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.

Our local gaming group ran an all day event over the weekend and it’s highlighted a few things for me with a semi-isolated test I did.

Essentially we were running 1k pairs. My first match was my 1k and 1k custodes vs 2k of Guard. Guard was lots of scions, guardsman, Russ, a manticore and a Valkyrie. My custodes partner basically ran 2 squads of custodes, one with shields footslogging and one in a venerable land raider with lascannon, a primaris -synergy, a squad of sisters of silence and a vindicare. My test was a stygies spearhead: a Neutronager, a Beamonager, 2 dakkastellans and Datasmith, a TPD and 5 dragoons split into 2 and 3. My purpose was essentially to try out various ways of playing with the dragoons and confirmed a lot of thoughts here: they’re amazing if you can spend a cp on them for +2 to hit, if not they’re merely good. The lack of advance and charge means They’re still not quick or versatile enough without infiltrating them. And being a vehicle anything holed up on the second floor of a ruin is essentially impervious. Result was about 13 to 4 they threw in the towel their turn 3 (we went first) I lost 3 dragoons the entire match, one of which took 11 wounds with repairs before dying.

Second match was my same 1k vs 1k of tyranids. I may as well not have even bothered, BUT I knew this was a hard counter to my list and I’ve been formulating plans to try and cope with numbers. His 1k was essentially 30 haums, 30 terms, 15 genestealers, 20 gargoyles, 5 warriors a flying hive tyrant and a neurothrope. I killed zero units. But only the genestealers, hive tyrant and neurothrope actually did anything. I really hate we have no good natural answer to smite or psychic powers in general. I gave up after his turn 3 (I went first) when he gained 13 points in a single round lol. At this point I still had 2 dragoons, the beamonager and TPD left but had only managed to remove the haums and dropped his flyrant to 2 wounds.

After some thought I had a crazy idea. Dakkastellans need a lot of support for them to be successful both in supporting units and cp. I know I’ve only fielded 2 sub-optimally but the thought of having to spend 500-600 points just on robots as well as another 250 on cawl plus 2 cp for override and more if I want to use wrath, purely to sit back and do nothing all game but roll a bucket of dice. Doesn’t appeal. If I wanted that I’d have gone Built a guard army or maybe orks or tyranids. So I’m thinking of dropping them completely.

You’re insane I hear you cry! Maybe. But hear me out. A single Dakkastellan is 110 points for 18 good shots that are woefully inaccurate without support and extremely vulnerable, static, predictable and inflexible. For 10 points more I can get 15 vanguard which, albeit at half range, put out 45 peashooter shots with a decent amount of 2dmg versions. Here’s the thing. What if I took 6 squads of them in a Metallica or graia brigade?

Metallica would allow them to move on average 10” and still fire their 18” at 3+. If you’re targeting heavy armour the phosphor of a kastellan is wounding on a 5 the carbines on a 6. If you’re targeting fodder the phosphor is probably wounding on a 2 but with less than half as many shots for the points and with less ballistic skill. And against armour the chances of getting a few of those 2 dmg carbine hits through is much higher. That 28” vanguard threat range puts you in range your opponents font line.

Graia on the other hand still has the range issue, but potentially much greater protection from shots and morale. And more importantly has a strategm to prevent at least one psychic power and plenty of cp to spend doing it as well as other stuff. This option I’m less enamoured with but you can still advance and fire the vanguard at the same bs as a kastellan but with more shots.

You save so many points not using robots and it’s support network. Even our elite choices now are 70 and 80 points per squad of priests and 110 for infiltrators. Bearing in mind that Corp priests under Metallica can also advance and fire all those electro shots at full bs and have the benefit of having a smog load of vanguard in front of them to help them get in range.

I have a theory crafted 1.5k list for our next event that looks something like this:



This is pretty much what just came to mind, having 12 cp to play with in an admech army is appealing though. It’s by no means final, I may not even end up going with a brigade, but the notion of using vanguard and dragoons as horde control I think is pretty sound. Elite section needs work though. Maybe 3 * 5 fulgurites instead. I dunno, I’m still mid-rumination lol

If you intend to use Vanguard as a mainstay in your army, there are two questions you need to ask:
1) Are these guys better than Guard?
2) How am I getting these guys down the field?

#1 is conditional. Guard have more bodies, access to a greater variety of 48" weapons, and ways to reduce casualties from morale. But Vanguard at 8 points is definitely much more do-able than 9 or 10.

#2 is tricky. Your best bet is probably doing pseudo-transports by getting a bunch of Tallarn vehicles as LOS blockers and advance behind them. Super inflexible and may require a bit of MFA, but it prevents them from being totally melted right off the bat.

Octovol wrote:
Our local gaming group ran an all day event over the weekend and it’s highlighted a few things for me with a semi-isolated test I did.

Essentially we were running 1k pairs. My first match was my 1k and 1k custodes vs 2k of Guard. Guard was lots of scions, guardsman, Russ, a manticore and a Valkyrie. My custodes partner basically ran 2 squads of custodes, one with shields footslogging and one in a venerable land raider with lascannon, a primaris -synergy, a squad of sisters of silence and a vindicare. My test was a stygies spearhead: a Neutronager, a Beamonager, 2 dakkastellans and Datasmith, a TPD and 5 dragoons split into 2 and 3. My purpose was essentially to try out various ways of playing with the dragoons and confirmed a lot of thoughts here: they’re amazing if you can spend a cp on them for +2 to hit, if not they’re merely good. The lack of advance and charge means They’re still not quick or versatile enough without infiltrating them. And being a vehicle anything holed up on the second floor of a ruin is essentially impervious. Result was about 13 to 4 they threw in the towel their turn 3 (we went first) I lost 3 dragoons the entire match, one of which took 11 wounds with repairs before dying.

