Killhammer Strategy: Close Combat

[Warp Angel]

The fundamental theory of Killhammer is to create a \"kill gap\" between your opponent and yourself.

 

Expanding on my original Killhammer essay, I\'d like to talk about applying the basic principles with regards to Close Combat. I\'m not going to go into the Killhammer basics again here, but instead focus in on applying Killhammer in combat.

 

To act as a memory aid though: K = Killing Power, D = Defensive Strength, and S = Situational Modifier

 

Close Combat units can be broken down into three basic Killhammer levels: Weak, Average, and Strong. Like everything else relating to Killhammer, ratings are subjective and situational. In general however:

 

Strong units will inflict far more casualties than they recieve.

Average units will win or lose combat by a small margin.

Weak units will usually lose combat by a large margin (and often break).

 

But you all knew that, right?

 

So why am I talking about it, and why is it important enough for me to do so? Because knowing how to apply CC power can win games.

 

In 5th edition, with the changes to Close Combat resolution, and the inability to roll into another assault, proper application of CC power is more important than ever.

 

Applying Killhammer principles at their most basic level, it would seem to always make sense to charge your best CC unit into their most damaging unit. For instance, charging vanguard into Dark Reapers. You are pretty much guaranteed to knock them below half starting strength, and force a break test at unfavorable odds.

 

But that may not give you the greatest \"kill gap\" advantage. Your objective with assaulting them is to eliminate the threat that they pose to your army. You can do that just as well by assaulting with a tactical squad, and allow your Vanguard to go after another target that the tacticals can\'t handle as well.

 

By sending in your average CC squad against their average CC squad, you\'ve almost guaranteed that combat is going to take multiple turns. Assuming that you\'re at no risk of being countercharged by anything, this is a VERY sound strategy in many cases. The Reapers aren\'t shooting anything, and they\'ve become somewhat ineffective for at least one turn of the game, and due to the nature of the combat, your tactical marines are probably taking fewer casualties than they otherwise would if not in CC. This shifts the \"kill gap\" in your favor.

 

That vanguard squad is now free to assault and severely damage or destroy the wraithlord that would inflict far more casualties had you chosen to reverse roles for the two squads. More than likely, the wraithlord ISN\'T dead on your turn.

 

(This is the part where you claim Warp Angel is crazy - you\'re thinking that you could have wiped out the Reapers and tied up the Wraithlord if you had reversed it. PS: You\'re right, you could have).

 

If you weren\'t crazy like me, however, your tacticals would have suffered far worse at the hands of the wraithlord comparatively than the vanguard would have, and your vanguard would now be out in the open, exposed to enemy fire. By staying in combat, you\'ve rendered much of your opponents army ineffective during the shooting phase.

 

Come your opponent\'s CC phase, you\'ve got a better than average chance to destroy the wraithlord and break/destroy the dark reapers. The latter is less likely, but even assuming your tacticals are tied up again, the vanguard can charge over and tilt the combat back in your favor and eliminate the Reapers. At the worst, you leave the tactical squad in combat and apply Killhammer principles with the Vanguard wherever they make the most sense.

 

So what do you do if you are overmatched in CC (like we usually are against Biker Nobz)?

 

It\'s the same principles, applied differently. You DON\'T send your vanguard against the Biker Nobz. You send a wall of Rhinos to deny their assault in the first place, or you send a squad that is guaranteed to die on their turn, leaving the bikers open to being shot. If you pick their target for them, you can ensure that for the price of one unit, you can pour fire into a tightly massed group of bikes.

 

If you don\'t have the localized firepower to inflict significant casualties (remember kids, only 1 in 4 non AP 1 or 2 wounds from shooting is going to stick), you feed the nobz a unit that will tie them up for multiple turns, or feed multiple units into the grinder so that the killing they do is meaningless compared to the carnage you fling at the rest of their force.

 

This latter example is one that many people aren\'t willing to go with, since it means that you\'re sacrificing a portion of your army to no gain... and one that is completely counter intuitive to the way that you would have played in 4th ed. Just keep telling yourself \"points don\'t matter\", and you\'ll eventually be able to believe it. Your job is to go for complete destruction of the rest of his army, while feeding the hungry nobs just enough to render them less effective.

 

That\'s how you create the kill gap with defensive CC.

 

Final lesson of Killhammer CC: It\'s almost always good to charge a non-marine enemy that\'s below half strength after your anticipated CC body count. If you win combat by 2, most armies are going to break on a 2d6 roll of less than 6. More than half the time. More often than not, they\'ll never recover. Even if you don\'t end up chasing them down, they are no longer scoring and will eventually run off the table. Charging a 15 strong boyz squad accomplishes the same thing. Even assuming they\'re sluggas and choppa boyz, you\'re going to hit them with 4 wounds, they\'re going to be lucky to get 2 in. They stick around, but they\'re down to 9 for the next CC turn where you\'ll probably rout them.

