Astartes Tactical Treatise.

Vaaish · October 13, 2008

Before I start this tactica, I'd like to mention that this is the result of my study of the new codex and my observations both playing the game and listening to the tactical discussions in various forums as they relate to Space Marines. I've found that there are either very few or no full tactical treatises available that promote engaged discussion on the effective use of our armies. Most are simply a regurgitation of the codex descriptions with a few loadouts and added ideas but fail to even touch on our armies as a whole or, even worse, are simply "how do I use unit/weapon X". Because of this I've put this together and several things may be controversial or even contrary to accepted doctrine, but I ask that you read with an open mind and feel free to engage in meaningful discussion on the subject. This first segment is theoretical and deals only with underlying strengths and weaknesses of the Marine list as a whole and is the foundation for the ideology that will dictate the remainder of the tactica. Hopefully it will be followed soon with a small section on application of these principles using several tactical exercises as examples of using these principles on the battlefield. Following that I would like to continue with a look at mobile warfare and static defense using the marine army and then possibly look at roles of particular units within this framework. The end goal is to give a complete tactica that addresses the function of the army without dictating the form of the units that compose it.

Fundamental Principles

There are many different units and unit combinations available to the Marine army. Some combinations are more tailored to fight specific types of enemies while others are tailored to fight in a specific style. In then end, no matter the style or build you wish to play, you will need some level of tactical acumen to ensure that you achieve your objectives. In order to effectively apply your tactical skills on the table you must have a comprehensive understanding of the fundamental strengths and weaknesses of the army you have chosen to collect. This understanding allows you to accurately determine what weapons and units you should take and how best to employ them to achieve your objectives. Above all, remember that marines units do not fight in isolation; to survive you must provide support for any unit deployed offensively or defensively.

Marine Strengths

As with any force, Marines have a variety of strengths and weaknesses that make them unique and challenging to play. Before we continue further in this tactica, I would be remiss if this tactica failed to address these points in some detail. For every strength or weakness in the Marine army, there is a counter. For you, a counter will seek to minimize a weakness while, for your enemy, the counters will seek to minimize your strengths. So, then, it is imperative to understand not only how your enemy will exploit your weaknesses but also how he will minimize your strengths. To begin with, there are several aspects of the Space Marine army classified as strengths which I will split into three broad categories; equipment, stat line, and rules.

The Strength of Marine Equipment

The equipment to which a Marine army has access provides them with some of the most flexible and durable units due to the wide availability of the 3+ save. Even 2+ and invulnerable saves are relatively common in the average Marine list. Beyond this, all troop models except terminators are armed with bolt pistols, frag, and krak grenades which make Marine troops capable of nearly any role on the field from killing armor to assaulting the enemy after shooting them even before upgrades that augment these roles.

These attributes will no doubt make a new commander unduly confident in the superiority of his units and even give pause to a seasoned enemy commander who encounters them. Because of this, care should be taken to understand your men are not invincible. Advantage in equipment can be countered quite easily by weight of fire and specialized units. You should expect your opponent to attempt to deny your armor with low AP weapons or simply overwhelm it by firing so many rounds that you will statistically fail enough saves to destroy the unit. You should also expect for your enemy to attempt to counter your units with specialized units that are capable of easily out out fighting your units. Such threats should be dealt with as quickly as possible because even a single model reaching assault will be devastating to your unit by preventing you from shooting and substantially reducing your firepower.

As a final note on Marine equipment, I must briefly mention Marine armor since the tough armor 14 of the Land Raider deserves special mention. Typically few of these vehicles will be fielded and your enemy will exploit this by attempting to remove them from play as quickly as possible. However, if used with care, they can be a very effective and durable boon to a Marine army with their capability to engage two separate targets or move at top speed and still fire.

The Strength of the Marine Stat Line

In addition to their equipment, Marines are given a better stat line than similar units in other armies enhancing their effectiveness primarily in regards to shooting, leadership, and toughness.

1. Shooting

With all but scouts hitting what they aim at 66% of the time, Marines are better than average at shooting. What this means is that a unit of marines firing roughly the same number of rounds as a similar enemy unit will hit more often and likely do more damage. Against T3 enemies this boils down to needing approximately two full squads in rapid fire range to wound sixteen guard equivalent models. With saves, you will kill only eight.

Despite the strength of shooting, two things should be apparent immediately: your units cannot operate without support and high body count can negate strong shooting. Your opponent knows this and will attempt to reduce your effectiveness by fielding larger squads. A second way he will attempt to compensate for your higher shooting skill will be to move quickly into assault to reduce the number of rounds you can put into his unit. Also expect your enemy to negate the Marine shooting advantage by not presenting targets your weapons can affect either by blocking line of sight to units or attempting to keep them out of range of your unit.

2. Leadership

A second strength of the Marine stat line is their leadership. Marine units are more than capable of remaining useful on the field despite heavy casualties and many times will remain in combat until the unit is completely wiped out. Expect your enemy to negate this by attempting to overwhelm a unit and destroy it outright or cause enough wounds that your leadership is reduced sufficiently to fail checks in combat. Avoid this by reducing enemy units to the point that they will be unable to cause significant damage when they return fire or assault.

3. Toughness

The final aspect of the Marine stat line that must be noted is their toughness. This is a critical advantage in that it reduces the number of hits that result in wounds and thus the number of armor saves that must be made. Combined with the Marines armor saves, it creates very durable units that can withstand surprising amounts of firepower. Your enemy knows this and will counter your toughness by taking high strength weapons for better odds of wounding your units. He also will attempt to counter your toughness in the same way he deals with your armor save by firing as many rounds as possible into your unit to reach a high statistical probability of placing a significant number of wounds on your unit.

The Strength of Marine Rules

A Marine army also has the benefit of several special rules that increases their capabilities and strengthens the army as a whole. The primary focus of these rules is to first get marines quickly into optimal range and second keep them there.

1. Drop Pod Assault

The first rule is the drop pod assault and provides you with a quick means of closing with an enemy early in the game and preventing them from using range or even movement to avoid the onslaught. Opponents will plan for this with tight deployment to ensure that they can bring enough firepower onto your attacking squads to make you think twice about putting them in range. They will also attempt to prevent you from eliminating critical units by placing disposable units between the main force and the potential assault to reduce the effect on their combat capabilities. If you determine your opponent has taken a defensive posture it is best to land on objectives or choke points forcing him to react to your deployment rather than attempting to weather the massed firepower of his army.

2. And They Shall Know No Fear

Once you have arrived on the field, two other rules come into play to keep your Marines where you want them. And They Shall Know No Fear (ATSKNF) provides you the ability to regroup with squads below half strength and immediately move and shoot. There is no real method to counter this rule other than placing an enemy unit within 6” of your squad to prevent them from attempting to regroup. This rule alone means that marine squads are capable of staying on the field and in combat until completely destroyed.

3. Combat Tactics

ATSKNF alone is useful; however, combined with Combat Tactics, it makes Marine units more difficult to trap by allowing them to fall back from heavy fire or an assault and still be capable of moving or shooting the next turn. As with ATSKNF, your opponent will have no real counter to this rule beyond minimizing the number of morale checks you take.

Marine Weaknesses

With these strengths and possible enemy counters in mind, a guard must be kept to prevent your army’s capabilities from being blunted. Beyond this, an effective commander must work to minimize any weaknesses that his enemy may seek to exploit. Marines are capable of almost any role due to their stat lines and equipment but this capability comes at a price making even the basic Marine troops some of the most expensive in the game. It is both this expense and versatility that expose several prime weaknesses in the Marine force to exploitation. While there are other aspects that can be considered disadvantages in a Marine force, the small size of a typical Marine army, the short optimal range of a majority of Marine weapons, and the propensity to waste combat potential are the three primary points that must be monitored throughout the engagement. The first two are due to the nature of the army itself while the last is a command failure.

The Weakness of Force Size

The flexibility that Marines enjoy comes at the price of high cost per model for many Marine units. This cost limits the size of a Marine force and it is not uncommon for Marine armies to be outnumbered on the field, sometimes considerably so. Since numerical superiority is not reliable, Marine armies are unable to maintain battles with high attrition for any period of time. Given the small size of your force to begin with this will severely limit your combat potential and quickly relinquish the initiative to the enemy. Steps must be taken to prevent battles of attrition or, at the very least, to minimize Marine casualties.

