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.

Disagreeing with someone and providing reason is not flaming.

Mike712 wrote:
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.

This is a fallacy. Cover is very much effective against the current meta. This seems like an assumption that every model in said enemy army will ignore cover. They do not, and typically they use their powerful Ignore Cover weapons on high quality targets.

As far as making CC viable, it entirely relies on speed. Eldar jetbikes, jetpack cavalry, beasts, jump infantry etc.. are great ways to get into combat fast. I play Nids vs these new gunline armies and I have never failed to make CC with the models I needed to.

 Illumini wrote:

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.

My razorspam list would crush that BA list you propose. I know this, because I faced that list many times in 5th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:

Mike712 wrote:
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.

This is a fallacy. Cover is very much effective against the current meta. This seems like an assumption that every model in said enemy army will ignore cover. They do not, and typically they use their powerful Ignore Cover weapons on high quality targets.

As far as making CC viable, it entirely relies on speed. Eldar jetbikes, jetpack cavalry, beasts, jump infantry etc.. are great ways to get into combat fast. I play Nids vs these new gunline armies and I have never failed to make CC with the models I needed to.

It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

Actually there IS an army list building section which is better suited for building lists.
The reason is We can sit all day with me spending hours building different effective lists that contain units in them that can be used in close combat to turn the tide of a game if needed to. In turn he can sit and meta game under the assumption he will know my exact army list before making his own and thus be able to tailor his to counter my list every time, make the statement that there will be no terrain on the table to benefit my army (despite the fact that the rules allow for me to have an equal part of setting it up), and control the dice "you will fail your armor and cover saves every time while I will never miss or fail to wound". The tactics section is designed for just that, tactics.

Again, making use of terrain cover, artificial cover and terrain to totally block line of sight to prevent the enemy from shooting you at all is not an overall tactics in and of itself. It is only a small part of tactics that needs to be taken into consideration.

It does not matter if the cover save is 6+, 5+, 4+ or even better, getting a saving throw when you would not otherwise have one is beneficial to your units. Even better if you are able to use buildings/rock outcrops/whatever to TOTALLY block line of sight to prevent getting shot at at all.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ways to assist with this is to have a part in the terrain at your home or local gaming store. A. You can of course get GW buildings and position the doors and windows on the lower levels to be closed in order block line of sight. B. I have seen many places use tiles to mount their building on in order to make them more sturdy and spiced the tile up to match the building. Players will often discuss before the game and rule that the entire tile offers area terrain to match the building to represent rocks and rubble having fallen from it. C. When building your terrain, make several sets of large rock outcrops or other things that can totally block line of sight. These often look really nice and when a board is set up with several of them used at once, it gives a whole different "feel" than buildings every time .D. Make some themed boards, have you ever played on foamboards where rivers and trenches or gulleys and such were build in? I realize that not everyone's home has room for these but shops will usually have at LEAST one and if your willing to help make one, they will invariable let you use shop supplies if your building it for them.

