This concerns all armies. Thought it might be nice to give it the light of day before it decays on my computer.
C&C welcome....
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Deployment tactica:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hiya folks, this is a deployment tactica for 5th edition. It spans across multiple armies, so plenty of folks should have something juicy to read here. I wrote this after hearing the phrase 'refused flank' too many times on internet discussion forums, with barely a mention of any other deployment strategies. I got the impression
40k deployment categories were being limited to either a long line, a half empty deployment zone, or nothing at all, and I wanted to throw out a few other useful deployment methods to try out.
It's been my experience that winning a game of
40k is round-about 50% armylist, 20% deployment, 20% ingame-tactics and 10% luck. This tactica will deal with some of the deployment strategies in
40k and how they can be combined with a well-built list to gain the best part of a victory before either player has had a turn!
I'm also gonna talk about some of those deployment tactics that don't work so well, but a lot of players use anyway. This is to give a bit of contrast, to be complete, and to give newer players here a better idea of what they're doing.
The really-really-quick overview, though, is that any method of deploying that means your enemy's whole army will be effective all battle is a bad one. The whole aim of deployment is often about trying to catch your opponent fighting 100% of your army with 50% of theirs, or not being able to use their army at all during a few turns of the game.
(Ooh, and on that note, the first vs second turn debate is one that goes around and around. In 5th edition the basics of 1st vs 2nd turn are:
- You'll want second-turn if most of your army is deepstriking & outflanking.
- You'll want second-turn if you're playing 'dawn of war' deployment.
- The rest of the time, you'll usually want first-turn.
Of course there are plenty of exceptions, but this is a general rule.)
Ok, the formations:
1. Line
2. Empty flank ('refused flank'-
40k Terminology)
3. Hammer and anvil ('refused flank'- military terminology)
4. Split deployment
5. Bisection
6. Corner Fortress
7. Empty objective
8. No deployment
1.
Line formation:
Aka 'normal deployment'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: Adapting to circumstance
1st/2nd turn: Either
The most common and basic formation - also a bit rubbish.
The line doesn't literally look like a line of models. Rather, it is an army spread across it's own deployment zone, trying to optimise cover,
LOS, targets etc. In general the line formation is common because it can be employed in any battles without much thought, and is quite forgiving on player mistakes. The weaknesses of this formation more than outweigh it's versatility, but it's a great 'first deployment strategy' for beginners.
- Pros:
- - Covers mistakes: A good spread army will be able to cover itself well, filling any 'gaps' with nearby troopers. Consider, for example, that your objective-grabbing infantry is shot to pieces by a lucky ordnance template and a deepstriking unit. In many deployment methods this would require you to rethink your strategy. In the line formation, though, friends will be nearby enough to get there in a turn or so. It's lovely to have a friend, no?
- Cons:
- - The enemy will almost always be able to find a target in range and line of sight of their weapons. Their whole army will be effective all battle.
- - Any elite Close-combat troops will be able to get an early charge, and potentially stay in assault, safe from shooting, for quite a while. Even in 5th ed it's a very real fact that a squad of genestealers can run from one side of your army to the other during the course of the game, taking limited casualties from shooting.
- - Enemy attempts to 'overload' one flank or objective will crush anything you use to contest it, because your forces are so spread out. For example, an enemy that concentrates will decimate half your army as they drive 100% of their firepower through it in a turn or 2, Leaving them a lot of forces left to steamroll your 50%.
2.
Empty flank
Aka 'refused flank' (innacurate
40k terminology)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: Shooting armies, annihilation games.
1st/2nd turn: Second
An empty flank formation is often referred to as 'refused flank', but in fact you're not refusing anything. Rather, you're inviting the enemy to march up one flank, safe in the knowledge that there is nothing there for them to destroy.
The empty flank deployment is based around the fact that anything deployed opposite an empty flank is likely to have little part in the battle, since enemy troops are so far away.
In order to acheive an empty flank, a number of factors need to be planned. First of all, you need the second turn (or at least second deployment, stealing initiative is a bonus).
If you lose the turn-selecting dice roll, try asking really nicely.
Second, you need some decent blocking terrain in the middle of the board.
If both these criteria are met, you can go ahead and deploy pretty much your whole army on one flank, leaving the other bare. This leaves half the enemy army ineffective for a few turns.
The empty flank has become somewhat weaker with the advent of 5th ed, due to the run option, the mission/deployment types, and the abundance of deepstrike and outflanking armies. It's only so good nowadays (though I'd say it was only ever so-so in 4th).
The first half of the battle will normally consist of 100% of your army staring down at some 50% or so of theirs. This should be a pretty easy 1st half for you.
Pros:
- You don't really have to make your list around this - it's a strategy of opportunity.
- If the game is annihilation the second half of the battle should consist of about 75% of your army staring down at 50% or so of theirs. This should be a solid victory for you.