 

Remember that Killhammer is a methodology and thought process that requires your judgement in applying the principles to your specific situation.

 

Discussion is welcome.

 

I\'d be especially interested if you\'ve found you\'ve been using Killhammer principles already. I didn\'t invent Killhammer, I just documented it. Far better players than me figured this out long ago and have been (consciously or unconsciously) winning GTs with it for years. I figure at almost 20 years into the hobby, it was about time for me to get a grip on the game theory behind the game.

[Shiodome]

Definitely seems to be a large part of the 'art of assualts' now that you deliberately try to win assaults in the second round (their turn). or if not win them, at least resolve them... (i.e after the second round of combat, have the involved units unengaged). This 'weighing up' starts before the assault phase though, the decision whether to fire on a unit before the assaults can often be quite important, and not just for the 'if i kill too much, will removed models leave me out of assault range?' reason. If firing on a unit is going to tip the odds of you winning the combat outright, it can often be worth holding fire on the assault target for a longer combat, and instead using that firepower to whittle down the opponents counter charge unit(s). though of course this applies to supporting fire... the unit assaulting can only choose whether to fire at the intended assault target (or not).

 

Marines now have an advantage in this area with the option to fail their morale tests, giving you more control than any other force over the length of assaults. i'm refering to the ability to voluntarily fall back from a 'minor loss' in assaults, though not fool proof it's an option others don't have.

[SeattleDV8]

Well thought out Warp Angel. . A very resonable look at CC. Like you say, at first it seems counter intuitive but on deeper thought makes perfect sense.

[Warp Angel]

Definitely seems to be a large part of the 'art of assualts' now that you deliberately try to win assaults in the second round (their turn). or if not win them, at least resolve them... (i.e after the second round of combat, have the involved units unengaged). This 'weighing up' starts before the assault phase though, the decision whether to fire on a unit before the assaults can often be quite important, and not just for the 'if i kill too much, will removed models leave me out of assault range?' reason. If firing on a unit is going to tip the odds of you winning the combat outright, it can often be worth holding fire on the assault target for a longer combat, and instead using that firepower to whittle down the opponents counter charge unit(s). though of course this applies to supporting fire... the unit assaulting can only choose whether to fire at the intended assault target (or not).

 

Marines now have an advantage in this area with the option to fail their morale tests, giving you more control than any other force over the length of assaults. i'm refering to the ability to voluntarily fall back from a 'minor loss' in assaults, though not fool proof it's an option others don't have.

 

And you can't forget the art of "keeping your enemy from using their dice against you".

 

I'm more than content to lose a CC over 2 turns to a squad of Dark Reapers if it means 2 turns that they aren't shooting at the rest of my army. The same theory goes towards feeding Ork Nob Bikers squads. If they're killing stuff I don't need to win, they can't kill the stuff that I do.

[Absalon]

First of; hi every body.

 

Been enjoying the board since starting my marine army, so it seemed like it was time to ad to the fun.

 

Second; nice piece.

 

You hit on some interesting points.

 

One question comes to mind though, assaulting IG. They are virtualy impossible not to kill in your round of CC by specialiced CC units, even when not shot at. So how do you see Killhammer used against that type of army? Overwhelm him with targets or...?

 

I like your point on tieing up/sacrificing units. Probably requires some test games to get the hang of, but has been thinking along those lines (with the local Ork speed freak horde in mind). This might not be Killhammer in the strictests sence but more standard CSing.

 

Full TAC SQD w. rhino, dividede into CS A (w. SGT) and CS B.

 

Rhino: Ranging ahead directing/hindering ork moves, even when wrecked it fullfils its role.

CS B: Behind rhino

CS A: Behind B

 

(Still working on the spacing between the units, probably something like 12" and 6")

 

CS B will be the recieving unit with four possible outcomes; A) shot at and falls back (CT), :D is charged and falls back (again CT), C) CS B doesnt manage to escape or D) CS B is wiped out.

 

Depending on the ork player outcome A is quite likely, untill (s)he grows acustomed to it, then D will probably become the norm. All of the results leave the orks vulnarable to CS A (counter)charge, with A and B being the most desireable as both CS get to shot and charge in your turn (remember we have both bolt- guns and pistols now).

 

This should keep the average ork speed freak mob occupied for some three turns, giving your more specialised assault units time to deal with his/hers special units.

