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.

If what you describe were so easy, it would be happening regularly in major tournaments. It's not.

I never said anything in BA were a perfect solution. Now you are just being a jerk poster making up quotes. In fact, here is MY EXACT QUOTE.

" It's not perfect, but it's dangerous enough. "

Did you miss the "not"?

I don't understand how your list cracks wave serpents/jetseer councils at all. Against many Eldar lists, there are no exposed 4+ saves to take advantage of.

I also mentioned that Eldar can cause a lot more than 50 wounds at close range. Close range is where the intercetors have to be to launch any kind of assault. Because they can not out shoot a Tau or Eldar list in any way.

And I have won some games using C:SM. Because the grav gun can actually get some things done against Wave Serpents.

What I think about CC is that need to get a certain number of models into CC against critical models in my opponent's list. ROFL stomping some Kroot and then getting pie plated by a Riptide the next turn gets me no where.

You really haven't explained how your list deals with Xeno fire power. Triple Riptide can cripple all your interceptor squads in one turn. Eldar can do about the same with a combination of firepower/jetseer council assault.

The top players in the game don't "walk through these armies", so I suspect there is something you are leaving out in your narrative.

 warpspider89 wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

You'll note in the post below yours that you're demonstrably wrong.

making that claim despite mountainour evidence proving otherwise, does not make it true. i have provided my evidence en-mass. Time for you to provide yours.

From what I have read I've seen anecdotes (aka hearsay) from you not hard evidence. The two are not the same. I would like to see some actual evidence.

I notice that martel is still proving my point for me. never seen anyone make one claim and then work sooooo hard to prove himself wrong. lol

Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.

The evidence I have provided is partially anecdotal. it is also based on worldwide events and tounaments. You have not provided any at all. Period.
Noting that martel is supporting the side he proffesses to hate is not mocking him at all and no one could claim it with a straight face. it is a statement of fact. He says close combat is dead and no longer plays a part in the game and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build. It is not my fault his statements and his actions dont match.

Martel732 wrote:
CC would be incredibly useful against Tau if I could get enough meqs into *meaningful combats* with them. But that doesn't happen. CC with screening Kroot is *not meaningful*. Tau players are not going to offer up their Riptides right off the bat. If you shunt close enough to assault the Riptide, guess who eats the pie plate next?

A dreadknight laughs at a single pie plate. By all means hit my dreadknight with that pie plate. Too bad it doesnt also hit his buddy dreadknight nearby. It is also too bad that those units of fire warriors wont be able to shoot at all as they wil be dead from the intercepters fire. Any straggler are just eaten alive on the following turn of shooting/assault.

 EVIL INC wrote:

Quit mocking a fellow wargamer and play nice. Martel732, while we have had our disagreements, is making a sound argument about the viability (or lack thereof) of melee-oriented armies in 6th. His argument is supported by tournament results, which, though the data can be skewed by hidden variables, is as close to hard evidence as is possible. He is not arguing that assault is without use in an absolute sense like you suggest. Look past your own argument to see the other person's side. It can be quite revealing.

The evidence I have provided is partially anecdotal. it is also based on worldwide events and tounaments. You have not provided any at all. Period.
Noting that martel is supporting the side he proffesses to hate is not mocking him at all and no one could claim it with a straight face. it is a statement of fact. He says close combat is dead and no longer plays a part in the game and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build. It is not my fault his statements and his actions dont match.

lol OMG now its back to riptides...


trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...

the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)

you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...

rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.


turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.

"and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build."

I said I use it to slow them down and shoot some more. It's not "the end all be all".

My C:SM builds have no CC elements in them at all, unless you count a chapter master beatstick whose primary job is to tank wounds or bikers.

walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen.
I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community.
Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.

To once again, try to steer the conversation away from your agenda.
OP, we have pretty much covered everything that would be helpful to you already. Your best bet now would be to try the army list forum to see what others are using and discuss the pros and cons of specific units that have caught your eye.

 easysauce wrote:
lol OMG now its back to riptides...


trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...

the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)

you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...

rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.


turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.

