Tactica: Killhammer 40k - Target Priority

[Warp Angel]

This Tactica is intended to be a generic assessment of target priority for 5th edition, usable by any army, but specific examples will be provided using Marine units.

 

It doesn't matter what mission type you've got set up, or what the battlefield looks like. Your objective is to kill your opponent and render him ineffective in preventing you from achieving victory. You need to create a "kill gap" in your favor. This is done by creating a Killhammer assessment for every unit on the table. You need your high Killhammer units and your opponent needs fewer of theirs.

 

Section 1: Assumptions - the framework for how to read the tactica

Section 2: The Formula - the (not)math on how to figure out what's next on the chopping block

Section 3: Applying the Formula - Pre Battle, Deployment, During the Game

Section 4: Summary - Skip to here if you don't want to read a lot.

 

Assumptions

A couple of assumptions that I follow, and I'd ask that you take into account when reading this article are:

 

• Assessing target value is subjective
  
• Different targets will assume different threat ratings depending on mission and battlefield terrain
  
• Your army fights according to your style, and your target priority should reflect that
  
• Evaluating target priority is a constantly fluid process, starting before the game begins, continuting through deployment, and changing not only every turn, but within a turn as casualties mount on both sides
  

 

The Killhammer Formula

It looks like math, but it's really not. Trust your gut

Whether you're fighting anihilation, or on an objectives mission, the formula for target priority is the same. The objective is to figure out what the most dangerous units you have are and use them (while keeping them alive) to deprive your opponent of his highest Killhammer units.

 

1. What is its kill potential? (K1)
   
2. When does it reach its kill potential? (K2)
   
3. How tough is it to destroy? (D1)
   
4. How soon can it be destroyed?(D2)
   
5. Subjective modifier for battlefield, terrain, mission, and situation(S)
   
6. What is the threat perception it creates?***
   

 

When combined together into a math looking formula (for demonstration purposes only) you end up with a formula that looks roughly like this:

 

Your opponent's units: (K1-K2) - (D1+D2) + S = Opponent Unit's Killhammer Rating

Your units: (K1-K2) + (D1+D2) + S = Your Unit's Killhammer Rating

 

K1, K2, and D1, D2 are all fuzzy values that you as a player provide to the unit. S is the evaluation that you, as a player, make of the current situation, taking all factors into account, and apply as a modifier to the formula. If you absolutely have to take the Land Raider out this turn or lose the game, it gets a high S rating and you try and kill the Land Raider, regardless of what the formula would say without "S". Similarly, when in an objectives game, scoring units get a higher Killhammer rating than they do in an anihilate game by applying the "S" to them.

 

Summary: Kill high firepower units with low defense first, protecting and utilizing your high firepower and high defense units.

 

While I've never bothered with formalizing numbers, if you're so inclined, you might want to calculate the numbers in terms of Tactical Marines or Predators that it's able to kill per turn, or whatever units make sense to you. For example, if you're figuring out what to kill, and you're most concerned about Marines dying, figure out which units present a threat to Marines and mathhammer the exact killyness. In that case, a squad of 8 Necron Warriors in rapid fire range has a higher rating than the 2 Heavy Destroyers.

 

I've found my gut works pretty well and have never crunched the numbers. Your mileage may vary.

 

*** You should NEVER go with perceived threat, but utilize it to your advantage when attempting to maniupulate the opponent. That Land Raider may be hard to kill, but it already deployed it's troops and can only kill a max of 6 Marines a turn. Leave it alone unless you have to kill it or have an easy shot at doing so.

 

Applying the Formula

Games of Warhammer 40k are numbers games. You're using a relatively limited random number generator (the d6), in sufficient quantities that you should see statistics play out over the course of a game, and let you somewhat rely on them. Since you can somewhat rely on statistics to produce results, and have no real control over the results of the individual die results, you need to manipulate the QUANTITY of dice in your favor. This is best achieved by reducing the number of opponent dice rolls affecting your army negatively while maximizing the number of your dice rolls to continue reducing your opponent's effective number of dice. This is the basic principle of Killhammer.

 

Lots of "Mathhammer" time and discussion is dedicated to squad equipment choices, engagement ranges, and predicted assault results. It's somewhat reliable, and you can searchy it to your heart's content. It helped me in formulating the theory behind this general tactica for target priority, and certainly helps in formula application, but isn't required reading. Going back to the assumptions used in this article, everything we're talking about is subjective. Help it along with some objective criteria, but that pesky "S" value in the Killhammer formula will punch "Mathhammer" in tender places if you rely exclusively on objective criteria.

 

So... back to Killhammer.

 

You start the game supposedly on an even playing field with your opponent, with the same number of points per side. Yes, different codecii are better than others, and yes some army lists are better than others. Obsessing over "better lists" and "better units" tends to cloud vision and create a threat perception value in opponent's units for target priority that doesn't match what's going on. This is a bad thing. We've all seen an opponent that gets obsessive about trying to kill a Land Raider for four straight turns without success. The whole point of applying the Killhammer formula is to avoid that sort of behavior and kill the stuff that you can kill.

 

Why kill the stuff that you can kill instead of that "powerful" land raider? An empty Land Raider has a kill potential of 5, and an actual somewhere around 2-3. (Someone can Mathhammer that). Compare that to a squad of 10 Berzerkers with a PF and PP. They have a a kill potential of 10 with shooting and 41 in CC. Is there a reason your lascannons are shooting at the Land Raider instead of the Berzerkers? The LR poses relatively little threat, while every Berzerker you kill from clear across the table effectively reduces the kill potential in a turn or two by 4 when they do get into range. Oh, and Berzerkers are scoring units for those 2/3 of battles with objectives. This is a generic situation, of course, and there WILL be times where the prudent thing to do is unload everything on the LR and ignore the Berzerkers. This tactica is to help you decide when that is.

 

You do this by applying Killhammer principles to create a "kill gap", or a situation where you have increased the ratio of your killpower to the killpower of your opponent. Once established, a "kill gap" almost always gets bigger in successive turns. If you look at the first turn as being "an even fight", evaluate the second turn as if it were the first turn. You can use "points" to assess it in a general sense. If you kill 300 points of their stuff and lose 200 of yours, you MIGHT have the kill gap in your favor. If you're up against Chaos Marines with a couple Defilers, and you're out all your S7+ weapons, that point advantage is meaningless. Your opponent has a "kill gap" in his favor, despite the points differential. And your target priority should drop Defilers to low on the list, since your firepower and close combat ability (your killyness) is much more effective against other units in his army.

 

In order to apply the formula, you need to be able to evalute both your units and the opponent's units and apply a preliminary rating to everything (the pre-game), and then modify your initial assessments during deployment, before finally applying Killhammer to each phase of the actual game.

 

Everything Dies

Before you can take to the battlefield, you need to understand the intended role of every unit in your army and (regretfully) assess the impact losing it will have on your army. This is the Grim Darkness of the Far Future, and the rules are set up so that everything can die. This means that it will. This lets you assess the risks that you're willing to take to manipulate the enemy to fighting the way that you want it to, and also what units are more expendable than others.

 

Every unit in your army should be assessed in the same way that you assess an opponent's army, that way you know your most valuable units for creating a "kill gap". I'm only going to address a few here, but may do a complete list of the C:SM units later. D2 is applied based upon your opponent's ability to apply killyness, so that will be evaluated later. S is purely situational, and will also be applied later.

 

*** This is all subjective ***

 

1) Tactical Squad: K1=low, they don't kill much. K2=low, they aren't fast to close to optimum range and have firepower tradeoffs for moving. K2 and D1 goes up if they have a rhino, and both K1 and K2 go up if they have a Razorback, though D1 may be lower or at best a wash.