 

I havent factored in SW or multiple units, as I'm only trying to underline the tactic. Still untested (not that many 5ed SM games under my belt) so comments are wellcome...

[Warp Angel]

As an avid guard player, you've got very little to fear from wiping a 10 man squad out instantly in hand to hand. Even rapid firing lasguns from the next squad are going to be lucky to inflict more than 1 wound. Don't be afraid of smearing a guard squad and running it off the table.

 

Killhammer says you'd be ignoring getting into CC with a line platoon anyway, in favor of taking out heavy weapon squads, command squads, and vehicles most of the time. A guard squad has Low K, Low D, and generally a low S. This means low priority target.

[Absalon]

Point taken concerning IG. Should have seen that coming, as it was the first 40K army I played. Shame on me! lol

What I was trying to say, and failing miserably as I re-read my post, was armies where you are almost sure of destroying one basic SQD per turn in CC (IG, Tau and some Eldar). But your point seems valid for those as well.

 

Having re-read your post, I see two distinct ways of applying KH.

1) Offensively; strong >< strong and weak><weak (you have the upper hand CC wise)

and

2) Defensively; weak >< strong and strong><weak (opposite is true)

 

If this is a correct assumption, the defensive pose is the hardest one to adopt. I see the concept, and it's a good one, but how do you hinder the enemy in getting as much out of it as you do? I know we have above average basic units but we have fewer of them and they are normally our troop choices which we need for scoring. You can only keep feeding them into CC for so long. Do you propose to ignore the threat altogether or deal with it at an opportune moment?

[Warp Angel]

If you go back to the original Killhammer article (see my sig), you'll find that there's a way to determine what units you need to try and destroy and a way to determine which units you have available to feed into the grinder.

 

Your opponent's units: (K1-K2) - (D1+D2) + S

Your units: (K1-K2) + (D1+D2) + S

 

K1 = Relative Killing Power of the unit

K2 = How long it takes to apply that killing power

D1 = How hard it is to kill

D2 = How much time it will take to kill

S = Subjective Situtuational Modifier (is it scoring? Do you need its mobility?)

 

Essentially, you go after your opponent's highest offense units with a low enough defense you can destroy quickly.

And you keep your high offense, high defense units mobile and active.

 

The objective is to create a "kill gap" in your favor by reducing the effective number of dice that your opponent can put against you faster than he's reducing yours.

 

Using CC as an example, Dark Reapers have got a stupidly high shooting K, but a very low CC K. Their defense (especially if they are in cover) is pretty darn good. By assaulting them, even if you are going to eventually lose the combat, you've swung the dice in your favor for that turn or two where the Dark Reapers aren't shooting.

 

Specifically: A vanilla combat squad of 5 within 12" of a 6 strong Dark Reaper squad has got options.

 

 

Stand and shoot

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

Marines (Low + 0 [they're on target]) + (Low [against Reaper shooting] + 0) + Avg [scoring] = Low Killhammer

Reapers (High + 0) - (Good + 2 [number of shooting turns needed, give or take] + Low = High Killhammer

 

Standing and shooting, your Marines are going to be subjected to a lot of killing power, while doing relatively little to your opponent.

 

Pistols and charge

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

Marines (Low + 0) + (High [against Reaper CC] + 2 [number of turns to wipe if they're lucky]) + Avg [scoring] = Good Killhammer

Reapers (Low + 0) - (Avg [against marine CC] + 2 [number of turns Marines need to kill or break]) + Low = Low Killhammer

 

By assaulting, you've rendered a powerful unit much less effective, even if you never manage to actually wipe them out or end up losing CC. You've changed the "kill gap" in your favor.

 

Defensively, it gets a bit harder, like you indicated. But if you feed just enough squads into the grinder against a Nob Biker Squad, while tabling the rest of his army, there's not a whole lot that he can do. The objective is to reduce his K (amount of killing that he can do) by dictating how and where he can do the killing, and against what units.

 

The units that you're feeding into the grinder should be buying you time to accomplish the following:

 

1) Clump them up for template weapons - increasing the K of your units

2) Channel them with expendable vehicles, increasing the distance to the next unit, and minimizing the number of of assaults that it can engage in

3) Maneuver them away from objectives and more valuable units

 

Like everything with Killhammer, specifics are situational and subjective.

 

The art is in the application.

[minigun762]

How can Killhammer work when it comes to making the decision to rapid fire or charge?

 

Often I find myself in a situation unsure what is the best course of action. A common example is this:

My 10 man CSM squad (armed with a variety of special weapons) vs a large (20+) Slugga Boy Mob.

 

If I charge, I deny them the Furious Charge bonus and get the +1 Attack for myself. I'm still going to hit before them which is good.

