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.

Happy New Year dakka!

I would like to talk about some general tactics concerning the overall play style. And I would sure like to have as many of you joining in the discussion as possible.

So, as you all know most of the missions in the book is about objectives. Relic...Scouring...Big gun...And then the "normal" ones. And surely, most beginners are taught to play to cater the game style designed by GW, but surely that's not the only way to play? As I've searched around on the internet, and after reading Fritz's tactics about "going for tabling" your opponent, I've decided to come to dakka to talk about this(although I'm sure I'm not the first one to bring this up?) The following is my opinion on how it should work, what units to take(and examples), and what in-game strategies to use; this is purely my opinion, feel free to criticize my ideas.

"You see the plan is simple, we KILL the batman" I believe that any giant can be brought low with enough rocks thrown at it. And in the 40k universe we can also opt for using rocks 20x the size of the giant to kill it. How this tactic should work is, instead of ignoring objective play, you bring the enemy to play your game. That means show him that you're not interested in objectives, you just wanna fight. So for example there are 3 objectives on the table, and your opponent somehow has all of them covered in troops at the beginning of the game. You first murder his "big guns" as in, CCS, Hive Tyrant, Pathfinders/Broadsides etc., the things that you know that's gonna wreck your face if you don't kill them. THEN you start killing off his troops. All through this tactic you never focus on moving your men onto an objective, or even for the secondary objectives. The goal is to cripple an enemy then do the boring clean up work

I'm going to bring out my favorite unit in the game: O'Vesa star! In my opinion it is a decent unit for the job, but not the best. But since I only played with this in 6th edition, I will focus around it. Having this all round unit murdering 1-2 units a turn while the rest of your army does a similar role is great, forget about the 20 kroots, even though they can also be deadly to help with killing MCs and other things you don't feel like killing with the big guys. For a space marine player, I would expect to see 3 vindicators, 3 contemptors, and then minimal troops with maybe a bike squad with grav guns to punch through everything. With the new Tyranids coming out, my plans is to have...Flyrant, 2 of those flying fatties, 4-6 Carnifexes, 6 warriors, and fill up the rest with Hive Guards. This is all without looking at the book, I'm just planning on using everything to rush my opponent and shoot a bit here and there. Take minimal troops, and even them try to make them hard hitting, then focus on getting units that will murder entire armies

In game, it is also fairly simple. Take out the big scary thing first! I've played against marine armies that have Tigarius and devs many times, and things like Tau with pathfinders and broadsides, or Orks with that big unkillable nob unit. Granted using the O'Vesa star it is a lot easier to do this kill-the-threat thing, and that you shouldn't always focus on that hard to kill unit(think screamerstar), you should always take out the THREAT. Going second usually helps with this, as you can also counter people who try to stick to the game, capturing and continuing whatever expansion they're on. But also be careful, the normal rules of shoot the guy with the knife, smash the guy with the gun still apply here.Kill the most threatening element of the enemy army, sometimes that COULD be the troops sitting on objectives, but usually its the thing that will kill you first.

So that's my input, if you have any different ideas, comment below! Excuse me for unclear wording, typing an essay in one go with no edit is not my thing..

Cheers!

What you describe is the standard deathstar playing style.

Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

Further, the entire point of deathstars is that they are built to withstand fire. Targeting a screamerstar or a bunch of Riptides is stupid and a waste of time. Not only will you fail to destroy the unit entirely, it will likely take you the entire 4-7 turns to do any damage. A much better strategy is to ignore them, or distract and delay them with screens and sacrificial units. This means most people will go for your troops and cripple any ability for you to score since you probably spent less points on troops anyway. They can also play keep away and hide their vital units from your killer deathstar.

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

If this were the case, then you have a very poorly scored tournament.

Fragile wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

If this were the case, then you have a very poorly scored tournament.

Why? tabling an opponent doesn't mean you accomplished all of the objectives, it just means your opponent can't accomplish his.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

If this were the case, then you have a very poorly scored tournament.

Why? tabling an opponent doesn't mean you accomplished all of the objectives, it just means your opponent can't accomplish his.