When setting up the table don't fall into the habit of just sitting buildings in the deployment zones and placing a few craters in the middle. Watch what the opponent sets up and play the deployment itself as though it is part of the game. Look where he is setting up fire lanes and block them off while setting up your own protected highways. I am guilty of playing into an enemies hands at this part by setting up what "looks" cool and at times end up playing on fields that look like the grand canyons that are loaded with mountains and rock outcroppings because it looks nice. Don't let your opponent bully you into not placing something you want "you cant put that rock there, its in the middle of the city". When it's your turn to place, YOU get to choose the piece, Remember, it will help affect if you win or lose later in the actual game.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The denied flank (Someone else who was familiar with it posted the official name but I forget it and don't remember what thread it was in). Mind you, this falls under strategies more so than tactics but close enough for our purposes.
This has actually made a comeback as the whole whoever gets first turn sets thier entire army up first instead of trading deployment of units. This is something to keep in the back of your mind because it is a tactic that works best if used under certain situations. These situations usually consist of A. Your opponent winning the first turn/deployment and B. They play the entire field trying to ensure that they have all avenues of approach covered (which gunlines usually do).
You observe the enemy deployment, possibly measure the ranges of his weapons, take into account which side has longer range and speed of units. Pick the side you want to work on first based on whatever qualifications suit you (this side has the artillery and I want to get into their minimum fir range early while taking away the advantage of it's long range, the other side is foot sloggers with short range weapons, whatever suits YOUR needs). Position as much of your army as you can focused entirely on that one flank. To avoid overcrowding, put your faster units closer a little further away but still able to reach that flank to focus on it right off.
Now, assuming you wont steal the initiative, half of his army will have to either sit still and twiddle their thumbs with nothing in range or move giving you a full turn reprieve from the guns of half (or some other large percentage probably close to 25 totally not shooting and 25 shooting ineffectually. While you are able to overload a small portion of their army with more units than they can shoot at. What usually happens is that you swamp and snuff out that flank killing half of their army while only suffering minimal casualties with the rest of their army trickling in towards you piecemeal depending upon the speed of his different units. While you are ensconced in the defenses.
Of course, if you are able to steal the initiative, it makes it even easier for you.
That being said, it does not work every time and there are ways to counter it just as there are with any strategy. This is one of the strategies I posted earlier that was totally dismissed as never working and being totally not useful. However, I have seen it work to great effect and I have used it myself to practically table opponents.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Slingshotting
This is another that I put forth earlier that was totally dismissed as being totally worthless and not worthy of acknowledging. However I have seen it used to great effect(against me was the first time I saw it, then I watched the guy do it to others with the same effect). As it is not something I have ever tried only seeing a national tourney guy (one of a large group that goes to different tourneys every weekend throughout the year to mop up the "local yokals" and walk out with the prizes, but tot talk with him, he is actually a nice guy) so forgive me if I dont have a full grasp of it's mechanics. Again, I mentioned this before and one of the other posters had actually seen it as well and piped in with a clarification to help explain it after which on of my fan club shut up about it.
I saw it used with chaos to deliver super slicer chaord lord goodness into my lines. He attached his lord to a maxed out unit of chaos spawn with the mark of nurgle. Even tau are hard pressed to kill 3 or more of them in a single turn of shooting with normal terrain and such. He strings them towards me in a single file line with the lord at the back. With thier speed, they can reach me on turn 2 so I only get a single turn of shooting at them 2 if I get first turn. Only a single one has to reach combat for the entire rest of the unit to be protected and unable to be shot at. This then slingshots the lord into combat from the middle of the table. of course, that is not the only unit coming at me, there are also another spawn squad and big vehicular daemon engine nastyness and so forth as well which causes me to be unable to effectively focus fire on any one single target.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This is something else I mentioned that was ignored. Not really a tactic but can help the strategy.
Although not specifically offering lists, the evolution of the game decrees that with each edition some units become more or less useful. Some become all powerfull while yet others such as the berserker can become practically obsolete. Personally, I am a conspiracy theorist and feel that thisis often done "on purpose" to force us as players to constantly be forced to buy new and different models to remain competative.
It would be too exausting for me to do a unit by unit analysys for every army. I'm a horrible hunt and peck typer as it is and dont have every codex on me. Suffice to say, that I will assume you can read and make your own decisionsas well as find out firsthand yourself through game play which units are now better suited for what role, what models to pack away until they become useful again and what units to put on your christmas or "to buy" list.
I am pretty sure that if you use the same list as last edition in the same manner you used it then now, you may find it harder to win. For example you may find that now termagants popping out of drop pods are now more effective than hormagaunt rushing.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Guns do play a more important role in the game than ever before. This is only right because it is a science fiction game where the fluff has them being everywhere. However, it is also a grim forboding and dark furure where monsters lurk everywhere so close combat need to play an important role as well (which it does). Getting into combat should not be easy, it should take skill, tactics and strategy to get to that point because when the monster is upon you and you fire off that last wild reflexive trigger pull, you will most likely be dead.
As I said before, the thread is designed for players to put forth actual tactics, strategies, one trick ponies and ideas to help players make it to close combat and be more effective at it. This is what we should be posting.

EVIL INC wrote:

Slingshotting
This is another that I put forth earlier that was totally dismissed as being totally worthless and not worthy of acknowledging. However I have seen it used to great effect(against me was the first time I saw it, then I watched the guy do it to others with the same effect). As it is not something I have ever tried only seeing a national tourney guy (one of a large group that goes to different tourneys every weekend throughout the year to mop up the "local yokals" and walk out with the prizes, but tot talk with him, he is actually a nice guy) so forgive me if I dont have a full grasp of it's mechanics. Again, I mentioned this before and one of the other posters had actually seen it as well and piped in with a clarification to help explain it after which on of my fan club shut up about it.
I saw it used with chaos to deliver super slicer chaord lord goodness into my lines. He attached his lord to a maxed out unit of chaos spawn with the mark of nurgle. Even tau are hard pressed to kill 3 or more of them in a single turn of shooting with normal terrain and such. He strings them towards me in a single file line with the lord at the back. With thier speed, they can reach me on turn 2 so I only get a single turn of shooting at them 2 if I get first turn. Only a single one has to reach combat for the entire rest of the unit to be protected and unable to be shot at. This then slingshots the lord into combat from the middle of the table. of course, that is not the only unit coming at me, there are also another spawn squad and big vehicular daemon engine nastyness and so forth as well which causes me to be unable to effectively focus fire on any one single target.