If I rapid fire, I thin out their numbers prior to them even getting to charge, however when they charge me next turn, they get to fire their Shootas (not a huge concern but there) and get Furious Charge but I'm still hitting before them.

 

As it stands now, I decide based on my choice of special weapons. Meltas and Flamers = I charge them and Plasmaguns = I rapid fire, but that decision is made without really viewing what the opponent is using.

[Warp Angel]

You need to make the decision that sways the "kill gap" in your direction. Unless you need that squad to not be engaged, you should almost always charge.

 

Let's use Mathhammer (approximations) to help.

 

You're within 12", giving you the option of charging in the first place.

 

If you rapid fire, that's 14 bolters, a bolt pistol (sarge), a special weapon (we'll go with flamer), and a heavy weapon (we'll call in heavy bolter).

 

Flamer gets 5 possible/3actual wounds, 10 hits/5 wounds from bolters and bolt pistol, and 2hits/wounds from heavy bolter. Since wound = dead with Ork Armor, you've taken out 10 of the 30 boyz.

 

That'll be 17 slugga shots, 9 big shoota shots from the remaining 20, for 6 hits/3 wounds from slugga, and 3 hits/2 wounds from big shootas. You'll lose 2 guys to failed saves.

 

They charge.

 

You get 7 regular attacks, and 3 sgt. power weapon attacks. That's 4 hits/2 wounds for regular attacks and 2 hits, 1 wound with sarge. 3 dead orks (assumes all saves fail). The remaining orks get 4 power klaw attacks (2 hit, 2 dead), 58 attacks (27 hit, 13 wound, 4 failed save) for a total of 6 dead marines. You start the second assault phase with 2 marines left standing against 17 living orks.

 

If you don't rapid fire, you get 9 bolt pistol shots for 6hits/3 wound/dead and 5 flamer hits for 3 wounds/dead. So you kill 6 instead of 10. Lower number.

 

You charge.

 

You get 18 regular attacks, and 4 sgt. power weapon attacks. That's 9 hits, 5 wounds, 4 dead orks. Sarge gets 2, kills one. 5 dead orks. On average, there are only going to be 19 orks left instead of 20. They only mange 48 regular attacks with 24 hits, and only 8 wounds (3 dead marines) and 2 dead from the Power Klaw for a total of 5 lost. The Orks have actually LOST combat, and since they're fearless because of unit strength, they're going to take an additional casualty, reducing the total mob strength to 18, but this is balanced against you having 5 surviving Marines.

 

Mathhammer is an educated guess at best, but you've resulted in a greater swing of "kill gap" in your favor by killing fewer orks but keeping more of your forces alive. You're also pretty assured of tying them up for another full game turn, preventing them from doing any real damage to another unit.

 

So, in Killhammer summary:

You should charge with your full tactical squad into a full choppa boyz squad more often than not, because you increase your D at little to no reduction in your K, while reducing their K

 

Killhammer says that this is a sound strategy.

 

Always remember the S modifier.

 

And honestly, I'd hope that you didn't have a single isolated tactical squad facing a single boyz squad, and could inflict even more shooting casualties from another unit, further swinging the close combat in your favor if you charge. The more you win combat by, the more boyz die from "fearless".

[robdark1]

hey warp angel here a question why is that most army dont have clean up units when your trying to assault in a some what fresh unit that hasnt been touched?

asking because i always found out that having a advanage in assault with it comes two a having double the assault power need to kill a unit because of how easy it is to lose sight of what is need to counter there power also. just wondering ...

[Warp Angel]

hey warp angel here a question why is that most army dont have clean up units when your trying to assault in a some what fresh unit that hasnt been touched?

asking because i always found out that having a advanage in assault with it comes two a having double the assault power need to kill a unit because of how easy it is to lose sight of what is need to counter there power also. just wondering ...

 

That's actually another aspect of Killhammer that I haven't expanded on.

 

Looking at the Defense (D1 + D2) of a unit, you can always decrease D2 by adding additional units (assaulting or shooting) to the mix.

 

Let's take the humble Chaos Marine squad. It's got a decent D1 (inherent defense), and a single Marine squad has got a low K1. It will take many turns (D2) to eliminate it with just the K1 of your loyalist squad... assuming it doesn't get killed first.

 

If you add in another unit... say a land raider (with a high K1) to the shooting, you've lowered your enemy's D2 (time it takes to kill).

