Killhammer Strategy: Army Building

[Warp Angel]

Welcome to the Killhammer army building article. This has been many long months in the making, and reflects the cumulative wisdom of many people from both the Bolter and Chainsword and real life. I'd like to thank everyone - too many to mention by name - who contributed to this article.

 

Article Contents

 

I. What is Killhammer? - Very brief overview of Killhammer with links to the article that started it all.

II. Basic Principles of Army Building - The principles that this article is based on.

III. Understanding Army Theme - Evaluating the kind of army that you want to play.

IV. Defining Unit Roles - Ensuring that each unit has a purpose and that they support each other.

V. Evaluating Army Capability - Can your army handle what your opponent is going to throw at it?

VI. Scoring Units - How many do you need?

VII. What points level? - The size of the game matters more than you might think.

VIII. Understanding the Metagame - Manipulating the odds in all sorts of ways

IX. Building the Army - Picking the right units for your Theme, Points Level, and Metagame

X. Summary

 

 

I. What is Killhammer?

 

Simply put, Killhammer is a framework and a common language for evaluating units and battlefield conditions. By applying Killhammer principles, you should be able to achieve a victory more easily. There's a pretty in-depth look in the Killhammer article on Target Priority.

 

This is accomplished by Killing your opponent faster than he can kill you. In the original Killhammer article, it was referred to as the creation of a "Kill Gap".

 

There's a complex formula for discussing things, but that's not the focus of this article. The focus of this article is building a winning army list. If you're looking to be fluffy, or play non-competetively, you're going to get less out of this article than someone who is playing to win.

 

II. Basic Principles of Army Building

 

1) This is the Grim Darkness of the Far Future. Everything dies.. You need to accept that every unit in your army is expendible.

2) Points values are not a primary method of evaluating if a unit is effective. The primary criteria for evaluation is whether or not it provides support for kill gap creation.

3) Versatility (S modifier for you Killhammer vets) counts for a lot, since it allows you to adapt a unit for more than one battlefield situation.

4) You are the general. Your playstyle will determine what units you choose and what tactics work best. Killhammer provides guidelines and suggestions, it does not dictate your actions.

5) There is no best unit. There is only the best unit for your army.

37) There is no overkill. There is only "open fire" and "time to reload".

 

III. Understanding Army Theme

 

Before you start putting together an army list, you need to have a general idea of what you want your army to do. Just picking the "best" units might be effective, but your army will eventually suffer from a lack of synergy when the units you've chosen leave you without the ability to work together towards a common purpose. For the sake of discussion I'm going to limit the army themes to a handful below. Feel free to suggest more, or combine the different types together to create your own. The list below should be fairly thorough. I've included a general playstyle as "Aggressive", "Steady", or "Passive" to reflect the most common general's personalities that I've seen playing these army types. If you fancy yourself an aggressive player, then you're more likely to have fun (and success) with an Aggressive theme. This is a generalization, and I know that there are aggressive players that like Gunline armies. I've just included this information to help those who might be newer to the game or sitting on the fence about what kind of army to make.

 

1) Strike Force - Typified by elite units performing hard hitting, lightning assaults, usually by deep strike/drop pod. This type of army is reflected most DA "Multiwing" armies, Daemons, and Drop Pod dominant Marine armies. Pros: Difficult to defend against, concentrates firepower early, large early casualty potential. Cons: Vulnerable to counterstrikes, some opponent deployment choices, lacks mobility in later game turns. (Aggressive)

 

2) Armored Hammer - Lots of vehicles, mechanized infantry, many heavy weapons. This type of army can be found in some Black Templar builds, many Daemonhunter builds, and is well supported by some C:SM builds. Pros: Relative immunity to basic weapons, high mobility. Cons: Vulnerable to "lucky" opponents, low model count. (Aggressive)

 

3) Horde - Typified by high model count, relying on a volume of relatively inexpensive models and redundnancy to achieve victory. The most effective armies of this type are those like Black Templar footsloggers, many Sisters armies, and Daemon builds without a ton of big creatures. (Steady)

 

4) Bully - These armies rely on a handful of very potent units to do most of their fighting. Daemon Princes, some Daemon Builds, and armies that rely on small numbers of elite units. Sternguard lists are a good example, so are most Daemonhunter lists, as many Chaos (specifically twin Daemon Prince) lists. Very often you'll see a Bully/Strike Force combination. Pros: Hard hitting, inflict casualties out of proportion to the number of models. Cons: Limited number of models, vulnerable to the death of a handful of key models, killing power drops dramatically as casualties are taken. (Aggressive)

 

5) Blitzkrieg - Fast Attack is the name of the game. Bikes, Speeders, Attack Bikes, light mechanization of infantry. If these armies can concentrate their firepower, they are able to quickly create a kill gap. Pros: High mobility throughout the game, flexibility in deployment options, good firepower per unit. Cons: Small number of models, relative fragility, killing ability drops quickly with casualties, limited by terrain. (Aggressive)

 

6) Gunline - Standing and shooting is the name of the game. Reliant on lots of long ranged firepower and individual unit resiliancy to maintain high levels of firepower even after sustaining casualties. Vanilla Marines are probably the best at this sort of list. Typified by Devastator/Havoc squads, static tanks, and shooty dreadnaughts. Pros: High firepower attrits enemy units before they can become a threat, high number of heavy weapons, degrades slowly. Cons: Limited hand to hand capability, limited mobility. (Passive)

 

7) Jack (of all trades) - This is the army that tries to be everything to everyone. It's got elements of most (if not all) of the army types, but lacks focus. Chaos is able to do this well, as are C:SM armies. Pros: Ability to play to opponent's weaknesses. Cons: Lacks any true strengths outside of versatility. (Steady)

 

IV. Defining Unit Roles

 

Now you know what your army theme is, but it's not yet time to start building a list. You need to ensure that you have the right kinds of units in your army to achieve success.

