, I don't have to "control dice roll results"... I know the rules and the opponents codex.

He was mistaken. We are not discussing 5th edition at all. The current edition is 6th so that is the edition we are discussing.
The thread is dedicated to helping people play more effectively in the current edition, not previous ones.
"mysterious 4+ cover saves", Believe it or not, despite your protestations, it IS possible to get a cover save of 6+, 5+, even 4+ or better given the terrain/wargear. I don't understand why you keep insisting that getting a cover save is impossible. I also fail to see why you insist on getting a cover save is such a bad thing. the ability to get a cover save to prevent models from suffering wounds as they advance towards the enemy can indeed ensure that more of the models reach the enemy.
If you put half as much effort into working on a solution to your inability to reach close combat as you do into flaming, trolling and doing your best to extend some sort of personal vendetta, you would already reaching close combat and winning games.

So what's a better delivery system for my Honour Guard then?

Drop pod or raven guard rhino?

EVIL INC wrote:
He was mistaken. We are not discussing 5th edition at all. The current edition is 6th so that is the edition we are discussing.
The thread is dedicated to helping people play more effectively in the current edition, not previous ones.
"mysterious 4+ cover saves", Believe it or not, despite your protestations, it IS possible to get a cover save of 6+, 5+, even 4+ or better given the terrain/wargear. I don't understand why you keep insisting that getting a cover save is impossible. I also fail to see why you insist on getting a cover save is such a bad thing. the ability to get a cover save to prevent models from suffering wounds as they advance towards the enemy can indeed ensure that more of the models reach the enemy.
If you put half as much effort into working on a solution to your inability to reach close combat as you do into flaming, trolling and doing your best to extend some sort of personal vendetta, you would already reaching close combat and winning games.

Cover saves no matter how good they are wont help you much in the current meta, the top meta lists have far too much ignores cover(serpent shields, marker lights, buffmanders, helldrakes) or simply sheer volume of st6/7 shooting that they can obliterate your advancing assault units unless you have a re-rollable 2++ or something equally broken, typical assault units are basically boned. You can pretty much count the number of competative assault units on your 10 fingers, there's that few of them and they're generally obsurdly tough and move at least 12 inches.

EVIL INC wrote:
He was mistaken. We are not discussing 5th edition at all. The current edition is 6th so that is the edition we are discussing.
The thread is dedicated to helping people play more effectively in the current edition, not previous ones.
"mysterious 4+ cover saves", Believe it or not, despite your protestations, it IS possible to get a cover save of 6+, 5+, even 4+ or better given the terrain/wargear. I don't understand why you keep insisting that getting a cover save is impossible. I also fail to see why you insist on getting a cover save is such a bad thing. the ability to get a cover save to prevent models from suffering wounds as they advance towards the enemy can indeed ensure that more of the models reach the enemy.
If you put half as much effort into working on a solution to your inability to reach close combat as you do into flaming, trolling and doing your best to extend some sort of personal vendetta, you would already reaching close combat and winning games.

Lol, I don't think he ever said it is impossible, he just said it isn't as common as you think it is.

And also when you mention the wargear that units have that does up it to a 4+ are normally not assault units.

EVIL INC wrote:
He was mistaken. We are not discussing 5th edition at all. The current edition is 6th so that is the edition we are discussing.

Sure, just ignore the tangent you started because you made incorrect statements. That's the way to win friends and influence people.

"mysterious 4+ cover saves", Believe it or not, despite your protestations, it IS possible to get a cover save of 6+, 5+, even 4+ or better given the terrain/wargear.

Thank you for admitting it requires specific wargear. Meaning it's not as common as you initially asserted. So you're admitting you were wrong without actually saying those words - I'll take it though.

I don't understand why you keep insisting that getting a cover save is impossible. I also fail to see why you insist on getting a cover save is such a bad thing.

I've never said either of these things. Ever. Please don't misquote me.

the ability to get a cover save to prevent models from suffering wounds as they advance towards the enemy can indeed ensure that more of the models reach the enemy.

Thanks Mr. Obvious! I wasn't aware of that vital fact!

If you put half as much effort into working on a solution to your inability to reach close combat as you do into flaming, trolling and doing your best to extend some sort of personal vendetta, you would already reaching close combat and winning games.

Please quote the insults. Please quote the flaming and trolling. There's no personal vendetta here - I just dislike someone who refuses to prove an assertion that is blatantly false.
I am reaching close combat. I am winning games. My problem is with the way you say "Just get 4+ cover it's easy." and then refuse to explain that. Continuously. You do realize that wording it that way literally helps no one?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Triple_double_U wrote:
So what's a better delivery system for my Honour Guard then?

Drop pod or raven guard rhino?

Drop Pod in almost every situation.

If you think that cover saves are worthless, Than I assume that if you ever play me, you will refuse to roll for them?
Rigeld, you have trolled and trolled and flamed and generally made yourself look foolish. I have effectively proven my point yet you insist on continuing. It IS possible to use cover to get into assault range of the enemy. It IS possible to get cover saves of 6+, 5+, 4+ or even better as I have stated from post #1. This has been proven thousands of times across the world by players. It IS possible to use tactics and strategy to win games and close combat is not worthless.
If you put half the effort that you put into trolling forums attempting to instigate drama into learning tactics and strategy or trying to find solutions to your inability to overcome your in-game weaknesses, you would likely have overcome them and be winning many more games.