Second match was my same 1k vs 1k of tyranids. I may as well not have even bothered, BUT I knew this was a hard counter to my list and I’ve been formulating plans to try and cope with numbers. His 1k was essentially 30 haums, 30 terms, 15 genestealers, 20 gargoyles, 5 warriors a flying hive tyrant and a neurothrope. I killed zero units. But only the genestealers, hive tyrant and neurothrope actually did anything. I really hate we have no good natural answer to smite or psychic powers in general. I gave up after his turn 3 (I went first) when he gained 13 points in a single round lol. At this point I still had 2 dragoons, the beamonager and TPD left but had only managed to remove the haums and dropped his flyrant to 2 wounds.

After some thought I had a crazy idea. Dakkastellans need a lot of support for them to be successful both in supporting units and cp. I know I’ve only fielded 2 sub-optimally but the thought of having to spend 500-600 points just on robots as well as another 250 on cawl plus 2 cp for override and more if I want to use wrath, purely to sit back and do nothing all game but roll a bucket of dice. Doesn’t appeal. If I wanted that I’d have gone Built a guard army or maybe orks or tyranids. So I’m thinking of dropping them completely.

You’re insane I hear you cry! Maybe. But hear me out. A single Dakkastellan is 110 points for 18 good shots that are woefully inaccurate without support and extremely vulnerable, static, predictable and inflexible. For 10 points more I can get 15 vanguard which, albeit at half range, put out 45 peashooter shots with a decent amount of 2dmg versions. Here’s the thing. What if I took 6 squads of them in a Metallica or graia brigade?

Metallica would allow them to move on average 10” and still fire their 18” at 3+. If you’re targeting heavy armour the phosphor of a kastellan is wounding on a 5 the carbines on a 6. If you’re targeting fodder the phosphor is probably wounding on a 2 but with less than half as many shots for the points and with less ballistic skill. And against armour the chances of getting a few of those 2 dmg carbine hits through is much higher. That 28” vanguard threat range puts you in range your opponents font line.

Graia on the other hand still has the range issue, but potentially much greater protection from shots and morale. And more importantly has a strategm to prevent at least one psychic power and plenty of cp to spend doing it as well as other stuff. This option I’m less enamoured with but you can still advance and fire the vanguard at the same bs as a kastellan but with more shots.

You save so many points not using robots and it’s support network. Even our elite choices now are 70 and 80 points per squad of priests and 110 for infiltrators. Bearing in mind that Corp priests under Metallica can also advance and fire all those electro shots at full bs and have the benefit of having a smog load of vanguard in front of them to help them get in range.

I have a theory crafted 1.5k list for our next event that looks something like this:

Spoiler:

HQ
TPD
2 * enginseer

Troops
6 * 5 vanguard

Fast
3 * 2 Dragoon

Elite
2 * 5 corpuscarii
1 * 5 infiltrators

Heavy
2 * Neutronager
1 * Icarus onager

This is pretty much what just came to mind, having 12 cp to play with in an admech army is appealing though. It’s by no means final, I may not even end up going with a brigade, but the notion of using vanguard and dragoons as horde control I think is pretty sound. Elite section needs work though. Maybe 3 * 5 fulgurites instead. I dunno, I’m still mid-rumination lol

There is no comparison in 18 shots str 6 -2 -cover 36" to none in the game none. No other army has this crap and when you buff mars it's broken. Most other armies want it nerfed.....!

Dragoons are superb. They rock badly but you can only buff one unit at a time meaning you need a 1*6 man and if you take 6 in a city or heavy table you won't be able to move them so you don't practically play 4 at a time for the first rounds.
The design of ad mech is essentially limiting by benefiting from large groups for command point buffs but not able to field lots of thing for make detachments or filed lots of them with lots of cp but not enough big units.

Breaking up robots means you remove your mortal source. Anything 3+ invu or better will make you cry. The combo Robots Dragoons snipers is one able to deal with this and 3 neutronagers for the tank part. If you are going less points yes it seems better to take something else.
After 1500 Cawl star can work else it's easy to get countered. Still you can play without robots. You need them to clea mid field troops camping obj. Str 6 -2 -cover .

Overall if you dont play imperial soup for guard then you need 2 detachments . And most likely two battalions. One must be stygies no matter what. It's more important than Mars.
So you get a stygies with
Dominus warlord etc etc
I suggest snipers in here and breachers

So it looks like

Dominus
Engineer
2*5*2 sniper omnispex
Breachers
1*10 priests staff
1*4 Dragoons.
You infiltrate priests to make a char kill or multi charge etc to get that 3+ invu and harash enemy lines. ASAP.
Dragoons won't b infiltrated always. Vs tyrnninds you need them screener . And in stygies they have -2 to move up field if need. And you should use the as fast units not as infiltration all the time.

That's the plan strategy and it's effective vs most armies snipers can shoot anything breachers can be used as relic holders infiltrated vs heavy rtilerry armies etc etc. Rangers also shoot 30 so use their rifles to guard vs horde armies.

From that point on I strongly suggest mars or Ryza. I'd prefer Ryza. Since you will have cp. I'd go for a
Dominus
Enginseer

1*3-6 destroyers plasma
2*5-10 vang maybe plasma

1*2 robots
1*2 icarus or neutron depending on local meta.

Point wise I'm not calc 1500 I'm giving you the options. Elimination volley Ryza specialist makes your Robots and destroyers 3+ and your plasma destroyers overs
Charge with no deaths and an extreme str 9 -3 3 damage weapon to deal with all that needs to be dealt with. Dominus rer. Ones.

