Tell Me All About......

[Bannus]

TELL ME ALL ABOUT...

The Way of the Earth Warrior


I refer you to this article as the foundation and introduction of the different ways to play Space Marine armies and this thread as an example of how I would like it to progress (except as it relates to Codex Space Marines instead of Grey Knights).

You may also find this thread helpful as well.


We want to know all about the earth elemental combat style as it apply to Codex Space Marines. There are several different army types that can fit within each of these themes - let's explore them all. As with all of these threads, we want to keep the discussions focused and on topic. The more we stray or ask off-topic questions, the harder it is going to be for our volunteer editors to sift through the material and put together a concise article. Unnecessary posts will be deleted for clarity.

In this topic (as with all of them), we want to focus on those aspects that only apply to any Space Marine army.

Let the discussion begin............

[chapter master 454]

At the risk of getting called a shameless self plug: There's a link in my sig about earth army style, not sure if it's up to standards your looking for but I would be honoured if it is even of some use.

 

But for general overall idea of play in my opinion: Earth style is static emplacement, employed heavily by imperial guard often (for reference only I mention them). Marines can make use of heavy weapons of a wide variety: Heavy bolter through to missle launchers, lascannons to multi-meltas, this wide selection is bolstered by standard troops being able to carry one special and one heavy weapon meaning no squad should be without means to deal damage at range.

 

Earth style focuses on static positions mainly to use heavy weapons while a few counter charge units like terminators or dreadnoughts are put to the front to guard the vast majority of firepower. Ideal leaders are the master of the forge or librarian as both can support the army at range or buff them in a way that helps the entire army.

 

In a nutshell earth packs the following pros and cons:

Pros:

Overwhelming ranged firepower

Area control

Harder to kill (since marines are already hard to kill :woot: )

 

Cons:

generally immobile

Lacks objective taking power

 

These flaws make it somewhat hard for fire armies to deal with as you grind away their momentum and water tends to find you lack of action in movement somewhat strange to react to. Air however will have a field day with you. In my opinion the 'rock, paper, scissors' here is: Air>Earth>Fire. Thats how earth lines up in my opinion. Hope this is benefical to the thread!

[Brother Captain Josef]

hmmm, Having had a read of the above links 'Earth Warrior' broadly means 'resiliant' not nessesarily 'gunline' or 'immobile'?

Rhinos make your squads more resiliant and mobile...

 

Earth armies tend to out-firepower other armies? 3 landspeeder typhoons for 270 pts is about as much firepower any single FOS can have but they would be air?

 

I shal have to think on this but as a first impression an Earth army would be heavily mechanised with rhinos for squads and heavy armour as in LR, Vindis, preds and dreads etc.

[chapter master 454]

hmmm, Having had a read of the above links 'Earth Warrior' broadly means 'resiliant' not nessesarily 'gunline' or 'immobile'?

Rhinos make your squads more resiliant and mobile...

 

Earth armies tend to out-firepower other armies? 3 landspeeder typhoons for 270 pts is about as much firepower any single FOS can have but they would be air?

 

I shal have to think on this but as a first impression an Earth army would be heavily mechanised with rhinos for squads and heavy armour as in LR, Vindis, preds and dreads etc.

 

If you put them in rhinos en mass and land raiders then I will call you water. You take the field with bikes and land speeders I call you air. You take to the field with deep striking units and assault marines, I'll call you fire. You take to the field with predators, rifleman dreadnoughts, land raider phobos and crusaders then I will call you earth.

 

Water: flows and fills whatever it goes into

Fire: burns all in it's path but lacks power if halted

Earth: durible and immobile

Air: fast and everywhere, uncatchable.

 

Thats what the elements are and they are applied likewise to army builds. You are obviously having a hard time going with the idea of being immobile (however I was the reverse, I find moving hard because I'm used to just shooting away like mad!)

[Zynk Kaladin]

I'd say earth is definitely multi-meltas in rhinos toting tac squads. Earth is a solid, aka nothing will get past it. Multi-melta tac squads are an effective area denial unit which will wall off where your opponent causing them to go around you. Think of the battle as building a road. The enemy will have to make a choice of whether, metaphorically, they would rather spend your resources blowing up the mountain or just going around.

 

Earth is all about stability and making conservative tactical choices. Solid gun lines allow for graceful victory rather than rash actions more akin to fire. Earth is definitely an Ultramarine's outlook to war and definitely not a Space Wolf's.