 

There are a bunch of roles in your army that need to be filled. These aren't as simple as "close combat" and "anti-tank". Though those are important (and covered later), you need to make sure that your army can DO certain things. Not every army is going to be able to do all of them, but they need to be able to do some of them. This is a case of "more is more better". Keep in mind that a unit can fill more than one role at the same time. This isn't optimal, but especially in small games, this is your only choice.

 

It's important to note that a unit that may be a Hunter in one game might need to be a Killer in another game due to the nature of your opponent. Think flexibly here, if you can.

 

 

1) Defend - Something in your army needs the capability to camp on an objective or piece of key terrain and defy your opponent to move them off of it. Such a unit needs to be able to endure concentrated hate when your opponent decides that they want what you have in a bad way. A Defender unit needs to have good inherent defense, a large model count, and the ability to either break up a charge before it hits, and/or survive the initial charge. The ability to inflict casualties is secondary to defense and the ability to endure. But virtually every Defender should be a scoring unit. Defenders fit into the Killhammer philosophy by being something that your opponent has to commit multiple resources to to fully destroy. The Kill Gap is created by soaking up killing power that could be used to greater effect elsewhere. They commit a lot of potent units to destroy one of your less potent ones.

 

2) Hunt - The Hunter's role is to limit your opponent's options and make the enemy units less effective at generating a kill-gap. This is accomplished by being a targetted threat that requires a significant amount of effort to address, while presenting a very limited and focused threat. The role of the hunter is to tie up or (preferably) eliminate enemy units from being effective in the battle. Hunters are EXPENDABLE. You're not counting on them to live, you're counting on them to cause chaos, mayhem, and thirty different kinds of migrane for your opponent to deal with. A hunter might tie up a long range firepower unit in hand to hand combat. (Has anyone considered charging Eldar War Walkers?) Another unit of this type is the Chaos "Termicide" squad of small, deep-striking terminators with combi-meltas. It's unlikely that they're going to kill a ton of stuff, but they might, and they HAVE to be dealt with. They are used to limit your opponent's options while leaving the rest of your army free to act. The Kill Gap isn't directly created, but it reduces your opponent's ability to Kill effectively, and increases your options for Killing. This artificially (and probably temporarily) boosts the Kill Gap in your favor for as long as the Hunter lives.

 

3) Kill - This is the most important thing that you can have in your army. Killers do exactly what their role says. They kill. In batch lots. No time to take names, their job is to reduce your enemy's ability to do anything but lose. Ideally, a Killer unit can completely destroy (or make combat ineffectual) most enemy units in a single turn of average dice. Killers tend to be expensive, but are worth every one of those points. To be most effective, they need some sort of ability to move where they are needed, so that they can do their thing (reliably) more than once in a game. The best Killers are hard to kill themselves, maintain a high level of effectiveness over a number of turns, and can either shoot and assault well, or do one or the other better than just about anything else. Sternguard are an example of ranged-exclusive Killers, Assault Terminators are an example of CC exclusive killers. Winged Tzeentch Daemon Princes with Warp Time and Winds of Chaos are just plain scary in both phases (within template range anyway). The Kill Gap contribution of these units is obvious. By their very existence, if properly utilized, they create the Kill Gap all by themselves.

 

4) Clean - Overlooked in many lists is the follow-on unit that supports all of the others. The most important quality of a Cleaner is their ability to finish off depleted units, eliminate small ones, and to generally act as a force multiplier for other units in your army. Faster is better, since you may need to support things on successive turns that are fairly dispersed. CC capability is also a bonus, since 5th edition relies so heavily on getting up close and personal. Many units can be made effective in CC by the addition of an independent character, even if they were only marginally so before. Assault Marines and Bike Squads make great cleaners. They aren't always potent enough to be Killers on their own, but their ability to redeploy rapidly and support with shooting and CC in the same turn make them valuable in this role.The Kill Gap contribution that Cleaners provide is complex, but can be summarized as "keeping your other units alive longer by reducing casualties and allowing them to kill more of the enemy than they could alone."

 

5) Fire - Every army should have some sort of Firebase. This allows you to engage enemy units that would otherwise be out of reach, especially in the initial turns of the game. Being able to weaken opposing units before they can engage is important to creating a kill gap later in the game. In those later turns, a Firebase allows you to provide Cleaner-like support at a distance, giving you tactical flexibility to deploy units across far-flung areas of the battlefield. Firebases provide you with a capability that no other type of unit in the game can provide, and as long as they exist, they're a credible threat. From a Kill Gap perspective, they can create the Kill Gap on their own or support others in creating it.

 

V. Evaluating Army Capability

 

No, it's still not time to start building your army list, but you should be thinking of component pieces at this point. The generic roles above are just that... generic roles. In addition to individual units fulfilling their roles, your army has to be capable of handling whatever your opponent can throw at it. Worked into the roles above, needs to be some basic capabilities. A failure to include one or more is likely to result in a bad matchup where the vast majority of your army is ineffective. Killhammer seeks to avoid this situation. Just like with unit roles, a unit can provide more than one capability. A TH/SS squad of Terminators is both Close Combat capable and Anti-Tank Capable.