Enjoy. It's a nice smaller point star with out Cawl no Mars and plasma 36" for any target split fire from knights to fliers.
Most likely 2* icarus can help. Breacher and Dragoons are superb screener breachers front Dragoons sides. If you don't need so much go offnsive. Your stygies got tons of options for various missions etc etc. And still your plasma destroyers even 3-4 can be lethal.

If you don't want the robot destroyer Ryza then invest in stygies and a knight. Good luck

Tip : your troops vs any other army will loose. Horde armies better troops elite armies better troops . You only need some troop to play your role. And yes you can make a mobile list !




if you dont like nothign from the above make the stygies and an onager spam worked prior to codex.
if you dont know how to play all strategies make a brigade Stygies and scale from that. breachers snipers onagers always must. Dominus.

Why dragoons and vanguard not vanguard and kastelans? Kastelans do more damage and the vanguard are pulling the role the dragoons traditionally handle?

This has given me a lot to think about.

Double battalion is something i should consider. I'm a good ways off being able to afford to purchase the models required for most of these though, so i kinda need to figure something out in the interim.

i've found 2 dragoons is perfect for holding up a tide of T3 fodder. Most have no AP so rolling 6s to wound and getting my 3+ save kept 2 dragoons alive for 3 rounds surrounded by gargoyles removing them several at a time. Which was fine, though they were holding an objective at the time so he was probably happy for them to be tied up there. 3 feels like a sweet spot, 4 takes up a lot of space but restricts movement. I found manoeuvring 3 was tricky enough. 3 may not be quite enough to remove a T8 vehicle in one turn, but anything below that is in serious trouble.

Our troops probably arent the way to go for cheap horde clearing. They have the number of shots, but not the range to get off more than one volley, unless you manage them with staggered dragoon screens...feels like too much effort.

Just feels like kastellans underperform without a support network. I would definitely consider some destroyers for elimination volley though, that seems like a quick win.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Why dragoons and vanguard not vanguard and kastelans? Kastelans do more damage and the vanguard are pulling the role the dragoons traditionally handle?

vanguard have the shots to pull off the attack numbers game but not the staying power of dragoons. 2 dragoons will hold up a swarm for days.

I use vanguard with arc tether in a unit of 10 graia as screener. But that's it. Nowhere else. If you manage to hold one vanguard in melee for that -1 T then your counter unit gets a buff . Don't have any other use. Rangers are better cheaper nice gun range etc. Only as a first screener with alpha taser and that's in lists you got point to spare not 1500.

Breachers are the best screener I got atm when I solo ad mech. stygies second rank after my cheap troops can hold with that -1 and I spend a 1 cp when I need them to survive. +1 save +1 attack is no joke on them + their T5 are perfect for 120p.

He question is wrath of mars or staff preists.
And then how much antitank options you got. Rest antihorde. Ryza plasma or straight up plasma can be used vs everything. Neutron and lasc balistarii.
Lasc balistarii. If you use 3 detachments like when having imperil soup I use two to fill up my stygies outrider and also screen my flanks. Cause I want shooting in my castle. Rest are antihorde same goes for icarus. It's not antitank.
If you plan to use destroyers calculate overcharging else won't worth it vs Cawl Robots. The real difference is robots got 18-36 bs 4+-5+ or 3d6 moving but can be 3 damage Ryza and str enough to hit vehicles. Destroyers can be a good force but don't forget you always gain something g loose something .Cawl and Robots for 2k list are tough can combo benefit from large unit etc more resilient !!!
This was a suggestion for. More versatile moving army on 1500 with probably good results. I hope your local meta does not involve 3 knights.
3 Dragoons sure as long as you make the combo with as many as possible destroyers 3-6 a set of robots for the buff. Remember while robots are stationary you can move destroyer if you don't have more cp. With a dominus they can roam those things suppose you need them and use them else Robots always perform better easier.

 Yoda79 wrote:
I use vanguard with arc tether in a unit of 10 graia as screener. But that's it. Nowhere else. If you manage to hold one vanguard in melee for that -1 T then your counter unit gets a buff . Don't have any other use. Rangers are better cheaper nice gun range etc. Only as a first screener with alpha taser and that's in lists you got point to spare not 1500.

Breachers are the best screener I got atm when I solo ad mech. stygies second rank after my cheap troops can hold with that -1 and I spend a 1 cp when I need them to survive. +1 save +1 attack is no joke on them + their T5 are perfect for 120p.

He question is wrath of mars or staff preists.
And then how much antitank options you got. Rest antihorde. Ryza plasma or straight up plasma can be used vs everything. Neutron and lasc balistarii.
Lasc balistarii. If you use 3 detachments like when having imperil soup I use two to fill up my stygies outrider and also screen my flanks. Cause I want shooting in my castle. Rest are antihorde same goes for icarus. It's not antitank.
If you plan to use destroyers calculate overcharging else won't worth it vs Cawl Robots. The real difference is robots got 18-36 bs 4+-5+ or 3d6 moving but can be 3 damage Ryza and str enough to hit vehicles. Destroyers can be a good force but don't forget you always gain something g loose something .Cawl and Robots for 2k list are tough can combo benefit from large unit etc more resilient !!!
This was a suggestion for. More versatile moving army on 1500 with probably good results. I hope your local meta does not involve 3 knights.
3 Dragoons sure as long as you make the combo with as many as possible destroyers 3-6 a set of robots for the buff. Remember while robots are stationary you can move destroyer if you don't have more cp. With a dominus they can roam those things suppose you need them and use them else Robots always perform better easier.

How are breaches performing as a screen in comparison with Guardsmen?