To effectively employ your forces, you must achieve local superiority over your enemy. This is done by concentrating your forces, identifying and attacking weak points, reducing enemy retaliatory capabilities, and maintaining the initiative. In order to attain local numerical superiority, you must bring the maximum amount of force to bear on the smallest section of your opponent’s forces. This is called your force concentration. Ideally the target will be a squad or two that is detached from the main enemy force that can be overwhelmed with little threat of retaliation. If there is no obvious point to attack determine areas of the field he must travel through that will not allow him to return fire with the majority of his force.

If you are unable to completely eliminate or break the target units, attempt to damage them to the extent that the return fire they can bring to bear will be insufficient to seriously reduce you unit strength. Once you have successfully eliminated the target continue to force him to react by pressing the assault if more elements of his force are vulnerable or retreating should he have the capability to bring substantial fire to bear on your units. Do not take any action that will allow him to overwhelm portions of your force.

The Weakness of Range

Overwhelming your enemy piecemeal is essential to maintaining effective combat strength. This is even more important given the optimal fighting range of ninety percent of your force is within twelve inches meaning that to do real damage you will need to be close and you will need to hit with enough force to eliminate or seriously cripple your target so your enemy cannot respond. Leaving a sufficiently undamaged enemy unit within shooting or assault range will result in heavy casualties to your force at worst and at best grant your enemy time to escape.

The most effective method to overcome short range weapons is to stay mobile and use this mobility to close to optimal range. Initially, drop pods will provide this mobility although once deployed your forces are fairly static. Because of this and the fragile nature of transports, a mix of methods is more effective at ensuring you can hit your enemy with the most force possible for the duration of the match. Failure to maintain mobility will quickly force engagements at or beyond the range of the majority of your weapons greatly reducing your effective combat strength and allowing the enemy to further exploit the small size of your force.

The Weakness of Wasted Combat Potential

While the previous two weaknesses are fairly obvious and require little in-depth discussion to minimize them effectively, the final weakness, waste of combat potential, is something of a more complex issue due to the flexibility and customization of which Marine units are capable. Unlike the previous points this weakness is solely the result of the Marine commander’s mindset and requires shift in tactical doctrine to correct. This waste comes in two forms, waste of combat power and over-concentration of combat power.

1. Waste of Combat Power

Because the Marine stat line makes them capable of many roles, Marines are more susceptible to waste of combat power than other units because they will never use all of the roles they are capable of performing. This means you must choose which role will waste the least amount of combat power. For example, a Marine tactical squad can outshoot a Tau firewarrior squad one on one but because there is a wider gap in close combat capabilities, Marines will waste less combat power by assaulting the firewarriors.

Marines will usually find that shooting is the least wasteful use of combat power and must be careful to avoid wasting the firepower of available units by failing to use each unit to the best effect of the weapon carried by a majority of the squad. This mindset is most easily seen in the use of tactical squads. Much emphasis is placed on assigning squads particular roles and equipping them for either anti-infantry or anti-vehicle duty and focuses undue emphasis on heavy weapons. Because of the restriction on movement needed to use heavy weapons much of the squad’s combat power is wasted by applying the majority weapon, bolters, to targets out of range or using them against targets they cannot affect.

2. Over-concentration of Combat Power

The second place this mindset can be observed is in the over-concentration of force. While it is necessary to concentrate your units to form an effective force, putting too many units in close proximity or concentrating too much firepower on an enemy unit is just as problematic to the combat power of your force as wasting the squads’ weapons because it does not allow you to hit the enemy with optimal force and hampers effective redeployment by locking forward units in place or leaving other targetable enemy units unscathed. A balance must be achieved by concentrating only the exact amount of force required to overwhelm the enemy at the chosen point without wasting the offensive combat power of your force.

Final Thoughts

Much of the effort required to minimize these weaknesses is linked to your force concentration. High unit concentration will go far toward attaining local numerical superiority and ensuring overwhelming force can be applied; however, waste of combat potential is an almost purely cerebral consideration and will require a deeper understanding of battlefield dynamics to identify and compensate for. If these weaknesses are understood and consideration is given when planning a force to reduce their effect, it will become much easier to play to the strengths of the Marine force. Ask yourself if your proposed force is capable of quick, concentrated deployment or redeployment into optimal range and if you have sufficient capability to eliminate an enemy unit even while moving. If your core unit selection fails either of these questions you should think very carefully about the foundation of your force before continuing.

Application of Fundamental Principles

This section is a review of the principles discussed in the first part of the tactica. Instead of rote memory and regurgitation, two game scenarios are presented where you will be given several options for deployment and attack. Following the example each option will be discussed and the correct choice explained. The goal is to engrain the underlying tactical foundation from the preceding discussion before building on it in the following portion of the tactica.

Exercise One: Deployment

Marine List:

HQ: Librarian, Smite and Gate 150

Elite: Sternguard 10x, 2x combi-melta 260

Troop: Tactical squad 10x, Multi-melta, plasma gun, drop pod, beacon 225

Troop: Tactical squad 10x, missile, plasma gun, drop pod, beacon 225

Troop: Tactical squad 10x, missile, flamer, Rhino 205

1500

Tau List:

HQ: Shas'el Commander (Plasma + Missile Pod + Multi-tracker) 87

Elite: 1x XV8 Fireknife (Plasma + Missile Pod + Multi-tracker) 62

Elite: 2x XV8 Fireknife (Plasma + Missile Pod + Multi-tracker) 124

Elite: 5x stealthsuits (1x Fusion blaster) 152

Troop: 11 Fire warriors +1 Shas'ui w/ rifles (Devilfish w/ D-Pod) 215

Troop: 10x Kroot 70

Heavy: Hammerhead (Railgun + Burst Cannon + D-Pod + Multi-tracker) 165

1500

Scenario: You are fighting a largely mechanized Tau force and have deployed your rhino squads along your board edge to advance on the objective. The Tau player has deployed his forces in transports between an impassible cliff and the board edge with kroot protecting them from assault in a canyon leading to the objective in the left-center of the board. The canyon ends in a small mouth before opening into a flat plain. You have first turn. After analyzing the provided lists and the diagram below, where do you deploy your forces?

http://www.digitalequinox.com/wip/treatise/example1.jpg

Option A: Deploy drop pods within rapid fire range of his force to make scatter free zone and gate the sternguard squad in for support.

Option B: Deploy drop pods to cover the mouth of the canyon.

Option C: Deploy drop pods to take the objective.

Exercise One Discussion:

Option A: This option wastes little combat potential by putting a large portion of your force into optimal range and shooting on the first turn. However, with the Tau deployed in transports and kroot deployed in assault range they have the ability to tie up or destroy half of your force while taking very little damage in return. This is because you do not have the strength to hit their lines with sufficient force to ensure that the Tau are unable to effectively return fire. Option A present the smallest odds of success because the effect of force size outweighs the minimization of wasted combat potential.

Option B: This option wastes some combat potential by not maximizing your firepower. It trades this initial capability for better positioning that allows you to better minimize your low numbers and prevents the Tau from exploiting their own range advantage. It also allows you to fire on Tau vehicles jumping to the objective and enemy forces attempting to march to the objective. A deployment here is in range of the rhino squads’ movement allowing them to reinforce the units arriving by drop pod. Finally this location allows the Sternguard more flexibility in picking where they attack based on the Tau movement and Marine shooting. This option is the best balance between the strengths and weaknesses of the Marine army.

Option C: This is the conservative choice. You hold the objective and deny the Tau a place to land when jumping, but waste combat potential and range while waiting for the enemy to march to your position. It also allows the Tau force to engage beyond your weapons range and forces you to move away from the objective to engage. Finally this presents the Tau lines with two small forces if your rhino squads are cut off from reinforcing units holding the objective.