[chapter master 454]

I'd say earth is definitely multi-meltas in rhinos toting tac squads. Earth is a solid, aka nothing will get past it. Multi-melta tac squads are an effective area denial unit which will wall off where your opponent causing them to go around you. Think of the battle as building a road. The enemy will have to make a choice of whether, metaphorically, they would rather spend your resources blowing up the mountain or just going around.

 

Earth is all about stability and making conservative tactical choices. Solid gun lines allow for graceful victory rather than rash actions more akin to fire. Earth is definitely an Ultramarine's outlook to war and definitely not a Space Wolf's.

 

-sigh- while I would agree I can tell what table you play on: 4x4. In those cases yes it is an extremely good area denial but I got bad news; what if you play on 6x4? your rhino is now not a threat to my movement. Rhinos may form platforms but I have to stress that there is two things: Rhinos are wasted if not moved. The idea behind earth is to create a wall and I would say a rhino hurts more than helps; you should make use of cover so tht you aren't limited to heavy and one other weapon. The cover makes you harder to assault (because these days almost every cat, dog, hamster and plankton has some CC-AT at their command) and you get access to all your bolter boys who can help get those added wounds and nothing hurts more than suffering a fluffed charge roll to have to take the abuse of a bolter blitz and if they were unlucky this may be their second blitzing.

 

For people who don't have buildings with more than one level, forests do help and while I wouldn't advise taking scout bikers often in earth armies, nothing would be funnier than letting your opponent know why your marines weren't in the cover only to discover that they are getting hit by both bolter and mines. Earth makes us of very little transports, if any arre to be taken only land raiders and razorbacks: if it don't shoot something heavy then it ain't no use in an earth army.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I play Earth and still utilize Rhinos, in one very simple way. I will use Rhinos to move 10-man Tactical Squads to an objective; ie, first turn, 12" then smoke; second turn deliver troops. The Tac Squads then take up firing positions, supported by fire by Scout Snipers, Dreadnoughts, etc on the mainline to their rear. The Rhinos are then free to go tank-shocking and objective-denying. And while you might call splitting up your troop gunlines as unEarthlike, I counter with the argument that the most effective defensive fronts in history are those that feature multiple walls that the enemy needed to get through/around.

[Zynk Kaladin]

-sigh- while I would agree I can tell what table you play on: 4x4.

 

Actually, I don't really use multi-meltas in my tac squads and I prefer 6x4, but that's beside the point. You're right about using the rhinos more effectively. I was just trying to throw out ideas; take it or leave it (in this case leave it <_< ).

[Grey Mage]

Good earth units?

 

Sniper Scouts, particularly in bolstered cover. 2+ saves that can be ignored by only a very small handful of weapons in the game is very durable, and their pricing is competitive.

 

Venerable Dreadnaughts. Nothing says 'tough' like a seven thousand year old bad-arse encased in adamantium. The rerolls on the damage table, combined with extra armor make these quite capable of taking volleys of enemy firepower while walking slowly and patiently towards wherever it is you need them.

 

Terminators are one of the classic 'earth' units, in all variations.

 

A Librarian is a solid earth unit, particularly with force dome- very much a defensive character, the added cover save and protection from enemy powers is very good.

 

Compared to most units the Basic Marine is an earth aspected creation. T 4 and a 3+ save? Simply amazing! Most marine players dont understand how good they have it on that end. The use of large numbers of tactical squads to give you a large number of solid, tough, troops. Earth isnt just about each individual units toughness, but also about the depth of your army.

 

TechMarines in all their variants are also heavily earth aspected- bolster defenses, repair abilities, 2+ save.... and cheap in points. If only they didnt take up elite slots!

[bystrom]

I'd say Earth is characterised as the mountain: immobile, unwavering, unbreakable.

 

By playing Earth, you choose to forego movement. This doesn't mean you can't move, just that you don't. For this reason, paying extra points for increased movement is paying points for something you're not going to use, which is a reason against taking for example rhinos. As you aren't moving, but still need to affect your enemy, your first option is firepower. This way you're putting the hurt on your opponent's army from the start. Close combat isn't wrong, and in most cases something useful to have in your army, especially by adding some more mobile elements in support of your largely static rock. That said, if you're playing earth, you're probably bringing a lot of firepower.