Cons:
- If the game is not annihilation, the second half of the battle should consist of your enemy taking most of the objectives and winning.
- Many armies don't deploy much of anything, and use deepstrike or outflank to close the distance.
- not working with a spearhead deployment roll, 2/3 mission rolls, and requiring second turn means it's pretty rare this is actually a viable strategy.
- Swarm armies can be vulnerable to pieplates if they bunch up too much.
3.
Hammer and anvil
aka Oblique order,
aka refused flank (military terminology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_order
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for - mainly for dangerous assault armies.
1st/2nd turn: Either
The hammer and Anvil setup is a simple but effective tool of maximising the abilities of dangerous assault armies, particularly those with slow-moving elements.
The idea behind the hammer and anvil is that you deploy extremely tough but relatively immobile units on one side of your deployment, usually opposite the main objective area. You will effectively be refusing your opponents army from breaching this flank. If you don't have tough units, then sticking really dangerous ones out of
LOS works the same - nobody wants to go to the genestealer teaparty behind those ruins.
On your other flank, you deploy fast, dangerous units. Ideally you're looking to drive the enemy into your 'anvil'. In
40k, though, due to the abundance of 'move or fire' weapons, many opponents will just sit there, in which case the hammer will act as a tie-up unit while Mr and Mrs Carnifex waddle up the board.
Pros:
- Versatility: It can be employed against highly mobile armies, and can be employed against pretty much any enemy setup.
Cons:
- Same as the 'line' deployment, above. It's a weak spread deployment, and will be smushed up by any tactics that divide forces or firepower. I love the word 'smushed'.
- Much harder to use in 'spearhead' deployment games.
4.
Split deployment (sacrificial flank)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: Stand-and-shoot armies
1st/2nd turn: Either
The sacrificial flank is a trick of the static gunline armies, and is a nasty one you should be on the watch for. In fact, it is probably the most powerful deployment tactic in all of
40k.
The setup involves bunching up half of an army in one corner of the board, and the other half of the army in another corner. This way, there is a massive 5' gap in between them. The two divisions of the army are organised so that one can shoot diagonally across the board (might need some indirect or long ranged weapons for this). The other division will be firing straight across the board. Note that 100% of the gunline army is firing at 50% of the attackers.
A good static gunline army is capable of killing perhaps half of your average army before it slogs it's way through 24-32" and reaches close combat. This is key. The idea is to direct *all* the gunline army's firepower from both halves at the enemy forces opposite *one* half, killing them before they reach assault. This means the gunline loses half it's army when assault begins. Oof course. However, now the surviving half of the assault army has to walk 60" under fire to reach the other half of the gunline army. An almost impossible task.
Add in mystics, ordnance templates, and 5th-edition rapidfire to counter-assault, and you're not even going to have much luck with outflanking or deepstrike.
(I first read it on the 'Igig 1st' imperial guard newsgroup, and after trying it, I was pretty impressed. Thanks Igig folks!)
So how do you beat such a deployment? The biggest weakness of the split deployment is in taking objectives. A good strategy to defeat it is to stay out of the fight until turn 3-4, at which point the gunline will have to start reaching for objectives. This means your army won't have to walk 80-something inches throughout the battle. Instead you'll be walking 20-something inches to get objectives, which is far more manageable. It's unfortunate that most static gunlines use indirect-fire weapons, such as basilisks, defilers, whirlwinds etc to encourage you to advance, and while it's difficult to ignore these barrages, it's your best chance for victory. Just remember - if their indirect fire weapons kill perhaps a quarter of your army, you still have 3 quarters to jump on objectives, and he probably only has a couple of units with the mobility to race you there.
Pros:
- There is no real counter to the sacrificial flank. There are counters during list-building, but expert stand-and-shoot commanders will typically have things in their army list to prevent deepstrike, block outflankers, and shoot vehicles (even landraiders). This lack of weaknesses means split deployment is a pretty solid strategy to build a list around.
- When used by a true gunline army, it will decimate assault armies. When up against a true gunline army, most lists will have to become assault armies since they can't outshoot a static gunline.
- Versatility: Can be used even in speaheard deployment missions (keeping one division in reserves)
cons:
- Objectives. any gunline forces near the center of deployment zones will act as a 'bridge' for assault, speeding up the enemy, and allowing a turn of safety from shooting while in assault. As such, the gunline will have no forces in the middle of the board, their whole army will be slow or static units sitting in board corners. Deepstrike or turbo-boost are the gunline's only ways to overcome this problem, and it's hard to overcome sufficiently while still having enough big guns in the gunline.
5.
Bisection (aka Phalanx)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: close-range armies
1st/2nd turn: Ideally first
Note: This is an expert deployment method, and it's use is inadvised except by competent players with lists designed to perform it.