EVIL INC wrote:
If you think that cover saves are worthless, Than I assume that if you ever play me, you will refuse to roll for them?
Rigeld, you have trolled and trolled and flamed and generally made yourself look foolish. I have effectively proven my point yet you insist on continuing. It IS possible to use cover to get into assault range of the enemy. It IS possible to get cover saves of 6+, 5+, 4+ or even better as I have stated from post #1. This has been proven thousands of times across the world by players. It IS possible to use tactics and strategy to win games and close combat is not worthless.
If you put half the effort that you put into trolling forums attempting to instigate drama into learning tactics and strategy or trying to find solutions to your inability to overcome your in-game weaknesses, you would likely have overcome them and be winning many more games.

Okay after this post I must really say EVIL INC you just do not get it at all. The discussion put forth (yes it was a discussion and not trolling or flaming) has demonstrated that while cover saves are quite available on tables. They do not solve the issue of getting cc units into combat. You have put forth 1 strategy, no builds, limited tactics and generally unhelpful posts. That 1 strategy involves the "slingshot" and is unusable by many cc units because they lack either the speed or durability to be effective while spread out as such.

You have continually misquoted and mis-represented the posts that are put forth by others and repeatedly called respected dakkanaughts trolls and flamers. You have not demonstrated that you have tactical skill that would lead to your claims of skill. You have not been able to give any meaningful tactics on combating the top tier armies that are present in every recent tournament (namely tau, eldar, IG, and allied forms thereof). You continue to say things that boil down to "use cover" "be more skilled" or "stop trolling". If you have any real advice to give present a cc oriented army list in a vacuum and describe how you would effectively use its strengths against a variety of opponents. Or failing that why don't you take a unit and describe why it is good for assault and give some situations that can be overcome by your VAST knowledge of the game.

I'm sorry if this appears to you as offensive but I will not watch this thread and the others you have posted in and continue as you flame those that are trying to engage you in a discussion and logically showing you that your posts are
1) inaccurate
2) unhelpful
3) overly prideful

-FirePainter-

These others are saying that it is not possible to get cover saves with assaulting units as they cross the table. I have proven that it IS possible.
They have also made the claims that they are totally worthless. By all means, don't bother taking them when you play me.

Not once have I EVER said they are the end all be all to getting into combat. The cover save is only a small part of what needs to be taken into account when devising tactics and strategies for getting into close combat. This is also what they are contesting. I have put forth several builds, strategies and tactics that including taking cover into account while implementing them along with helpful posts. At least until the flame brigade showed up, then I have spent my time responding to their flames and trolling. I am not the only one who has proven them wrong on this (I am left to assume it is personal because when others have chimed in telling them I was right on something, they do not respond to those others instead centering their attention on me and respamming the flames), but I am the only one not letting them get away with it.

if you believe as they do that I have never won a game in my life and will never win a game in my life, by all means, play me in a game. You may win because unlike them, I do not claim to be God skill level with the ability to see your army list before a game and tailor my own to counter it and I also do not have their ability to determine the dice results before rolling the dice, however, I can bet you that the game would not be as easy as you think it would be.

Notice, that I have not given a lot of builds. This is because I usually play in tournaments. I have to build a take all comers list not knowing exactly what I will be facing. I could sit here and write up 5 lists for each army out that a player can win with or have a good chance of winning with that have units in them that can turn the tide of the battle in hand to hand combat. However, that does not add to the conversation because you could do as they have been doing and metagame with the assumption that you will know my exact list beforehand and be able to tailor to counter it. "Well, if you take drop pods, I will take this negating them". What is important are the tactics and strategies that are more "generic" that would aply to multiple armies and units that can allow you to win with your own army or to win with the opponants if you were to switch.

EVIL INC wrote:
I have put forth several builds, strategies and tactics that including taking cover into account while implementing them along with helpful posts.

Really though? Have you?

I distinctly recall that Selym politely asked you early in this thread (Page 1 I believe) to put forth a solid CC oriented list, or even a core to build around.

You deferred him to the army list section and somehow dodged it entirely.

The rest of your 'helpful' posts have been about using 4+ cover saves, which as has been shown to be the exception to the standard 5+ cover, despite the fact that the two top armies have easy access to ignore cover weaponry en masse.

So, why don't you actually put forward some genuine lists, builds, and tactics that don't revolve around 'just having 4+ cover in the open' and maybe take the time to actually read and understand what others are saying.

No one here has been trolling, or flaming, or anything else you accuse them of. When you post tactics, they're expected to be good, useful, and backed with proper knowledge of the rules. Start delivering.

EVIL INC wrote:
These others are saying that it is not possible to get cover saves with assaulting units as they cross the table.

That's a lie. I've corrected you before where it might have been a mistake, but continuing to say it is simply a lie.

if you believe as they do that I have never won a game in my life and will never win a game in my life, by all means, play me in a game.

I've never said that. Please cite support for your assertion - why do you think that?

You may win because unlike them, I do not claim to be God skill level with the ability to see your army list before a game and tailor my own to counter it and I also do not have their ability to determine the dice results before rolling the dice, however, I can bet you that the game would not be as easy as you think it would be.

Please don't lie about what I (and others) have said.

Despite your assertions I can promise you I'm not trolling. I'm trying to help your thread by offering correct information.
Which is why I asked for clarification (which you refused to offer). Which is why I have posted the 3 things an assault unit needs in 6th edition.