 

To remain unwavering and unbreakable you need morale and toughness, one to counter effects that can force your troops into submission, the other to prevent your forces to be smashed by your opponent. For marine armies this isn't much of a problem, as units are more often slow, tough and carry a lot of heavy weaponry rather than fast, and overall marines have good Ld or special rules that hinders them from running away. For marines, toughness means numbers, individual toughness or a mixture of the two. Toughness through numbers doesn't mean you'll outnumber your opponent, more likely it means you've got a lot of T4, 3+ marines and/or light and cheap vehicles such as razorbacks and predators in your army. Individual toughness relies on taking the heaviest elements available, land raiders and terminators among others. The problem with the second option is that these are far from immobile, meaning you're paying extra for abilities you're not using. These kind of armies work better as for example water armies, where you take advantage of the movement potentials of the units.

[Brother Captain Josef]

I think I'm beginning to understand this now, Earth armies rely on static firepower so are essentially gunline / firepower armies that don't use typhoon speeders (the most cost effective firepower platform)...

 

In that case your core choices are preds, vindis (less so as only has 24" static range) TF cannons (Tech w/bolster defenses) Devastators (excellent when coupled with bolstered defenses) and pew pew terminators to add a bit of CC defense but not get away from the core premise of the army which is firepower. I suppose you could use dreads for this too.

 

Because of the lack of mobility your main consideration is going to be range so lascannons will take up the majority of heavy tank hunting as MM is too short ranged to be on a static/slow platform and will be easily avoided. This is quite a disadvantage and AV14 vehicles are going to be a problem needing a 6 to penetrate. Its no help that lascannons are pretty expensive as well except on tac squads which really are anti hoard.

[bystrom]

I find it hard to justify using a pure Earth army when playing space marines, both from the units available and from fluff (even though this isn't about fluff, it is a part of the hobby). Space marines are more often than not attacking rather than defending, and when defending they're usually ill equipped to stand still. I guess I'm a bit biased towards not having mobility or 'variance' for the lack of a better word, that I feel I get from the different playstyle I use as opposed to what I see as more of an Imperial Guard playstyle. I do use units in an 'earthly' fashion, as most games require me to defend in my deployment zone, not to mention the added pressure these units give from the beginning to the end with their firepower can damage my opponent's mobility or striking power.

[Mysticaria]

There is nothing to say that Earth CANT move. I like to think of a slow moving mudslide or avalanche... slow moving yet undeniably powerful and hard to stop. It comes at you, not always quickly, but it can't be turned aside easily. Vindicators are perfect in this sort of army. They aren't air rapidly deploying all over the place, or fire to burn out in a blaze of glory. They are a solid AV13 front that can go right into terrain and still move 6" and fire for full effect. In fact, I think they are the perfect Earth unit. I combo mine with tactical terminators (CML) for a pretty resilient, hitty, yet fairly slow moving thrust. Earth doesn't mean defense only, or static only, it just means that you rely on resiliency more than speed or alpha strikes to carry the day.

 

by the way, I really think of the Neverending Story when I think Earth Army. Rockbiter, the slow moving giant, he's just super slow, but you get the feeling that he can't be stopped.

 

-Myst

[Bannus]

Just as a reminder of what an Earth army is.

 

From the article I linked above:

 

Earth

An Earth army wins by outlasting it's opponent, and is characterised by it's resilience and staying power. This means that good Earth armies tend to have high model counts and/or resilient troops.

 

Movement Phase

 

For reasons given below, Earth armies are usually firepower based, and movement precludes the firing of heavy weapons. Thus, Earth armies do not usually invest much in mobility. Moreover, Earth troops often benefit (directly or just generally) from being in proximity to each other, so high movement, which serves only to separate the unit from the whole, is to be actively discouraged. However, this often means that Earth armies surrender the initiative to the enemy, and it is this phase that will usually defeat an Earth army.

 

Shooting Phase

 

The rules of 40k mean that Earth armies are almost always firepower based; cover adds resilience in a shooting war, but means little in protracted close combat, and ranged weapons allow a concentration of force despite the army's size and sluggishness, whereas in assault those numbers cannot be brought effectively to bear. This is the phase in which an Earth army tries to win the war.

 

Assault Phase

 

Although not geared for assault, Earth armies are by no means pushovers. High numbers of resilient troops (often receiving the charge in cover) mean that Earth armies can often grind their opponents down over time.

 

Example: An infantry heavy marine army with Purity Above All and hidden power fists.

 

Personal Comment: I dislike Earth armies as I find the play style dull. Undeniably effective however.

[tahrikmili]

Dreadnoughts, Terminators and Devastators scream Earth to me..

[chapter master 454]

Dreadnoughts, Terminators and Devastators scream Earth to me..