2) Assault Squad (with packs): K1=middle - they can kill a lot. K2=high, they're very fast to get to optimium range. K1, K2 and D1 actually go DOWN if you deep strike them since they spend a turn unable to apply their full strength against an enemy for a full turn.

3) Land Raider: K1=middle - it kills ENOUGH that it's reliable, but not a ton of stuff. K2=middle - they're almost always in effective engagement range, but suffer from a move and fire problem. D1 is awesome. They're tough as nails, and immune to most attacks.

4) Dreadnaught: K1=medium - they can kill a lot. K2=low - they're not very fast to get into optimum killyness if they have a DCCW, and hard to reposition if they don't. D1=medium - AV12 is nice, but powerfists and even some of the lighter heavy weapons can take one down without a ton of trouble. If you throw them in a drop pod, you immedictely increase K1 and K2, and slightly increase D1 if it survives to get into H2H in the next turn. S depends on its role in your army.

5) Bikes: K1=medium - they can kill a lot for the squad size. K2=high - very mobile and can apply their firepower in a focused manner. D1=medium. Higher than basic marines, but not great. If you throw in a character on a bike, the K1 goes up (especially in Hand to Hand), add an attack bike as well as increasing the squad size to maxiumum and K1 goes way up. D1 remains middling.

 

By now you should be getting your own ideas (and your own opinions on these evaluations).

 

The highest value should be placed on the units with good offense, good application of offense, and good defense. These are the units that are best utilized to create a "kill gap" in your favor and apply the principles of Killhammer, achieving a high Killhammer rating. From the list above, Bikes and Drop Podded Dreads are potent tools while Tactical Squads are suboptimal for applying Killhammer. Putting some of your lower Killhammer rated units in danger to draw attention or protect your higher Killhammer rated units is a perfectly valid tactic and may get a separate treatment at somepoint in another Killhammer tactica.

 

Assess your opponent's army (or what you know of it) in the same manner, using it to determine what units have a higher Killhammer rating.

 

This knowledge of your army and your opponent's army will help during deployment.

 

II - During Deployment

Powergamer Bob: "My Land Raiders have both survived the last three battles it's been in."

"Killhammer Joe: My guess is they'll probably survive this one.

Deployment is the first opportunity to reassess the Killhammer Ratings you assigned before. Why reassess so soon, you ask? Didn't you just put together your army list 5 minutes ago? You performed the first assessment so that you've got a baseline to work off of. It's easier to re-evaluate than it is to evaluate all at once (at least for me), and it forces you to begin thinking about how your army should be deployed ahead of time.

 

Now that deployment is here, you know what the mission is, what the terrain is like, and what side of the table you're going to deploy on. You've got an idea what poses a threat to your army, and what in your army is most valuable for creating the "kill gap". But now you need to check on situational modifiers to the formula.

 

Let's look at the criteria again:

 

1. What is its kill potential? (K1) -- What can you expect it to kill in the first few turns? Lots or litte?
   
2. When does it reach it's kill potential? (K2) -- How long is it going to take to get to optimum kill range?
   
3. How tough is it to destroy? (D1) -- Does cover, range, or terrain make it harder or easier to kill?
   
4. How soon can it be destroyed?(D2) -- When can you bring on enough firepower to significantly reduce effectiveness or destroy the unit?
   
5. Subjective modifier for battlefield, terrain, mission, and situation (S) -- What does your opponent need to win the battle? (Scoring units? Phase Out? Easy Kill Points?)
   
6. What is the threat perception it creates? -- Evaluate what your opponent thinks you're going to prioritize so you don't fall into any traps, and try and get your opponent to go after your lower Killhammer Rated units
   

 

A perfect example of a unit that gets downgraded substantially in Killhammer Rating during deployment is a Vindicator tank that starts the game in a corner of the battlefield, hiding in cover, more than 30" away from any of your units. It effectively spends the first turn doing nothing (probably popping smoke as it closes), and increases its K2 while increasing it's D1 and D2. Bad idea to shoot at it unless you don't have better targets. It's better to deploy in such a way as to make it even less effective in K2.

 

An example of a unit that gets more attractive during deployment is a squad that deploys in a manner that's going to allow you to get multiple units firing at it early. It might not be the highest killhammer rating from your initial evaluation. But by deploying in a way that you can get multiple units shooting in on it, you've reduced the D2 substantially and have the ability to minimize or eliminate its battlefield effectiveness entirely early on, giving you a "kill gap" in later turns, even if it doesn't do much for you the first turn.

 

D1 goes up if a unit is in cover. D2 goes up if it's deployed in a way that reduces the number of effective weapons that can be brought to bear.

K1 can go down from bad deployment, reducing the kill potential. K2 can go up for a well placed unit.

 

Managing Killhammer here is as much finesse and experience as anything else. Every deployment should be made with the idea that you want maximum destruction out of the unit the first three turns of the game (most targets, easiest targets to maximize K) and to increase its survivability by utilizing cover and obstructed lines of sight (D1 and D2). Always deploy for mutual support whenever possible, and use cheap vehicles to screen infantry from outflankers and long range heavy weapons whenever possible.

 

Take advantage of opponent's deployment whenever possible, though if you choose to go first, that may not be possible.

 

And ALWAYS ALWAY ALWAYS try and get your opponent to shoot at a low Killhammer rated unit instead of something overall more powerful by utilizing percieved threat against them.

 

A sometimes forgotten deployment option is to not deploy at all. Or at least not to deploy a key Killhammer unit with the rest of your army. Think about the havoc that a full Bike Squad, Captain on a Bike, and Attack Bike can create when they arrive on turn 2 or 3, within rapid fire range of an advancing enemy, and possibly within assault range. They don't even need to outflank, just show up and kill. This effectively increases their K1 (especially if you go second) because they'll have taken no casualties to enemy shooting before they get to go, their K2 by applying firepower exactly where it's needed, preferably to finish off an already damaged enemy, the D1 by making them effectively IMMUNE to all shooting and their D2 by bringing them on a table in a place where you've minimized potential shooting or assaults against them. This means that they're still at or close to full strength for their second turn on the table and (with a captain on a bike) sweep an enemy off of their objective and hold it in subsequent turns. You can do the same thing with tactical squads with transports to come on late to hold an objective. Their firepower probably won't make a difference in the early game, but a full squad in immediate rapid fire range later in the game is something potent.

 

III - Playing the Game

"I love the smell of promethium in the morning. Smells like.... Victory!"

So the game is going and the dice are rolling. Both sides have taken casualties, the game is in the balance, how do you maximize the "kill gap"? The first few turns should be spent reducing the Killhammer rating of your opponent's army while protecting your highest Killhammer rated units.

 

You should be killing a higher percentage of his killing capacity every turn, while he should be killing less of yours. This gap should become evident at the end of turn 2, be a clear advantage on turn 3, and make turns 4-5+ a formality. Luck always plays a part in all things 40k, and if your opponent is skilled with a good army matchup, all the Killhammer in the world might not save you. But it will give you a fighting chance.

 

As the game evolves, constantly re-evaluate the criteria. Outright destruction of a unit might not be your objective anymore:

 

1. What is it's kill potential? (K1) -- Is the unit combat effective anymore, or is it of limited effectiveness? Is it a scoring unit/contesting an objective?
   
2. WHen does it reach it's kill potential? (K2) -- Does it have the potential to kill anything important anymore, or can I divert it by means other than shooting it or tie it up in CC for a few turns?
   
3. How tough is it to destroy? (D1) -- Is there something easier to kill that I should direct my firepower towards?
   
4. How soon can it be destroyedd?(D2) -- Can I bring enough firepower to bear while still pursuing victory/objectives?
   
5. Subjective modifier for battlefield, terrain, mission, and situation (S) -- Can I get my opponent to do what I want by creating a threat where none/little exists and minimize the effectiveness of a unit without killing it?
   