Exercise Two: Engagement

Marine List Alpha (Blue Force):

HQ: Librarian, Smite and Gate 100

Elite: Sternguard 9x, 1x combimelta, drop pod 265

Troop: Tactical squad 10x, multi-melta, flamer, drop pod, beacon 215

Troop: Tactical squad 10x, missile, flamer, Rhino 205

1000

Marine List Bravo (Red Force):

HQ: Master of the Forge, Conversion Beamer 120

Troop: Tactical Squad 10x, Plasma Cannon, Plasma Gun, Rhino, Extra Armor 235

Fast Attack: Landspeeder, Multi-Melta 60

Elite: Dreadnought, TL Autocannon, TL Lascannon 145

1000

Scenario: It is turn three; Marine Force Alpha has consolidated around the hilltop objective with a rhino squad, sternguard, and one drop tactical squad none of which are in combat squads. It is Alpha’s turn and reserve rolls were failed preventing the arrival of the final tactical squad. Force Bravo has chosen to use combat squads and has positioned his heavy weapons squads with dreadnoughts and HQ to target the objective. Bravo’s remaining squads have disembarked from rhinos and are in position to assault the objective next turn supported by the plasma cannons, dreadnoughts, and land speeders. You are in command of Force Alpha. Examine the diagram below. What action do you take?

http://www.digitalequinox.com/wip/treatise/example2.jpg

Option A: Target Force Bravo’s assaulting troops with your units and ignore his vehicles.

Option B: Target Force Bravo’s vehicles with your heavy weapons and his troops with the sternguard.

Option C: Fire your bolt pistols and charge his units, gate the librarian and sternguard to target his firebase.

Exercise Two Discussion:

Unlike exercise one, all three options will work, but they work to different degrees of efficiency. This exercise is primarily about target priority and artificially increasing the threat level of your units to make an opponent to ignore the remainder of your forces. It is a mirror match which makes it challenging to find the best solution.

Option A: This is the least acceptable of the choices available. With the small size of Force Bravo’s assault section, you troops supported by the sternguard will have little difficulty destroying it. This leaves you in full view of his firebase while granting them a turn or two to deplete your lines while the speeders contest the objective. It may work, but you will take more losses than needed.

Option B: This option will ensure that the threats to the objective are eliminated, but it still leaves you under attack from his firebase. Since you don’t have room to spread out your forces, his templates will be inflicting heavy casualties on your forces. In order to deal with the firebase, you will have to abandon your position around the objective in order to engage his remaining units.

Option C: This is the strongest option because it locks your units in combat preventing him from targeting them. The gating sternguard can remove one of his dreadnoughts or one of the plasma cannon combat squads while reducing the conversion beams to low strength. On the following turn, you can reinforce the sternguard with the final drop pod or retreat to the objective. This does put your sternguard at greater risk, but it takes pressure away from your forces holding the objective and prevents Bravo from using his weapons to their best effect.

General Astartes Tactical Doctrine

As with most forces in the 40k universe, the Space Marines are capable of executing several different tactical doctrines. These can be split into two broad categories, mobile and static, which I will be discussing at some length. On the surface both are fairly simple to grasp. A mobile force is capable of moving around while a static force is deployed in a stationary manner. These two doctrines are not exclusive and hybrid variations may also be employed.

Static Warfare

This is the simplest of the two categories and the one most likely to be used to defend objectives. It quite simply involves placing your forces in a particular patch of ground and leaving them there with minimal movement, waiting for your enemy to come into the kill zone. Most often this is found in the gun line style of play where the commander relies on an abundance of heavy firepower to prevent his lines from being breached. If vehicles and transport are employed they are used to funnel enemy units or block enemy advance rather than reposition friendly units. This style is very easy master because it requires little tactical thought other than which enemy to shoot first.

Because Marines must overcome their low numbers by force concentration and they enjoy good shooting skills, static warfare plays to Marine strengths at first glance. It appears to be an effective tactic due to most available forces being concentrated and capable of supporting any other point in the line. Looking more closely, though, the static posture opens the Marine weaknesses of range and wasted combat potential to easy exploitation.

1. Static Warfare and Range

As we have determined in the foundational principles of this tactica, Marines are most effective at ranges under twelve inches. By deploying in a static posture, Marines are unable to minimize this weakness effectively, instead relying on the advance of enemy forces to close distance while attacking with a fraction of their combat potential. In addition to this, especially against opponents like Tau, the enemy does not need to close into the Marines’ weapons range to engage.

2. Static Warfare and Wasted Combat Potential

To build upon the previous section, failure to minimize the weakness of range leads to the exposure of a second, more serious problem by wasting combat potential. With a static line, more of the game is spent waiting to shoot or shooting very little. Over time this amounts to a large number of potential shots wasted for every weapon that is not in range or unable to target an enemy unit each turn. Not only this, but the close grouping of your forces opens you to over-concentration as well making it impossible for your full combat strength to be brought to bear on the target when it does come into range.

Applied Static Warfare

Despite the shortcomings of static warfare, some discussion must be given to exploring the practice of static warfare in a Marine force for the sake of completeness. There are two methods I wish to touch on in this section; dismounted and drop pod deployed.

1. Dismounted Static Warfare

When using dismounted static doctrine, the force is placed in formation inside of the deployment zone so that it is able to cover approaches to the position and engage targets at the greatest distance possible. It will likely not take transport in an attempt to put more bodies on the field. Such a force is more resilient than a typical Marine force but is extremely slow to reposition and susceptible to breaking apart if units run to compensate for slow movement when dismounted. A dismounted force is especially disadvantaged when objectives must be captured as it lacks the speed to effectively engage and time to stop in order to use heavy weapons. A Marine force using dismounted tactics will focus on high body count and large numbers of heavy weapons. It will emphasize devastator squads over vehicles and will also include some form of countercharge unit to delay the enemy and buy more time for the gun line. Because of the ponderous nature of this force it impossible to employ tactics such as refused flank or feints effectively. It should be noted that high point games allow this method of static deployment to initiate an implacable advance by overwhelming the enemy with bodies as it closes to optimal range.

2. Drop Pod Deployed Static Warfare

The second application of static warfare is somewhat of a paradox since, initially, it appears to be a super-mobile force. In reality, a drop pod is a means of delayed deployment that ignores pre-game deployment zones. It provides a degree of support and cover but does not grant the benefits of a truly mobile force. This branch places most if not all units in drop pods and lands them on objectives. Once in position these units and drop pods employ the same methods as their dismounted brothers by forming a static gun line waiting for the enemy to come within range. More offensive applications of this method would deploy the pods within optimal range of the enemy force preventing waste of combat power. Combined with sufficient numbers and the drop pod assault rule, this can be a potent method of attack though risky if the enemy is prepared or too few pods are able to land in range.

Individual Units and Static Warfare

Despite the shortcomings of applying static doctrine to the army as a whole, it is extremely useful when used with particular units that need to be stationary to achieve maximum effectiveness. Units such as devastator squads, thunderfire cannons, and whirlwinds are all good examples of units that should remain stationary through much of the engagement and will be discussed in depth later in the tactica.

Summary

To review, while initially there is less risk because your force will stay intact longer in a static posture, this benefit is also granted to your opponent in addition to control of the field allowing him to execute his plans largely unmolested. Although it can be made to work army wide and has definite uses with specific units, a static deployment opens your force to exploitation on the points of range and wasted combat potential and it is not well suited to the Marine army as a whole.

Mobile Warfare

Mobile warfare is much more complex in execution than static warfare. On the simplest level it entails providing transport for all infantry units to hit enemy forces and quickly redeploy to other fronts to keep the enemy off balance as they attempt to compensate for the constant shifts in force concentration. Similar to the static posture, mobile warfare seeks to reduce the Marine weakness of low numbers and plays to the strength of Marine shooting. Unlike a static posture, forces that employ mobile warfare are less likely to suffer from the exploitation of short range and wasted combat potential. This is not to say that mobile warfare is without flaws. Efforts to mechanize the entire force reduce the number of units fielded and open the weakness of force size and concentration to enemy exploitation.

1. Mobile Warfare and Force Size

Mobile warfare leaves the Marine force more susceptible to the weakness of force size. Although it is necessary for the successful execution of mobile warfare, the added cost of transport and other vehicles capable of providing mobile support while advancing is quite costly. This reduces the number of units a mechanized force is able to field magnifying the effects of the already small Marine force.

