Better Objective Camper

[minigun762]

Which of these would be the best overall unit to camp objectives for a Chaos army?

Note: all of the units have approximately the same point cost

 

1) 7 Plague Marines, 2 Plasmaguns, Rhino = 226

+ most durable unit

- least overall firepower

 

2) 10 CSMs, 2 Plasmaguns, Icon of Chaos Glory, Rhino = 225

+ more firepower then Plague Marines

- less durable against some firepower then Plague Marines

 

3) 10 CSMs, Plasmagun, Heavy Weapon, Icon of Chaos Glory, Rhino = 220-230

+ longest maximum range

- least mobile firepower

 

4) 8 Noise Marines, 8 Sonic Blasters, Rhino = 235

+ most static anti-infantry firepower

- least durable unit overall

[Koremu]

You can only fire 2 weapons from the top hatch of a Rhino, so the Plague Marines win hands down.

[ShinyRhino]

For objective camping, firepower isn't your main goal. You want a unit that has the numbers to take wounds, and who won't fall back off the objective after a couple casualties. The REST of your army needs the firepower to keep the bad guys off of your defender.

I'd go with the Plague Marines for those reasons. They can take a lot of incoming fire after their Rhino pops. Fire out with those two plasmaguns as long as you can at anything that's juicy.

[Vissah]

You can only fire 2 weapons from the top hatch of a Rhino, so the Plague Marines win hands down.

 

But in the COdex it says that the Rhino only got one fire point so how can you fire two weapons?

 

Anyway I would go for the Plague Marines they will stand the longest.

[ShinyRhino]

But in the COdex it says that the Rhino only got one fire point so how can you fire two weapons?

 

Anyway I would go for the Plague Marines they will stand the longest.

 

That was fixed in the CSM Codex FAQ:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_Custom...-05_Edition.pdf

[Brother Nihm]

1) 7 Plague Marines, 2 Plasmaguns, Rhino = 226

+ most durable unit

- least overall firepower

With a pfist champ I'd say these.

[minigun762]

For objective camping, firepower isn't your main goal. You want a unit that has the numbers to take wounds, and who won't fall back off the objective after a couple casualties. The REST of your army needs the firepower to keep the bad guys off of your defender.

 

Hmm really?

I would assume that the #1 priority would be to stay alive, but you think that any additional firepower that the squad can generate is insignificant?

Part of me felt that having a squad whose sole duty was to huddle in a Rhino or in cover around an objective was wasteful, hence the urge to give them something to contribute by picking long(er) range weapons for fire support.

[ShinyRhino]

For objective camping, firepower isn't your main goal. You want a unit that has the numbers to take wounds, and who won't fall back off the objective after a couple casualties. The REST of your army needs the firepower to keep the bad guys off of your defender.

 

Hmm really?

I would assume that the #1 priority would be to stay alive, but you think that any additional firepower that the squad can generate is insignificant?

Part of me felt that having a squad whose sole duty was to huddle in a Rhino or in cover around an objective was wasteful, hence the urge to give them something to contribute by picking long(er) range weapons for fire support.

 

Heh, i think we're actually agreeing on all points, but are issing on the exact language. Yes, you want your defender to be reliable and hardy. Once that's established, you can go for firepower. But don't forget that two plasmaguns is hardly mass firepower. It certainly can help, as you said, but it's not enough to dominate the field. The rest of your army has to be putting enough fire downrange that your defenders aren't in a make-or-break situation.

[thade]

Plague marines are so hard to kill it's sickening (irony-pun). FNP with a marine save and defensive grenades...and I'm all assault. B)

[Drudge Dreadnought]

It depends. Do you really want to be dumping that many points into a squad that, in an ideal game, will never see combat?

 

Here's the issue to consider: If you have a big expensive objective camping squad like plague marines, it'll be hard to kill. But thats also a ton of points that are only helping you if your enemy is fighting them. What i often see happen (and by that i mean what i often do to people) is simply engage the rest of their army outside the range of their objective camping squad. If we each have 5 squads and one of theirs is not in the fight camping their objective then its 5 vs 4 and i pretty much automatically win that sort of fight. Then its no problem for my remaining squads to come mop up the objective campers because it'll be that 1 squad versus my several remaining ones (even if they are a bit damaged).

 

So there is certainly a strong argument to not use objective camping squads, and to have one of your other squads go back and score your objective after you've crushed your opponent. Of course this has a slew of associated issues.

 

If you are going to use objective campers, you want something cheap enough that it doesn't detract to much from your main force, and with long enough range that it can still contribute to the main battle. The best unit we have for this is 5 noise marines with a blastmaster. Give them a rhino if you don't think they can hide them completely. The BM has 48" range and hurts meqs badly. Its still not the most point efficient squad, but its more efficient than a 10 man marine squad with only 1 heavy weapon contributing.

[Giga]

Plague marines are so hard to kill it's sickening (irony-pun). FNP with a marine save and defensive grenades...and I'm all assault. <_<

Initiative 3 though. And they cost 23 points a piece. :)

[Vissah]

Thanx ShinyRhino that clears it for me :tu:

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

I am against the idea of having dedicated objective camper squads, at least with CSM.

What are CSM best at? Short-range firefights and assault.

What does objective camping do? Take away both of those advantages as well as divide your army at all critical points (bad).

[minigun762]

I am against the idea of having dedicated objective camper squads, at least with CSM.

What are CSM best at? Short-range firefights and assault.

What does objective camping do? Take away both of those advantages as well as divide your army at all critical points (bad).

 

That the second time that the idea of objective campers has been called into question.

 

Atleast for Chaos, are we thinking that because of their intended playstyle, that the concept of dedicated squads holding objectives is faulty?

Instead you do like Drudge mentioned and come back to the objective after the battle has been fought.

[Brenner]

That the second time that the idea of objective campers has been called into question.

 

Atleast for Chaos, are we thinking that because of their intended playstyle, that the concept of dedicated squads holding objectives is faulty?

 

Capture and Control + Spearhead Deployment against shooty IG with outflanking troops. For assault-oriented CSM army seems like uncertain situation. I mean, one cannot be sure that he can score (probably contest only) that enemy objective in such conditions, and then we get that enemy Outflanking Troops...

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

I'm not saying that there are never times when you'll have to camp.

But building army lists with dedicated camping units is self-defeating.

I finish the battle, then take objectives.