 

Essentially, if it isn't worth killing it - Delay it or divert it. If it is worth killing, make sure you do so, but not at the cost of victory. If it's a powerful CC unit that was relatively ineffective in shooting, but now needs attention, give it due attention. You should have prepared for it along the way by having fewer other risks to shoot at.

 

It's okay to take casualties to low Killhammer Rated units to maintain a "kill gap". Diverting a CC unit to kill a weak unit that leaves it exposed to return fire is a GREAT tactic and allows you to keep your firepower on other threats for longer. Suckering in a Wraithlord to take on some Scouts but being left in rapid fire range of three plasma guns and in range of a few autocannons is a beautiful thing. Especially when you spent your time blowing away Dark Reapers for the previous few turns.

 

This is a part of the game that everyone is familiar with, and if you've embraced the first two steps in applying Killhammer, the third should flow naturally. If you're still struggling with the concept of not using a lascannon on a Land Raider when there's a Plague Marine squad you could be shooting instead, the Killhammer flow might be more difficult.

 

Summary

 

So, if you've read everything up above, Bravo! Thanks for taking the time and you'll have a better understanding of the whys of Killhammer. For everyone who is reading this, you've got a handy-dandy summary and checklist.

 

 

Killhammer is a subjective system for determining target priority and unit effectiveness that allows you to evaluate the key components of your army and your opponent's army, providing a framework for target priority. The objective is to create a "kill gap" between you and your opponent. A "kill gap" is the difference between the effective offense of your force and your opponent's force. This is achieved by reducing the kill potential of your enemy by always targetting the more important units first while protecting and effectively utilizing your most important units.

 

There is a subjective "formula" for evaluating the value of a unit:

 

Yours: (K1-K2)+(D1+D2) + S

Theirs: (K1-K2)-(D1+D2) + S

 

• What is the kill potential? (K1)
  
• How soon does it reach that potential? (K2)
  
• How tough is it to destroy? (D1)
  
• How soon can it be destroyed?(D2)
  
• Subjective modifier for battlefield, terrain, mission, and situation. (S)
  

 

The results of the formula should give you the best unit to go after. It'll take practice and experience, but if applied properly it will prevent you from going after a hard target with several squads to little effect and instead using those same units to completely wipe out an opposing unit.

 

Feedback is appreciated and I'd love to see what people evaluate pre-deployment units at, and how they'd modify Killhammer Ratings.

[Cale]

Actually, that's a pretty good article--and I don't usually say that about the sorts of 'tacticas' that show up on the internet. Good work.

[Sigismund Himself]

Nice work, Warp Angel. Worthy of a place in the Librarium :P May we enter it in there?

[Warp Angel]

I'd love for it to be in the librarium. Place away.

 

Thanks for the positive feedback!

[greatcrusade08]

II - During Deployment

Powergamer Bob: "My Land Raiders have both survived the last three battles it's been in."

"Killhammer Joe: My guess is they'll probably survive this one.

Deployment is the first opportunity to reassess the Killhammer Ratings you assigned before. Why reassess so soon, you ask? Didn't you just put together your army list 5 minutes ago? You performed the first assessment so that you've got a baseline to work off of. It's easier to re-evaluate than it is to evaluate all at once (at least for me), and it forces you to begin thinking about how your army should be deployed ahead of time.

 

Hmmm, do you actually know a powergamer named Rob with two land raiders?

Cause this is spooky!!!!

 

GC08

[Mal]

Actually only one of my raiders survived my last TWO battle, the second was crippled.

 

And for the record, im not a powergamer, I just refuse to make it easy for people to beat me.

[Warp Angel]

I own 4 LR, and field two of them in some of my 2500 point lists.

 

From a Killhammer perspective they are moderate K1 most of the time, with K2 being higher for the Crusader and Prometheus since they have to close to be truly effective. Their D1 is great, and positioned well, can have high D2.

 

Where they shine, however, is in their ability to increase the D2 of high K units by screening or by providing safer transport to get to K2 range.

 

(Man... this is a rough post - lots more elaboration needed to make it easier to conceptualize).

 

As transports, they multiply the Killhammer rating of any unit they are transporting.

As moderate Killhammer rated units, they're suitable for screening high Killhammer rated units.

Deployed and utilized effectively, they can become high Killhammer rated units by themselves.

 

Important to note, and why they are a relatively low priority target much of the time, is that they're too darn hard to kill.

 

If they've got a Sword Brethren squad inside of a Crusader, you can bet your bottom dollar that they become a very high Killhammer priority.

[minigun762]

I think its a great tool for target priority which is always a difficult decision, especially against good opponents.

The typical Dual Lash Daemon Prince, Beserkers and Plague Marines in Rhinos and Vindicator list is a pain in the butt to prioritize as everything is scary and dangerous. Hopefully the Killhammer method will help give you some guidance.

 

My one piece of advice is I don't believe you've stressed the importance of the "S" factor enough, particularly when it comes to scoring units. Many times a particular unit (like those Tactical squads you mentioned) might be very low on the kill list for most reasons, but their ability to count as scoring skyrockets them to the top. You mentioned this, but I feel it could be stressed more.

Great job though.

[Mal]

I agree, its all to easy to concentrate on the 'big and scary' things and ignore the all important unit of grots crawling through the ditch to that objective to win the game. Lets face it, unless your a highly imbrassed bloodthirster, your not going to rank grots as a high prioity target.

[Warp Angel]

My one piece of advice is I don't believe you've stressed the importance of the "S" factor enough, particularly when it comes to scoring units. Many times a particular unit (like those Tactical squads you mentioned) might be very low on the kill list for most reasons, but their ability to count as scoring skyrockets them to the top. You mentioned this, but I feel it could be stressed more.

 

How do you stress something that is totally and completely subjective? (Hence the "S" abbreviation) That part of it is still very intuitive for me and hard to elaborate. But if they're a scoring unit, that increases S. If they're on an objective or contensting it, that increases S (at least as you get closer to turn 5). I'm definitely open to suggestions on how to quantify S in the same general way as I did the K and D ratings.

 

There's still a lot of concepts that I struggle with communicating regarding Killhammer. I haven't really begun to speak to Advanced Killhammer: Multipliers. A Lash Prince is a perfect example of what I mean. Decent Killhammer on his own, but he turns otherwise basic threats into something much greater by increasing allied K and significantly reducing your unit's D.

 

It's a tough choice. Do you go after the Prince, or the things that actually do the killing?

 

Objectively - you're going to take casualties. And Killhammer says divert or delay things you can't kill outright. Skillfull deployment and use of reserves as a counter attack unit will keep the Lash Prince from being a force multiplier for a while and minimize the K of the Demolishers. Bring them into your kill zone first, and make sure your units are mutually supported so that coming after one exposes them to greater K2.

 

This is why I'm a huge fan of a full bike squad in reserves with a captain.

 

They have fairly high K1, about the lowest K2 in the game, higher D1 than most units, and when kept in reserves, have amazing D2 since the first time your opponent sees them, they've already chewed through a squad, possibly assaulted it and massacred forward. So much for the Rhino rushing Plague Marines and Zerkers (that you should have already whittled down through use of S - knowing that your bikes can finish them off). That positions them well for a run at a DP and/or a Vindicator on their way to an objective in the opponent's zone. Combat squading into a tank hunter and melee group can situationally (There's that pesky S again) provide even greater Killhammer than the whole squad together.

 

Skillfull use of supporting units (like rhinos) and battlefield location may also significantly increase their D and make your opponent divert attention to them, trapping him in the fallacy of percieved vs. actual threat and lowering his overall Killhammer effectivness by chasing around a hard to kill unit while not increasing the "kill gap" as quickly as he should be.