2. Mobile Warfare and Force Concentration

Force concentration is the second weakness to which Marine armies using mobile warfare are susceptible. Because the ability of a mobile force to remain mobile is linked to the survivability of its transport and the majority of Marine transports are fragile, their loss can render a mechanized Marine force incapable of effectively concentrating units. Should sufficient transport capacity be eliminated, such a force will revert to static warfare.

Applied Mobile Warfare

Mobile warfare can be one of the most difficult styles of warfare to master but the capability to quickly adjust to the tides of battle is invaluable. Because this style is unforgiving and requires a commander to plan further in advance with good understanding of the capabilities of his enemy, it may not be well suited to new players. There are again two methods I would like to discuss in the following paragraphs, transport based mobile warfare and, a form new to Marines, hyper-mobile warfare.

1. Transport Based Mobile Warfare

This form of mobile warfare is based around a fully mechanized Marine force. All units that can are equipped with Rhino transports or razorbacks. Jump pack equipped units, fast moving land speeders or bikes take the fast attack slots while land raiders or predators are taken as heavy support. This army is based completely around overloading enemy anti-armor units with vehicles. It can be highly effective if your enemy has a balanced force because mounted units negate his anti-infantry weapons while he is overwhelmed with vehicles they can’t be destroyed before sufficient forces hit his lines. Assault based tactics are common with this army.

This form of heavy mechanization is extremely costly and especially so if vehicles take upgrades to ensure they are capable of reaching enemy lines and disgorging their cargo. Great care must be taken that you strike where your units will quickly break the enemy and focus fire is essential to success. This force cannot be indecisive; it must attack and do so quickly before enemy fire reduces both its mobility and combat power.

2. Hyper-mobile Warfare

Hyper-mobile warfare is a subset of mobile warfare that relies on the capabilities of the unit itself instead of transports to quickly project and concentrate force. It is not necessarily cheaper than a mechanized force but it is more mobile. No unit in this force will move less than twelve inches allowing them to quickly consolidate around objectives and enemy formations with maximum firepower.

A force of this kind will be centered on one or two librarian HQ choices and multiple jump equipped squads. The librarian will be equipped with gate, granting the attached squad the capability to target nearly one third of the board with rapid-fire weapons. To aid him, a squad of scouts with a land speeder storm can be used to disrupt enemy operation and affect quick redeployment. Much of the remainder of the force will be built around jump equipped squads like assault marines and vanguard veterans or bikes. These Marine bike units provide additional durability with their augmented stats and are capable of providing mobile firepower in support of other units providing a viable alternative to jump infantry. Land raider transports can even be employed because they are capable of 12” movement while still firing a single weapon, providing fast and durable transport for remaining squads.

With the capability to move two squads 24” per turn and all others 12” this method of deployment is a fearsome adversary. Against static foes it is capable of focused fire from multiple squads in rapid-fire range in the first turn supported by the librarians with jump troops and heavy armor not far behind still able to provide supporting fire. It can field a large number of bodies capable of rapid redeployment independent of transport making it very durable. The number of models fielded and speed at which they can engage mitigates the weaknesses of force size and range leaving the commander to prevent a waste of combat potential.

Summary

Mobile warfare is difficult to master but very rewarding when played competently. It must be used with precision and care to avoid entrapment. Despite its great strengths and capabilities in the hands of a skilled commander, this philosophy leaves open several weaknesses in the Marine force that must be watched in order to succeed. If fully mechanized, care must be taken to protect the transports that are the key to maintaining momentum. If a hyper-mobile force is fielded it will be susceptible to scattering making force concentration difficult to achieve especially at critical junctures.

Hybrid Warfare

The final tactical philosophy that I believe is relevant and necessary to discuss is a combination of static and mobile stances. This method seeks a balance between each extreme in order to gain the advantages of each style while minimizing the weaknesses of each. I believe this method provides the Marine army with the greatest range of capabilities and durability on the field. Even hyper-mobile lists are enhanced by use of a hybrid structure. Since this form is a melding of the preceding discussion there are no specific weaknesses outside of those previously discussed.

Applied Hybrid Warfare

A Marine army fielding a hybrid force will be equipped with a combination of drop pods, transports, and armor. Care must be taken to ensure that sufficient numbers are present in the subordinate doctrine to strengthen the force as a whole. Too few elements of the subordinate doctrine will instead serve to dilute the force as roles become confused because neither doctrine is capable of fixing the weakness of the other. No matter which doctrine is dominate, these hybrid forces fall into two categories following the doctrines that they are based upon, static oriented and mobile oriented.

1. Static Oriented Hybrid Warfare

A force that is founded on static doctrine may opt to take several transport vehicles to include a mobile element that alleviates the problems of range and wasted combat potential. Alternatively such a force may include elements of drop pod based static forces to combat the range problem and soften or delay the enemy before they engage the main force. Such a force may also include fast fire support units like land speeders to harass enemy units closing on the main force or heavy armor like land raiders to provide both transport and mobile support to the static core.

2. Mobile Oriented Hybrid Warfare

This form of hybrid force seeks to add durability to the mobile force by anchoring them with static units. Most often this will be done using drop pods because they complement the already fast moving elements by allowing a commander to place the static units where they are most needed. Hyper-mobile forces are most helped by this addition because of their reliance on deep strike rules. A drop pod arriving turn one with a locator beacon provides a fixed point to ensure that librarians gating units may do so without fear of scatter allowing for reliable movement and adds extra firepower to the attack. Alternatively these pods may contain units suited specifically for static warfare such as a devastator squad or thunder fire cannon.

Summary

Hybrid warfare is probably the best application of the Marine army list because it provides a range of options that take advantage of the flexible nature of Marine units. This allows Marine units to play to their strengths while mitigating the weaknesses of a force based on a single doctrine. Despite the potential of such a hybrid force, care must be taken to ensure that the sum is truly greater than its parts. Failure to do this will result in a force that highlights the weaknesses it attempts to avoid.

Army Considerations

Part three of this tactica deals with a more immediate issues well know to any 40k player, namely the art of list construction. Because there are a variety of applications and the complete discussion of every permutation would be well beyond the scope of even the most comprehensive tactica, I will instead focus on what is foundational to a successful list no matter which method of warfare you employ or on what units you choose to rely. To that end I see three brackets that are the foundation for marine firepower; 9/2, 4/5, and 7/4.

9/2 – The Lascannon

The Lascannon is the heaviest firepower that a marine army can take to the field in any numbers. While there are other alternatives, this weapon is the most universal and reliable in the Marine inventory. There doesn’t seem to be a point where there are too many lascannons and their utility ranges from taking down vehicles to popping special characters or heavily armored infantry. The AP2 means that it ignores both armor and feel no pain while S9 ensures that most things are wounded or killed outright. No Marine army would be complete without deploying several lascannons.

4/5 – The Bolter in All Forms

The bolter isn’t the most powerful weapon, but it is the most plentiful weapon in the Marine arsenal. The fact that it is the primary weapon of your basic troops alone ensures it will be fielded in greater numbers than more powerful options. Its high AP and lower strength make it a challenging weapon to use but rapid fire salvos put out a withering amount of firepower. This weapon in all its forms is the foundation of Marine firepower and care should be taken to employ it to the best effect.

7/4 – The Autocannon

The last weapon I see as foundational to the Marine army is the autocannon. The number of rounds combined with the range they can be delivered presents a brutal support weapon for the short range bolters. Its high strength provides a good deterrent against monstrous creatures and light armor alike while its range complements that of the lascannon. This is important because it allows concentration of force without the need to physically place units in close proximity to achieve it allowing your short range troops more freedom of movement.

Discussion of Supporting Arguments

Some may wonder why I have not discussed actual units in the section on army list considerations and it would be a valid concern. Because of the complexity and number of options available, an in depth discussion on the utility and application of each would be painfully tedious. Instead I believe that distilling the basis of Marine firepower to the most basic level will allow readers the freedom to field a wide variety of lists while adhering to the tenants of Marine strength and tactical philosophy that create the core of a successful force. The first two weapons I’ve selected to form the core of Marine firepower fills a particular role while the third augments the roles of the other two. The lascannon is widely available and provides anti-vehicle firepower. The bolter is standard and provides anti-infantry while the autocannon can support both as needed. Second, all three were chosen based on reliability within the framework of Marine shooting. None of these weapons relies on the scatter of templates making them reliable in their performance. Finally, these weapons were chosen because all can be fielded together in sufficient numbers for a reasonable price giving the player more flexibility in equipping the remainder of his force. Should he feel more anti-vehicle is needed, multimeltas, melta guns, or missile launchers can be added. The same is true if more anti-infantry is needed freeing him to field heavy bolters, plasma guns, or plasma cannons without compromising the core capabilities of his list.