It's a decent tactic - the mistake you made in presenting it was saying that close combat blocks line of sight.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

Tau do, Eldar most of the time just put enough wounds enough on you that you die regardless.

You (or another member of my fan club) totally dismissed it as rubbish when I brought it up before. Someone pointed out that it did not block line of sight and I researched it. That was a matter of playing catch up (we have all done that on different aspects going from one edition to another) and being wrong on that aspect and posting as much in a follow up post. Regardless of actually blocking line of sight, it can still force the opponent to shoot through a unit (providing a 5+ save to their target) instead of shooting at the unit itself when they can see the lord out in the open in the middle of the field. He can literally thumb his nose and moonwalk his way into the close combat his spawn beat him to.

Fragile and Makutsu, you both have valid points. However, there are a few things I would point out...
1. Not everyone plays tau or elder
2. Not all tau or elder use the same build. Yes, you will find that certain variations are predominant but even then, you'll find small differences.
3. It is possible to measure out their ranges and ensure that you can decide which of their units can shoot at which of yours
4. true the amount of firepower they can put out could possibly wipe out an entire assault unit but for them to focus that much firepower on it from all of their different units, other units of yours will not be getting shot at (yeah yeah, I know, tau can split fire but we all agree that they are broken)
5. When it comes down to it, roll those dice for those cover saves they are making you roll. there is always the possibility you could be lucky roll all 5s and 6s. getting the chance to roll the dice and have a possibility of saving models is always better than just removing them from the table without having the chance to roll the dice at all.

 Makutsu wrote:

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

Tau do, Eldar most of the time just put enough wounds enough on you that you die regardless.

Sounds like you should concede when you play a Tau or Eldar, since you missed my question entirely.

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

They don't have to ignore cover. They just make you roll so much you fail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fragile wrote:

 Makutsu wrote:

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

Tau do, Eldar most of the time just put enough wounds enough on you that you die regardless.

Sounds like you should concede when you play a Tau or Eldar, since you missed my question entirely.

I do find that conceding would save me a lot of time and frustration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"Although not specifically offering lists, the evolution of the game decrees that with each edition some units become more or less useful. Some become all powerfull while yet others such as the berserker can become practically obsolete. Personally, I am a conspiracy theorist and feel that thisis often done "on purpose" to force us as players to constantly be forced to buy new and different models to remain competative. "

If GW is this clever, I can't see it, because they leaves units crappy for decades at a time. That has to hurt sales.

"4. true the amount of firepower they can put out could possibly wipe out an entire assault unit but for them to focus that much firepower on it from all of their different units, other units of yours will not be getting shot at (yeah yeah, I know, tau can split fire but we all agree that they are broken)"

I've had Eldar cripple 4 units in one turn once I got within catapult range. They don't have to KILL a unit, just cripple it for HTH purposes. Meqs, in particular, aren't THAT good in HTH that they can win 4:1.

EVIL INC wrote:
You (or another member of my fan club) totally dismissed it as rubbish when I brought it up before. Someone pointed out that it did not block line of sight and I researched it. That was a matter of playing catch up (we have all done that on different aspects going from one edition to another) and being wrong on that aspect and posting as much in a follow up post. Regardless of actually blocking line of sight, it can still force the opponent to shoot through a unit (providing a 5+ save to their target) instead of shooting at the unit itself when they can see the lord out in the open in the middle of the field. He can literally thumb his nose and moonwalk his way into the close combat his spawn beat him to.

Sorry - I must have missed the post with the bolded statement (and can't find it in this thread). Where did you admit you were wrong?
Yes, a 5+ cover is easy to get. No one has ever said otherwise. It's the elusive 4+ you asserted was easy and refuse to explain why...

Slingshotting is good but not that reliable (IMO). I always grab cover with my FMCs, usually with my Tervigons, and always with my podfexes. With my spawned gants I rarely do because I don't want to slow them down and I want my opponent to waste shots on them.

Martel732 wrote:
They don't have to ignore cover. They just make you roll so much you fail.

This is a completely different issue. Your going from cover is useless because the enemy has all Ignore Cover weapons to cover is useless because he has a very high quantity of fire.

I do find that conceding would save me a lot of time and frustration.