I’m teeing up a purchase of another 2 kastellans, an enginseer and a box of destroyers. Just trying to see how cheap I can get them on eBay before I drop 75 quid at my usual online store.

You will definitely find cheap destroyers none plays them. Don't waste money!!

SilverAlien wrote:
I'm impressed how pessimistic people are being given the upcoming chapter approved price cuts. We've now got cheaper sources of everything.

Our basic infantry are solid at 7/8 points, we don't have the bodies of IG, but at only 35/40 points for a basic squad they are still great. For a 3 point upcharge you get rangers instead of guardsmen, with a better gun, bs, armor save, plus the canticles and 5 man unit to make getting cover much easier than an IG squad, and while we have the same leadership keeping them at 5 man units means we are less likely to take significant morale losses. Oh and our sarge gets a rifle, which is minor but nice. At 35 points for a basic unit it's also amongst the cheapest troop filler in the game, only Gretchen and Brimstones can be had for less at 30 points for a basic unit.

I know people are upset about transports still, but really why? Infiltrators are now cheap enough to be compareable to a hypothetical set of corpus priests in a transport, and the now cheaper destroyers have a similar relationship to plasma vanguard. I get if it's an aesthetic thing, but it's not going to actually make the army better, unless it happens to be a particularly shooty transport. I just don't really see the appeal balance wise, unless you are desperate to use fulgerites/rustalkers and hate Stygies.

I maintain our codex wasn't as bad as people claimed balance wise (externally at least, internally was more of an issue) and chapter approved looks to be tweaking those issues as well.

Literally made an account to quote this right here. There are three to four extremely loud people on this forum who drown out all other opinions because the math they have done outweighs all other opinions, experiences, and tactics. The amount of variables in Warhammer is insane, and to claim you can tell how a game will turn out based off of math alone is no way to discuss optimal tactics. It leads to mathematic dogma.

If I had listened to the vocal minority on this forum I would have never conceived of taking down Mortarion/Magnus list without Cawl and Dakkabots. Or defeated a loaded guard army with infantry coming out of the wood works, Leman Russes, and Shadowswords without my own Guard detachment+Cawl and Dakkabots. Mathhammer is fine, but having tangible experience with a history of written battle reports at the time of battle to back it up is extraordinarily more valuable. Showing that yes you have tried Dakkabots, you have tried Dragoon spam, you have tried en mass Vanguard, you have tried other Forgeworlds besides Mars. Then I suspect I will hear "my time is too valuable to waste on what is suboptimal" then I will say to you my time is too valuable to waste on your *opinion*.

 Goldenemperor wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:
I'm impressed how pessimistic people are being given the upcoming chapter approved price cuts. We've now got cheaper sources of everything.

Our basic infantry are solid at 7/8 points, we don't have the bodies of IG, but at only 35/40 points for a basic squad they are still great. For a 3 point upcharge you get rangers instead of guardsmen, with a better gun, bs, armor save, plus the canticles and 5 man unit to make getting cover much easier than an IG squad, and while we have the same leadership keeping them at 5 man units means we are less likely to take significant morale losses. Oh and our sarge gets a rifle, which is minor but nice. At 35 points for a basic unit it's also amongst the cheapest troop filler in the game, only Gretchen and Brimstones can be had for less at 30 points for a basic unit.

I know people are upset about transports still, but really why? Infiltrators are now cheap enough to be compareable to a hypothetical set of corpus priests in a transport, and the now cheaper destroyers have a similar relationship to plasma vanguard. I get if it's an aesthetic thing, but it's not going to actually make the army better, unless it happens to be a particularly shooty transport. I just don't really see the appeal balance wise, unless you are desperate to use fulgerites/rustalkers and hate Stygies.

I maintain our codex wasn't as bad as people claimed balance wise (externally at least, internally was more of an issue) and chapter approved looks to be tweaking those issues as well.

Literally made an account to quote this right here. There are three to four extremely loud people on this forum who drown out all other opinions because the math they have done outweighs all other opinions, experiences, and tactics. The amount of variables in Warhammer is insane, and to claim you can tell how a game will turn out based off of math alone is no way to discuss optimal tactics. It leads to mathematic dogma.

If I had listened to the vocal minority on this forum I would have never conceived of taking down Mortarion/Magnus list without Cawl and Dakkabots. Or defeated a loaded guard army with infantry coming out of the wood works, Leman Russes, and Shadowswords without my own Guard detachment+Cawl and Dakkabots. Mathhammer is fine, but having tangible experience with a history of written battle reports at the time of battle to back it up is extraordinarily more valuable. Showing that yes you have tried Dakkabots, you have tried Dragoon spam, you have tried en mass Vanguard, you have tried other Forgeworlds besides Mars. Then I suspect I will hear "my time is too valuable to waste on what is suboptimal" then I will say to you my time is too valuable to waste on your *opinion*.

Anecdotal evidence doesn't trump raw statistics for a dice game.

Well that's it, I'm borderline hating my army right now. Played a game against our best player today, 1500 pts, 40 little Brimstones (the ones who don't split), a few flamers, exalted chariot, Tzeentch Heralds, Changeling, 2 Daemon Princes, Ahriman, a Terminator Sorcerer, and a few more stuff. Got obliterated, but I hold my ground for 6 turns ! Seriously, there was no way I could beat this list. Smite spam is just uncounterable as AdMech. And who on Earth thought giving a 4++ to a 3 pts model was a good idea ?