Summary

A Marine army based around a solid core of the lascannon, bolter, and autocannon will be well equipped for dealing with almost any foe. To further augment a particular aspect, the player may customize units to his taste without sacrificing his core capabilities within the bounds of the foundation principles of this tactica. Because there are difficult units and concepts to take into account when putting together a force, I would like to spend the remainder of the tactica discussing these problem units and difficult concepts.

Problem Units

There are three units that are most troublesome to Marine commanders, Tactical squads, Devastator squads, and Land Speeders. Each of these units comes up time and again with requests for information on load out, size, viability, and the list continues. Because they are one of the two normal troop choices, we will begin with the Tactical squad.

Tactical Squads

Applying the foundational principles discussed at the start of this treatise, tactical squads suffer from short range and wasted combat potential. Their bolters are only capable of 12” range should the squad move and the purchase of a heavy weapon draws the player to leave the squad stationary, wasting the majority of its firepower. This temptation to leave the squad stationary at range is strengthened by the classification of tactical squads as troops and the need to preserve them to capture objectives. Finally, the variety of options available to these squads further confuses their battlefield role making their effective use a daunting prospect.

Much of the problems surrounding the use of tactical squads are related to the heavy weapon. Kept at range to use this weapon, the threat level of the tactical squad is greatly reduced placing undue pressure on the remainder of the force. Because the enemy can ignore the tactical squad in favor of more immediate threats, he can focus on eliminating more effective and specialized Marine units forcing tactical squads to become the primary heavy weapons platforms. This creates the skewed perspective that the role of the tactical squad is to use the heavy weapon because it lasts the longest and many times is all that is still available. Instead, these heavy weapons should be thought of as redundancies should the primary platform be eliminated allowing the Marine force to continue operations although with reduced efficiency. To that end, the heavy weapon should only be used if 1) The unit is holding an objective or has completed its mission, 2) The primary weapon platform is unavailable, 3) Using the weapon will prevent the immediate loss of another unit, or 4) The target is too good to pass up.

If the tactical squad’s heavy weapon is not its primary role, what is the squad’s true function? By removing the heavy weapon, this role is greatly clarified. Although little has changed, mentally, it becomes more attractive to keep the tactical squad mobile and close with enemy to use your weapons to the best effect. This changes the perceived role of the tactical squad from a support role to a shock role and dramatically increases their threat to enemy units by their proximity, forcing your opponent to deal with the tactical squad instead of your specialized units.

A tactical squad on foot is not well equipped to close with an enemy force making it impossible to reduce the waste of combat potential or range unless the enemy chooses to come to you. In order to compensate for both range and combat potential, some form of transport is necessary. Which form is largely up to the personal preference of the player though drop pods tend to allow quicker deployment and combat squads can make razorbacks a tempting option.

Tactical squads have great flexibility due to the wide range of equipment they are capable of fielding. This makes it difficult to decide what should be taken and if it will have utility on the field. Because most of this equipment provides redundancy in your force, it is best to identify what areas you feel the army as a whole is deficient in and take weapons that can cover these aspects if needed. As a final note, tactical squads benefit from combat squads. This allows a tactical squad to waste less of its combat potential if it chooses to fire the heavy weapon but opens the squad to other difficulties. This concept will be more thoroughly discussed later in the tactica.

Devastator Squads

The second unit that can be problematic to use effectively is the Devastator squad. While not typically prone to the problem of range, these squads will more likely fall victim to wasted combat potential. Given the added cost to equip these squads, this is a serious issue. This wasted potential in devastator squads can be traced to two factors, the size of the squad and squad movement.

The strength of a devastator squad is that it is able to field four heavy weapons and can do so without the prerequisite ten men needed to field one such weapon in tactical squads. Fielding five men and four heavy weapons means that you will only waste one bolter by sitting still to use those heavy weapons thus reducing wasted combat potential. Many times this efficiency is wasted by inflating the squad’s numbers to add durability and help prevent the loss of the heavy weapons carried. This creates a serious waste of combat potential and increases the cost per shot.

The second hindrance to the effective use of devastator squads is that in order to effectively use the heavy weapons carried, the devastator squad must remain stationary.

If their initial deployment is not adequate, transport must be used to minimize the time the devastator squad will be unable to fire. In this regard, drop pods make excellent deployment tools because they place devastator squads where needed without the need to move. This allows devastators to use their heavy weapons for more of the game. Razorbacks are also excellent options because they provide additional heavy weapons to augment the squad’s firepower especially if the unit uses combat squads.

Devastator squads are extremely powerful when tooled to a particular task, be it anti-armor or anti-infantry. Fully upgraded these squads are also very expensive and wasteful of combat potential by confusing mobile short ranged weapons with static long range support. Small squad size and combat squads are both ways to reduce the inefficiency and cost of these static support squads. However, with these small squads, care must be taken to ensure that they are not seen as the highest priority target by your opponent.

Land Speeders

Land speeders are the last problem unit that shows up frequently. Speeders are fast and can shoot while moving, two very good things in a Marine list, but are very vulnerable to even basic weapons. In addition to their speed, there are many weapons options on these vehicles which give them a wide range of capabilities. Often, this results in a conflicted unit and likely makes unable to perform effectively before being easily destroyed by enemy troops. This is the primary reason why speeders are a difficult unit.

To begin, land speeders are vulnerable to practically every weapon your enemy has. This places them in to two categories, disposable assault firepower and long range support. The disposable firepower theory focuses on short range weapons and one shot kills to take out key units. So long as they survive to kill their target, anything else is a bonus. Speeders used in this manner are fairly straightforward but many players tend to include extra weapons that are at odds with the role. These speeders need to remain cheap and should only mount a weapon that can be used for their intended purpose. For example, it is common to take a heavy flamer and a multi-melta on these craft. One is dedicated anti-vehicle and the other decidedly anti-infantry. It would be better to field only the multi-melta or the heavy flamer to clarify the unit’s role. This makes disposable firepower speeders a simpler prospect to employ.

Long range support speeders attempt to use range to prevent enemy weapons from targeting them. In order to be effective, these speeders need to have support of heavier armor to present more attractive targets for the long range weapons capable of hitting the speeder. Because they can shoot outside the range of most enemy weapons, these speeders can be more expensive that disposable firepower versions. Typically these should be armed with twin heavy bolters or a typhoon upgrade granting enough firepower for both anti-vehicle support and infantry support.

Support speeders should be compared to mobile devastator squads, performing a similar role with similar firepower at a much more palatable cost while remaining mobile. With a typhoon upgrade, they are equipped with two missile launchers and a heavy bolter that can move 6” and still fire all weapons or 12” and fire off frags and the heavy bolter. While pricy, compared to devastators, you are getting three heavy weapons and mobility for the price of a five man squad alone. An alternative to this option is dedicated to anti-infantry and provides the cheapest mount for the support speeder. By taking an additional heavy bolter you double your firepower and are still capable of moving 6” per turn.

Finally it should be noted that the popular assault cannon upgrade is an exceptionally poor choice for speeders. Despite the chance at rending, these weapons place an expensive and fragile vehicle well within range of enemy fire while failing to field enough firepower to effectively engage targets. Even if supporting other units, these speeders are too vulnerable and expensive.

No matter which weapons you choose to field, care must be taken that these fragile platforms are able to complete their objective before coming under fire. In the case of support speeders, the extended range allows greater flexibility for engagement and in turn survival by not exposing the speeder to as much return fire.

Difficult Concepts

The final portion of this tactica deals with several difficult concepts the Marine commander must understand in order to employ his units effectively. These difficulties are primarily related to rules unique to the Marine force but are also due to overconfidence and misconception of Marine capabilities. The three aspects that are discussed will be combat tactics, combat squads, close combat, and psychological considerations.