My lack of tournament experience might have been the problem. So how is it normally scored?

normally you get points for holding objectives. which only 1 out of 6 games those objectives are killing enemy units. killing something first. getting into the enemy's deployment zone and killing the warlord.

so yes i may not be able to kill your 1000 point tau deathstar but in a 1500 point game i can easily kill one of your small squads. and if your deepstriking to get closer leaves me alot of fire power for your little bitty units.

if im faster. i can get into your DZ or capture last minute objectives.

if you have a tone of points in your warlord that is less points else where and given enough firepower you can eventually bring down anything.

now i wont cant guarantee this happen most or even half the time but keep in mind rock paper scissors. if your going to focus on only one style. some one else who focuses on your down fall will beat you constantly. just ask paper when scissors comes around.

and with any strategy game you can play how you desire. but there are reactions and consequences to every throw of the dice. good or bad.

happy hunting

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

If this were the case, then you have a very poorly scored tournament.

Why? tabling an opponent doesn't mean you accomplished all of the objectives, it just means your opponent can't accomplish his.

Playing this scenario out, as far as objectives go, I can simply spend my turn 3-5,6,7 moving to seize the objectives since you are dead. Which is why tabling is considering a crushing victory.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
Focusing on combat just for the sake of tabling or killing things is a very bad strategy. Depending on how a tournament is scored, tabling an opponent quickly can potentially yield less points than playing the game out to turn 7, resulting in a lower position at the end of a tournament. You can table everyone on turn 2 and still not be the 1st place winner.

If this were the case, then you have a very poorly scored tournament.

Why? tabling an opponent doesn't mean you accomplished all of the objectives, it just means your opponent can't accomplish his.

I suppose this would make sense if the table happens on the last turn of the game and the like, but if a person manages to table an opponent by turn 2 or 3 I don't think they should necessarily be punished for that. Either allow them to play out the remaining turns of the game to get the rest of the objectives, or give them full points for complete destruction of the enemy.

I'm in two minds about tabling not giving full points. On the one hand it discourages just loading up on the killiest stuff possible and simply trying to shoot down your opponents every game. On the other hand, it excessively punishes tablings that were the result of good leadership. Blarg.

I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

Tabling a good opponent isn't likely in 5 turns. Most probably you'll have to go to 6 or 7, and you're basing your strategy then on the chance that the game does
go on.

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

... Way to strawman? He didn't say tabling was a loss, he said tabling wasn't an automatic win - you score based on the mission. If you don't grab objectives you don't win.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

... Way to strawman? He didn't say tabling was a loss, he said tabling wasn't an automatic win - you score based on the mission. If you don't grab objectives you don't win.

I think you misunderstand. His point is very valid and hence why tabling should be max points.

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

... Way to strawman? He didn't say tabling was a loss, he said tabling wasn't an automatic win - you score based on the mission. If you don't grab objectives you don't win.

I think you misunderstand. His point is very valid and hence why tabling should be max points.

It's really not.
If you're worried about losing because you decided to try and table your opponent, ignoring objectives on the way to doing so, that's a tactical mistake - not something to be rewarded for.

Most major tournaments that I have attended, tableing awards Max points possible..

 quickfuze wrote:
Most major tournaments that I have attended, tableing awards Max points possible..

While that's true - and my experience as well - I've been to some that require you to play it out, or end the game that turn.

Trying to steer the conversation back to the OPs question:

You'll notice most Deathstar lists like Jetseer, or O'Vesastar or Screamerstar still have enough scoring to make due. Whether it be 5 Jetbike squads or 5 solo suits with Kroot and a 3-man Crisis or lots of plague bearers and the portalgylph.....they still have scoring.

Completely selling out to table is a poor strategy for several reasons:

1) In this meta, you've never going to be good at killing everything. If you take O'Vesa Star or TiggyGravCent star or something, you're going to be fairly ineffective against hordes (and with Nids, IG and Orks on the horizon, they're going to be prevalent). And even if you're good at killing elites, what if you go up against a Jetseet and they get Fortune and Protect with Baron tanking? Have fun with that re-rollable 2+/4++. You've not always going to be able to kill the other guy.

2) Even if you're largely successful in eliminating the other player, he doesn't need much left on the table to win if he eliminates your paltry scoring. If one Fearless Plaguemarine or a single jetbike manages to zoom around and hide; you're screwed.

Deathstar 40k is obviously alive and well; heck, it's dominant. But the strategy you describe of eschewing all scoring concerns will not work consistently.

rigeld2 wrote:

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

... Way to strawman? He didn't say tabling was a loss, he said tabling wasn't an automatic win - you score based on the mission. If you don't grab objectives you don't win.

I think you misunderstand. His point is very valid and hence why tabling should be max points.