I tried Graia with this list and it was utter garbage, it saved like 4 guys in total who just died to more smite, and I used the stratagem to deny 3 times and it worked once. But had I chosen Stygies as usual it would've been useless against his list. Maybe I would've hold my ground better if I deployed as a big backfield gunline, but not even sure, and there were objectives to capture. If I have to play as an immobile gunline at the back of the table while waiting to table my opponent if I want to have a balanced game against a good list I might as well wait for FoC. If it sucks well... I'll sell my army probably. My meta is becoming too much hardcore for my armies, and when an opponent agrees to run a "fun list" and I obliterate him I feel guilty as hell and so in the end no one has any fun. Don't know what to do. Dragoons are exceptional but too expensive if I have to buy 3 more boxes to have a decent list.

Already looking forward for the Drukhari codex, hoping it will be good. It's the same concept of glass cannon army but where you trade toughness for speed, but even then the Drukhari players of the forum are complaining of the state of the army as it is, and the absence of anti-psyker abilities too. And I can forget about my nice snipers too.

Dark Angels codex looks promising, I don't know. I'm confused as hell guys.

 Aaranis wrote:
Well that's it, I'm borderline hating my army right now. Played a game against our best player today, 1500 pts, 40 little Brimstones (the ones who don't split), a few flamers, exalted chariot, Tzeentch Heralds, Changeling, 2 Daemon Princes, Ahriman, a Terminator Sorcerer, and a few more stuff. Got obliterated, but I hold my ground for 6 turns ! Seriously, there was no way I could beat this list. Smite spam is just uncounterable as AdMech. And who on Earth thought giving a 4++ to a 3 pts model was a good idea ?

I tried Graia with this list and it was utter garbage, it saved like 4 guys in total who just died to more smite, and I used the stratagem to deny 3 times and it worked once. But had I chosen Stygies as usual it would've been useless against his list. Maybe I would've hold my ground better if I deployed as a big backfield gunline, but not even sure, and there were objectives to capture. If I have to play as an immobile gunline at the back of the table while waiting to table my opponent if I want to have a balanced game against a good list I might as well wait for FoC. If it sucks well... I'll sell my army probably. My meta is becoming too much hardcore for my armies, and when an opponent agrees to run a "fun list" and I obliterate him I feel guilty as hell and so in the end no one has any fun. Don't know what to do. Dragoons are exceptional but too expensive if I have to buy 3 more boxes to have a decent list.

Already looking forward for the Drukhari codex, hoping it will be good. It's the same concept of glass cannon army but where you trade toughness for speed, but even then the Drukhari players of the forum are complaining of the state of the army as it is, and the absence of anti-psyker abilities too. And I can forget about my nice snipers too.

Dark Angels codex looks promising, I don't know. I'm confused as hell guys.

Sorry to hear that mate. I play against Chaos alot with my admech. Usually 1ksons and deamon support with some renegae chaos marines. Psykers are a huge problem for admech as we have no pratical means to counter (pure admech anyways) as our units are expensive and we have no psykers ourselves. From my experience, the best way to handle smite spam (which my friends doesn't heavy spam it, just every unit he has is a psyker pretty much, 1ksons and all...) is to outgun/range. Most of Admech: robots/destroyers/onagers have decent range. Or go opposite, build the strange but sometimes effective melee admech list and charge them ASAP. This is more luck based and circumstantial than anything else so i may be of limited help...

Or hopfully, and if not I highly recommend you guy start, play objective games, which will turn your from slugfests to tactical positioning and terrain manipulation.

 Tsol wrote:
Sorry to hear that mate. I play against Chaos alot with my admech. Usually 1ksons and deamon support with some renegae chaos marines. Psykers are a huge problem for admech as we have no pratical means to counter (pure admech anyways) as our units are expensive and we have no psykers ourselves. From my experience, the best way to handle smite spam (which my friends doesn't heavy spam it, just every unit he has is a psyker pretty much, 1ksons and all...) is to outgun/range. Most of Admech: robots/destroyers/onagers have decent range. Or go opposite, build the strange but sometimes effective melee admech list and charge them ASAP. This is more luck based and circumstantial than anything else so i may be of limited help...

Or hopfully, and if not I highly recommend you guy start, play objective games, which will turn your from slugfests to tactical positioning and terrain manipulation.

Yeah I think I'll buy the Tactical Cards someday, and play Maelstrom. Outrange ? 18" smite + move + advance and he's already in my face. I didn't have much luck in this game though, have you ever had 36 Kastelan shots kill 3 Brimstones ? That's how I felt the whole game. I had fun, but the sad kind of fun you know ?

I'd like to run CC AdMech, really, but it's imperative to run at least 3-4 Dragoons for it to work and I'm really reluctant spending 114€ for 204 pts :/

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

 Goldenemperor wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:
I'm impressed how pessimistic people are being given the upcoming chapter approved price cuts. We've now got cheaper sources of everything.

Our basic infantry are solid at 7/8 points, we don't have the bodies of IG, but at only 35/40 points for a basic squad they are still great. For a 3 point upcharge you get rangers instead of guardsmen, with a better gun, bs, armor save, plus the canticles and 5 man unit to make getting cover much easier than an IG squad, and while we have the same leadership keeping them at 5 man units means we are less likely to take significant morale losses. Oh and our sarge gets a rifle, which is minor but nice. At 35 points for a basic unit it's also amongst the cheapest troop filler in the game, only Gretchen and Brimstones can be had for less at 30 points for a basic unit.

I know people are upset about transports still, but really why? Infiltrators are now cheap enough to be compareable to a hypothetical set of corpus priests in a transport, and the now cheaper destroyers have a similar relationship to plasma vanguard. I get if it's an aesthetic thing, but it's not going to actually make the army better, unless it happens to be a particularly shooty transport. I just don't really see the appeal balance wise, unless you are desperate to use fulgerites/rustalkers and hate Stygies.