 

1) Anti-Horde - A significant part of your army needs to be able to inflict large numbers of casualties at once against lightly armored or massed opponents. Failure to include this capability in your army leaves you very vulnerable to small bug Tyranids, Ork Hordes, Tau Gunlines, and the soon-to-be-awesome Guard armies. Volume of fire (wounds inflicted) is more important than the quality (AP/Strength) of wounds. This applies to both shooting and CC. On the flip side of Anti-Horde is that you need to be able to sustain casualties. Small, elite armies may struggle here. Anti-horde does moderately well against smaller/more elite armies as well, by ensuring that the weight of numbers is in your favor when rolling to hit/wound.

 

2) Anti-Vehicle/Monstrous Creature - Depending on what you expect to face in your local environment, you need the ability to pop multiple tanks in a game, and plan on needing the ability to at least threaten a Land Raider or front AV14 in shooting. I predict a LOT more Leman Russ and Battlewagons in the near future. If you don't plan for this, you're going to be helpless as your opponent rolls up and disgorges rapid firing Sternguard/CC Monsters. And if they play like I do, they'll park a Rhino right on top of one of your objectives and you won't be able to kick it off. One meltagun probably isn't going to cut it. And always remember you've got krak grenades.

 

3) Close Combat - You don't have to be able to be offensive in this area, but you need some capacity to deal with an enemy CC unit that closes on top of you quickly. If your opponent has local superiority in hand to hand, it's time to write off that unit. But if you can bring support from another unit that's of decent CC capability, you might delay or deflect your opponent's assault, and you aren't helpless if you don't. Having an IC attached to a squad is a good way to do this, and to be honest, if you've got a good Cleaner unit, you're probably okay here if they're not the only thing you've got.

 

4) Redundancy - Never rely on one of anything. Always have a plan B. Even if plan B is far less efficient than plan A, it's still a plan. For example, if you lose your bike squad (filling the role of primary Cleaner), you can do some of the same job with a mechanized tactical squad. And Razorback with a TLLC is a poor support for a Devastator Squad, it can still act as a Firebase. If you're relying on transporting troops to bring the fight to your enemy, make sure you have more than one transport in the army.

 

5) Scoring - I'll talk about this in the next section, but if you can't take and hold objectives you're going to have issues.

 

VI. Scoring Units

 

This is a pretty hotly debated topic in many places on the Bolter and Chainsword. There are those that advocate the minimum number of scoring units, and those that recommend as many as possible. Killhammer has little room for debate on the facts about scoring units. Applying those facts is up to individual generals.

 

Fact 1) 1/3 of your games you need no scoring units at all. This means that any unit that is in your army because it scores (and not because it fills a role, or - more importantly creates a kill gap) is simply inefficient. If you take the example of 2.5 Tacticals vs. a Tactical and a Sternguard squad (similar points cost), the Tactical and Sternguard will probably kill more of the enemy than the 2.5 Tacticals will.

 

Fact 2) 1/3 of your games require one surviving, scoring unit and one surviving contesting unit to ensure victory. It is perfectly reasonable to win a game by killing every enemy unit that can reach an objective with one of your scoring units while sitting on one of theirs with something as lowly as a Drop Pod with a weapon destroyed. Basically, if you kill him fast enough, he can't stop you from scoring and preventing him from scoring. Again, overloading on units that are there just because they are scoring is less than optimal.

 

Fact 3) 1/3 of your games will have enough objectives that more than two scoring units might be needed. But never forget that controlling 1 and contesting every one that your opponent is trying to score on is sufficient for victory. You're playing to win, not to score. And this is Killhammer - everything dies. If you're doing it right it's "everything your opponent has dies".

 

Fact 4) Every game can be won by anihilation. If you don't have a reasonable chance of obtaining victory by this condition from time to time, you've handicapped yourself.

 

Fact 5) Many armies have alternate scoring units. Vanilla Marines are the biggest abuser of this privilige, followed by Dark Angels and all big-bug armies in an Apocalypse Army that have taken "Hold at All Costs". It's probably a good idea to consider the inclusion of these units in your army since they are far more valuable in most situations than a basic troops choice.

 

Fact 6) Some of you are fortunate enough to have basic troops choices that are also great killing units. You don't have to worry so much about taking too many of them. I'm looking at you, Chaos and Inquisition.

 

Essentially, don't overcommit to scoring units at the cost of offense. Simple, eh?

 

VII. What Points Level?

 

It's important when building your army to understand how different points levels affect your choices. Smaller games mean fewer options, but larger games change how units perform.

 

1) Under 500 points: You should really be using Combat Patrol rules for games this small. The core 40k rules themselves break down at this level, and many armies can't do much more than field a low HQ and two naked scoring units here.

 

2) 500-750 points: This should be the point where you are creating a core army that is functional and lethal on its own and that can serve as the core of your larger armies. There's some benefits to thinking like this. First, regardless of the points level, you know the capabilities of a significant portion of your army. Second, you've got a lot of experience with your army core's strengths and weaknesses, and know how to account for them when you have more flexibility. Don't skimp on your commander or you'll regret it when Warboss Wuzzat Kominatme runs through your army with just his bike and power klaw. Many other armies are capable of fielding CC gods at even the smallest points levels, and you need some chance of defeating them. Chances are you won't be able to field true "Killers" at this points level, and will have to make due with a solid Cleaner or good Hunter in its place. Your army needs to win on its own strengths, because flexibility here is hard.