Combat Tactics

This is the first of the difficult concepts that must be understood. Alone this rule appears to be somewhat lackluster because it has limited utility. In basic terms, you are allowed to fail your morale check at will to escape close combat. This concept becomes difficult because the enemy can still catch you if you fail to break off. The more specialized to close combat the enemy unit is, the less likely that you will successfully break off. Before continuing there is a ground rule that must be discussed. Combat tactics should only be employed in your opponents assault phase. Using this in your own assault phase will do nothing more than give him additional wounds on your unit or allow him to charge you again on his turn, both very bad for the Marine player.

There are three applications that are effective means to employ combat tactics beyond simply extricating from combat that will be discussed; baiting specialized close combat units, multiple combats, boosting assaults. Because high initiative units present the smallest odds for successful application, this rule should only be used rarely against such enemies unless you are specifically baiting an enemy close combat unit and even then the utility is limited. What this entails is simply use the combat tactics rule to initiate a fall back toward your lines in order to bring these units into range. This allows you to separate the close combat unit from the main enemy force and hopefully shoot it before your forces must deal with the rest of his army. It is a very risky maneuver because you will probably lose the bait unit and is the only method that can break the combat tactics ground rule.

The second method, and probably the most useful, is a form of bait and switch. Because units engaged in multiple combats can’t attempt to catch a unit that is falling back, you can extricate a depleted unit before it is destroyed and replace it with a fresh unit while preventing the enemy from catching you. Additionally, this can also be used to replace a weak close combat unit with a strong unit and change the dynamics of the combat in your favor.

The final method is using combat tactics to boost assaults. Marines are equipped with bolt pistols allowing them the option to fire a volley and still charge the enemy. This method plays off of this by extricating the unit from combat on the opponents turn, firing assault weapons in the Marine turn and assaulting to gain bonus attacks. While tempting, this options is probably best used against units with initiative lower than your own and against hordes that are susceptible to shooting.

Combat Squads

Combat squads are very difficult to justify much less use effectively because in almost any configuration they are worse apart than as a whole squad. Much time could be spent reviewing the possible combinations within the units capable of combat squads. However, I believe the problem lies with the application rather than the combination. This is compounded when employing units using this rule because of the ease enemy forces can kill each combat squad, making it less attractive to combat squad units. Under most circumstances, combat squads are not necessary, but they can be vital when using drop pods and heavy weapons or creating a skirmish line.

The first and most useful method to employ combat squads is when using drop pods. Because half of your overall force will be taking the brunt of enemy firepower, deploying the initial drop pods as combat squads will serve to dilute your enemy’s firepower by presenting him with many small targets. Since each combat squad can likely withstand the shooting by a single enemy unit, you will force your enemy to waste firepower eliminating small portions of your force.

The second method that grants some utility is primarily an attempt to reduce wasted combat potential. This is mainly applied to tactical and devastator squads by isolating heavy weapons from the remainder of the squad or splitting the unit to allow multiple targets to be engaged. Either action is a compromise by wasting some potential in order to gain more capabilities. In a tactical squad this is less useful but it does bring about the final method.

This last application of combat squads comes primarily out of the previous. By isolating the bolter armed marines from the heavy weapons and, in some cases, the sergeants, a skirmish line can be formed in front of the longer ranged weapons. These small skirmish units can then advance under covering fire or stall closing enemy unit to grant the remainder of the Marine force more time to shoot at higher value targets. If applied to razorbacks, these small squads become “cheap” skirmish units that can provide mobile firepower and quick redeployment should concentrated force be needed in a different position.

No matter which method is employed, combat squads are one of the most difficult concepts to use effectively in the Marine army. Much of their utility is situational and the disadvantages are easily understood. However, if properly employed, their use can create a frustrating array of targets for an opponent to engage.

Close Combat

It may seem odd that close combat is listed under difficult concepts and that it is placed near the end of the tactica. This is because close combat is perhaps the most misunderstood of all the difficult concepts. Many players draw the wrong conclusion when they see the Marine save and stat line. They assume that the generally high values and number of dedicated close combat units available to Marines makes them good at close combat. However, they fail to notice the one thing that combat hinges on, initiative. Outside of HQ choices, Marines are I4. This means that no matter their equipment, they have two weaknesses in combat.

First, they can be overwhelmed by numbers, and second, they can be outfought by specialized close combat troops. Generally things with lower initiative like guardsmen will have numbers and things with higher initiative, like Eldar Harlequins, will kill you before you swing. Because of this and Marines engaging in close combat must have some form of invulnerable save to have a chance of striking back.

While individual Marine units may be geared for close combat, no Space Marine unit should seek close combat unsupported. This places the role of close combat troops into the category of support instead of spearhead against most enemy units. In this role, the close combat troops target enemy units already softened by shooting allowing you to direct your firepower onto other enemy units.

Psychological Considerations

While psychological warfare will often deal with disrupting the concentration of your opponent in hopes of causing him to perform poorly, I want to deal instead with the flawed concept of getting points back. This is a second greatly misunderstood aspect of not just Marine players but 40k players in general. Too much emphasis is placed on killing more points than your unit’s costs and little is placed on its psychological effect.

To begin, the success of a unit is not always equal to the number of kills it makes although this is the simplest gauge of the unit’s performance. Much more difficult to quantify is the psychological impact a unit has on the enemy. A unit may never fire a shot and yet still hold the flank because of the reluctance of an enemy to enter the range of the weapons carried. This makes it no less successful than the squad that eliminated twice its own value. The psychological “fear” of losing models driving your opponent’s reluctance to enter your field of fire takes pressure off the flank just as effectively as if the enemy unit was destroyed.

This is not to say that you can set up an invisible psychological wall that your opponent will not pass. More likely he will focus on areas that he believes will give him better odds of success. This can be used to your advantage by placing weapons to direct your opponents advance. In combination with solid deployment this can force an opponent into riskier choices than he would otherwise prefer, increasing the odds in your favor.

The last aspect of psychological impact I would like to consider is the threat value your opponent assigns units when making decisions. These assessments will color both his movement and target priority. While a unit can be assigned a higher threat simply by nature of the weapons it carries, a second aspect that can weight this assessment is range. In general, the closer the unit is the higher the threat your enemy will place on it.

The primary application of this aspect psychologically is to manipulate your enemies perceived threat values in order to present equally difficult options or make the choices you want him to take more attractive. This was briefly touched upon in the section dealing with tactical squads, but it can be applied to practically any unit. Care must be taken by Marine commanders avoid imbalance that favors specialized units causing unnecessary stress to be placed on generalist units.

Closing Statements

No matter how you decide to field your army there will be the need to compromise in order to be as efficient as possible. Because of this there is no perfect combination of units or strategy. I want the topics that I’ve covered to provide a basis for tactical discussion among Marine players and I hope that this tactica will have provided helpful insight for understanding the mechanics of the Marine force in order for you to make educated decisions when selecting and using a Marine army. Finally, no matter how well you apply these principles or how well selected your force may be, you must have a plan of action when engaging the enemy because even the best trained and equipped force is useless without a mission.

I would be remiss if I failed to mention two other excellent tactical articles on Bolter and Chainsword. Both of these provide a more narrow focus into specific application of Marine combat power and are extremely useful for the the Marine player.

The Reformation of War - Brother Atrox

The Way of the Water Warrior - Silent Requiem

Vaaish · October 14, 2008

no comments so far? I guess I'm failing at getting some tactical discussion going.

robdark1 · October 14, 2008

vaaish what is more important being on the offense or trying to flank you opp with a drop based army with the little bit of force need so they can support the rest of your army?

Vaaish · October 14, 2008

not quite understanding your grammar, but I'll give it a go. Flanking in the terms you use is part of being on the offense so in that sense both are equal. However, while it might be an offensive operation to pod in on the flank to hit your enemy, it doesn't make it a good operation if you only hit with a little force because it lacks the strength to threaten his position which makes the support they can give ineffective.

robdark1 · October 14, 2008

sorry for the bad grammer . what i was refering to was how much stuff you put on one side of the table vs being on the table with everything. i seem a 6 drop pod have to play both the left and right flank. being of course the mission was an objective so i had to attack on the weakside of his army and did ok overall. were taking someone strenth and cover there weakness is in the player and the roster that he builds being that what expersnse he tanken for play 40k over the years.

vaaish you also put up in the info you said that marine stat line is a big help if you playing the army well i incline to disagree because while i see marine as a shooting army there also in designed to assault being that everyone has some kind of counter punch in there army. i leave this for now see you soon.