I maintain our codex wasn't as bad as people claimed balance wise (externally at least, internally was more of an issue) and chapter approved looks to be tweaking those issues as well.

Literally made an account to quote this right here. There are three to four extremely loud people on this forum who drown out all other opinions because the math they have done outweighs all other opinions, experiences, and tactics. The amount of variables in Warhammer is insane, and to claim you can tell how a game will turn out based off of math alone is no way to discuss optimal tactics. It leads to mathematic dogma.

If I had listened to the vocal minority on this forum I would have never conceived of taking down Mortarion/Magnus list without Cawl and Dakkabots. Or defeated a loaded guard army with infantry coming out of the wood works, Leman Russes, and Shadowswords without my own Guard detachment+Cawl and Dakkabots. Mathhammer is fine, but having tangible experience with a history of written battle reports at the time of battle to back it up is extraordinarily more valuable. Showing that yes you have tried Dakkabots, you have tried Dragoon spam, you have tried en mass Vanguard, you have tried other Forgeworlds besides Mars. Then I suspect I will hear "my time is too valuable to waste on what is suboptimal" then I will say to you my time is too valuable to waste on your *opinion*.

Anecdotal evidence doesn't trump raw statistics for a dice game.

Tactical+dice game. Tactics go beyond math.

Warhammer is a War simulator, creating war, no matter the stage, is an art form, part science part art. To believe it is fully one or the other is the surest sign of a fool.

If you think the math is misleading, prove it by winning a major. Unless you can show AdMech competing at top tables then for all we know you're just seal-clubbing inferior players at your local scene who look up netlists but don't understand them.

 Aaranis wrote:

 Tsol wrote:
Sorry to hear that mate. I play against Chaos alot with my admech. Usually 1ksons and deamon support with some renegae chaos marines. Psykers are a huge problem for admech as we have no pratical means to counter (pure admech anyways) as our units are expensive and we have no psykers ourselves. From my experience, the best way to handle smite spam (which my friends doesn't heavy spam it, just every unit he has is a psyker pretty much, 1ksons and all...) is to outgun/range. Most of Admech: robots/destroyers/onagers have decent range. Or go opposite, build the strange but sometimes effective melee admech list and charge them ASAP. This is more luck based and circumstantial than anything else so i may be of limited help...

Or hopfully, and if not I highly recommend you guy start, play objective games, which will turn your from slugfests to tactical positioning and terrain manipulation.

Yeah I think I'll buy the Tactical Cards someday, and play Maelstrom. Outrange ? 18" smite + move + advance and he's already in my face. I didn't have much luck in this game though, have you ever had 36 Kastelan shots kill 3 Brimstones ? That's how I felt the whole game. I had fun, but the sad kind of fun you know ?

I'd like to run CC AdMech, really, but it's imperative to run at least 3-4 Dragoons for it to work and I'm really reluctant spending 114€ for 204 pts :/

Its easier on my end because my buddy footslogs most of his Rubrics but his terminators are always a pain. Yeah if you need to stay still, pulling back when he moves forward wont be of much help. :(

I cannot recommend enough trying out the maelstorm missions or the new chapter approved ones. The cards are decent as well, but I prefer a little more consistancy to my game rules/goals. At my hooby group we play with lots of terrain and objective missions. Pure Kill points never really happen (unless its part of the mission) and I suggest playing those. They are more fun and much more diverse.

Trust me though, I know the feeling of bad dice rolls. I had 3 venerable dreadnaughts charge my buddys sorceror and 20 man rubric squad into melee, rolled 9 1s. I think I still have the picture of his smug face.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
If you think the math is misleading, prove it by winning a major. Unless you can show AdMech competing at top tables then for all we know you're just seal-clubbing inferior players at your local scene who look up netlists but don't understand them.

Prove that a pure mathematical approach best by winning a major yourself then? I mean you can try and quantify all of the top lists into pure mathematics but overlooking the tactics and understanding of basic principles of war making is silly. I get psychologically humans want to have 100% control over everything around them (this is usually done via math) even in a game like Warhammer, but there are just some things you simply cannot factor into a war/battle simulator like Warhammer.

 Goldenemperor wrote:
war/battle simulator like Warhammer.

oh man who wants to tell him

It's game based on fiction that doesn't even closely represent it's fiction. It's not a simulator.

I have a friend who doesn't take maths into account and I've never seen him come close to winning a game in 7th or 8th.

Maths is a big part of optimal decision making and not using it accounts for many of the whiney SM players complaining they don't survive past turn 2 and not understanding why.

Take grav destroyers they are worth about 30pts outside of Mars (give or take a few due to low durablebility) they cost about 70 they are therefore always a bad selection. Now optimally if you wanted to play them you can put them in a fortification but you won't change that other options would do the job better

The problem isnt the use of maths

it's firstly the oversimplification of it there are many aspects to a unit yet often the vocal people pick one aspect and focus on that solely. Usually based on a unitary tactic. often this leads to inacurate conclusions which can be demonstrated. Also certain unconventional combinations change the stats eg takeing a pure infantry list lessons the effectiveness of your enemies multidamage weapons.

Secondally yes strategy and tactics are important there are many ways to build a list and do well I could give my terrible friend a good list and I could still beat it with a bad one because he positions badly and focuses the wrong targets. Its bad not to consider other tactical options and what they offer however there is nothing wrong with pointing out flaws in those selections.

@Goldenemperor
I think you're presenting an unfair argument.

There are qualitative and quantitative aspects to the game. This is undisputable. However, only the quantitative aspect is objective, hence why it is used as a basis for comparison. When we do delve into qualitative aspects, it is usually as a tactics hypothetical. However, it is difficult to impossible for me to compare my play style to your play style.