[Sigismund Himself]

[robdark1]

:D what matter in dealing with target priority is that you have more inables to make harder to decide what he should a ahave to shoot at first. every time i played it to put a big enought gap in the lines were i starting to shoot his back bone of the army as the third turn starts because that how long it take to kill stuff in the front line because of the rule set out curenttly. mostly i foucs on the fact that troops are the answer to elimitate but no one is going to rid of six squad of troopss when someone has that advange on the table because he want to foucs on what more important that it. what seem to be the solution in the aritce is not using killhammer but target priority hammer because once you establish the fact that you are going to play a certain then you on the way to playing the game alot better.

 

nothing against the person but i dont agree with just put a list of target on the table an saying if you dont shot at this well i win and that it . not to be a a pain but i seen game were i put target priority a head of the the other game plan ideas and got my but kick in the last rtt i was playing in. no fair to me that i wasnt at my best ether playing a bike list with not really heavly support that what really kick me in the but. but what i want to say is this with out a general idea of how to be fair weather player and a generalest army writer here i would rather talk about list writing and see what ideas come into play making player forcely shoot at what is reqired to kill and win quick so he doesnt get out played in the late half of the game, mostly turn 4 -6 were this happen s alot of times......

[Warp Angel]

Robdark1: If you provide an opponent's list and possibly a table setup/mission, I can certainly try and apply Killhammer principles to it. In the situation that you talk about with 6 troops choices on the table in what I'm assuming is an objectives battle - killhammer should work like this:

 

1) In most armies, troops choices tend to have moderate to low K1 and K2 (without transports). They've also got middle to very low D for the most part. When you're playing an objectives game, their S is going to go up based upon proximity to the objective.

 

2) Using killhammer principles, you'd first try and take out any units with a high K that can reduce the amount of firepower you can bring to bear on the enemy.

 

3) Continuing with killhammer principles, you then begin to concentrate as much firepower as possible on a single troop squad per turn as you can. It's probably worth it to "waste" shots from one of your squads to completely wipe out one of their troops choices.

 

4) Anything you can't kill, delay or divert. A full 10 man squad does your opponent no good in an objectives game if he's tied up for three turns in hand to hand with an assault unit that he'll eventually destroy. If he's not on the objective, he can't win. Use rhinos to increase the distance that he has to march, etc.

 

5) Always remember that the S can completely outweigh all of the K and D factors.

[Redbaron997]

5) Always remember that the S can completely outweigh all of the K and D factors.

 

I was thinking the same thing, for instance if the enemy has two tactical marines on an objective at turn 6 and its your last turn, that unit, with a rock bottom K1 & K2, has become probably one of the largest target priorities due to low D1 and extrememly high S.

[Warp Angel]

The thing is, their S should have been high enough in turns 4 and 5 to warrant them getting to the high target priority before that. Turn 6 just makes them absolutely top priority. Unless you've got more objectives. :) Then you continue to ignore them.

 

When applied correctly, and with decent tactics and dice luck, by the end of turn 3, there shouldn't be much out there capable of threatening your army anymore, so troops choices that are otherwise unthreatening turn 1 become the highest Killhammer rated unit by default.

 

A unit of Plague Marines sitting on an objective might warrant a higher Killhammer rating on turn 1 than a normal squad in an objectives game, if only because you're not going to be able to wipe the whole squad out if you wait until turn 4 to go after them. Increase S appropriately.

[DemetriiTZ]

Okay, Warp Angel.. Try and give me some Killhammer ratings for a list like this.. The mission is Recon.

 

 

Eldrad

 

Autarch

-Laser Lance

-Bike

 

Guardian Squad (on bikes) x10

 

5 Rangers x2

 

10x Dire Avengers

 

3x War Walkers

-Double Scatter Lasers

 

Falcon

-Holofield

-Bright Lance

 

5x Fire Dragons (inside Falcon)

-Tank Hunters

 

 

Just curious as to how you'd apply the KH values here, in general.

[Warp Angel]

Okay, Warp Angel.. Try and give me some Killhammer ratings for a list like this.. The mission is Recon.

 

 

Eldrad

 

Autarch

-Laser Lance

-Bike

 

Guardian Squad (on bikes) x10

 

5 Rangers x2

 

10x Dire Avengers

 

3x War Walkers

-Double Scatter Lasers

 

Falcon

-Holofield

-Bright Lance

 

5x Fire Dragons (inside Falcon)

-Tank Hunters

 

 

Just curious as to how you'd apply the KH values here, in general.

 

Pregame: The Highest K values he's got are on the War Walkers. They have lots of firepower and can bring it to bear on turn one. They're also relatively fragile. Very high on the Killhammer rating for targets. I'd be looking for a way to get as much of my firepower as possible directed on them during deployment. Falcons are notoriously hard to kill, and until the Firedragons dismount, there's not a whole lot I can do about them. They hit the bottom of the Killhammer list.

 

Deployment: Anything I couldn't get to target or threaten the War Walkers during the first turn or two, I'd start evaluating against other targets. The guardians on jetbikes (especially with attached Autarch) are probably priority number 2, since the Dire Avengers would be a bit slower to get to me. The rangers are going to have a stupidly good cover save, be placed in a hard to shoot at area (high D) and relatively low K (at most 5 models a turn (and no vehicles). They'd be at the bottom of the target priority along with the Falcon for the first part of the game.

 

If I had to put things in an order (generically speaking) I'd go with the following Killhammer ratings (highest to lowest) Warwalkers, Bikes, Avengers, Eldrad, Rangers, Falcon, Fire Dragons (since unable to be seen means invulnerable).

 

My deployment would exposure my low Killhammer (easy to kill and not high firepower) units in a way to maximize the exposure of his units to target them.

 

During the game: Sometime during Turn 3, the War Walkers should be gone, the jetbikes and Avengers reduced in effectiveness or destroyed, leaving me with the now very high K Dire Avengers and Fire Dragons to deal with. I'm going to continue to ignore the Falcon unless I've got a good shot at taking it down without diverting firepower from the Fire Dragons and Dire Avengers.

 

This is an example of a couple of units (Fire Dragons and Dire Avengers) who have total K increase as the game goes on. Early turns they are out of range or in transports, so their K2 is high, reducing their overall K (K1-K2) and if in a transport, posessing great overall D. But if I've done my job during turns 1 and 2, the War Walkers are out of the game entirely, significantly reducing the throw weight of the army, creating a kill gap in my favor. By the time that other units can start inflicting heavy casualties, I can utilize the overall kill gap in my favor by burying them under the weight of dice.

 

Situation and tactics are going to determine how the rest of the game plays out target wise. It's an objectives game, so you need to contest or kill those Rangers sitting on the objective at some point (starting around turn 3, but planning on getting to them by no later than turn 4, preferably in assault), but with the loss of the Dire Avengers and Jetbikes (who were always pretty high up on the target list), you've minimized his ability to challenge objectives in your area of control, and elminated his ability to take them.

 

Starting middle/end of turn 4 you've got to start doing something about the Falcon as well, if only because it's going to stick around to try and contest. Because he can bring it in from all the way across the table towards the end of the game, you're still better off ignoring it as long as possible *IF* you go second. That forces him to always expose the Falcon at/near an objective at the end of a game where you get at least one round of trying to bust its rear armor in assault.

 

Because Eldar are such a maneuver based army, S is always going to provide a lot of weight to your targetting decisions.

 

My logic for all of the above is contained within the explaination of the K1, K2, D1, D2 up in the first post. Remember... every anti-tank weapon fired at the falcon is a warwalker or jetbike (save 3+) that's more likely to survive to the next turn.

 

Remember, that you're the general, every battle is unique, and the skill in Killhammer is applying S to targets as the battle evolves.

[Warp Angel]

I thought it would be a good idea to examine some units in Killhammer fashion and hopefully spur some more discussion on this topic. There's a lot of keen minds that I'd like some input from.

 

To provide some discussion numbers, here's how I'm going to do it.

