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.

Personally I like to hit one flank hard and leave a couple of shooty units in the centre to do their thing, usually get sacraficed by the end of the game but my opponent usually overcommits forces to do this (usually only about 200-300pts of shooty units have 400-500 points thrown at them) Then you get to go around the side and gobble the rest up.

This works well with marines and has worked well with the limited experience I have with DE, not so much with Tau though.

Just wondering what broad strategies you all prefer to use?

I play guard, and tend to just hold the lines with my infantry squads. I flank my main formation with RR and a hellhound to one side, and sentinels and an armoured fist to the other. I keep all squads in proximity to my officers, and shoot alot, using my flanks to move and provide counter assualt/objective seizing movements.

Guard: I like to try a fake-out in deployment, and see which flank the opponent loads up on - then corner castle in the opposite end. I have to sacrifice some units for this, but oh well, it's Guard - life is cheap. Then I drop in the plas/melta/flamers suicide squads beside the most expensive appropriate enemy units.

Nids: March 4 MCs up the center with Raveners + leaping Warriors/Stealers/Hormagaunts hidden behind. Zoeys push-back in deployment across the whole board and lead units of gaunts up the flanks. Flyrant tries to roll a flank if I field him.

Death Guard: I tend to drive Rhinos with Assault / Havoc squads and Dreadnought up opposite flanks, while the big foot squads and my AV13 Defiler go up the center. I like to put Chains on a Daemonhost, give him a Plaguesword and put him in an Assault unit and use him for CC with the boosted strength until dead, then the GD can play for a turn or two before dying to instability. A flying or infiltrating Lord with a Manreaper gets a 2nd turn charge, locking up shooty units

We really do have to get another game in this decade dood. :p

I like to try and build my list for reactionary purposes. I find that about 70% of players are aggressive and will come to you. This usually works to my advantage and I can focus fire and and take out whole units at a time. I tend to favor mobile firepower armies so I can react and counter opposing strengths. Most missions seem to favor mobility anyway to claim objectives. Deepstrike and infiltrate have become almost essential in tournament play for the same reasons.

"Broad Strategies"

beer, lots of beer.

strategy depends on 3 things

 

.terrain

.mission

.opposing armies composition

 

punching a flank on a guard line and then walking the line  works well with my deathwing, but it doesn't work as well agaist a number of outher armies. and it also doesn't neccisarily work with my other armies either.

I like to set up lines of las/plas squads and deepstirke assault marines, dreads, termies, landspeeders behind enemy lines. I take out their big guns with my assault cannons on rear armour and mop up the rest of the squads with a pincer formation. I like to call it a hammer and anvil.

Strategy depends on 5 things... METT-T
Mission: What sort of mission is it? Staight out kill em, or objective based. What is the objective?
Enemy: What am I facing? Shooty guard dictates different strategies than dropping Deathwing.
Time: Is it random game length or six turns. Tournament game with 2 hour time limit where moving lots of models may be a hinderance or friendly game where it doesn't matter.
Terrain: What sort of terrain is there? Is there a large piece in the center that naturally divides sectors, or is it an open plain?
Tactics: What sort of tactics does the above dictate my opponent will try. What tactic counters that?

That said, I prefer to establish a base of fire and maneuver around it towards the objective (be it objective or enemy based). If objective based, I put firepower covering the objective, and move assault units to take and hold. If multiple objectives, I concede the minimum and concentrate on getting the majority. Often this allows me to face much less than the opponent's full army, as 2-400 points are off claiming objectives, leaving the rest of the fight unbalanced.

When people start falling into the "one tactic syndrome (OTS)" it makes it much easier to deal with them and dictate the pace of the battle from deployment on. If I know you like envelopments (refused flank being the most common), then I can deploy initially to dictate which side you will see as the most advantageous. The, in the latter stages of deployment, I simply deploy to deny that as a viable tactic. Now, you're stuck.

So, to sum up, I try to avoid any standard tactics, plan on having several based on the opponent's army type, and decide sometime between deployment and turn 5 which tactic I'm going to use.

<begin shameless plug for club site library>

http://www.warmongerclub.com/articles/pdeflo_formations01.htm

</plug>

With my Tau, I don't care about objetives, just concentrate on killing and then claiming the objetive. As for overall strategies, I go for enemy fast assault first, concentrate all firepower to kill them in first round. If this works, then I just start killing enemies from most dangerous (obliterators, heavy weapons, land riders...) and at best by turn 6, when the smoke clears, everyone on the other side is down. Its pretty damn hard to outgun tau, you know.