Anyhow, instead of unproductively criticising the use of math, how about you present a productive argument (qualitative or quantitative) in favor of one model or another?

@Aaranis
It is annoying. Your best bet is literally to deploy as far away as possible and put as many bodies between you and them as possible and hope for the best.

After 300 posts in tactics from many players I find it luckluster to listen to anyone saying we shouting he knows better math tell half truth etc. Some blamed competitive some now math next will say we pros and he amateur etc. I don't get it. Anyone in here believes we don't play the game ? The feedback given in forum does not include from experienced players to fresh ones. Bl a bla pooping saying one crap then that's it.

When we talking details trying to find the best optimal is because we talk about an war environment where my enemy will use all his weapons including math to win.

None said what to play to none. Play whatever makes you happy. But we must measure our top performing list in theory at least to start testing for optimal. What will suit after that epeach players playstyle is irelevant. Some like cc some range other options etc.

Unfortunately the ones doing more harm than good are those that believe that after 1000 experienced talks in here you know the magic list or unit.

If a robot costs 110 fires 18 shots buffed from wrath and Cawl you can type all day but there is none better. Math wise play wise game wise. Now a list is not only robots n
Cards obj etc. Sure we can figure out more in list try more now with reduced cost but taking troops won't win you nothing and you can cry about it.

Now ad mech got v v few options. Atm no need to offend none or tire people with this. Try them out find your super list and try to win.

But can't be luck so many editions now to get valid results and ignore them. I don't use math I say my experience other help with math others with point of view others with tactics. Read 300 pages then write crap!!!

In a more uplifting tone, I finally have my Chapter Approved book and am looking through it.

I am very pleased to see the point reductions are accurate (I assumed true, but nice to verify it personally). Though am still sad to see that they haven't done any hard changes to admech. Meaning rules changes and the like.

What I'm taking from this is the same as most people. Tech Priests and TPD are less of a tax but still overcosted, though its nice to see them come down in costs. Servitors are unchanged and I don't know why, I have never seen them deployed other than myself who was simply seeing if I could make them work.

Rangers are viable now and I think I'll be using them as my special weapon holders instead of Vanguard. Vanguard... At 8pts, they are still technically "meh" but thanks to Graia or Metallica you can actually build a list to make use of them.
Slight tangent. I think Metallica's faction should just be built into the skitarri datasheets: All skitarri models just have the metallica faction bonus as a rule, not a faction bonus and I think that would go a LONG way to helping us as a faction deal with our lack of mobility.

Vanguard I have always liked but with their point reduction, I think I'll be taking 2, 10 man squads with data tethers as harrasment troops/ screens. And probably 2 10 man squads of rangers with 3 Arc rifles and omiscope. Thats a large amount of bodies with some tatical flexability for pretty darn cheap. A TPD and an enginseer would make for a good Graia/metallica detachment.

I've been using destroyers and breachers even before the codex came out because I think they are super cool looking. Breachers... I think they are price about right, I'd like them to hit on 4s with their crappy powerfists, and I wish the Torsion cannond was 2 shots or D3 shots but for Heavy Arc Rifles and Arc claws they are pretty decent at 120pts for 3.

Torsion cannon and hydralic claws though... If they had more shots and didn't hit on 5+ (claws) maybe... Too much chance to miss unless you have Cawl, then I'd say they could be taken. But it is nice to have 6 breachers fire mini Lazcannons with AP-4 at something and watch your opponent flinch.

Destroyers as with Breachers I've always been using because they are cool. Now with their points reduction, I think anyone who takes Cawl can easily justify their presence. However, if you're like me any ou play primairly Lucius you must keep a TPD nearby. His rerolls of 1 and ablity to repair these high cost models are imperative. But that in mind you're dropping 175+ 130 for the TPD is a little over 300pts still. So you're brought back to the: Should I pay 100 more points for an Imperial knight? The answer is both.

In all seriousness, the unit is still a bit overcosted, but workable. For the amount of firepower the Grav and plasma offer taken in conjunction of synergy and even strategies, I think many people may get more mileage out of these glass cannons. I prefer the Grav as 15 shots plus whatever gear is always better than 3d6 shots of plasma, but that just personal prefrence. I think I will almost always take the flamers though, as the phospher blasters hardly ever do anything, and the flamers act as excellent charge deterrents due to their 2d6 pick the higher rule.

Infiltrators are still heavily overcosted but a 2pts reduction is a welcome boon. I still always take 2 squads one powersword and one taser goad because their deepstrike and hard counter/absurd number of shots make them useful despite their shockingly high costs. These models in particular make me miss dunestrider more than any other.... I'd pay 4 points more for each model if they had dunestrider...

Cawl is Cawl. Now hes 10 pts cheaper. Thumbs up!

Overall, this isn't a drastic change for Admech, but a nice boost to our desyroyers and breachers which have been made relevant if nothing else. And a reduction on our primary taxs the TPD and Enginseer are almost properly costed. Meaning for me, I might roll my eyes at their price but I have little room to complain. Rangers are actually good. I know you maffs hammers and guard/soup players will contest, but for us Pure admech armies, Rangers are compatent especially when gear up for purpose. 10 man squads with arc rifles and a omiscope are going to be a staple in my new lists and vanguard stock are pretty decent and just throwing out dakka for a reasonable price. Might still put plasma with them though, as I'd like to keep the assault weapon with their kin.

Suzuteo wrote:
@Goldenemperor
I think you're presenting an unfair argument.