 

K1: Est. #of MEQ kills per turn or AV12 penetrating hits per turn

K2: Est. #of turns to get into optimum kill range (0=now, 1= next turn, etc)

D1: Est. #of units shooting/engaging in H2H required to kill the unit or render it powerless. (I'm assuming a balanced army in my numbers, you know your army best)

D2: Est. #of turns it's going to take to destroy the unit based upon available firepower/number of attacks (i.e. If it's 3 units shooting to get it, and you can only bring 1 per turn for the next three turns, that number is 3)

S: Arbitrary rating applied by you to affect Killhammer rating. In general, add 1 for a scoring unit during deployment in an objectives game, and add one for each turn after the first; Add 1 if it contributes to phase out; add 1 if it's a vehicle and its AV is under 12, subtract 1 if it's AV is 13, 2 if it is 14; Add 1-3 in a scoring game if it is contesting an objective; Add 1 if they are easier to kill than MEQs; Add 1 or more depending on unit support (Eldar farseers, Tau markerlights) available. This number should be equal to the increase in MEQ or AV12 penetrating hits it generates.; Add 1 if they have LD below 8;

 

Again, scoring is ALWAYS subjective, these are intended to be guidelines. Higher numbers are better, but only best targets will have positive numbers. A 0 or -1 is still a good target.

 

 

High Priority Targets - Their units (pregame)

Formula: (K1-K2) - (D1 + D2) + S = Target Priority We don't know D2 during pregame, so we are going to assume 0. Table quarters may make it very easy to target some otherwise long range units. Deployment would obviously apply different S and D2, we're just trying to figure out deployment options.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eldar: War walker squadrons: (3 - 0) - (3 + 0) + (2) = 0. Tons of firepower, long range, low defense and probably supported for more kills.

Necrons: Destroyers: (3 - 0) - (5 + 0) + (1) = -1. Tons of firepower, long range, high mobility, good defense, but small numbers mean a high return on your kills. Plus they count towards phase out.

Orks: Loota squads: (4 - 0) - (3 + 0) + 1 = 2. Stupidly huge firepower potential, long range, but rubbish defense and leadership.

Tau: Crisis Squad: (3 - 1) - (3 + 0) + 0 = -1. Great firepower, but fairly slow to engage, takes a bit of shooting to bring down. This assumes a low number of drones.

Dark Eldar: Raider mounted squad: (3 - 0) - (2 + 0) + (3) = 4. Enough firepower and mobility to be a threat, assumes the ability to get to pistol range and possibly CC first turn. Vehicle has very low AV, easier to kill than MEQs, low LD and a scoring unit. If you aren't shooting at them, why not?

Guard: Basalisk: (4 - 0) - (2 + 0) + 0 = 2. Devastating firepower potential, with the ability to kill far more than 4, but also none (averaged 4), and great range. [As a side note, guard squads are about equal, but have a lower kill potential, making them a lower priority target. They hardly ever rate much different than a 0. (2 + 0) - (2 + 0) + 2 = 2 - scoring, low leadership.]

Chaos Marine: Noise/Rubric Marine Squad: (4 - 1) - (4 + 0) + 1 = 1. Decent firepower when upgraded, but no harder to kill than regular Marines. Khorne marks have a higher K2 during deployment, Plague Marines have a slightly lower K1 but mich higher D1, basic CSM have slightly less K. Assumes objective mission.

Loyalist Marine: Assault Squad: (4 - 0) - (4 + 0) = 0. Low time to target, with PP/Flamers and PW, they can kill a lot, very quickly. Die just as easily as regular marines.

Daemon Hunters: Fire Support Dreadnaught: (2 - 0) - (4 + 0) + 0 = -2. You don't have ANY good targets against a pure DH force in the pregame. See below for the breakdown on a GK squad for more info.

Sisters of Battle: Immolator mounted Celestians: (5 - 0) - (4 + 0) + 0 = 0. They're in your face with heavy weapons out of the gate, hitting and potentially killing a horde of your guys, but aren't overly difficult to kill.

 

Low Priority Targets - Their units (pregame)

Eldar: Falcons: (2 - 0) - (6 + 0) + (1) = -3. Deceptively low firepower, that if he bothers to use isn't transporting dangerous troops. Transport capability gives another priority point from S, but too many squads need to fire. I might actually rate the K2 lower, and the D1 higher if I was positive that it would be used to deploy across the board early instead of shooting.

Necrons: Monoliths: (3 - 0) - (8 + 0) + (0) = -4. Relatively low firepower. 3 K1 may be generous. The living metal means you have next to no weapons that will hurt them, and you need to fire a number of times to actually take it out with those weapons. It's a transport, but doesn't count towards phase out. Ignore it.

Orks: Nob Bikers: (8 - 1) - (Off the Chart + 0) + 1 = Stupidly low. Off the hook CC capability, not a whole lot in shooting actually. With the possibility of 24 FNP wounds, cover saves, invulnerable saves, most shots you're going to send at this unit are going to be wasted. This is one bad ass unit that you aren't going to want to spend any shooting but what you have to at first turn. The only way to deal with this monster is to use sacrificial and blocking units to maneuver them into a kill pocket where you can start lobbing plasma cannon and flamer templates at them bringing Off the Chart amounts of fire power at them in a single turn, and charge en masse, or deploy in such a way that they are going to spend time in the open after each combat. Kill the rest of the army if you can, and prove you're a better general than the cheesemonkey who brings gobs of these guys. It can be done.

Tau: Devilfish: (2 - 1) - (5 + 0) + 1 = -3. Relatively low firepower, short ranged. Yes, it is a transport, but it's not scoring, and isn't carrying the equivalent of assault troops or tank hunters.

Dark Eldar: Talos: (3 - 2) - (4 + 0) + (0) = -3. Bad firepower, high toughness, and even with run it's SLOOOOOOOOW. It can wait until you've savaged the ravagers.

Guard: Leman Russ: (4 - 0) - (6 + 0) + 0 = -2. Devastating firepower potential, with the ability to kill far more than 4, but also none (averaged 4), and great range. AV 14 on the front is a pain in the rear in the beginning of the game. The K1 goes down once you can get into assault with it or bring melta guns to bear, so wait until you can bring the pain (not deployment) to go after it.

Chaos Marine: Dreadnaught: (3 - 2) - (4 + 0) + (-1) = -4. Low firepower in general, needs hand to hand to really shine, but slow to get there. Also the chance of doing something stupid to your opponent (hence the -1 S).

Loyalist Marine: Assault Terminators: (12 - 2) - (8 + 0) -5 = -3. Here's an example of using S outside of the guidelines. A full squad of assault terminators is going to destroy just about anything that it gets to in H2H. But it has to get there. It's going to take an average of 8 tactical squads dedicating firepower to them at > rapid fire range to bring them down (deployment time means long range). So on the S - they're probably in a transport. I can't do anything to them (-1). Even when they eventually reach hand to hand on turn 2, they're going to overkill any unit they're fighting, and be exposed for return fire. Additionally, by good maneuvering, I get to choose the units they get to engage, limiting their overall effectiveness. This ability to limit their effectiveness and marginalize by maneuver rather than eliminate by fire and close combat rates a -5 in my book. Low priority target.

Daemon Hunters: GK Squad: (4 - 2) - (5 + 0) + -2 = -5. 10 GK with Storm Bolters (and maybe a psycannon) aren't that threatening. If they get to hand to hand, they'll kill more, but it's a foot slog for them to do so. Additionally, the shrouding is a -2 overall rated S deterrent to targetting them in the first place. Like when dealing with Assault Terminators, they can be marginalized in effectiveness if you kill their support and maneuver well.