Meta's will change when people adapt to their opponents. Start changing what the Eldar are facing and you might be able to overcome this frustation.

I've had Eldar cripple 4 units in one turn once I got within catapult range. They don't have to KILL a unit, just cripple it for HTH purposes. Meqs, in particular, aren't THAT good in HTH that they can win 4:1.

What did you do to cripple their firepower before you got there ?

Fragile wrote:

 Makutsu wrote:

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fallacy when Tau and Eldar can spam enough wounds to cripple your units through the cover saves. Nids might work, but jump pack marines demonstrably don't.

What weapons are you spamming that are AP 1/2 at a Jump pack marine unit to force it to take cover saves and not their basic armor save? Those weapons should be hitting higher value targets. But even still Tau and Eldar do not throw enough Ignore Cover wounds around like you are saying.

Tau do, Eldar most of the time just put enough wounds enough on you that you die regardless.

Sounds like you should concede when you play a Tau or Eldar, since you missed my question entirely.

Huh? How does saying what their guns do mean that I should auto concede?
I am confused :S

As said above, they don't really care about cover, they force so many wounds on you that you will fail.

Well, if you are talking about AP2 Ignore Cover, then the Riptide is probably the prime unit that actually does that.
If it gets a hit on the scatter, you lose 4-6 power/termi armor generally, and that means you lose 2"- 4" to get to assault.

Fragile wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
They don't have to ignore cover. They just make you roll so much you fail.

This is a completely different issue. Your going from cover is useless because the enemy has all Ignore Cover weapons to cover is useless because he has a very high quantity of fire.

I do find that conceding would save me a lot of time and frustration.

Meta's will change when people adapt to their opponents. Start changing what the Eldar are facing and you might be able to overcome this frustation.

I've had Eldar cripple 4 units in one turn once I got within catapult range. They don't have to KILL a unit, just cripple it for HTH purposes. Meqs, in particular, aren't THAT good in HTH that they can win 4:1.

What did you do to cripple their firepower before you got there ?

I never claimed that cover was useless because of "Ignore Cover" mechanics to my knowledge. Rather, cover is *insufficient* because Tau and Eldar are rolling buckets of dice.

In the game I"m referring to, it was a BA ASM jumper list, so I wasn't able to cripple their firepower before I arrived. BA can't afford to bring enough bodies and have significant shooting throw weight. I was just highlighting that it's critical to shoot back in an effective way, and that's where I feel that meqs fall apart in 6th.

If it was not in this thread, it was in one of the many others you have stalked me through. I wondering why you were still going on and on about it. lol

5+ is still better than no save at all and can help keep models alive. 4+ may be harder to get but not impossible. One of the ways is through area terrain. Check out my suggestion on basing buildings on tiles to make them sturdier and then using the entire tile as area terrain to represent rubble fallen from the ruin. Instead of letting your gunline opponent trick you into only putting them in deployment zones, put some across the middle of the table as well. An assault army/or shooty army for that matter can lose the game in the setting up of the table.

I did not say slingshotting was the end all be all tactic. It is only one and even then, is not that effective with all armies. That is the point of the thread, for others to put forth their tactics and strategies as well. I'm not the font of all knowledge. I want others to put their ideas out too so that I can learn as well.

Martel732 , true, a unit of guys in cover will likely fail enough saves to get wiped out from the concentrated fire of an entire army. Their buddies in other units will raise a memorial to them after the game as they are not getting shot at as they proceed unmolested. Fragile, your right, it is a dynamic game where players should evolve along with their tactics. I myself never use the same list twice building a new one from scratch before every game or before every tourney.

EVIL INC wrote:
If it was not in this thread, it was in one of the many others you have stalked me through. I wondering why you were still going on and on about it. lol

That's fair - I haven't "stalked" you through multiple threads. I honestly couldn't care less about you as an individual I just want what anyone posts to be correct information.

5+ is still better than no save at all and can help keep models alive. 4+ may be harder to get but not impossible. One of the ways is through area terrain. Check out my suggestion on basing buildings on tiles to make them sturdier and then using the entire tile as area terrain to represent rubble fallen from the ruin. Instead of letting your gunline opponent trick you into only putting them in deployment zones, put some across the middle of the table as well. An assault army/or shooty army for that matter can lose the game in the setting up of the table.

Area terrain isn't 4+ cover... Ruins are, but the base is explicitly not (meaning you only get a 4+ if you're obscured by the ruins, based or not).

Martel732 wrote:

 Illumini wrote:

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.

My razorspam list would crush that BA list you propose. I know this, because I faced that list many times in 5th.