 

3) 750-1000: Here's where you start to get some flexibility. If you don't have true Killers in your list yet, you need to start adding them. If you've got them, it's not a bad idea to add more of them. A single uber unit can still dominate the entire game if you're not careful. Plan on countering one of them. You still need to concentrate on winning on the strengths of your army, but may want to try and incorporate flexibility. True Redundancy is hard, but try.

 

4) 1000-1500: Armies start to come into their own at this points level. Uber units are now easier to deal with without focusing exclusively on them. You've got multiple options for units, and can start seriously considering a second HQ unit in your army. You might not be ready for it yet, but you should be. Expect to see Land Raiders, Monoliths, multiple Carnifex and Daemon Princes around here. And beware the dreaded Ork Nob list. You need to balance out both anti-tank and anti-horde, since you might see both. True flexibility becomes possible at this point level, if you choose to take advantage of it. Start paying more attention to Redundancy.

 

5) 1500-2500: The gloves are off. Anything goes. Your army needs to be one of two things at this point - razor sharp and focused, able to rely exclusively on its strengths to overcome any opponent - or it needs to be flexible and balanced, capable of adapting to whatever your opponent might throw at you. There are benefits to both philosophies, and it's up to you to decide which is the route you want to go. A second HQ should make an appearance, especially at higher points levels. If you don't have all of the Roles and Army Capabilities addressed at this points, you should. Redundancy is also important. Your backups should be nearly as good as your primaries.

 

VIII. Understanding the Metagame

 

This is an important, but commonly grasped, yet badly articulated part of the game that many take into account without thinking. Others have no idea what it is, and probably never will.

 

In short, the metagame is knowing your likely opponents and playstyles. This can be easy, like when you're playing against your buddy in the weekend game you've had regularly for the past 10 years. Or it could be hard, like going to your first Adepticon. Usually it's a bit of both, where you're up against players and armies you're familiar with in the local game store.

 

People talk a lot about creating an "all comers" list. But if you prod them enough about their list, they tend to have a general idea of the kinds of armies that they're going to be facing. Their store might have a lot of Daemons and Chaos, or it might be all Necrons except for them. Maybe it's a mix of Horde and Bully armies. Maybe they know that nobody in the regular store tournaments have Land Raiders (it boggles, I know, but bear with me).

 

Army choices can (and SHOULD) be made based upon what you know of your likely opponents and their armies. Remember, this is Killhammer, not Nicehammer.

 

Author's Note: I can't emphasize this enough - Friendly games should remain friendly. Don't build armies that nobody has fun playing against if you're playing for fun.

 

If you don't expect Nob Bikers, don't build for them. If you know they're going to be there, you're dead meat if you don't plan something for them.

 

There's a risk to this part of the metagame. That risk is that you're WRONG. Heaven forbid that any of us are ever wrong, but if you are, it's possible that you get spanked. I'm always amused by someone packing for tanks when I tell them I'm bringing my Guard army only to be swamped by sheer number of troops.

 

Another part of the metagame is knowing your enemy. You should have a solid idea of what the other codecies contain, so that you can account for possibilities. Another part of knowing the enemy is keeping your finger on the pulse of what the "uber units" and "game winning tactics" are for opponent armies. There's a fair chance that's what your opponent is doing for his army.

 

Scout. If you get a chance to know your opponents and talk to them about their armies, you'd be surprised what you can learn about their style and model collection. Ask the store proprietor what people have been buying recently, and what they've seen people playing.

 

It can hurt to play the metagame, but it usually helps.

 

IX. Building the Army

 

It's going to take far too much time and space here to go through each force org slot and provide advice about which units fill which roles in your army. Fortunately, I've planned ahead and have created topics to discuss that very thing.

 

Choosing your HQ

Choosing your Troops and Equipping Tactical squads

Choosing your Elites

Choosing your Fast Attack

Choosing your Heavy Support

 

You're the general. This is where your choices become reality and your army list starts to take shape. There is no right choice here, only the right choice for the Army Type that you want to play, at the point level you're playing at, in the metagame environment you've got. Personal preference is the rule of the day.

 

X. Summary

 

- The goal of building an army is to win.

- Winning is achieved by creating a Kill Gap.

- Proper army balance supports Kill Gap creation.

- Balance is affected by points level and metagame choices

- Unit choice affects army balance.

- You're the general. The final choices are yours.

 

I hope that this provides both new players and veterans with some food for thought, and makes them better players because of it. As always, feedback is appreciated!

[brother carc]

This is a great final piece to round it all off, brilliant work warp angel!

[maturin]

Bravo - a nice piece of work!

[Warp Angel]

This is a great final piece to round it all off, brilliant work warp angel!

 

Who says it's [censored] final? There's still the more technical stuff to play with. ;) You guys aren't getting rid of me that easily.

 

But thanks for the positive feedback.

[soshuro_tenchi]

The article that links them all, and in killhammer binds them.

 

Nice work Warp angel, from the first article and still as interesting as it was.

[minigun762]

Some particular elements that I thought were very noteworthy. Of course the topic as a whole is excellent.

 

 

1) This is the Grim Darkness of the Far Future. Everything dies.. You need to accept that every unit in your army is expendible.

So true, I know I have a hard time coming to grips with the fact that I might have a 50% or even 90% casuality rate, but I can still pull out the win.