So why doesn't this happen in top tournaments? Are you just smarter than all those players? Go show them how its done.

 easysauce wrote:
lol OMG now its back to riptides...


trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...

the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)

you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...

rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.


turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.

What happens if the Tau player infiltrates two throwaway units of Kroot to block you off, forcing you to shunt into a bad position or not shunt at all? I mean, the Kroot die, obviously, but then what?

And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.

 EVIL INC wrote:
walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen.
I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community.
Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.

Again, where are the personal attacks?

Again, did you miss the part where I'm arguing with other people than you?

Again, you haven't proven squat. Zilch. Zero. If you think I'm harassing you, report me, but I'm going to continue to call BS on unsubstantiated claims that ought to be simple enough to prove with actual quotes. You're claiming that I've said something, it's up to you to prove it with concrete evidence, not more of this "oh, but it's been proven!". Show us where, if you're right it should be easy.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Table control, true. They can move sideways too, though, as well as make holes to move through by shooting stuff to death.


But you can't assault after the 30" shunt, so they'll still have a turn to get away from you.

seriously...

how many times do I have to say this

I KNOW THEY GET ONE TURN TO SHOOT ME... that is the PLAN , that is INEVITABLE.. stop citing it as the reason why my tactic "wont work" because everyone gets to shoot EVERYONE for one turn..

just because you cannot charge turn one, does not make CC un viable.

I also already told you, MULTIPLE times, that they only get to move sideways... thats a good thing, and it still means they hit a board edge sooner rather then later, and it still means they are abandoning objectives and giving up table control, and is still countered by simple flanking maneuvers..

I literally said "trap them against their board edge, and flank them so they cant go sideways"

to which you go "yeah, but they can sill move sideways!"

.....

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
lol OMG now its back to riptides...


trip tide does nothing, I get cover, even against tau, they have enough market lights to take cover off of one or two squads sure.. but they dont get to take EVERYTHING.. they have a points limit to adhere too... if theyhave 3 rip tides, they dont have somthing else...

the DK's laugh at the rip tides, the interceptors just go near their troops so that templates cannot be placed, and/or take COVER (yes, contrary to the internets, you do get cover saves against tau... even the "best" lists rarly have 2 or more dedicated marker light units)

you severly underestimate how deadly 20-30 interceptors + 3 shunting DK's with incinerators are against armies like tau/eldar... espcially since my range is 54" to their 36 with the shunt... if i get 1st turn I literally have never lost a game against these armies... if I go 2nd, I still have won 90% of the time...

rerolling 3+ to hit, 60 shots, wounding on 2+s, plus 10-15 insta gibs (actually lots more then this, as all the tau/eldar tend to clump up since they all have to be so close together to stay away + for buffs if they are spread out, its easy enough to simply divide and conquer the isolated units) from the incinerators generally means that by the time i get to charge, more often then not, i kill all the troops turn one, as well as having my pick of units to take off the table... namely anything thats actually a threat... to the point where I have had tau player cheat and LOsir to other units to try to save their buff-commander, and they still die because I canforce so many wounds.


turn two is charging serpants /riptides/whatever with krak grenades/force weapons if they survive the psybolt shots/ I cant get rear armor.

What happens if the Tau player infiltrates two throwaway units of Kroot to block you off, forcing you to shunt into a bad position or not shunt at all? I mean, the Kroot die, obviously, but then what?

And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.

Ummm. Yeah. I didn't even think of this point. His list is doing all its damage in the shooting phase. Talk about proving the other guy's point. Shooting up the joint with fancy move powers and then mopping up survivors is not a victory for CC. In fact, I'd say this isn't even a CC list at this point.

Martel732 wrote:
"and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build."

I said I use it to slow them down and shoot some more. It's not "the end all be all".

My C:SM builds have no CC elements in them at all, unless you count a chapter master beatstick whose primary job is to tank wounds or bikers.

Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.

 EVIL INC wrote:
walrus, kindly stop with the personal attacks. I proved you wrong and you have yet to provide even a scrap of evidence to support your own position. You have erected an armies worth of strawmen.
I also notice that your attacks and insults are still directed directly at myself instead of any of the MANY others who has disproved your position. They have the exact same stance as myself and make the exact same statements. More evidence of this being a personal vendettas, agenda on your part towards harssing a specific member of the community.
Further emonstrations of that behavior will likely result in reports.