Thanks to DakkaDakka for the article on mech sisters using bisection, which was originally written by stjohn70 ...
Most decent deployment strategies involve some method to trick your opponent into fighting your whole army with half of hers. The Bisection phalanx involves no tricks, your physically, forcefully part your opponent's army into two halves, then deal with each half seperately.
Parting methods can vary, but generally involves vehicles - a couple of deepstriking monoliths might do the job. A gang of droppods would likewise work. Sisters of battle can take a *lot* of smoke-launching rhinos and part an enemy to great effect, bringing their nasty firepower to bear on half of the enemy army while their rhinos work as a 'wall'.
The bisection can be a very powerful technique to to it's lack of counters, but is hard to acheive.
The idea is that you stick up a 'wall' in the middle of the enemy army, then deal with the two halves seperately. Essentially, it's the close-range equivalent of the stand-and-shoot split deployment.
Pros:
- Even the savviest player can't both see this coming *and* stop it - there's not a lot to do about 8 rhinos tank-shocking your men unless you're fielding loads of autocannons.
- Very good for objective based missions, as the phalanx player will have a column of armour parting the board.
Cons:
- It can be hard getting enough vehicles to part the enemy while still having enough points left over to fight off half an army, then the other half.
- Somewhat Terrain-dependant
- Must be planned *way* before the battle starts, in the listbuilding stage, so not a very dynamic one.
- Ineffective against vehicle-heavy lists
6.
Corner fortress
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: tank-heavy armies, NOT loot missions
1st/2nd turn: Either
A basic tactic that has become very effective in 5th edition. You deploy a bucket of tanks in one corner of the board, usually using the board edge and each other to deny side/rear armour hits, and block off outflankers. With the arrival of vehicle cover saves, your weak tanks at the front of the fortress will give cover saves to the strong tanks behind them, making your strong tanks really hard to kill. Even moreso if you deployed second, where many enemy heavy weapons will be out of range.
Add in some indirect fire to get the enemy moving, and a couple of contingencies for objective taking, and you've got a pretty strong strategy for almost all games.
First or second turn doesn't really matter - first turn gives you that extra turn of shooting, second turn means a good half of the enemy army will be reaching diagonally across the field to hit you. The only really bad start is getting first turn then having the initiative stolen, but this will be really rare, especially if you always choose second.
The reason this one is only good for tanks should be fairly obvious - cramming infantry into a board corner is going to get a lot of trouble from blasty pieplate template weaponry. Vehicles, on the other hand, are pretty safe from half-strength hits. You can stick them down hull-to-hull and plink away all battle!
The weakness, as usual for a static army, would be objectives, but in 5th edition it's not that big a big weakness at all. Annihilation missions are in your favour, because you will have good firepower and more resilience than your opponent. Take ground missions aren't bad - your opponent will probably play for a draw (and a boring battle), but with enough firepower and a couple of fast units/deepstrikers, you'll often be able to contest for a win. Loot missions are a little stacked against you, especially considering the danger of getting boxed in by your own wrecked tanks.
pros:
Creates a nearly impenetrable fortress of big guns.
cons:
Hard to get objectives in loot missions, requires smart list building to guard against deepstriking.
7.
Surrounding
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for: beating fast assault armies
1st/2nd turn: Either
A fairly simple strategy to use against assault armies. You deploy your army in your deployment zone, but leave out a couple of effective firepower units to deepstrike behind the enemy.
For example, if tyranids are charging forward to connect with marines, but then a terminator squad appears behind them with an assault cannon, the nids are faced with an awful dilemna - do they commit a killy unit (stealers etc) to running back for the terminators, thereby having no real part in the fight against the marine army, or do they ignore the terminators, and take an assault cannon all battle, not to mention giving up objectives at the end of the game.
Pros:
- Potentially allows you to shoot your assault opponent for a few turns, then get tied up in close combat for a turn or 2 without their killer units arriving in time to mop up.
Cons:
- Good deepstriking units with good guns can be somewhat expensive. Anything else will either be ignored, shot to pieces, or killed with cheap swarmy troops.
8.
No Deployment
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Useful for - deepstrike armies, dawn of war deployment
1st/2nd turn: Second
Take the second turn, don't deploy a thing. Battle begins at your end of turn 2. Good for objective rushing.
If a list is geared to rushing objectives late in the game, this can be a crucial advantage. Even if it isn't an objective-rush list, a deepstriking army is effectively getting the first turn and the last turn of the game.
Pros:
- Enemy is denied 1-2 turns, depending who gets first turn roll.
- Enemy is denied the chance to shoot you as you approach (kinda the point of deepstrike, but worth saying anyway. )
- You get one more turn than the enemy
Cons:
- Enemy can use those early turns to bunker up objectives or clog up table edges against outflanking.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