 

That's because they are corner stone earth units. Terminators are however a swish army knife unit as they can be used with all army types but in earth they form part of the response from the largely immobile army.

 

While earth gives up movement as a whole you aren't meant to remain 100% still. My thread I made on it states that you should have a deticated squad or 2 for taking objectives or denying them. This is mainly the job of dreadnoughtss, razorbacks (very valuable in earth armies) and terminators. Earth may be known not to move alot but when it does move it is known to be very powerful so any units taken for objective grabbing must be able to dish out and take punishment. Venerables are key because they can do this far better than ironclads (who are more fire based) hence my distain for ironclad love (just saying).

If your forces are in need of extra firepower and can't fit in anymore predators then razorbacks come in handy here: you can get one for each tactical squad. While dividing by bannus is true, he doesn't mention that what he said could be applied to anything: 'staying together makes you easier to target' but the key is doing what you need to do correctly. Earth moves in a very strange way: once it moves it stays in motion in one direction regardless. 'What is put in motion stays in motion unless another force acts upon it', this is what is required of the few units that do move and I ain;t talking about just say a dreadnought with a tactical squad: I'm talking two dreadnoughts, a fully loaded up razorback with a combat squad in it armed with special weapons and the sarge coming out more bling than bullhorn after the bull rampaged through a jewellery shop. Throw in a techmarine and all. It's a large chunk but lets be honest: if your slow then you got to make sure your moves count. 6" every turn so shots can be fired repeatidly and consistently.

 

Earth isn't a dull army ether bannus, I would disagree with your thoughts: I personally find earth more fun and that fire and water less fun (more due to fact that the for one the game is over if their run out of momentum while the other only reacts and nevers does it's own thing) but whatever, my opinion to yours. Discussion over what armies are like also will create the full potrait of this mighty army type.

 

Earth armies are like diamonds, made of carbons in a certain arrangement become nigh untouchable but bad allignment shall see your army fall to pieces like pencil lead. Earth is about being a brick wall. To modifiy a phrase slightly: 'A brick wall that really hates you and all you...move for?' (because the brick wall stands so...yeah, PM on that one if you have a solution to how that works! :rolleyes: )

[Bannus]

Earth isn't a dull army ether bannus, I would disagree with your thoughts...

I was posting a snippet of the article - they aren't my thoughts....they are Silent Requiem's.

[Gamelli Streamfisher]

I think I'll jump in here just for fun and throw some more concepts into the mix.

 

The idea behind the "Earth" or "Mass" army is to forgo mobility for the sake of more bodies and weapons. The next idea to understand is how to use an Earth army. To quote Sun Tzu and The Art of War,

So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.

This makes sense, because this way, you will have little risk of losing even if you only have little to gain. It's like cracking a nut with a sledge hammer. There is no chance of the hammer breaking and the nut is guaranteed to crack. Repeat until you have cracked all the nuts without risking anything.

 

Think of your army as a basket of nuts. Your opponent will attempt to pull a nut out of the basket and smash it with his hammer. If you keep your forces together, this will be difficult for him to do, and while your forces are together, you are strong.

 

When most people think of an Earth army, they think of a static gun line army such as the Imperial Guard. While this is a prime example of an Earth army, do not restrict yourself to only shooting. Orks and Tyranids are also great Earth armies that are built around assault.

[Brother-Captain Isaac]

Earth armies bring lots of cheap firepower, so this generaly means high body count, which makes them extremely hard to root out.

Thunderfires, Conversion Beamer MotFs and Librarians all provide withering firepower, and improves the army's survivability.

 

RifleDreads, Razorbacks, Raiders, Typhoons and dual Heavy Bolter Speeders are cheap fire platforms able to move 6" and fire at full capacity.

 

Preds and Devs are static firepower that rely on getting the enemy buried before they get close.

 

Sternguard and Terminators are mobile foot units designed specifically for Earth armies to counter CC threats, with their withering close range firepower.

[chapter master 454]

as the Imperial Guard. While this is a prime example of an Earth army, do not restrict yourself to only shooting. Orks and Tyranids are also great Earth armies that are built around assault.

 

While I applaud outside thinking, anything that uses the assault will NEVER be earth army if that it is main power attack (however if you can somehow make your opponent come to you while shouting 'this is sparta' then I may agree ;) ).