 

 

1) Strike Force - Typified by elite units performing hard hitting, lightning assaults, usually by deep strike/drop pod. This type of army is reflected most DA "Multiwing" armies, Daemons, and Drop Pod dominant Marine armies. Pros: Difficult to defend against, concentrates firepower early, large early casualty potential. Cons: Vulnerable to counterstrikes, some opponent deployment choices, lacks mobility in later game turns. (Aggressive)

 

2) Armored Hammer - Lots of vehicles, mechanized infantry, many heavy weapons. This type of army can be found in some Black Templar builds, many Daemonhunter builds, and is well supported by some C:SM builds. Pros: Relative immunity to basic weapons, high mobility. Cons: Vulnerable to "lucky" opponents, low model count. (Aggressive)

 

3) Horde - Typified by high model count, relying on a volume of relatively inexpensive models and redundnancy to achieve victory. The most effective armies of this type are those like Black Templar footsloggers, many Sisters armies, and Daemon builds without a ton of big creatures. (Steady)

 

4) Bully - These armies rely on a handful of very potent units to do most of their fighting. Daemon Princes, some Daemon Builds, and armies that rely on small numbers of elite units. Sternguard lists are a good example, so are most Daemonhunter lists, as many Chaos (specifically twin Daemon Prince) lists. Very often you'll see a Bully/Strike Force combination. Pros: Hard hitting, inflict casualties out of proportion to the number of models. Cons: Limited number of models, vulnerable to the death of a handful of key models, killing power drops dramatically as casualties are taken. (Aggressive)

 

5) Blitzkrieg - Fast Attack is the name of the game. Bikes, Speeders, Attack Bikes, light mechanization of infantry. If these armies can concentrate their firepower, they are able to quickly create a kill gap. Pros: High mobility throughout the game, flexibility in deployment options, good firepower per unit. Cons: Small number of models, relative fragility, killing ability drops quickly with casualties, limited by terrain. (Aggressive)

 

6) Gunline - Standing and shooting is the name of the game. Reliant on lots of long ranged firepower and individual unit resiliancy to maintain high levels of firepower even after sustaining casualties. Vanilla Marines are probably the best at this sort of list. Typified by Devastator/Havoc squads, static tanks, and shooty dreadnaughts. Pros: High firepower attrits enemy units before they can become a threat, high number of heavy weapons, degrades slowly. Cons: Limited hand to hand capability, limited mobility. (Passive)

 

7) Jack (of all trades) - This is the army that tries to be everything to everyone. It's got elements of most (if not all) of the army types, but lacks focus. Chaos is able to do this well, as are C:SM armies. Pros: Ability to play to opponent's weaknesses. Cons: Lacks any true strengths outside of versatility. (Steady)

Very good description of the different army types. Without wanting to get too buried in the details, I think its important to mention the "Anvil and Hammer" army as it seems to be a fairly common build that combines elements of the other army types.

 

 

 

1) Defend -

 

2) Hunt -

 

3) Kill -

 

4) Clean - O

 

5) Fire -

I personally feel that the hunter is less well defined than the others. You talk about it as a skirmisher, harassing units and holding them up, but what does that gain you that a Killer/Cleaner couldn't do better? The Killer would not be satisfied with merely holding a unit up, but rather focus on removing it entirely while the Cleaner could easily handle smaller or weaker units, or mismatched units (assaulting their shooting guys for example) where the Killer is well, overkill.

So in light of the Killer and Cleaner, what does the Hunter bring thats different?

 

 

4) Redundancy - Never rely on one of anything. Always have a plan B. Even if plan B is far less efficient than plan A, it's still a plan. For example, if you lose your bike squad (filling the role of primary Cleaner), you can do some of the same job with a mechanized tactical squad. And Razorback with a TLLC is a poor support for a Devastator Squad, it can still act as a Firebase. If you're relying on transporting troops to bring the fight to your enemy, make sure you have more than one transport in the army.

Very important element and one that can be addressed in 2 different ways.

1) Unit spamming, instead of using 1 of something, you use 2,3,4, 8 etc. This helps ensure you have a unit for the job. The drawback to this is that it tends to make for boring "cookie cutter" armies and gives you little flexibility because 8 of one thing might be alot less useful than 2 of something else.

2) Generalist units, these are the guys who can do a variety of things decently. Tactical Squads are probably the most common example. They are average in all aspects and as such, they can make for a solid Plan B. You don't want to rely on them as Plan A, as other units are more efficient at doing their job, but if you lose those units, the generalist squad will atleast give you an option.

I personally prefer using Generalist units as it gives you a good plan for those rank and file "boring" units that are needed while still allowing you to have your fancy pants super death squads.

 

Fact 6) Some of you are fortunate enough to have basic troops choices that are also great killing units. You don't have to worry so much about taking too many of them. I'm looking at you, Chaos and Inquisition.

Haha its so true!

Essentially, don't overcommit to scoring units at the cost of offense. Simple, eh?

However this has to be tempered with point 4 from above, Redundancy. Scoring is an ability that cannot be mimiced by most units out there. This means that if you lose your last scoring unit, the only way for you to win is through slaughter.

So don't overdo it but if you have to error, I'd say error on the side of caution when it comes to scoring units.

[Warp Angel]

The hunter is a harrasser. They're expendable, and not necessarily going to kill anything. Maybe the best example is the double melta land speeder. It doesn't do a whole lot and takes more effort to kill than it's worth to your army. If it does do something though, it can swing the battle, that's why it can't be ignored.