Sisters of Battle: Foot slogging sisters: (5 - 2) - (7 + 0) + 1 = -3. Massed 20 strong, bolter fire at BS4 has got a heavy throw weight, but they have to close to be most effective. Additionally, the large squad size, acts of faith, and power armor make them a tough customer. Go for equally threatening units that can bring more firepower to bear faster. Keep in mind, that if you let them close to rapid fire range without inflicting serious casualties, you're asking for a world of hurt.

 

Feedback would be appreciated.

[Grand Master Raziel]

Warp Angel, this is an excellent thread. These are things I've learned over the years, but never pulled together in a cohesive way like this. I think this will help my play a lot.

 

A couple of related points I'd like to touch on...

 

1: I think one of the differences between winning players and losing players is that winning players leave as little to chance as they can, and they do it by having any number of secondary targets for all their units, and by making sure that they can bring a lot to bear on priority targets if they need to, whereas a losing player will engage single units with single units and not have backups for really important targets. Or, to put it another way, a bad player will engage a Wave Serpent full of Dire Avengers with a single multimelta-toting Speeder, and if he misses or doesn't roll an Immobilized or Destroyed result will blame it on bad luck. A good player will back up the tank hunting Speeder his ML-toting Devastators, his Dreadnought, the autocannon from his Predator, and whatever else he can reasonably bring to bear. That way, he minimizes the impact that one bad die roll can have.

 

2: You covered target prioritizaton very well, but you might have touched more on the prioritization of what units to engage with. You want to engage targets in a way that maximizes the potential of the units you're engaging with (to be fair, you did mention that). Using the above example, you engage the Wave Serpent with the Speeder first. The Dev Squad with 4 MLs may have a better chance of killing it, but it could also be turned to good effect on any number of other targets, so you use the Speeder first. If the Speeder whiffs, then you evaluate the situation and determine what to engage with next. Do you use the Devs, or is there something more important they should be engaging? You've still got the Pred and the Dread, but if you engage with the Pred, then only its autocannon has a chance of having an effect, wasting the heavy bolter shots. Do you engage with the Dread, or try and save it to engage the Dire Avengers once you pop the Wave Serpent with something else? The answer is always going to be situational. If your opponent is frittering away potent units on silly escapades along the edges of the board, then you can unload on that Wave Serpent with everything you've got. If your opponent is remaining focused, then maybe you can't lavish such attention on it.

 

3: Redundancy: if you rely on one unit for one particular task, then the loss of that unit is going to sting more than the loss of points-invested suggests. For instance, if you're relying on a single Predator Annihilator to cover your anti-tank needs, then losing it is really going to hamper your army as the game progresses. Consequently, if you have an opponent relying on a single unit for a particular task, then hammering that unit with everything you feasably can to make it go away becomes a good idea. I think you only touched on that briefly with your example about the Defilers.

 

4: Objectives only matter on the last turn of the game. Trying to jump on them Turn 1 is a mistake. It distracts you from killing your opponent's stuff. I find that thinking about them on Turn 4 is about right.

[CompanyOfTheFallen]

I had two games after reading your tactica.

I took quite a balanced list.

 

The first one was against pretty balanced tyranids - which came out at a 15:5 (special mission of an upcoming tournament) for me.

The second one was against massive footslogger orcs on a table to their favor (stupidly high amount of cover and slightly too small board) which came out as an 11:9 in the same mission. This one was pretty interestig, because I never, ever won against him before :D

 

So thanks for this tactica - it seems to help me a lot.

[Warp Angel]

Warp Angel, this is an excellent thread. These are things I've learned over the years, but never pulled together in a cohesive way like this. I think this will help my play a lot.

 

A couple of related points I'd like to touch on...

 

1: I think one of the differences between winning players and losing players is that winning players leave as little to chance as they can, and they do it by having any number of secondary targets for all their units, and by making sure that they can bring a lot to bear on priority targets if they need to, whereas a losing player will engage single units with single units and not have backups for really important targets. Or, to put it another way, a bad player will engage a Wave Serpent full of Dire Avengers with a single multimelta-toting Speeder, and if he misses or doesn't roll an Immobilized or Destroyed result will blame it on bad luck. A good player will back up the tank hunting Speeder his ML-toting Devastators, his Dreadnought, the autocannon from his Predator, and whatever else he can reasonably bring to bear. That way, he minimizes the impact that one bad die roll can have.

 

2: You covered target prioritizaton very well, but you might have touched more on the prioritization of what units to engage with. You want to engage targets in a way that maximizes the potential of the units you're engaging with (to be fair, you did mention that). Using the above example, you engage the Wave Serpent with the Speeder first. The Dev Squad with 4 MLs may have a better chance of killing it, but it could also be turned to good effect on any number of other targets, so you use the Speeder first. If the Speeder whiffs, then you evaluate the situation and determine what to engage with next. Do you use the Devs, or is there something more important they should be engaging? You've still got the Pred and the Dread, but if you engage with the Pred, then only its autocannon has a chance of having an effect, wasting the heavy bolter shots. Do you engage with the Dread, or try and save it to engage the Dire Avengers once you pop the Wave Serpent with something else? The answer is always going to be situational. If your opponent is frittering away potent units on silly escapades along the edges of the board, then you can unload on that Wave Serpent with everything you've got. If your opponent is remaining focused, then maybe you can't lavish such attention on it.

 

3: Redundancy: if you rely on one unit for one particular task, then the loss of that unit is going to sting more than the loss of points-invested suggests. For instance, if you're relying on a single Predator Annihilator to cover your anti-tank needs, then losing it is really going to hamper your army as the game progresses. Consequently, if you have an opponent relying on a single unit for a particular task, then hammering that unit with everything you feasably can to make it go away becomes a good idea. I think you only touched on that briefly with your example about the Defilers.

 

4: Objectives only matter on the last turn of the game. Trying to jump on them Turn 1 is a mistake. It distracts you from killing your opponent's stuff. I find that thinking about them on Turn 4 is about right.

 

That's all for advanced tactica that I'm working on. I you check some of the other killhammer posts, you'll see the same things that you're talking about being discussed. But I don't disagree with anything you've said.

[Warp Angel]

Based on another thread, Brother Ra'Kesh and I began a PM conversation about Killhammer that I thought worth sharing. With his permission, I've reposted the conversation here, with my commentary.

 

The first exchange:

BR: Ok I have read your killhammer as well as a bit on OODA. you article in all essence I find doesn't give someone a firm grip or Idea on how to use it. I would almost like to see a way that you used your killhammer theorys and got into another persons kill hammer. How you depicted in your own list what was sacrificial to the cause and what you chose was important to effectively eliminate the threat. I know perceived threat can put a lot of focus away from the real threat. I'm a little confused on how your formula works. If you could provide an example that would be great. Talk to you later.

 

 

WA: The OODA loop isn't explicitly stated, but is implied in the "creation of the Kill Gap". The objective being, eliminate your enemy's options until he's doing exactly what you think he's going to do.

 

Then you're 40 second Boyd and your opponent is another sucker buying the beer.

 

And the first Killhammer Article is Target Priority. No more, no less. The advanced concepts of how to apply it aren't really covered. I'm still working on how to best explain that.

 

But examples:

 

Opponent's units are rated on damage output less defensive strength. Essentially, you want to pick the easiest to kill units out of his killing units.

 

(K1 - K2) - (D1 + D2) + S = Target Rating

 

Your units are rated on damage output and survivability rolled into a single package. You want to have units that have a good kill ratio, and are able to survive punishment.

 

(K1 - K2) + (D1 + D2) + S = Attack Rating

 

A single War Walker is a good example of a great target.

 

Two heavy weapons = High K1, Good range = Low K2, AV10 = Low inherent defense, Single model = less time to kill, Mobility and potential Farseer buffs = Good S.

 

A 10 man basic terminator squad is a good example of a great attacker.