 

Orks and tyranids are infamous for fire tactics, they will run all over you and try and kill you quickly in one phase (hence fire's main trait: momentum. You stop it for even a moment and you have caused it unrepairable damage to the enemy. Ironically: earth is like firefighters when it faces fire armies; douses the enemy in holy purifing bolter rounds and blessed frag missles until they are no more!). Imperial guard are agreeablely the one army you should NEVER pick a firefight with, not even tau should. While we all may jest about them having rubbish standard issue weapons: they have the best tanks any army can boast about. They have so many tanks that they can tool up completely for any enemy no matter what they are.

 

In the end: if your earth versus imperial guard, kiss your power armoured rear good-bye. Now where did I put them collosus siege mortars! (oh I am in high hopes for the new mechanised game rules coming out: full army of tanks? Oh yes, being a treadhead I wait patiently for this!)

[Brother Valerius]

Would you say the earth style works against Tau, or is it at a disadvantage against them, too (as I understand they're very shooty)? I've always been an earth player at heart in strategy games I've played (unless the game just made it impossible), so I'd be sad if there were two armies that I would have to accept I would never beat with my preferred playstyle.

[mowglie]

I think the point a lot of people are missing here is that the styles are playstyles, not unit selection restrictions. There's nothing that says a Typhoon, or mech gunline "isn't earth" simply because it *can* move.

 

Earth-style is about outlasting your opponent and wearing him down. It doesn't necessarily mean static gunline - you could outlast and wear down your opponent in assault if you really wanted.

 

The reason Earth armies don't move is because the units support eachother, not beacuse they can't move.

 

An obscured squadron of typhoons hovering in your castle popping off shots every turn is earthy.

 

A storm full of Fist/CCW scouts alpha-striking your opponent is un-earthy.

 

Would you say the earth style works against Tau, or is it at a disadvantage against them, too (as I understand they're very shooty)? I've always been an earth player at heart in strategy games I've played (unless the game just made it impossible), so I'd be sad if there were two armies that I would have to accept I would never beat with my preferred playstyle.

 

Alas, if you deploy in a static gunline, Tau and Imperial Guard will probably beat you. We can't be the best at everything. That's where the mantra "shoot the choppy stuff, chop the shooty stuff" comes from. Tau/IG gunline is as shooty as it comes.

 

Both Air- and Earth-focused lists would probably do better to adopt Fire-style against Tau or Guard.

 

That works at the other end of the scale too, though. Fire armies have to adopt Air-style against e.g. 180-Ork.

 

There's an excellent (many would say seminal) Magic: The Gathering article called "Who's the beatdown" which is really worth understanding if you're serious about strategy in games.

 

It can be summarised thus:-

 

"[if you are better than me at X, then I should adopt Y playstyle, even though my list was designed with X in mind.]"

 

i.e. your gunline should be assaulting the IG gunline.

[Warprat]

I can speak to Tau a little...

 

I play an all foot Black Reach+ army, typically 1500 pts. Sometimes I switch things around and add a Sternguard, Devestator squad or whatnot for variety or larger point games, but this is my usual.

 

 

HQ

 

Chapter Master 155 pts

Relic Blade

 

Librarian 100 pts

Gate, Avenger

 

 

ELITES

 

10 Terminators 400 pts

 

Dreadnought 125 pts

Hvy Flamer, Assault Cannon

 

 

TROOPS

 

10 Tacs 180 pts

Plasma Cannon, Flamer, Melta Bombs

 

10 Tacs 180 pts

Plasma Cannon, Flamer, Melta Bombs

 

110 Tacs 180 pts

Plasma Cannon, Flamer, Melta Bombs

 

10 Tacs 180 pts

Plasma Cannon, Flamer, Melta Bombs

 

 

I am playing Earth to re-learn the game. As you can see, my list is hardly optimized. But it forces me to concentrate on the fundamentals of the game. Standing still, rapid fire, close combat and cover. Learning to sqeeze the last once of effectiveness out of my guys.

 

My regular opponent is Tau. He usually chooses a couple fire warrior squads, stealth squad w/fusion guns, suited plasma commander with shield drones, kroot sqaud with kroot hounds, shaper and krootox, a couple skimmer transports w/missiles, sniper dones, pathfinders and a broadside or two. A fairly optimized gunline with decent outflanking ability.

 

At first, I lost all my games to the Tau. My firepower is so limited, I ususally have no other option than to be the beatdown. I tried teleportation and gate to make up for my lack of mobility, but only ended up hitting his lines piecemeal. I got slaughtered...

 

 

My tactics evolved, however, and now I usually win (but still lose some and tie some). This is what I have learned... and is generally applicable to any earth army.