It's really not.
If you're worried about losing because you decided to try and table your opponent, ignoring objectives on the way to doing so, that's a tactical mistake - not something to be rewarded for.

With no one left to fight you you can choose to take whatever objectives you like, and therefore it should be considered a win, like the best win possible, 10/10. But the real situation will obviously depend on how a tournament is ran and what scoring system they use.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Shrike wrote:
Trying to steer the conversation back to the OPs question:

You'll notice most Deathstar lists like Jetseer, or O'Vesastar or Screamerstar still have enough scoring to make due. Whether it be 5 Jetbike squads or 5 solo suits with Kroot and a 3-man Crisis or lots of plague bearers and the portalgylph.....they still have scoring.

Completely selling out to table is a poor strategy for several reasons:

1) In this meta, you've never going to be good at killing everything. If you take O'Vesa Star or TiggyGravCent star or something, you're going to be fairly ineffective against hordes (and with Nids, IG and Orks on the horizon, they're going to be prevalent). And even if you're good at killing elites, what if you go up against a Jetseet and they get Fortune and Protect with Baron tanking? Have fun with that re-rollable 2+/4++. You've not always going to be able to kill the other guy.

2) Even if you're largely successful in eliminating the other player, he doesn't need much left on the table to win if he eliminates your paltry scoring. If one Fearless Plaguemarine or a single jetbike manages to zoom around and hide; you're screwed.

Deathstar 40k is obviously alive and well; heck, it's dominant. But the strategy you describe of eschewing all scoring concerns will not work consistently.

Hmm...I see what you mean, you're betting on both red and black...

So how about you do the same thing to him? You hunt down his troops so you are both on the same level?

So what's alternate about it? Regular deathstar strategy. 1-2 Strong units, support based on what deathstar u're running and something to score. Don't really see how ignoring points can help you. If you want to go full offensively just place points midfield so you can go offensive and still claim points. I do it all the time with orkses and ig platoons.

rigeld2 wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:
Most major tournaments that I have attended, tableing awards Max points possible..

While that's true - and my experience as well - I've been to some that require you to play it out, or end the game that turn.

He's not worried about losing. He's worried about winning the game too soon, which is why he mentioned running away with his guys.

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't see how this is even a question. Table your opponent = max points, otherwise you have ridiculous situations where you almost table your opponent but then stop shooting/charging so you don't kill the last models and the rest of the game consists of you desperately running away from the last survivors so they can't make a suicide charge on anything.

... Way to strawman? He didn't say tabling was a loss, he said tabling wasn't an automatic win - you score based on the mission. If you don't grab objectives you don't win.

I think you misunderstand. His point is very valid and hence why tabling should be max points.

If the mission has Objectives and you have no scoring units left you should never be able to score max points.

I win more against opponents who 'go for the table' than against people who actually try to play the game.

Fragile wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:
Most major tournaments that I have attended, tableing awards Max points possible..

While that's true - and my experience as well - I've been to some that require you to play it out, or end the game that turn.

He's not worried about losing. He's worried about winning the game too soon, which is why he mentioned running away with his guys.

Which would mean - wait for it - losing.
Which means he made a tactical mistake in over committing firepower. It's not like you can "accidentally" fire too much. "Oops. Even though there was literally no requirement to I fired 37 las cannons at your remaining land raider. Darnit. "

You often can't place objectives in tournaments; they're in fixed positions. And the conversation has turned to the tournament viability of a go-for-broke strategy.

@OP: The reason why the "just kill his troops too" strategy doesn't work consistently is the nature of their troops. Against Jetseer, you're likely facing at least 5 3-jetbike squads. They're held in reserve and with the aid of scrier's gaze probably aren't coming in until T4; where they can move 48" in a single turn to get out of LOS. Not to mention, you're busy likely dealing with an unkillable unit if they get off the right powers, plus 2 Wraithknights and 10-12 Swooping Hawks.

Against O'Vesastar you can probably kill the Kroot and the mandatory 3-man Crisis unit, but then there's the 5 solo suits. They can deepstrike in and then JSJ around, they've 36" range from missile pods, it's tough.

Screamerstar can take cheap hard-as-nails plaguebearers and the portalglyph is pooping out more.

The point is, conventional wisdom is conventional for a reason. That's not to say it's always right, but even Deathstars bring substantial cheap scoring to supplement their kill power. By exchanging your own scoring for a marginal amount of firepower, you're probably giving up a more-than-marginal advantage.