That is not my experience, and I know because I faced lots of razorback spam lists with that list Dark eldar were much worse for that list than any razorspam list.

@Makutsu: You should never loose 6 guys to a single big blast. You can easily spread out to only get 3-ish hits, and 1/6 of those fail to wound.

Against most weapons, the math of killing meqs doesn't change in cover anyway. The Tau slap ignores cover on the Riptide, and then everything that would allow an armor save anyway just spams.

The Eldar are even more direct. For marines, the wave serpent is a headache because everything wounds on a 2 or 3 and has 36" range. You can't deny flank against wave serpernts. You can't shoot back without your own gunline. The Eldar don't have to cast a single ignore cover power. They can just power down entire lists spamming wounds through automatic twin linking and needing 2's and 3's to wound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Illumini wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Illumini wrote:

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.

My razorspam list would crush that BA list you propose. I know this, because I faced that list many times in 5th.

That is not my experience, and I know because I faced lots of razorback spam lists with that list Dark eldar were much worse for that list than any razorspam list.

@Makutsu: You should never loose 6 guys to a single big blast. You can easily spread out to only get 3-ish hits, and 1/6 of those fail to wound.

The balls to wall assault army had horrible problems against SW and IG leafblower as well. Razor spam provided the magical 5th ed vehicle damage table as protection.

"Martel732 , true, a unit of guys in cover will likely fail enough saves to get wiped out from the concentrated fire of an entire army."

It doesn't have to be an entire army. Even the marines can shoot better than that.

 Illumini wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Illumini wrote:

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.

My razorspam list would crush that BA list you propose. I know this, because I faced that list many times in 5th.

That is not my experience, and I know because I faced lots of razorback spam lists with that list Dark eldar were much worse for that list than any razorspam list.

@Makutsu: You should never loose 6 guys to a single big blast. You can easily spread out to only get 3-ish hits, and 1/6 of those fail to wound.

At 2" spread you should get from 3 - 8 guys physically, and that's the limit physically.
But unless you're using a congo line, or some really specific case, I generally can get 4-6 hits under a large blast.
If I can only get 3, I wouldn't even bother shooting at them unless they are termies.

As a relatively new player who started earlier this year (practically when the K-os Marins Codx came out), I would like to offer these insights. I know people like to discredit the newb outright at times, however I'd like to point out that sometimes a fresh pair of eyes is all it takes to sort the problem. With that, I'd like to preface my gaming experience by saying I love games of nearly all kinds and grew up with them. Some say sad. I say it's a generation. I love rts like Age of Empires, Star Craft, DoW, etc. I have been tournament worthy for games like Yu-Gi-Oh and Mechwarrior as well. I also am big on history, and of course the last 2000 years are full of combat examples to sample from. I'm not going to call my self a pro or anything because I firmly believe there is always someone better and we all have a place of our own to fill anyways, so why bother about the prodigy showing us up? Better that we worry about showing the prodigy up from time to time? Seems more productive in my opinion.

Getting to the point, I started with the Dark Vengeance box and am essentially playing two Dark Vengeance box's worth of Chaos Space Marines. My Force Organization is screwed. i don't really play according to points because of my limited means, although I'm still trying to get an appreciation for costs. Apparently my 200+ pt sorcerer is a bit costly still. XD


So here is what I've gathered about this particular setting. Firstly, the gun is superior in war setting, period. That's just how it goes. The ability to kill your opponent without your opponent killing you is the ULTIMATE wartime strategy. In medieval times, it was the bow and arrow. The crossbow became a weapon of "pure evil" because of its ease of use. And the cannon destroyed the castle. In WW1, seige lines were destroyed by tanks and in WW2 planes dominated the oceans and land alike. In our current military structure, we take highly lethal weapons that can be fired at extreme range with pinpoint precision. The Epitome of Ranged Warfare.

Does this mean the Assault doesn't have a place anymore? ABSOLUTELY NOT because as we learned with the removal of central command (the castle), a de-centralized force can be just as effective at demoralizing the opposition, as much as crushing it out right. The Infantry gets the better of the Cannon once again. Guerrilla Tactics.

And that is what you need to survive WH40K. If you think you're a knight in shining armor in this day and age? Think again. You're a fool in a heavy suit, waiting to get picked off by the Jungle Guard and their high powered shotguns. lol

So assault suffers NATURALLY. However, assault has one massive advantage that shooting doesn't, the same as shooting having a massive advantage that assault doesn't.

Shooting your opponent gives you the benefit of killing your opponent at range with some certainty. Precision is your weakness at that point, or how well can you shoot said gun v. enemy armor and all other x factors taken into account.