Vaaish · October 14, 2008

I don't believe there is a single answer to that question that is "right" 100% of the time. What you drop in and where has everything to do with how your opponent plays and is why you need to understand the underlying principles to know when it is a good idea and when it isn't. If you are referring to using all pods vs all transports or foot slogging, I am getting ready to add a section on static deployment vs mobile warfare. in a nutshell, all drop pods will leave you static and unable to effectively pursue an enemy if they escape the initial attack. All transports can be destroyed before you get close enough to hit with rapid fire. a mix of methods targeted at weak segments will take attention away from the rhino squads as they are not an immediate threat and give you time to roll up to reinforce or redeploy as the enemy moves away from the initial line of attack.

On statline. I said it was a strength, not a big help. I also did not say the entire marine statline, just BS, T, and Leadership. A strength doesn't necessarily mean that they are better than anything out there at a particular job, it just means that it will be more of a benefit to your force than a hindrance. There are other more dedicated units with better shooting or better close combat, but the marine shooting is better that quite a few things and is one piece of the equation that aids them as a whole.

minigun762 · October 14, 2008

nice start, I think it helps people to step back and view the Marine armies as a whole rather than get caught up debating "Plasmaguns are better than Meltaguns!!" and such.

Vaaish · October 15, 2008

Thanks! I've added in the first phase of the focused doctrine section and revised several paragraphs under marine weaknesses.

xenosmk2 · October 16, 2008

A very well written piece Vaaish, I look forward to the excerises :D. Also if you have any tactics on sucessful use of tactical sqauds with flamer weapons I would find them very helpful, as I am constantly finding these squads a little under powered while en-route to the enemy where the flamer is useful.

Vaaish · October 16, 2008

Thanks, I still ahve a ways to go since I'm only just hitting general tactical philosophy and I have yet to do specific or difficult units. I'm trying to stay away from very specific use X unit like this. But I'll concede a little and give you a short exercise. :)

try to do this without looking at my answers since it will help you to think through the problem and apply the principles of the tactica.

you are trying to use flamers effectively.

Using the fundamental principles above answer the following:

What weaknesses are most visible using flamers?

first, range is most obvious as a weakness falling into the under 12" category

Second, waste of combat power. You aren't getting the most out of shooting it while getting to the enemy so you are wasting firepower.

How can I overcome these weaknesses?

To minimize the range issue you have to get within 12" and to not waste combat potential, you need to do it very quickly.

there are several options available to do this:

1. transports - capable of redeployment, fairly speedy, susceptible to being shot, cheap

2. drop pods - capable of instant deployment within 12", no redeployment, cheap

3. Librarian gate - capable of fast deployment and redeployment, with epistolary adds firepower. expensive. If your flamer squads are assault marines, a gate librarian can get you in range for second turn assaults to support drop pod troops unless your enemy deploys less than 6" from his table edge.

xenosmk2 · October 16, 2008

Some great ideas there Vaasish, I am thinking of a transport as the drop pod would leave me open to a charge if i dropped into flamer range.

The Rhino seems the best choice for putting a full tactical squad into rapid fire/pistol & charge range quickly and as you said very cheaply too. :)

Many thanks and keep up the good work

Vaaish · October 17, 2008

OkI've updated the tactica to include mobile warfare. I'll be working on a short section about hybrid tactics using elements of static and mobile warfare. I'll probably go back and refine all three sections before moving into a specific look at list construction and difficult units.

Vaaish · October 17, 2008

Updated again to include hybrid doctrine. I believe that this completed the general section of the tactica and I'll be refining it over the next few days. I realize it's rather lengthy but I would appreciate if there are any comments, oversights, or accidental contradictions I missed.

Following that I plan on finishing the tactica with list building considerations and dealing with problem units.

minigun762 · October 17, 2008

Even better than when I read it the first time. I like your discussion of different army types in regard to mobility. I was thinking you should discuss a hybrid army and poof there it was haha.

Not to toot my own horn, but I did something similar to this for the Chaos armies, but more geared for the beginning player. If you want to take a look at it, here is the link.

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=130396

I like the idea of army building help, but make sure you explain your logic behind choices.

With the problem unit section, I'd build it like, what the problem unit is, why it is a problem to marines and what the best counter(s) are, you could even talk about common counters to the marine counter if you wanna get fancy (example 'Nids sending gaunts to tie up Power Fist squads to protect their dakkafex)

Vaaish · October 17, 2008

Thanks, I'll take a look at that.

Along the lines of army building, I'm not planning on saying take X unit or Y wargear. I'm planning on identifying the three weapons that a successful force should be built around. Currently I'm thinking along the lines of Lascannon, bolter, heavy bolter. because all of these options are available to nearly any unit. Alternately I'm thinking it might be Missile Launcher, bolter, autocannon because these provide the most versatility and capability against a broader range of threats despite a more limited availability. The idea being you base you armies around a balanced core of these choices and then fill in whatever you want for the style you like to play.

The problem unit section is going to be a more in depth look at things like tac squads and their use, devastator squads in relation to waste of force, an possibly a section on things like combat squads. it's not a section on here is a counter to this or that but from a marine perspective of what those units are supposed to do and what aspects cause people to use them improperly.

minigun762 · October 17, 2008

Thanks, I'll take a look at that.

Along the lines of army building, I'm not planning on saying take X unit or Y wargear. I'm planning on identifying the three weapons that a successful force should be built around. Currently I'm thinking along the lines of Lascannon, bolter, heavy bolter. because all of these options are available to nearly any unit. Alternately I'm thinking it might be Missile Launcher, bolter, autocannon because these provide the most versatility and capability against a broader range of threats despite a more limited availability. The idea being you base you armies around a balanced core of these choices and then fill in whatever you want for the style you like to play.

The problem unit section is going to be a more in depth look at things like tac squads and their use, devastator squads in relation to waste of force, an possibly a section on things like combat squads. it's not a section on here is a counter to this or that but from a marine perspective of what those units are supposed to do and what aspects cause people to use them improperly.

Ahh ok. Then with the Army building, I wouldn't think about it in terms of particular weapons, but instead weapon roles. From what I see, you are stressing the importance of "heavy anti tank weapons", "anti light infantry weapons" and "anti light armor/heavy infantry weapons". Or something like that.

So with the problem units, it sounds like you're going to show Marine players how to dodge some of the pitfalls for making/using their own units, not talk about opponent's units? Gotcha. That would be useful as well. Things like when/if to include a Power Fist in a Tactical squad.

Snozz · October 17, 2008

Very in depth, what I would like to see most is army selection and example lists.

Vaaish · October 18, 2008

I've added the first exercise, discussion of options to follow.

StormTAG · October 18, 2008

Quick initial question... If the Sternguard have a drop pod, why are they already deployed? Where is the Librarian? Based on the options, I'm guessing the Sternguard aren't in a DP and are led by the Libby. I'm making that assumption for my analysis...

For the note, I'm a noobie to 40k. Lessee if the wisdom from other war/minis games will help.

So, just some initial thoughts. The Tau force is highly mobile and shooty. By contrast the Marines hold the advantage in durability with more bodies on the table with higher saves. It would seem in our best interest to cut the Tau off from taking the objective or funnel them into specific fire cooridors if they want to take the objective.

"Option A: Deploy drop pods within rapid fire range of his force to make scatter free zone and gate the sternguard squad in for support."

This takes advantage of our superior short ranged firepower, but it could leave us vulnerable to being out maneuvered. We commit ourselves to somewhere our opponent doesn't want to be in the long term. If we're lucky, this bold strike will cripple the Tau army and allow us to slug it out in close quarters where the Marines have the advantage. However, the Tau could rapidly (with their skimming tanks, if I understand right) redeploy to the objective if they don't suffer debilitating casualties. That leaves us to march back towards the objective in order to hopefully take it, advancing into the teeth of the enemies guns. The Libby could buy us time by gating the Sterns in close and distracting them while the Rhino and DP squads make their way to the objective. Bold, but not the one I would choose.