To once again, try to steer the conversation away from your agenda.
OP, we have pretty much covered everything that would be helpful to you already. Your best bet now would be to try the army list forum to see what others are using and discuss the pros and cons of specific units that have caught your eye.

This is not a counter-argument.

 easysauce wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Table control, true. They can move sideways too, though, as well as make holes to move through by shooting stuff to death.


But you can't assault after the 30" shunt, so they'll still have a turn to get away from you.

seriously...

how many times do I have to say this

I KNOW THEY GET ONE TURN TO SHOOT ME... that is the PLAN , that is INEVITABLE.. stop citing it as the reason why my tactic "wont work" because everyone gets to shoot EVERYONE for one turn..

just because you cannot charge turn one, does not make CC un viable.

I also already told you, MULTIPLE times, that they only get to move sideways... thats a good thing, and it still means they hit a board edge sooner rather then later, and it still means they are abandoning objectives and giving up table control, and is still countered by simple flanking maneuvers..

I literally said "trap them against their board edge, and flank them so they cant go sideways"

to which you go "yeah, but they can sill move sideways!"

.....

And I've responded that you shoot your stuff at one unit, create a hole and then take back manouverability. You're also missing the part where Wave Serpents, Jetbikes, Jump Infantry and the like CAN move over you if they have to.

 EVIL INC wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"and then uses a close combat unit as his end all be all answer to a specific army build."

I said I use it to slow them down and shoot some more. It's not "the end all be all".

My C:SM builds have no CC elements in them at all, unless you count a chapter master beatstick whose primary job is to tank wounds or bikers.

Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.

If you'd actually read what we're saying you'd know that's not it.

I had already refuted his every argument in previous posts. At this point it has come down to just making personal attacks towards me for revenge as he is unable to provide any actual evidence. That is why, it would be best for him to join the rest of us in addressing the ACTUAL topic and OP.

How does a list with three squads of interceptors and three dreadknights and presumably an HQ pay for Ork allies?

I might also point out that after you shunt, you're footslogging. That presents all kinds of problems as well. This sounds a lot like Space Wolf or SM drop pod alpha strike; builds I've beaten many times.

 EVIL INC wrote:
I had already refuted his every argument in previous posts. At this point it has come down to just making personal attacks towards me for revenge as he is unable to provide any actual evidence. That is why, it would be best for him to join the rest of us in addressing the ACTUAL topic and OP.

Look, I'm asking you where I said the things you're alleging I said. That's not something you can refute, that's something you can refuse, but there's no reason to do so if you're in the right.

Martel732 wrote:


I might also point out that after you shunt, you're footslogging. That presents all kinds of problems as well.

They're still Jump Infantry/Jump Monstrous Creatures.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.

its about merged, synergized tactics to support the CC... its not just "placing guys infront of a gun line at 2x tap range" as you guys seem to think.. and while I wipe off a few units to shooting, it is indeed in CC where the rest of the army gets wiped out, especially when using the tactic of planning asssaults to last/tie up multiple units so your own units are "hidden" in CC for a turn.

yes, shooting plays a big part of the GK CC army, mostly 1st turn, the shooting just takes out the key or vunerable units, and the assault is what rolls over the whole tau/eldar list, riptides/WK's and all.

the sweeping advances i get in melee after that are what wipes out the rest of his troops, and the melee is what wipes out the serpants/heavies/riptides/ect

GK ints are not uber CC units, but they are good CC units, and they are hugly mobile, meaning tactics like controlling who you charge, how many units you charge, ect become very very viable...

CC is about forcing the SA, and hiding your units from their shooting for a turn in CC, as well as reaping the benifits of being able to make attacks in their turn.

 EVIL INC wrote:

Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.

What he actually said was that in some games he's gone without having anyone in assault, rather than in the whole of 6th edition.

If you think that a tactical marine is any good in assault, you need to go back and think about it some more. A tac marine has all the combat power of a wet paper towel. They can slowly kill guardsmen or fire warriors, but that's about it. Anything that's even slightly good in an assault will beat them without any problem whatsoever.