 

I'll update tomorrow and make it more clear that Hunters are EXPENDABLE. A threat that can't be easily ignored. EXPENDABLE. And tend to take an effort to kill that's greater than their killing power. Because of that low overall value to your army, you can lose them and not care, but they still have enough of a positive to be an effective unit if ignored.

 

A guard squad can never be a hunter. A tactical squad does okay. An attack Bike is beautiful.

[Jamie777]

This is one of my favorite articles in your killhammer line. Well written, filled with facts and so far about the most useful info ive come across since returning to WH40k. Thanks!

[soshuro_tenchi]

I'll update tomorrow and make it more clear that Hunters are EXPENDABLE. A threat that can't be easily ignored. EXPENDABLE. And tend to take an effort to kill that's greater than their killing power. Because of that low overall value to your army, you can lose them and not care, but they still have enough of a positive to be an effective unit if ignored.

 

This bit finally helped me locate an hunter units I could effectively use in my chaos army list. This role could be done by the the 3-4 men termicide squad with combi-weapons. They are expendable, but they can't be ignored or they could make big trouble in the litte ennemy line.

[Jackelope King]

So in light of the Killer and Cleaner, what does the Hunter bring thats different?

From what I understand, I'd think that the Hunter's role is to limit your opponent's options and make the enemy units less effective at generating a kill-gap for the enemy, while not necessarily doing any significant killing of their own. The way Warp Angel describes it, an ideal form of this would be like sending some Scout Bikers to hit an Eldar player's Dark Reapers on turn 1: now the Eldar is going to be sans his best anti-power-armor firepower while your Scout Bikers are at very little risk. The rest of your army can act with greater freedom in generating a kill-gap while the rest of his army is less capable of doing so, as he must destroy the Scout Bikers to reclaim his lost firepower and that option for generating a kill-gap.

 

One of my favorite hunters is a drop-podded Ironclad Dreadnought landing in the enemy's deployment zone and spraying away with a pair of heavy flamers. The enemy has to devote some firepower to killing the dread or risk a painful war of attrition which most units can't win. So your opponent's choices are limited: if they don't dedicate some anti-tank capability to killing the Dread, then it's going to be a menace for the rest of the game. But if they do, then they're less likely to kill off your Rhinos and Razorbacks and forget about taking out that land raider full of Thunder Hammer / Storm Shield assault terminators.

 

That, as I understand it, is what a Hunter does: provides you with more options for generating a kill-gap and allows your opponent fewer options to do the same without necessarily generating that kill-gap itself.

[Warp Angel]

So in light of the Killer and Cleaner, what does the Hunter bring thats different?

From what I understand, I'd think that the Hunter's role is to limit your opponent's options and make the enemy units less effective at generating a kill-gap for the enemy, while not necessarily doing any significant killing of their own. The way Warp Angel describes it, an ideal form of this would be like sending some Scout Bikers to hit an Eldar player's Dark Reapers on turn 1: now the Eldar is going to be sans his best anti-power-armor firepower while your Scout Bikers are at very little risk. The rest of your army can act with greater freedom in generating a kill-gap while the rest of his army is less capable of doing so, as he must destroy the Scout Bikers to reclaim his lost firepower and that option for generating a kill-gap.

 

One of my favorite hunters is a drop-podded Ironclad Dreadnought landing in the enemy's deployment zone and spraying away with a pair of heavy flamers. The enemy has to devote some firepower to killing the dread or risk a painful war of attrition which most units can't win. So your opponent's choices are limited: if they don't dedicate some anti-tank capability to killing the Dread, then it's going to be a menace for the rest of the game. But if they do, then they're less likely to kill off your Rhinos and Razorbacks and forget about taking out that land raider full of Thunder Hammer / Storm Shield assault terminators.

 

That, as I understand it, is what a Hunter does: provides you with more options for generating a kill-gap and allows your opponent fewer options to do the same without necessarily generating that kill-gap itself.

 

Also yoinked for greater clarity in the main article. :wallbash:

[Jackelope King]

Also yoinked for greater clarity in the main article. :wallbash:

Glad I was not only understanding you correctly, but also that it was helpful.

[Warp Angel]

It may seem like it sometimes, just based upon how I write and post, and with the relativel lack of responses vs. views, but Killhammer is not a solo effort. I'm more than happy to steal ideas that work, and have spent a good amount of time discussing things with my friends.

[ShinyRhino]

More brilliance, this.

Wonderfully timed, as well, since I'm abotu to enter into our shop's monthly tourney. 750 points is a wacky number for us, since normally it's 1500 or 1750. but this week is an attempt to get some of the less-established players into the tourney scene.

In the 1500-1750 range, I just threw everything I owned into the list, which isn't killhammery at all. But now I can beselective, and it's wrapping my mind in knots! This article helps a LOT.

[minigun762]

I'm the kind of person who likes examples, as it gives you something concrete to discuss. In light of that, I thought I'd post up a sample list using the different unit types detailed above. This is just a sample, to give people ideas so don't rip it up too bad ok? :P

If someone wants to do a Loyalist version, I think that would be fairly helpful as well.

 

Sample Chaos Killhammer list

 

Defenders: 191 points

7 Plague Marines, 2 Plasmaguns

This unit form the basis of your scoring unit defenders. It has a high D values and some ability for long(er) range fire support to assist the rest of the army while they're camping that objective. In non-objective games, it would assist the Firebase.