 

Two heavy weapons (cyclones or assault cannons) plut storm bolters = High K1, adequate range = Low K2, 2+/5+ Save = high inherent defense, 10 models = more time to kill. Mobility, ability to fire on the move, deployment options = Good S.

 

Now, in a Killhammer v. Killhammer fight (or in any other fight) you have to manipulate the number of the equation in your favor.

 

K1 is fixed until the unit starts taking casualties or damage to weapons. It's obvious what you need to do to modify it down for a target, but less obvious is how to modify it up for yourself. Protect the unit from shots to keep it's model count high or it's damage results low. Cover is the easiest way to preserve K1, but not the only one.

 

K2 can be controlled by controlling range and/or the engagement details. If a unit is better on the charge, and you're going to get charged by it, maybe it's the smart thing to charge instead. Or, if the unit is only effective in CC, run away from it, and throw low Killhammer rated units at it. Similarly, you can decrease your K2 by being mobile. It gets you into optimal shooting range/assault range faster, and allows you to disengage from a threat that you can't handle.

 

D1 can be improved with cover. Aside from a few wandering invulnerable saves, there's not much else you can do to it either way.

 

So you seek to modify D2. The simplest way to do this is to direct more firepower at the unit to make it take less time to kill. Similarly, by keeping your units from being swarmed in a similar fashion prevents your opponent from lowering your D2.

 

Look for my battle report on my game vs. Tyranids for an example of Killhammer in action. It's an extreme example, but my opponent ended up having no options for how to prosecute the game against me, and it was fought entirely on my terms. Dictating those terms is exactly what getting inside the OODA loop does.

 

You need to create the Kill Gap as quickly as possible. Once you create it, it's only going to grow bigger, and in your favor (barring horrendous dice luck anyway). Once you've done that, the number of effective moves that your opponent has decreases (hopefully to the point of being a very predictable path), until the game is over in a win for you.

 

Like I said, I'm still working on applied Killhammer where I discuss getting into people's heads. There's a definite limit to how this sort of discussion can take place effectively on a text only forum, and in a limited number of words. There are entire textbooks and college-level courses where such things are discussed, and I'm just one guy in a real limited medium.

 

I'm more than happy to discuss specifics one on one. And I take consolation from one thing. Even 40 second Boyd was unable to effectively communicate practial OODA in written form, as were the people who attended his lectures and trained with him. So better minds than mine struggle with the same thing. It's understanding the principles that's important, then instinct and training take over and you can execute more effectively than without OODA.

 

But: Limit enemy options, concentrate your firepower, minimize your casualties, achive victory (which may or may not coincide with killing the enemy).

 

The response: He's got some good ideas about how to throw numbers into the Killhammer formula, but I don't agree with how inflexible those numbers are. It's obvious that he gets it though.

 

BR: I have boon looking and thinking this over and trying to make sense of OODA loop and killhammer. I think there are multiple ways to apply killhammer depending on the army a person is playing. Not only that but K1 of a unit can change depending of the army you are facing like a space marine has a medium shooting K1 when facing a Imperial guard guardsman, Eldar, Dark Eldar, tyranids, and Orks. However have a low shooting K1 against all others.

I propose we work together to try and make killhammer simpler to use yet still an advanced technique that mostly only expirenced players will be able to use since junior players do not know enough about different armies to really use it well. For example lets use your K1 What is the kill potential? None = 0 (some units have no chance to kill something), very low = 2, low = 4, medium = 6 high = 8, and very high = 10. This leaves the General to be subjective enough to decide what level of threat they are facing yet assigns a number so the formula can be relatively consistent. Next is K2 When does it reach its kill potential? Right after I am done (now) = 10 (Immediate threat) Next turn = 8, Turn after = 6, 3rd turn after = 4, 4th turn after = 2, 5th or later turns or never = 0 (Has almost no threat potential at the moment). This way you can see this is a very flexible formula that takes in changes as the battle goes on. I suggest we change kill potential to threat potential as you think about objectives being captured and them killing you so K1 What is the threat potential? K2 When does the unit reach it's Threat potential? All a person has to do is evaluate which threat is more important.

 

Now lets move on to D1 how tough is the target to destroy? I say use the scoring scale very low = 0, low = 2, medium = 4 high = 6, and very high = 8, Can't kill = 10. You do not account for cover saves (explain later), you only account for toughness, saves, invulnerable saves, and armour values. D2 will use the scale Right after I am done (now) = 10 Next turn = 8, Turn after = 6, 3rd turn after = 4, 4th turn after = 2, 5th or later turns or never = 0.

 

Now S I suggest take into consideration cover saves only. This allows a person to put in the modifier in based on the battlefield and terrain because the mission and situation are being assessed in K1 and K2 Threat potential. The scale would be No Cover = 0, 6+ Cover = 2, 5+ Cover = 4, 4+ Cover = 6, 3+ Cover = 8, 2+ Cover or better = 10. Always assume the squad will go to ground to get worst case scenario rating as going to ground can make a difference. I know you are thinking but if someone has a flamer or something that ignores covers saves we are down grading the unit your not though because you just up the K1 of the attacking unit.

 

Lets say a 10 man Space Marine squad (withing flamer range) up against 10 man squad of imperial guardsmen in a fortified bunker (these two squads are the only ones on the battlefield). Marine squad had one flamer and 9 bolters. Guards have 1 Heavy Bolter and 8 lasguns. Threat level low, would be very low but that heavy bolter can pose a small problem. They can be killed now. Tough to kill low. Can be destroyed Now. possible 2+ cover save. So (K1 + K2) + (D1 - D2) + S = Squad Rating, (4 + 0) + (2 - 10) + 10 = 6 rating. Marines kill guards men well but the guards men have a good cover save so they are down graded to low. Marines are ready to kill now. Guardsmen will have a hard time to kill them and they get to attack them right after but would probably never destroy the marine unit. Lets say the marines have a potential cover save of 6+ if they want to go to ground (they wouldn't) that means they have a (4 + 8) + (6 - 0) + 2 = 20 rating. The marines are goin to stomp the guardsmen.

 

I have changed your formula as well to (K1 + K2) + (D1 - D2) +S = Squad rating. The formula then equals out to:

 

K1 = What is the threat potential of the unit? (Strength)

K2 = When will the unit reach its threat potential? (Time)

See how the longer the unit is on the table surviving its threat potential goes up?

 

D1 = How tough is the unit to destroy? (Toughness)

D2 = When will the unit be destroyed? (Time)

See how the earlier the unit is destroyed the less of a threat it becomes?

 

S = Modifier based on cover saves

 

What the user of the formula has to do is make sure they pay attention to all the variables as the K will be creeping up and if they look at the ratings alone they could miss the large threat.

 

I want to know what you think of this work it a few times. It should work if there is a mistake let me know and I'll see if I can figure it out. Or if you can figure it out let me know.

 

I worked on this after listening to a few things John Boyd said to a class one. "One cannot determine a character of nature of a system within itself. Moreover, if it attempts to do so it leads to confusion and disorder." This statement is what describes what the OODA loop tries to do. Paraphrasing a bit here but you must fold your adversary back inside himself so he can't consult the external environment he has to deal with thus creating confusion and disorder inside himself leading to paralysis. Basically when you cause your opposing player to lose so many guys he depends on to win the game he will start making desperate predictable moves which you can counter easily because he is thinking inward only on how to turn the game around instead of consulting the external environment he should be dealing with, now you are in his line of thinking.

 

WA: Brother Ra'kesh,

 

In my opinion, youre attempting to oversimplfy Killhammer.

 

In the original Killhammer article, I was very specific that you need to continually re-evaluate the formula and weight things in relative terms, not absolute ones.

 

Starting with K: If a unit has bolters and all your opponent has on the table are vehicles, your K becomes next to worthless (i.e. Sternguard without upgrades). So yes, you need a flexible scale, but assigning fixed ratings doesn't make any sense. It's up to the general to decide what the values are based upon the S.