Assault may not be dead, but unless you're playing daemons, a CC army isn't viable. It's too easy for most armies to shoot you, throw an expendable unit or two out front to slow you down and then shoot you some more. The top armies are mobile as well as shooty, so you won't get into assault unless they want you to.

walrus, my evidence is within this very thread. the simple fact that you select me out of all the others who disagree with you to target for the attacks. The others who have the exact same stance and make the exact same statements. The very fact you single me out is proof enough. Now put up or shut up. provide evience to support your stance. Also, do try to gear it to remain on topic as the rest of us have done.
franky, You assault a tac marine into a guardsman. tell me who wins. I'll put money on the marine every time.

 easysauce wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
And even then, what you're arguing is that you're killing Tau with shooting, proving our point for us. You break them fast with shooting and then mop up survivors with melee, but that's not a melee list. If you cause that sort of damage with turn 1 and 2 shooting (keep in mind that I'm not saying you don't) the melee prowess of your troops is irrelevant, you'd absolutely murder them with shooting anyway. It's not the melee power that's carrying the day for you.

its about merged, synergized tactics to support the CC... its not just "placing guys infront of a gun line at 2x tap range" as you guys seem to think.. and while I wipe off a few units to shooting, it is indeed in CC where the rest of the army gets wiped out, especially when using the tactic of planning asssaults to last/tie up multiple units so your own units are "hidden" in CC for a turn.

yes, shooting plays a big part of the GK CC army, mostly 1st turn, the shooting just takes out the key or vunerable units, and the assault is what rolls over the whole tau/eldar list, riptides/WK's and all.

the sweeping advances i get in melee after that are what wipes out the rest of his troops, and the melee is what wipes out the serpants/heavies/riptides/ect

GK ints are not uber CC units, but they are good CC units, and they are hugly mobile, meaning tactics like controlling who you charge, how many units you charge, ect become very very viable...

CC is about forcing the SA, and hiding your units from their shooting for a turn in CC, as well as reaping the benifits of being able to make attacks in their turn.

But they're not hugely mobile. They're mobile for one turn. And then you're fethed against a truly mobile opponent because then you're footslogging with the Dreadknights. You're all in on a great alpha strike. An alpha strike, I might add, that an opponent can manipulate by limiting the amount of places around them you can legally shunt to.

 EVIL INC wrote:
walrus, my evidence is within this very thread. the simple fact that you select me out of all the others who disagree with you to target for the attacks. The others who have the exact same stance and make the exact same statements. The very fact you single me out is proof enough. Now put up or shut up. provide evience to support your stance. Also, do try to gear it to remain on topic as the rest of us have done.

I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.

Refuting your slanderous remarks is not off topic, because you're claiming that I've said things that I haven't pertaining to the topic, and then built your case against this invented argument (strawmanning).

To clarify (AGAIN), I'm arguing the case that melee is inferior to shooting and generally should not be the focus of a list if you're aiming to win, NOT that all melee units at all times are worthless.

Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?

 EVIL INC wrote:

franky, You assault a tac marine into a guardsman. tell me who wins. I'll put money on the marine every time.

And if you put a Defiler up against a unit of Fire Warriors, odds are the Defiler's going to win. That doesn't prove that the Defiler is a better shooting unit than the Fire Warriors. You're literally ignoring everything else in the armies, potential weapon loadouts AND points cost, and then claiming that because one is better at melee than the other that means it's a good melee unit.

Let's do it this way: Bloodletters are awful melee units (we both agreed on that in that other thread). If you assault a Bloodletter against a Sister of Battle, odds are you'll win. Does that make the Bloodletter a good melee unit all of a sudden?

 grrrfranky wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:

Your entire Marine army does not have a single model in it that is capable of close combat. as a matter of fact, even base naked marines are decent at close combat. Your also saying that never EVER have a single round of close combat in 6th edition. Not ONCE have you EVER had even a single model in an assault either as an assaulter or as a defender? Your saying that under no circumstances would assault or close combat be usefull in ANY way? I still have to disagree with that.

What he actually said was that in some games he's gone without having anyone in assault, rather than in the whole of 6th edition.