 

Killers: 410 points

2 Daemon Princes, Mark of Tzeentch, Wind of Chaos, Warptime, Wings

Killers through and through. Able to slaughter entire squads with Wind of Chaos and Warptime rerolls backed up by a powerful assault. There are few units like TH/SS Terminators that can actually stand up to this much killing but such units are rare and expensive. This unit also has the mobility (Wings) and durability (3+/4++ save) to survive long enough to make that large killgap.

 

Hunter: 105 points

3 Terminators, 3 Combi-Meltas

A semi-suicide squad, deepstrikes in and hopefully removes a valuable piece of equipment. Afterwards it hangs out in the backfield causing a headache until its removed. Will not win the game on its own, but usually it will remove one of your opponents key units, making it more difficult for them to achieve a proper killgap.

 

Cleaner: 250 points

10 CSMs, Flamer, Meltagun, Power Fist Champion, Icon of Chaos Glory, Rhino

A true jack of all trades unit. Enough assault capabilities to handle small squads and sufficient shooting to weaken larger squads. The weapons give it the flexibility to be used against horde, MEQs or tanks with some degree of effectiveness. Most importantly, the Rhino gives the squad the mobility to go where they are needed.

 

Firebase: 300 points

2 squads of 2 Obliterators

Sufficient ranged firepower to knockout most armor and MCs. The added flexibility of weapon morphing allows for the targetting of multiple unit types with little decrease in effectiveness.

[Warp Angel]

Remind me to take some asprin before playing against that list, Minigun762. I like it, and well explained in terms of Killhammer roles. Care to elaborate how it meets army capability requirements? :)

[Hymirl]

Intresting theories, it reminds me of some of the tactics you get in Chess (and even in real warfare theory), namely 'tempo' where you put your plan into action so quickly that the enemies plan is irrelevent - because they've lost before they use it.

 

This normally only translates to very aggressive highly mobile play styles. Its the kind of tactics I enjoy using (just in case my White Scar Avatar hadn't given it away!).

 

Could you explain a bit more on the theory of the Killgap? Is that the difference in killing ablity of the two armies as one pulls ahead in damage?

[minigun762]

Remind me to take some asprin before playing against that list, Minigun762. I like it, and well explained in terms of Killhammer roles. Care to elaborate how it meets army capability requirements? :)

 

Of course ^_^

Plague Marines = Scoring and Redundancy

Their first priority is to act as a tough scoring unit, even with 7 guys you have a unit thats very hard to kick off of an objective and could be made even harder by adding more bodies, a Power Fist Champion or even a naked Rhino to hide in. If scoring units are not a issue in the game, they function as a backup to the firebase, Obliterators in this case. With a Rhino and/or Champion they could take that further and be more aggressively used.

Tzeentchian Daemon Princes = Close Combat, Anti-Tank/MC

It should be fairly obvious but these guys are geared to take out things in combat quickly and decisively. The only thing that really scares them would be huge Ork squads with a hidden Power Klaw, but the Wind of Chaos/Warptime combo should help to reduce the number of Orks prior to assault. Against Tanks or MCs, the fact that they can't be insta-killed and come with a 4++ save means that big guns and other MCs aren't that scary to them.

Terminators = Anti-Tank/MC, Close Combat

A small squad but one that is geared to remove an important piece of armor in one shot hopefully. 3 Melta shots will also take a chunk out of most MCs, wounding on 2's normally and backed up by the Terminators themselves, you might just be able to finish it off. Once they've fired their Combi Weapons, they exist as a small, but useful assault squad, 9 Power Weapon attacks on the charge isn't anything to ignore.

Rhino CSM squad = Scoring, Redundancy

Like the Plague Marines, this unit exists to score primarily. The main difference is that this unit is used aggressively, taking the objectives in the opponent's area rather than camping your own. The weapon loadout also makes them a great Plan B squad, throw them against hordes or tanks or anything in between and they have a good chance of winning.

Obliterators = Anti-tank/MC, Anti-Horde

Used first and foremost to take out tanks at range, it also works well at killing MCs and Terminators. Surprisingly, against a horde army the Plasma Cannon can thin out hordes fairly quickly and if you're a risk taker, Deepstriking and TL Flamer will knock out swarms of little buggers.

 

Overall you see the list is fairly well balanced with a slight emphasis on anti-tank/MC which could be due to the Metagame where its played. It lacks real dedicated anti-horde unit but every squad is moderately useful against horde so you might be able to make up for it. However if you're viewing your list using unit capabilities, you might decide that adding a Dakka Predator with AutoCannon/Heavy Bolter for anti-horde duty would be appropriate.

[Warp Angel]

Intresting theories, it reminds me of some of the tactics you get in Chess (and even in real warfare theory), namely 'tempo' where you put your plan into action so quickly that the enemies plan is irrelevent - because they've lost before they use it.

 

This normally only translates to very aggressive highly mobile play styles. Its the kind of tactics I enjoy using (just in case my White Scar Avatar hadn't given it away!).

 

Could you explain a bit more on the theory of the Killgap? Is that the difference in killing ablity of the two armies as one pulls ahead in damage?

 

Okay...

 

Assume (and it's not true, but it's close enough) that at the beginning of the game, all things are equal. After all you have the same number of points to build your army list, and are fighting on the same battlefield.

 

There is no gap in the killing ability of your army vs. the army of your opponent.

 

The objective is to neutralize more of your opponents offense than he neutralizes of yours. The gap is going to start small. Maybe you got first turn and took out two tactical Marines and stunned a predator. He has that much less to come at you with. Maybe he only gets one tactical marine and shakes your Land Raider.