 

Moving on to D: Cover changes D. It's not it's own piece of things, it's a modifier. You could throw it in S if you want, but that's not where it belongs.

 

Continuing to S: Cover isn't the only thing S is worth looking at.

 

Is the unit scoring? If so, then in any objectives game, it's obviously a more important target or more important to your army to keep intact.

What turn of the game is it/how many other scoring units are left? Again, relative importance is key here.

Is it the only unit you have capable of reaching the enemy/an objective? If so, it may be weaker than another unit, but it's the ONLY thing thag can do the job and S goes up.

These and other things all are part of that big fuzzy modifier that is S.

 

OODA: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. You have to do the same to your army and your opponent's army every turn, after every roll of the dice. Trying to formalize values for Killhammer oversimplifies things and takes the burden of constant evaluation off of the commander, to the detriment of effectiveness.

 

That's the difference between fighting by doctrine (This unit has X rating and that unit has Y rating, because I'm only including these factors), and fighting by OODA where you aren't following doctrine or limiting the factors that you're evaluating, but adapting EVERYTHING as the situation requires to put your opponent in an untenable situation.

 

Critics of Boyd say that it was his skill as much as it was his "process" that allowed him so many training wins. I don't have a problem with this criticism, and think that Killhammer shouldn't be "formalized" any more than it is now. It's a set of guidelines, not a set of 'rules'. There is no best unit, there are only different units led by different generals. Those with more skill will get more out of Killhammer, and maybe there is no 40k equivalent of Boyd who can remain undefeated, but everyone should be able to see some improvement in their game by thinking in the terms that I've laid out.

 

What you're proposing might be a prop for 'less experienced' players, but would hurt more experienced players who might not dig as deeply into Killhammer and think about it as much if they are given something "easy" to work with. Besides, I've gotten great feedback from new and old players about how Killhammer, as it is right now, works great for them. I really don't think anything needs to be simplified. It just needs to be discussed.

 

It's obvious that you understand it well enough to adjust it for personal use, and if that's the case, then the original articles have served their purpose. I encourage this kind of discussion and innovation. I'm just not going to be the one to simplify the principles. (-edit: In the Killhammer Article - W.A.)

 

And to be more specific, I don't necessarily agree with the way you evaluate things. We're both working within the Killhammer framework, but applying different "math" to it, to achieve the results that we desire.

 

Your method of filling in the numbers for Killhammer isn't any less 'right' than mine, but I do not agree with absolute values for anything, and think that there are situations where if you try and apply fixed values to the Killhammer formula you get the WRONG answer.

 

I'd like to take our PMs and move them onto the forums for exposure to the greater community, and with your permission, will do so.

 

And his final response where he states my goal of achieving greater understanding:

 

BR:] I do not mind if these conversations go into the public forum however I only really read the black templars one, just tell me where you are posting it so i can read other peoples input as well. My Simplifacation of the killhammer formula is an attempt to explain the same thought process. I am not saying either way is right or wrong just my attempt to understand where you are coming from as well. I am not sure if I completely understand how your line of thinking works when comparing ratings of units. My thought process I tried to make so people think of all things as well, sure take out my S value and add it to D1 I just figured that limits are needed in the formula or people can put in the wrong numbers and get a wrong answer. By no means am I trying to insult you or discredit your idea and I hope you don't take it that way either. Evaluate the threat, evaluate the toughness of the threat, take account for additional factors. Evaluate your force the same way. The numbers should be changing as the game goes on no single number will really stay the same as the effectiveness of that unit will change as things happen to it.

 

I am sure we are going toward the same solution just different paths being taken to get there. I guess when I see a formula some sort of value has to go in it but if there really isn't a formula to killhammer and it was just there to show a bit of a thought process I misunderstood it and made it the fore front of my thoughts while reading the whole article.

 

Anyway I look forward to your thoughts on the issue further and hopefully understanding one anothers thought processes.

 

And with that task now done, I'd love for some more feedback. Thanks again to Brother Ra'kesh!

[Siobhan]

Thanks for posting this tactica, and sorry for only posting now after being looking over this forum for a while now.

 

I do have a few questions which i was discussing with my mr last night, that i wondered if you had considered in this theory.

 

firstly, does Killhammer (ie the process of making decisions on target priority) begin before deployment, during deployment? Only where my mr and I play we do not share lists between ourselves, so (although we do play to WYSIWYG) things like Deep Striking units, (Vanguard with HI for example) become incredibly important parts of the forthcoming game.

 

Will you agree that this means your priority would need to change drastically to stop certain things like DS Vanguard, or, lets say, Deep striking anything really (those orks with rockets on their back, i cant think of the name for the life of me, with the special character) who you will need to deploy and actually, during the game, consider with regards to how your army is deployed and reacts?

 

For example, would you still put unit A (important unit) or unit B (tactical squad) in areas which are "risky" to draw his units in, which could potentially be overrun long before you wished it to happen?

 

How would this affect your decisions?

 

Apologies if this sounds long and a bit drawn out but this tactica is impressive, i just hope that i could help refine it to become a genuine masterpiece!

 

Siobhan

[Warp Angel]

Thanks for posting this tactica, and sorry for only posting now after being looking over this forum for a while now.

 

I do have a few questions which i was discussing with my mr last night, that i wondered if you had considered in this theory.

 

firstly, does Killhammer (ie the process of making decisions on target priority) begin before deployment, during deployment? Only where my mr and I play we do not share lists between ourselves, so (although we do play to WYSIWYG) things like Deep Striking units, (Vanguard with HI for example) become incredibly important parts of the forthcoming game.

 

Killhammer begins with list building. You have to have a general idea of the capabilities of the forces in your army and the likely opponent(s) you're going to be facing.

 

Will you agree that this means your priority would need to change drastically to stop certain things like DS Vanguard, or, lets say, Deep striking anything really (those orks with rockets on their back, i cant think of the name for the life of me, with the special character) who you will need to deploy and actually, during the game, consider with regards to how your army is deployed and reacts?

 

That's kind of the point of the killhammer formula. A Vanguard unit wreaking havoc in your deployment zone after falling from the sky in a drop pod is a massively important target to destroy, but if it's already destroyed everything in rapid fire range and is now standing out in the open, more than 12" from anything, you can effectively ignore it.

 

For example: A full sternguard squad (no weapon upgrades) that is within 12" of one of your units could be assessed as: K1 = high K2 = 0, D1 = average D2 = average, S = high (Pedro makes them scoring). They're a high offense and relatively (for space marines) low defense unit. Kill them!!

 

Increase that range to 18" and the K1 becomes average, K2 becomes 1, D1 = average, D2 = average, and they never had Pedro, so their S = average (only because of special ammo). They're something that you can ignore for the most part, depending on what else is on the table.

 

CONSTANTLY re-evaluate the Killhammer ratings of your units and your opponent's units. That constant re-evaluation is why I shy away so hard from coming up with hard rules on what sort of numbers should go into the formula.

 

For example, would you still put unit A (important unit) or unit B (tactical squad) in areas which are "risky" to draw his units in, which could potentially be overrun long before you wished it to happen?

 

How would this affect your decisions?

 

Apologies if this sounds long and a bit drawn out but this tactica is impressive, i just hope that i could help refine it to become a genuine masterpiece!

 

Siobhan

 

The last part here is where you, the General, need to understand your army, your units, and your playstyle to know whether or not that's a good move. Killhammer isn't going to provide you with the "best tactics", it's only going to give you some guidelines on how to effectively use the ones you've chosen.

[Ricter]

Something that may help to get people to understand and use killhammer ideas is to explain how they already use it - for example, a lot of people talk about "units getting their points back". If you explain new ideas in context of old ideas, they're much easier to accept and adapt.