If you think that a tactical marine is any good in assault, you need to go back and think about it some more. A tac marine has all the combat power of a wet paper towel. They can slowly kill guardsmen or fire warriors, but that's about it. Anything that's even slightly good in an assault will beat them without any problem whatsoever.

Assault may not be dead, but unless you're playing daemons, a CC army isn't viable. It's too easy for most armies to shoot you, throw an expendable unit or two out front to slow you down and then shoot you some more. The top armies are mobile as well as shooty, so you won't get into assault unless they want you to.

You take a single tac marine and assault a singleguardsman. I'll put money on the marine every time.
The whole claim of me ing assault armies are god is a strawman the "other side" has put out. stance is that assault and close combat are still alive and well. that it is possible to make use of assault or close combat using trategy and tactics to win games. that speed and having a synergy between your different units helps them be more effective than they would be on their own. as shown earlier, it is possible to win a game because of an assault without even ever destroying a single unit in close combat. close combat can win you a game simply by tying up an enemy unit long enough for you to acomplish a different goal or to contest an objective.
No one is saying build an entire army dedicated soley to assault without ever having a single gun or shooting attack as their strawman is claiming. My (and many others if you read the thread) is that assault and close combat still play a role in the game and can be very usefull. useful enough to possibly win you a game WHEN USED WITH STRATEGY AND TACTICS. This last is important as our claim is that strategy and tactics play a role in who wins or loses. We are alone in this thought.

So digging around the internets a bit, I looked at the GK codex. So it's great that GK get a unit that basically has a built-in drop pod with no chance of mishap and remains jump infantry afterwards. This is a rather unique mechanic, and I was just curious what the rest of us are supposed to do, since no other codex can replicate this feat to my knowledge.

I'd also like to have jump infantry with stormbolters. Or any non-terminator infantry with stormbolters. Now I remember why everyone hated the GK in 5th.

In fact, it's been a long time since I looked at the GK codex. It's a lot more like a Xeno codex than a marine codex in many ways. So basically you're saying that your Xeno shooting can beat Xeno shooting, assuming the other Xenos aren't meched up.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.

Slanderous lies. Until this very post, i have not called you on them. This is my first one. You make these claims and never provide evidence. Reported

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?

Your "evidence actually supports ME rather than yourself. Each and every one of those armies have elements within them that are capable of close combat and in each and every one of their games, close combat took place and assisted in the wins. Thank you for helping me disprove your strawman.

You pigeohole models to be purely what the stereotype is and forget that they can be used for other things or that situations can and do arise where a unit can shine in a role it was not designed for. An example being a guard unit standing firm in close combat with a space wolf grey hunter squad on an objective to contest it at the end of a game denying the space wolf player the objective needed to win the game.

Just out of interest easysauce (and this isn't me trying to take a dig at you or insult you), what does your list look like? I've actually been toying with the idea of an Interceptor/Dreadknight-heavy list for my GK, mainly because no one ever plays them.

 EVIL INC wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Again, as evidence, 7 out of the 8 top armies according to TorrentOfFire are usually built as predominantly shooting armies. Where's your tournament data to back your claims up?

Your "evidence actually supports ME rather than yourself. Each and every one of those armies have elements within them that are capable of close combat and in each and every one of their games, close combat took place and assisted in the wins. Thank you for helping me disprove your strawman.

For the third time, that's not what I'm saying. Read. Understand. Respond to what I'm actually saying. Other posters have pointed that out to you too.

 EVIL INC wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

I'm singling you out because you called me a liar without providing anything to back it up, and I'm singling you out because you aren't responding to what I'm actually writing. You'll notice that easysauce has no problem arguing with be because, while he disagrees with me, he's actually reading and responding to what I'm saying, as opposed to just making up some sort of argument that just doesn't exist. I'm not the only one calling you out either.

Slanderous lies. Until this very post, i have not called you on them. This is my first one. You make these claims and never provide evidence. Reported

You claim that you're not making strawmen, and then proceed to make the same strawman again.

To start with;

A: On page 2, you wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
Well said.
As we and a few others have been saying you put it well. It proves the lie that these others have been spamming about that close combat is dead and no longer plays any part in the game at all.