 

1) Distribute the terrain and objectives in a way that plays to army strengths and opponents weakness when possible. (Duh!)

2) Try to setup second and exploit any weakness. With limited mobility, this is key. With limited movement ability, quarters are hard to deploy in.

3) Refused flank works well. It concentrates strenght in one area, limiting the mobility disadvantage.

4) It's great to concentrate squads together when there are little or no barrage weapons. Concentration overwhems defenses and limits enemy visability.

5) Never attack piecemeal, it's all or nothing. Firepower is overwheming and many losses will be taken on the approach.

6) Tau are very squishy, even to almost bog standard Tac squads.

7) Kill point missions are the hardest. Objectives the easiest.

8) Objectives can be taken later in the game, without exposing troops to turns of fire. Hide, for a while, when possible (reverse the beatdown).

9) Tau can be out shot on a flank, being very carefull to avoid exposure to return fire. Win a KP or two, while deneying KP's to the enemy... but tricky to pull off.

 

 

Well that's about it, except to say that I am really pretty impressed with what these basic troops can do. I thought they would let me down, but am surprised at how well they can perform with a little thought and a bit of tactics. I tend to think of them as a Water army, but with very limited mobility. I have played them against other armies, including Tyranids and Eldar, and came out pretty OK.

 

Warprat ;)

[mowglie]

1) Distribute the terrain and objectives in a way that plays to army strengths and opponents weakness when possible. (Duh!)

2) Try to setup second and exploit any weakness. With limited mobility, this is key. With limited movement ability, quarters are hard to deploy in.

3) Refused flank works well. It concentrates strenght in one area, limiting the mobility disadvantage.

4) It's great to concentrate squads together when there are little or no barrage weapons. Concentration overwhems defenses and limits enemy visability.

5) Never attack piecemeal, it's all or nothing. Firepower is overwheming and many losses will be taken on the approach.

6) Tau are very squishy, even to almost bog standard Tac squads.

7) Kill point missions are the hardest. Objectives the easiest.

8) Objectives can be taken later in the game, without exposing troops to turns of fire. Hide, for a while, when possible (reverse the beatdown).

9) Tau can be out shot on a flank, being very carefull to avoid exposure to return fire. Win a KP or two, while deneying KP's to the enemy... but tricky to pull off.

 

That's pretty much earth-style in a nutshell. Great post.

[chapter master 454]

1) Distribute the terrain and objectives in a way that plays to army strengths and opponents weakness when possible. (Duh!)

2) Try to setup second and exploit any weakness. With limited mobility, this is key. With limited movement ability, quarters are hard to deploy in.

3) Refused flank works well. It concentrates strenght in one area, limiting the mobility disadvantage.

4) It's great to concentrate squads together when there are little or no barrage weapons. Concentration overwhems defenses and limits enemy visability.

5) Never attack piecemeal, it's all or nothing. Firepower is overwheming and many losses will be taken on the approach.

6) Tau are very squishy, even to almost bog standard Tac squads.

7) Kill point missions are the hardest. Objectives the easiest.

8) Objectives can be taken later in the game, without exposing troops to turns of fire. Hide, for a while, when possible (reverse the beatdown).

9) Tau can be out shot on a flank, being very carefull to avoid exposure to return fire. Win a KP or two, while deneying KP's to the enemy... but tricky to pull off.

 

That's pretty much earth-style in a nutshell. Great post.

 

Disagree on the 7th point: KPs should be the easiest and by the far most preferred because the enemy now has to face you down and let's face it; entrenched marines are not moving for much if paul plasma cannon and michael missle launcher are taking down tristan the tyranid. KP is what we do best in because we do not take that much in losses and we tend to be able to drag the opponent out quite well. Objectives are difficult as you have to spread out for them and we can't do what eldar do and just decide to win because we can tank shock up to 36" away to take your objective (which I think need's fixed).

 

However I have had to re-do my army playstyle for BA because I don't have decent dreads no more. Furiosos are quite easily the worst dread I've ever seen (at least the ironclad has got 13AV side armour to match it's front) and the removal of the MotF was a big hit to me too along with the TFCs removal. All for fast moving predators, starting to feel it's not worth the hassle because I can't field my favourite dreadnoughts no more (so BA's errata needs to say: sorry, please add all dreads except death company to elite choices and put in the venerable dreadnought again. THAT alone would forgive the MotF and TFC removal). -rant rant, grumble grumble...furiosos suck!-