 

The same thing applies if you were to add a group of 5 assault marines into a fight between a 10 man tactical and a 30 man ork squad. Expanding on my example above where the tactical squad charges: The 5 man assault squad gets 5 bolt pistol shots, 2 kills out of shooting. This reduces the Orks to 22 before assault and inflicts about 4 more casualties on the Orks, reducing the total number to 18. Orks end up doing one less casualty to the Marines, losing combat by even more, and ending up with about 14 orks left against 10 Marines. Guess who is going to hands down win that fight next turn?

 

Killhammer lesson: Adding units together to reduce opponent's D2 makes them a better target.

[Brother Gathurn]

Exelent as usall warp angel. I loved you kill hammer buy the way

[robdark1]

so what you saying in short is that in order to destory any unit it take about average of 2 turns to really destory any unit unless you apply a different idea to the equation overall. so what the differnce between offense and defense, that one unit may excel in offense other than that it not that good on defense. well that one way at looking at the value of one unit vs another. why would anyone thoe want to play this way it a little to analioc dont you think. i kill hammer mean that you only going to kill the main support units in his army while not loseing to much of your own. would also say that having a 4 to 2 advange in assault power and support power make it easyier to play the army that you already have to began with. alteast this way you can say that most unit that you destory will take about 3 kill point to drop one your units..

[Warp Angel]

Robdark:

 

It seems analytic, but when you actually start applying Killhammer, you'll find it flows organically.

 

Reduce the number of dice that your opponent can use against you.

Maximize the amount of dice that you can use against your opponent.

 

If you've spent any time playing, you're probably already doing this, or at least trying.

 

Killhammer is just a way of figuring out the best way to do it, and a tool to help you do better at things you're already doing.

[robdark1]

well that how you put it. yes i figure that out for a long time now that if you reduce the opp dice rolls and make him fail the most critical rolls need to win that mean that you applying kill hammer to the equation over all. also consider that most people hate playing me because the i play mostly deathwing army at 1850 again and about for a 1 year and half now off and on. mostly because the armour save and the fact a squad full of power fist at 255 is a steal of a deal but what make it more importantly is the fact as you said in kill points.

 

opp spend so much time trying to kill the whole unit that the rest of the army is on the way to there objective or total wipe out of the enemy key unit as predict. mostly people panic when they see that army i havent really play against deathwing at all but it hard when you deep stike about 90% of the time out of time.

for kill hammer i would apply the fact that it a lot to wipe anything as you said earier, adding on thoe power of assault is a big thing when you count it any staragy you play if you ask me..

[Warp Angel]

Especially with the changes to CC resolution in 5th edition, being able to supplement shooting with the ability to assault is critical to Marine armies. Combats that we would have lost in 4th edition now turn into close victories for us, with the possibility of wiping out the opponent.

 

I played a 3000pt, 3hr. Apocalypse game with 4 Deathwing, 1 GK Grand Master and 5 man termie retinue, 2 BA Assault Squads, Belial, Shrike, 3 man Ravenwing bike squad, and 3 Venerable Dreads.

 

I just about tabled a guard army by turn 5, during which destroyed 100 Stormtroopers in a single turn. I did this by winning combats that forced them off the table, destroyed them falling back through one of my units, or caught them with an assault squad sweeping advance.

 

I sat on 5 of the 6 objectives and he had a barely functional LR Demolisher left on the table.

[Joshta]

Warp,

Your tactica is spot on. I love reading your work.

 

Jay

[Warp Angel]

Just trying to do my part.

[chunky04]

To add a couple of things to this, one of the ways you can manipulate opponents D2 to be favourable for you in a CC is to charge multiple units, especially against armies like IG. You then either kill a lot more with a wipeout roll, or they stick in combat for longer. As long as you're winning the combats and not in danger of losing to attrition, this is generally a good idea. You'll often need to do some very careful manouevering in order to pull this off however. Units with larger bases such as terminators or bikes who are more forgiving with regards to unit coherency tend to be better at this role.

[Twin .44]

Reduce the number of dice that your opponent can use against you.

Maximize the amount of dice that you can use against your opponent.

 

Had a game last night where I applied such a thing to a T. There was quite a bit of death moving my in the form of a near full strength tactical squad, 5 man terminator squad and half tactical squad. Creating a wall of armor, I lead each squad in one at a time, gunning them down with two tactical squads, reducing them down to almost nothing to drop their numbers where they would get maybe nine attacks in if they charged. I maximized the number of bullets put on to his squad, and minimized the number of attacks he could have made towards me.

 

After applying three of warp angels killhammer tactics ( basic killhammer, bigger squads/defensive squads and this) I managed to protect my objective for the win. Killhammer is good stuff.

 

another good way to keep units from shooting or assaulting etc to get much dice down is loads of pinning weaponry. nothing says I love you like a sniper shot to the dome. even space marines cower at that.