With Assault however, you have the benefit of using superior brute force against a substantially weaker opponent and outright slaughtering an enemy in the opening blow. Your lethality increases exponentially (unless you're the Tau who invert this trend, lol). And here is the kicker that made me hate my Cultists for a little while: Say I've got 20 cultists against 3 Grey Knight fatties or some such noise: We go to blows and I roll 80+ dice against you! And I inflict...no wounds. Let's say my weapons are ineffective (I don't actually know the stats on GK or what their fatties are called...cause I'm new.). Then the fatties swing back and all of their blows kill something. Let's say 6 dead cultists. And you won combat? And I don't get away?

Might as well have just killed 20 damn cultists for free. Better than free. I paid an assault to let you kill 20 damn cultists. lol

So the assault, while cripplingly difficult to actually get into, if stacked right can be more lethal than shooting. Especially when we're talking about squishy-shooty armies like the Tau and IG. But we're still talking about cripplingly difficult to get into combat, especially with overwatch and supporting fire. I do like dirge casters though.


Also, with all that said, I strongly agree with the idea that picking your battles is more important than the squad and dice roles themselves. Talking specifically about blocking LOS. That is the most important asset at your disposal. If the enemy can't see to shoot you, then you don't have to worry about dying.

I think assaulters might be too comfortable charging out of Land Raiders on turn 1. lol

Another thing to think about - even if you're unlikely to win an assault (your 20 cultists vs 3 boss models that can't be hurt).

Tieing up a shooty unit, even if you're going to lose the combat over time, may be worth sacrificing a unit.

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
As a relatively new player who started earlier this year (practically when the K-os Marins Codx came out), I would like to offer these insights. I know people like to discredit the newb outright at times, however I'd like to point out that sometimes a fresh pair of eyes is all it takes to sort the problem. With that, I'd like to preface my gaming experience by saying I love games of nearly all kinds and grew up with them. Some say sad. I say it's a generation. I love rts like Age of Empires, Star Craft, DoW, etc. I have been tournament worthy for games like Yu-Gi-Oh and Mechwarrior as well. I also am big on history, and of course the last 2000 years are full of combat examples to sample from. I'm not going to call my self a pro or anything because I firmly believe there is always someone better and we all have a place of our own to fill anyways, so why bother about the prodigy showing us up? Better that we worry about showing the prodigy up from time to time? Seems more productive in my opinion.

Getting to the point, I started with the Dark Vengeance box and am essentially playing two Dark Vengeance box's worth of Chaos Space Marines. My Force Organization is screwed. i don't really play according to points because of my limited means, although I'm still trying to get an appreciation for costs. Apparently my 200+ pt sorcerer is a bit costly still. XD


So here is what I've gathered about this particular setting. Firstly, the gun is superior in war setting, period. That's just how it goes. The ability to kill your opponent without your opponent killing you is the ULTIMATE wartime strategy. In medieval times, it was the bow and arrow. The crossbow became a weapon of "pure evil" because of its ease of use. And the cannon destroyed the castle. In WW1, seige lines were destroyed by tanks and in WW2 planes dominated the oceans and land alike. In our current military structure, we take highly lethal weapons that can be fired at extreme range with pinpoint precision. The Epitome of Ranged Warfare.

Does this mean the Assault doesn't have a place anymore? ABSOLUTELY NOT because as we learned with the removal of central command (the castle), a de-centralized force can be just as effective at demoralizing the opposition, as much as crushing it out right. The Infantry gets the better of the Cannon once again. Guerrilla Tactics.

And that is what you need to survive WH40K. If you think you're a knight in shining armor in this day and age? Think again. You're a fool in a heavy suit, waiting to get picked off by the Jungle Guard and their high powered shotguns. lol

So assault suffers NATURALLY. However, assault has one massive advantage that shooting doesn't, the same as shooting having a massive advantage that assault doesn't.

Shooting your opponent gives you the benefit of killing your opponent at range with some certainty. Precision is your weakness at that point, or how well can you shoot said gun v. enemy armor and all other x factors taken into account.

With Assault however, you have the benefit of using superior brute force against a substantially weaker opponent and outright slaughtering an enemy in the opening blow. Your lethality increases exponentially (unless you're the Tau who invert this trend, lol). And here is the kicker that made me hate my Cultists for a little while: Say I've got 20 cultists against 3 Grey Knight fatties or some such noise: We go to blows and I roll 80+ dice against you! And I inflict...no wounds. Let's say my weapons are ineffective (I don't actually know the stats on GK or what their fatties are called...cause I'm new.). Then the fatties swing back and all of their blows kill something. Let's say 6 dead cultists. And you won combat? And I don't get away?