There are qualitative and quantitative aspects to the game. This is undisputable. However, only the quantitative aspect is objective, hence why it is used as a basis for comparison. When we do delve into qualitative aspects, it is usually as a tactics hypothetical. However, it is difficult to impossible for me to compare my play style to your play style.

Anyhow, instead of unproductively criticising the use of math, how about you present a productive argument (qualitative or quantitative) in favor of one model or another?

Listen I never said and will never say that math is not important when building competitive lists, plain and simple it is. Which is why, as U02dah4 stated, we get whiny SM players who can't figure out why they have to concede turn 2. Because mathematically their list is inferior.

But mathematics and unit comparisons are not the end all be all. I mean the simple difference of mobility between an assault weapon and a rapid fire weapon is so difficult to quantify. Or a heavy weapons versus rapid fire weapons and how just the weapon types alone even though not wide in variety play with someone's decisions on the board.

If mathematics is all that is being compared here because we all want to be objective in our arguments this thread should be changed to 40k Mathhammer not 40k Tactics, as it is a sham to call it tactics when thought out and tactical arguments are put to the sword based off of Mathhammer alone.

I like the Cawl price drop because I like playing my Cawl model I spent too much time painting.

But I don't like that Cawl is such an auto-include and that makes Mars the obvious best subfaction.

If it were up to me, I'd move Cawl back up 10 points and the other HQ both down an additional 10. But I'd still play Cawl myself!

 Goldenemperor wrote:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
If you think the math is misleading, prove it by winning a major. Unless you can show AdMech competing at top tables then for all we know you're just seal-clubbing inferior players at your local scene who look up netlists but don't understand them.

Prove that a pure mathematical approach best by winning a major yourself then? I mean you can try and quantify all of the top lists into pure mathematics but overlooking the tactics and understanding of basic principles of war making is silly. I get psychologically humans want to have 100% control over everything around them (this is usually done via math) even in a game like Warhammer, but there are just some things you simply cannot factor into a war/battle simulator like Warhammer.

Please tell me, why I should use a more expensive, weaker in terms of durability and damage unit instead of a superior unit in all these 3 things, when they fill almost the exact same role?
That's where math comes in. Through 100 games, you will win a lot more often with the more efficient units. Done and done.

For me, when I think of taking kataphrons, ruststalkers, servitors, fistellans, etc... I think "lol, I'm not stupid. They are bad". (this is pre-CA)

I'm not saying "everyone who takes them is stupid", I just can't force myself to do it unless it's a completelly friendly game with a new player.

So I'm pretty new to admech as primarily a guard player, but I've really been enjoying mixing skitarii into my guard lists. IG lacks good quality shooting at range sometimes, especially if you forgo Cadia, and I've found Neutron Laser Onagers, sniper rangers, and even Vanguard/TPD have been handy to shore up weaknesses.

I play Metallica, so I end up using my skitarii a bit weird. Mainly, I treat the admech as cut rate stormtroopers in my backfield, kind of a substitute for Carapace Veterans, which are gone in our codex. Vanguard are excellent for an IG infantry line because not only do they have a higher BS, they also get rerolls from the Dominus, and have the melee aura. It sounds useless, but if you combine say Vanguard with a Catachan army, your Catachans are going from wounding space marines on 4's to 3's, with just bayonets. With the Metallica ability thrown in, Vanguard make excellent firefighter units for plugging gaps in a line or dealing with something dropping in. They put out a ton of shots, then charge in with a couple of guard squads. Combined with perhaps a priest or two roving around behind your lines, you could mount some scary countercharges by tagteaming your infantry squads and vanguard. I'm still figuring out the best ways to use them, ranging from shadowing onagers to sticking them on the flanks to just sticking them in the center of my army and seeing where they're needed. Even with regular guardsmen though, dropping the enemy toughness value is huge. You just have so many attacks that even going from say a 6 to a 5 is a massive deal.

Rangers help IG a lot by giving you a hard hitting source of sniper fire with the arquebus. Granted Snipers aren't the most insane thing ever, Admech ones can do a decent amount of damage and I've often found myself using them to soften up backfield characters for a stormtrooper drop. At the very least they make a nice objective sitter and let me be more aggressive with guardsmen. They're probably not super efficient but they're fun to use at least. I've noticed people really don't like to let their characters get shot at by them though, so at the very least it seems to scare squisher characters like eldar or IG.

Finally, I've really liked my Techpriest Dominuses so far, although I feel the Volkite blaster is pretty crap after using them for almost an entire match nonstop on 2 different TPD. No AP just really hurts them and maybe it's just bad luck, but I never seem to actually get mortal wounds with them. Tempted to try out the other beam they have. Love the macropistols though, those things are handy. With him getting a little cheaper and providing repairs/rerolls, I actually liked him quite a bit. He was even handy for melee when I've had some guys break through my lines.

Still figuring out how exactly to make it work, but it seems like if you bring enough guardsmen and stormtroopers, people just don't have time to fool with the skitarii, which lets them move around and do whatever they need to do. Essentially you run a very infantry heavy army split between stormtroopers, guardsmen, and vanguard/rangers to get both volume and quantity of fire. From there Onager dunecrawlers with neutron lasers are incredible and they even match up pretty well with basic leman russes and Exterminators, each variant covering the other's weaknesses.

Probably not going to take NOVA or anything but it's definitely strong and fun to use. Metallica probably isn't the most powerful trait for them, it's just what mine are painted as.

Since my question got somehow lost in the discussion I repeat it:

How are Breachers performing as a screening unit in comparison to say Guardsman?

 Yoda79 wrote:
After 300 posts in tactics from many players I find it luckluster to listen to anyone saying we shouting

this.

Breachers would not be my first choice for a screen. They are more a troop artillery unit.