"Option B: Deploy drop pods to cover the mouth of the canyon."

This one I like best, I think. It cuts some of the Tau's mobility by forcing them to come through the narrow mouth. However, I'm not certain if that's actually the case. Can't the Tau's tanks simply fly over the terrain to take the objective? If so, then the mouth no longer acts as a choke point. If they can't, then this seems useful as its proactive in that the Tau either have to fight their way through the Marines to get to the objective or split their forces; part to distract those guarding the choke point and part to move and take the objective.

"Option C: Deploy drop pods to take the objective."

This seems the most prudent. Moving to take a static position takes advantage of our numbers and durability. However, the Tau can out range us so we need to play a Hammer and Anvil. The Tau need to take the objective, so they need to fight through 30 marines plus Pod Defenses, while the Rhino and Libby Squads can act the hammer to try to force them into the guns of the static objective holders.

I'd have to learn more about how the Skimmers interact with the terrain to really give a solid answer. :tu:

Vaaish · October 18, 2008

good catch, The sternguard shouldn't have the pod. I'll update it shortly and respond to your answers.

Vaaish · October 18, 2008

ok to your answers. remember to think through how each possible option caters to your strengths or weaknesses.

This takes advantage of our superior short ranged firepower, but it could leave us vulnerable to being out maneuvered. We commit ourselves to somewhere our opponent doesn't want to be in the long term. If we're lucky, this bold strike will cripple the Tau army and allow us to slug it out in close quarters where the Marines have the advantage. However, the Tau could rapidly (with their skimming tanks, if I understand right) redeploy to the objective if they don't suffer debilitating casualties. That leaves us to march back towards the objective in order to hopefully take it, advancing into the teeth of the enemies guns. The Libby could buy us time by gating the Sterns in close and distracting them while the Rhino and DP squads make their way to the objective. Bold, but not the one I would choose.

If you select the two multi-melta tactical squads to drop in and pull in the sternguard you can, if all goes perfectly, kill three tau vehicles. If two of them are the devilfish you will force him to walk around to the objective. Doing this will still leave your three squads open to 3 pie plates from hammerheads, the fire from the crisis suites and any firewarriors that are forced to get out of the transports. You will then face counterattack by the 20 kroot. Three marine squads don't have the firepower to take on the entire enemy force. doing this means you will be fighting piecemeal and despite having more bodies overall, will allow him to fight only half your force.

This one I like best, I think. It cuts some of the Tau's mobility by forcing them to come through the narrow mouth. However, I'm not certain if that's actually the case. Can't the Tau's tanks simply fly over the terrain to take the objective? If so, then the mouth no longer acts as a choke point. If they can't, then this seems useful as its proactive in that the Tau either have to fight their way through the Marines to get to the objective or split their forces; part to distract those guarding the choke point and part to move and take the objective.

This is the correct option. You reduce the number of squads they can bring to bear by forcing the dismounted portion and those that can't jump far enough to clear the cliff to walk to you. You also deploy close enough your rhino squads can move up to support allowing you to concentrate all but one drop pod unit. You are still capable of shooting at any tau units that jump to the objective with the units deployed at B. Not only this, but you are well in range of the sternguard gate to clear the objective and counterattack with the remaining pod. It is also the best balance to minimize waste of combat potential.

This seems the most prudent. Moving to take a static position takes advantage of our numbers and durability. However, the Tau can out range us so we need to play a Hammer and Anvil. The Tau need to take the objective, so they need to fight through 30 marines plus Pod Defenses, while the Rhino and Libby Squads can act the hammer to try to force them into the guns of the static objective holders.

This is the most cautious method. It is an alright choice, but not as strong as B. The reason is that you waste more combat potential by waiting to engage later if he has to walk units to you because of the cliffs and you allow him to concentrate his forces before attacking you. Finally it will take longer for the rhino units to reach you and possibly get bogged down out of range of supporting fire from units on the objective.

Brother Tual · October 21, 2008

Option C also has the issue of LOS... Many Tau weapons systems can ignore LOS...

I agree Option B is 'best' ... Could you hybrid options here my friend? There are soo many variables to a tactica... Nice work though.. ;) good read -

A few things I feel that you have missed or brushed over - Bikes - They increase all of the strengths of marines (Toughness - mobility - specilisation (concerntration of force?) and optimise firepower - twin linked) whilst they suffer from low model count, their mobility directly counters this weakness...

Named characters - I know that you dont want to go into take x over y - but the named characters do strange things to the basic abilities of marines... They can change the dynamics of your list considerably and enhance certain strengths or counter certain weaknesses...

Marines VS MEQ - these are the majority of your games - MEQ vs MEQ - Similar strengths vs similar weaknesses so that neither a str becomes a str (thinking in terms of advantage) or weakness a weakness (similar model count for example) - ofcourse, hybrid selections create some degree of difference, but in terms of a general 'game plan' or consideration of

comprehensive understanding of the fundamental strengths and weaknesses of the army

it sometimes becomes somewhat problematic and hard to apply, simply because they no longer are an advantage and become hard to decifer or apply... Example - rapid fire a 10 man tact squad at a 10 man tact squad or charge it?? You get more str 4 hits in but you loose half of your 3+ to hit but gain more 4+ to hit - and the enemy gets to swing back... Vs anything bar MEQ, there is a clear advantage or wasted combat potential relationship wheras here it is not so clear...

EDIT - That is not so clear after re-reading it - but I think my point can be seen... if not - I can re-word it... tired now... ;)

Keep up the good work there mate - I have a few more points, (such as transports - they can do alot more than taxi or funnel) but I will let you develop your ideas - The new dex has alot in it.... Bravo

Vaaish · October 21, 2008

Hey, thanks for the comments!

Option B. In an actual game, yes you can. For the sake of application and to ease some of the complexity, there are only three options.

You're right, I missed bikes completely. I'll add a blurb under the mobility warfare about them as a possible option. I'm attempting to keep this a pure tactica that avoids most discussion on individual units leaving it to the reader to apply what he learns to the units in the codex. The goal is to promote more thought rather than everyone asking what's the best list or weapon.

I may add in something about the named characters in the last portion of the tactica. It will have a section on difficult units and situations (what to do with devs, tacs, speeders, combat tactics, combat squads). I probably won't deal with individuals directly since it goes against what I'm aiming for and most of them are fairly straightforward to understand what they do.

Good idea, I think I'll work the MEQ vs MEQ into the second exercise. I would say though that it depends on where you are if meq vs meq is the majority of games. Around here I've seen a pretty even mix of armies.

Vaaish · October 21, 2008

added in a bit to mobile warfare about bikes and the first segment of part three.

minigun762 · October 21, 2008

It keeps improving, nicely done. Some things to consider however.

1) Autocannons (for Loyalist marines atleast) are very rare. You only find them on Predators so in a normal game, you'll be lucky to have 3 of them. I see the point you're going for but I would structure that part different. Focus not on the type of weapon, but its exact target. In many ways a Meltagun/Multi-Melta/LasCannon and even Missile Launcher all have the same role, knock out heavy armor and heavy infantry, so in most lists they can be considered equivalent, atleast to the stated objective. Same idea with a Bolter, a Flamer or Chainsword or Heavy Bolter or Whirlwind Missiles all do the same thing, eradicate light infantry.

2) You discuss different types of armies as far as static vs mobile vs hybrid and the different types of weapons you believe should be in a successful list, but I think some mention of the close combat phase/assault would be appropriate. How to maximize or avoid it with Marines, common pitfalls, things of that sort.

3) More of a thought than suggestion, what about a discussion on the benefits of a balanced army vs specilized? I mention this because very often what I see is people taking an army based around a particular concept and maxing it out. Nidzilla or Armored Company are prime examples. The idea is to field as many MCs or tanks as possible in an attempt to negate the effectivness of anti-infantry guns and strain the amount of anti-tank weapons a balanced army would have.

Sign In

Astartes Tactical Treatise.

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Archived

Recently Browsing 0 members

Important Information