Might as well have just killed 20 damn cultists for free. Better than free. I paid an assault to let you kill 20 damn cultists. lol

So the assault, while cripplingly difficult to actually get into, if stacked right can be more lethal than shooting. Especially when we're talking about squishy-shooty armies like the Tau and IG. But we're still talking about cripplingly difficult to get into combat, especially with overwatch and supporting fire. I do like dirge casters though.


Also, with all that said, I strongly agree with the idea that picking your battles is more important than the squad and dice roles themselves. Talking specifically about blocking LOS. That is the most important asset at your disposal. If the enemy can't see to shoot you, then you don't have to worry about dying.

I think assaulters might be too comfortable charging out of Land Raiders on turn 1. lol

Please do not use fluff or "real life logic" when determining a game's mechanics, it doesn't really work that way...
Responding to your fluff though, these guys aren't wearing t-shirts and jackets to a fight. These guys wear armor that can ignore a rocket launcher to the face.
That's the only reason why assault still makes sense.

lol, if you can name one instance where man does not draw upon real life for inspiration in all things? You let me know. There is a fundamental psychology that goes into pretty much everything that man does, you just have to recognize it. Hell, you do it when you size up a player in a 40k match. Are they a Cowboy or are they a Knight? Are they a Pirate or are they a Wizard? O__O

Obscure. Seemingly unrelated. As a Chaos player, I can tell you this is how the World works. Everything from playing a first person shooter or tabletop to getting a job or going to school. You use this stuff and you don't even know it.

You also missed the part where I pretty much said "new point of view for your consideration."

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
lol, if you can name one instance where man does not draw upon real life for inspiration in all things? You let me know. There is a fundamental psychology that goes into pretty much everything that man does, you just have to recognize it. Hell, you do it when you size up a player in a 40k match. Are they a Cowboy or are they a Knight? Are they a Pirate or are they a Wizard? O__O

Obscure. Seemingly unrelated. As a Chaos player, I can tell you this is how the World works. Everything from playing a first person shooter or tabletop to getting a job or going to school. You use this stuff and you don't even know it.

Uh psychic powers in the game? There's a thing called imagination that doesn't rely on real life for inspiration.
Also, how real life is has nothing to do with how effective shooting is compared to assault.
I don't even understand what the cowboy, pirate etc is supposed to mean...

How does being a Chaos player have anything to how the world work? And use what stuff? I'm super confused.

 Makutsu wrote:

 TheRedWingArmada wrote:
lol, if you can name one instance where man does not draw upon real life for inspiration in all things? You let me know. There is a fundamental psychology that goes into pretty much everything that man does, you just have to recognize it. Hell, you do it when you size up a player in a 40k match. Are they a Cowboy or are they a Knight? Are they a Pirate or are they a Wizard? O__O

Obscure. Seemingly unrelated. As a Chaos player, I can tell you this is how the World works. Everything from playing a first person shooter or tabletop to getting a job or going to school. You use this stuff and you don't even know it.

Uh psychic powers in the game? There's a thing called imagination that doesn't rely on real life for inspiration.
Also, how real life is has nothing to do with how effective shooting is compared to assault.
I don't even understand what the cowboy, pirate etc is supposed to mean...

How does being a Chaos player have anything to how the world work? And use what stuff? I'm super confused.

Imagination doesn't draw upon real life? It's like being a fish in the ocean. You're surrounded by the stuff, so acting outside of it is impossible. And who is to say there are not real life examples of psychics? Not to dare, but more to suggest. And yeah, real life has everything to do with that. If shooting didn't exist in real life, would you have shooting in a game? Getting way off point though. I'm speaking very generally and I think you may be taking me to literally. The cowboy, pirate, etc. are metaphors to how a persons behavior might be. The same way a person has personal preferences or play styles. It's why there are different races to accommodate those personal preferences in 40k. I'd imagine it's also why an arrow isn't as effective as a laz cannon, between Fantasy and 40k respectively.

And how does being a Chaos player help to understand the ways of the world? Because it gives you a very abstract picture to gleam a perspective/reflection of reality from. Someone had to write that stuff, and so they likely embody it in some respect. The same way some player might, if given the opportunity, want to be a Grey Knight paladin under different circumstances.

The "stuff" I was speaking of at that time is called Metamessaging, Social Sciences and Psychology/Sociology. The Sciences of the Human Mind and Behavioral Patterns. +__+ In poker, it's the difference between reading your cards and reading your players.

