Resv Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 The more we get into this topic the more I think we should change the name of the thread to "S and the Deployment of Tactical Marines." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rage Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 A discussion of what S means and how it might effect options would be interesting but I think it would have to be very heavily example and diagram based to discuss it...worth considering maybe? I'd like to make a point about Killhammer that I think might bbe important, The K and D are highly effected by your play dynamic which is what the S is for but since that is a very loose fudge factor that we in diffrent areas can never grasp, by discussing the unit use and method you can see how those factors may change e.g. a Land Raider hanging back will have a much higher durability than one moving close to an enemy line due to the effect of melta weapons, but one hanging back will have less K1 than one equipped to go to the enemy line...It is all pure suppositiion and quite interesting to see how peoples reasoning paths work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resv Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Well I think we have all come a long way since we first started going at each other in this thread. The notion of possible killing potential to possible defensive potential I think has been well addressed. I understand your thoughts and practical philosophy and I think that has been repeted in kind. I do have a question for you though Rage, a constructive one I hope. You seem to favor a more "agresive" play style and army list. You have also mentioned the need for stronger "Killy Units" to increase pressure on your opponent. My question is with fielding more expensive units with not a lot of tactical troops do you worry about low model count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warp Angel Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 A discussion of what S means and how it might effect options would be interesting but I think it would have to be very heavily example and diagram based to discuss it...worth considering maybe? I'd like to make a point about Killhammer that I think might bbe important, The K and D are highly effected by your play dynamic which is what the S is for but since that is a very loose fudge factor that we in diffrent areas can never grasp, by discussing the unit use and method you can see how those factors may change e.g. a Land Raider hanging back will have a much higher durability than one moving close to an enemy line due to the effect of melta weapons, but one hanging back will have less K1 than one equipped to go to the enemy line...It is all pure suppositiion and quite interesting to see how peoples reasoning paths work. The K and D are flexible. If you read the first Killhammer article (the art of target priority), you'll see that I advocate constant re-evaluation of the Killhammer rating of targets and units. This is because if you're facing a horde army, your basic LR isn't very useful (relatively low K of a max of 5 dead per turn) compared to a LRC (very high K of a max of 16 dead per turn). If you're up against a foe that uses a lot of low AV vehicles, then the basic LR is has a better K with 2 (independent) TLLC compared to 1 assault cannon, and with better range to use it. Similarly, a Tactical squad with a flamer is better against horde, but worse against Deathwing than a squad with a melta-gun. K2 might be high all game long for a squad without a heavy weapon that never advances towards (or is advanced on), since your time to target never decreases. Everyone has games from time to time where a unit just sort of sits there, being more or less useless all game. But what we discuss most often is the initial Killhammer rating of a unit (evaluated prior to the start of battle), since there's absolutely no way to do the constant re-evaluation without being there and playing the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rage Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 @ Resv: Hmmmm, that's an interesting question and the simplest answer is...YES! All of the time when building a list, I even have a special box in my spreadsheets for calculating the model count. The truth is though that when I hit a table I'll usually find one or both of two things for armies that outnumber me: 1. They've filled their list with choz e.g. Necron Warriors, that doesn't put out much damage and since that is the case they usually are short on kill units e.g. Destroyers, thus I can take out the kill units (either by killing them or by removing their mobility i.e. transports) quite easily due to the low numbers and then jump up and down all over the basic stuff. 2. They don't have enough mobility and I can maneuvre my units to attack small chunks at a time...since the days when I played Eldar I hate static armies, doesn't suit my mindset, I hate being on the defensive and when I am forced to (Horde) I'm always doing it looking for a way to attack him and break his attack and then give myself room to move to finish him off. I wouldn't go as far to say I'm always successful, a turn or two of bad rolling can ruin my day. Then there are times I run into a power list and get trampled on...usually the Chaos lists with loads of nasty shooting and some excellent CC, they usually have a lowish model count as well but have so many excellent multi task units it doesn't have all that much effect, while us Marines either have to build things for specific tasks to be effective or pick out the good multi-purpose units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vel'Cona Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Just wanna chime in, I really appreciate all the time and effort that's gone into the Killhammer Strategy articles. Warp Angel has a great idea going here, and has singlehandedly refreshed my interest in C:SM and tactical philosophy in general. In particular, I find this article is a good read because so many players seem to malign the Troops choices available in C:SM. Applying Killhammer to compulsory choices allows both experienced and new players to tailor their Tac squads with a much more in-depth approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robdark1 Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 then only thing that i keep seeing with tactical squads that if you running more that 4 squad in an army than you putting to many point in to that slot lately that what i been reading lately if you ask me. or am i missunderstanding about what i trying to accomplish in the rtt they i trying ot play in . at bar min i running 4 tactical squad in the next rtt but i would rather run deathwing if i cant make up mind just because it so much easier to put on the table and play but not very smart being that i want to combine that army with the other one that i have right now . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warp Angel Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 then only thing that i keep seeing with tactical squads that if you running more that 4 squad in an army than you putting to many point in to that slot lately that what i been reading lately if you ask me. or am i missunderstanding about what i trying to accomplish in the rtt they i trying ot play in . at bar min i running 4 tactical squad in the next rtt but i would rather run deathwing if i cant make up mind just because it so much easier to put on the table and play but not very smart being that i want to combine that army with the other one that i have right now . Tactical squads don't kill very much. 4 is too many. Drop at least one and use the extra points on something that does kill stuff. Like... oh... A Vindicator and an attack bike. Or whatever you like best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rage Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Yup, tactical spam is not going to win you much against anyone who isn't also tactical spamming....oh god it would actually be like running a Sunday GW kids 40k teaching session! 2 basic tactical squads shooting away at each other or stuck in CC for 56 turns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robdark1 Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 so the best of understanding here i would be better running 3 tactical squad and after that put the rest of my point into other part of my army. maybe stuff that would enhance my tactical squad ability to stay on the table longer or better support so were they dont get in trouble all the time. what would sound better to anyone here so far.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rage Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Not even that many in 1500pts...depends on how you run your marines to be honest and what numbers you find work, I'd suggest 2 x 10 Tac squads at 1500pts, with maybe a 5 man unit in a Razorback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warp Angel Posted May 21, 2009 Author Share Posted May 21, 2009 Not even that many in 1500pts...depends on how you run your marines to be honest and what numbers you find work, I'd suggest 2 x 10 Tac squads at 1500pts, with maybe a 5 man unit in a Razorback. My first two troops choices are a full bike squad (because I have a captain on a bike) and a 10 man tactical with either Rhino or Razorback depending on the number of points. At around 1500 or so, I add in a second tactical. I never go any higher than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.