I responded with:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:

Actually, YOU are the one who bandies about the name calling and personal attacks.

Where? Quote me or concede the argument.

 EVIL INC wrote:
It has also been proven that it is a personel vendetta against me in particuler because there are MANY others who disagree with you and provide proof that you leave alone.

Where? Quote me or concede the argument.

You didn't provide any quotes of me calling you any names or of any personal attacks, and you didn't prove any "personal vendetta" (and before you go on about me "singling you out", it's because you called me, among other things, a liar without backing it up, as evidenced above). When repeatedly called out on this, you go on about how "it's been proven", but don't actually provide that proof for everyone to see. If you want me to stop posting then prove me wrong, line up your proof against me and defend your statements, or accept that I'm going to call bull on them for being false.

And yes, an Imperial Guardsman can win combat against Abaddon himself. That doesn't make it a melee unit, or mean that it's generally a good idea to try to win combat on a regular basis with Imperial Guardsmen, just like not every unit with a ranged attack is a good shooting unit.

while back, I won a tourney with a grey knight list that had a shunting intercepter squad and dreadknight, coatez and some henchmen units with a single chimera, the unit with chimera had monkeys and coatez attached. Guard allies with a wall, harkers mob/camo/LC behind a wall wit a comm lord and a camo manticore. Sure there mighta been a few other lil things.
Did very well, but i got lucky on a game stealing initiative where the other player had set up VERY aggressively and was wide open. This past one, i went pure grey knights and ha 2 dreadknighjts and intercepter squads, coatez and 3 squads of henchmen and 2 razorbacks with LC. Only game i lost was to the new bugs which ate me up, literally. The games were a lil skewed in this one though because there was a superheavy stormlord someone was using and a necrom player using a biggie 900 pnt c-tan.

Sorry, realized you had time to post by the time I edited, see above post for edited stuff.

Sor, cant remember the exact units and compositions of what I used. Those are the main gist lists of what I had. I wont 1st in the one where I only had 1 dreadknight, didnt place in thislast one due to getting eaten alive in close combat by the gribblies.

on the previous discussion,I still remain vindicated.

 WarMonger33 wrote:
I'm going to be picking up a Dark Eldar army soon and really like the incubi and wyches.

From reading various sources though it seems shooting is king in 6th edition. I still think
an mainly assault focused army will work with some dedicated shooting elements, but
would love some outside input.

Close combat needs to be balanced with ashooting, and Dark Eldar have no problems in that regard. However, the Wyches seem the poorest option for trying to accomplish close combat dominance in the Dark Eldar Codex. On the surface they look tailor made for it but they are simply not good at surviving the trip across the board (though as a reserved defender, not too shabby at all)

The way I did it was with BeastMasters (ultrafast and lots of wounds), Wracks (tough and poisoned) and Grotesques (Aaaaaawesome in melee, take the punches well and Urien is just silly fun). The Carnival of Flesh is strong with me.

Assault isn't dead but they haven't ensured well against the amount of benefits basic shooting has gained in the year and a half that 6th has been out. Shooting (and shooting armies) have been buffed in this edition while assault-based armies have lost some resiliency due to general point cost and adjustments to number of shots being fired now.

The key to assault is speed. Necron Wraiths and Scarabs as well as Chaos Spawn are known to be fairly effective options overall due to their ability so get to combat quickly. Orks on the other hand require transports to get across the table faster and that reduces their unit size (and general effectiveness) by 1/3-2/3s depending on the transport. If you attempt to move a full unit of 30 across the board, they aren't resilient enough to withstand the mass amounts of shots that'll come their way each turn to make them effective if/when they make it into CC.

As for DE and Wyches - I would advise against Wyches. S3 doesn't do too well and being only T3 with a 6+ save, you'll be losing a lot when your AV10 raider blows up. Last night I played a DE player with a raider full of wyches and killed 7 out of his 10 just from the explosion. There are better options for CC units in DE. I use Grots with Urien (which are T5) and do rather well since they survive the raider explosion and can manage getting into my opponent's lines in 1 turn. Wyches in Raiders (or Venoms even) are deathtraps.