Good assault units are basically either 12" movers and cheap (spawn,flesh hounds) or expensive and hard to shoot (ymgarl,fmc etc.) There is another category which is the opportunistic assault guys like cultists or obliterators who are mostly there to score objectives or shoot but but might get an opportunity to charge or counter charge.

One thing that can help a swarm charge is to have an ic at the front (when it forms time to charge) who can Los wounds backwards without loosing charge range. For this a M 12" works nicely.

Another tactic is to sacrifice a weak unit to overwatch e.g. gaunts to charge with a strong one e.g. tervigontervigon

wtnind wrote:
Good assault units are basically either 12" movers and cheap (spawn,flesh hounds) or expensive and hard to shoot (ymgarl,fmc etc.) There is another category which is the opportunistic assault guys like cultists or obliterators who are mostly there to score objectives or shoot but but might get an opportunity to charge or counter charge.

One thing that can help a swarm charge is to have an ic at the front (when it forms time to charge) who can Los wounds backwards without loosing charge range. For this a M 12" works nicely.

Another tactic is to sacrifice a weak unit to overwatch e.g. gaunts to charge with a strong one e.g. tervigontervigon

In general, I would agree with this. Meqs don't fall into any of these categories.

Right, but that's why he said "good assault units."

EVIL INC wrote: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.

Having read through this entire thread with interest, I have to say the above sums up why I'm having a problem with EVIL INC's posts. Nowhere in what I have read have Selym or rigeld said that it is "impossible" to get cover or that they are totally worthless. The above is putting your own words in someone else's mouth in order to make it easier to shoot them down. You've repeatedly accused them of being insulting and trolling and saying how you have "proved" them wrong. But as someone new to this site who knows no-one here and has just started reading this thread from the beginning, what I see is mostly reasonable posts and a lot of attempts by you to cast other posters as villains, to pretend that they are a minority who everyone else considers discredited and to drag the conversation down to the level of dick sizes. Just stop. Your attempts to try and pretend things are concluded or people think they're wrong are transparent and unhelpful. I'm an old player (from Rogue Trader days) who has taken a long absence and is now returning and I've found their comments helpful. It is not enough just to list ways of surviving into close combat if those ways don't work well or are very difficult to achieve. I need to know how viable tactics are. And both of their posts have been helpful to me as a returning player.

You are the one trolling by repeated straw-man'ing and changing of subject rather than admit a mistake. And I would love to see it stop whilst these other two posters are still remaining polite rather than lose their temper and sink to aggressive name-calling and mud-throwing as you have been.

For my own part, though I'm still gearing up to be good at sixth edition (there are still too many enemy troop types that I am unfamiliar with and I need more recent game experience at a high level), I'm coming to the opinion that for the most part, the best approach to Close Combat is to treat it as a follow-up punch or a defence force. Once I've started shooting up the enemy, then assault troops can make an excellent game-tipper. Similarly, if the enemy has encroached on my gun troops or is closing on an objective, some quality CC troops can really hit back hard. Close Combat is potentially very powerful. Get a small force of Wraith Blades mixing it up with a large number of lower quality troops and they can push back (and Sweeping Advance with some luck) many times their number. I'm finding the balance in my armies to be a small to medium smattering of quality CC amongst a non-CC focused list. If advancing, I keep my CC troops ready as a follow-up punch to drive people from objectives and if being advanced upon, they're ready to spring out on the enemy once they get too close and wreck the enemy's plans. As an advancing first strike approach, I am finding it hard to get them into combat without basically offering up a valuable gun-unit as a sacrifice. And the really good players wont fall for it anyway. Or simply have too much power. Close Combat benefits a lot from being a mid-game strategy.

I don't know what the others think of this. It's the impression of a returning old player trying to bring themselves up to speed on a new edition, but I'd be extremely interested and grateful to hear how it sounds (accurate or idiotic).

The fundamental problem, knas ser, is that when assautling, your opponent chooses what and where something gets assaulted.

My own lowly BA have used this to my advantage before. I have placed a unit in the path of a large mass of khorne berserkers to basically say "you are assaulting this". The unit was placed in a region with no cover and so, there was nowhere for the berserkers to go after they won. I shot the unit to pieces the following turn.

Assault units have no choices. They can either a) not assault and take another turn of shooting or b) assault what is presented to them and then take another turn of even worse shooting. A key is feeding them flimsy units that won't last a single turn. That opens them up to a huge counter barrage the next turn. Tau are the absolute best for this, because you will assault on squad, get shot a bunch, win, and then get shot more the next turn.