 

You close the distance, and through good maneuver and agression, you're able to table the damaged tactical squad and tie up a command squad with a Dreadnaught. Your opponent now has one full tactical squad and a command squad that he cannot use to hurt you in the way that he wanted to. It's impossible for him to close the "kill gap".

 

The next turn, you've got a large force advantage and use that to table another unit and finish off the Predator, while the best he's able to do is take out your Dreadnaught.

 

Barring minor casualties, you've wiped three of his units off the table, gotten two turns of effective use of a unit neutralized, while only losing one of yours.

 

Chances are that your opponent isn't going to be able to swing the battle back in their favor, because you've greated a kill gap that's too big to bridge.

 

You're absolutely correct that it's like the tactics in chess and real world battlefield strategy. I based Killhammer on them (primarily the latter). But there are ways to effectively create a Kill Gap without aggressiveness and mobility. Sheer firepower can do it. Watch out for what guard can do when the updated codex arrives. Entire armies will be blown off the battlefield in short order if they aren't prepared for the sheer volume of high S, low AP weapons. Maneuver and aggression are the BEST ways to deal with things though.

 

In the real world, you'd be attacking the enemy maneuver elements, supply lines, and drawing weak units into fights against many of your strong units.

 

Good observations though.

[Giga]

A great article. Very informative and it really gets me thinking from the Killhammer perspective.

 

Keep up the good work! :)

[minigun762]

Chances are that your opponent isn't going to be able to swing the battle back in their favor, because you've greated a kill gap that's too big to bridge.

 

One thing that is important to remember and easy to forget, is to deny your opponent the ability to create that killgap.

Sometimes the best move is not to move, is not to fire but hide for a turn. Often this is the case if your opponent (who is probably skilled) has achieved a focal advantage at one point, you can't win in the current situation, so you have to fallback, regroup or bring in reinforcements. By denying your opponent the ability to hurt you, you maintain the option of swinging that killgap back into your favor. If you have no army left, its alot harder to do that.

 

Aggressiveness is always important, to set the tempo and take the initiative, but don't confuse aggression with stupidity.

Whats that saying? Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor.

[templargdt]

Hey Warp Angel, thanks for the great articles, I've enjoyed reading them and giving them some thought. I've built a Grey Knight list trying to apply your principles, I can't wait to test it out at the RTT next month.

[minigun762]

Here is a question for the group.

 

"Is unit spamming for redundancy the best method?"

 

By this I mean, say you want some anti-tank firepower. Is the best thing to use the same unit over and over (eg 6-9 Obliterators) OR are you better off taking a variety of units that all achieve the same goal in different ways? (eg Obliterators, Combi-Melta Terminators, Vindicator etc)

[teh_perfesser]

"Is unit spamming for redundancy the best method?"

This question plays to the priority of your opponent's S perceptions.

 

If you spam three of the same unit, your opponent is likely to target them in order of their real K/Ds as opposed to a set of mixed units which has a good chance of being targeted in S (fear factor) sequence. If my opponent has an irrational fear of Vindicators (all Vindicator fears are irrational :) ), I think there might be more success to be found in an army with two 2x Obliterator units and a deep covered Vindi than in a three 2x Obliterator unit list. The more killy units you can get further down the priority list the more killy they'll deliver.

 

An opponent who's experienced and wise will take out your units in K/D sequence and not give your units any free S by his subjective views on them. So in this case, spam your strongest choices.

 

At least that's my thinking at the moment (all thinking likely to change once I'm convinced I'm wrong). Survivability comes through redundancy OR the lowering of relative perceived threat.

 

Edited to add: Once you understand how S perceptions exists and which S perceptions you bring in your own mental baggage, it becomes very hard to use these perceptions against you...

[Brother Maimer]

So here's is a 2000 pt Blood Angel army analysed in Killhammer terms. (In the grim darkness of the 41st millenium, everything must be killy madness)

 

Chaplain Lemartes w/ 8DC-Jump packs

- Primary killers (heavy infantry, infantry)

 

8 man VAS w/ 2PwrFist, 1Thammer, 2 Meltas

- Primary killers (MC, Heavy infantry, tanks)

 

2 10 man Tactical squads w/ ML, Flamer, PwrWp, Rhino

- Cleaner/ Firebase (Infantry / Heavy infantry)

 

10 man RAS w/ PwrFist

- Cleaner (Infantry / Heavy infantry)

 

2 squads of 2 Attk bikes w/ Multi-melta

- Hunters (Tank)

 

2 Baal Preds

- Firebase, (Infantry / heavy infantry)

 

1 Vindicator

- Firebase, (All targets are good targets)

 

 

So I think I got most aspect covered, especially redundancy.

The only unit that doesn't have a redundant counter-part is the VAS.

 

About the spamming for redundancy, I believe it is indeed one of the best way to cover your back.

Having different units with different "S values" filling the same role can let the opponent choose which one to deal with first, and which one to cope with.

For example, having a squad of attack bikes with multimeltas vs a squad bike with 2 meltas and a pwr fist for tank hunting. The opponent who cares for his heavy infantry will let you have the attk bikes and try and exterminate the standard bike squad.

Where as if you spam bike squads, what are his choices ? He'll have to cope with one squad.

 

I think the way to see it is that if you're convinced with your choice of unit, spam it. Now if you want a wider perspective "S-wise"' different units filling the same role could be a better alternative.

 

 

 

 

so this list sums up to 1980 pts, anybody thinks they know how that 20pts would be spent best ?