How would you beat this?

[Vaktathi]

You don't really have to kill them all in a single turn. Shaking them to prevent them from shooting (in the case of this particular list) or immobilizing them will work just as fine.

Right, I was just making the point that expecting them all to be dead in one round of shooting was a bit optimistic. Keeping them from shooting if you really want is entirely doable, but killing them all instantly is another story.

 

Basically, fighting the OP list would be all about preventing the medusa and the vendettas from shooting, at which point the only long-range shooting he has is a bunch of multilasers and the executioners.

It depends on what your list is, the medusa's may actually be somewhat ignorable, one may instead want to keep the meltatoting transports from getting where they want to go. Granted the vendettas are priority #1 probably, but if they soak up all your AT fire, that's not good either.

 

As for vendetta survivability, I've always found it easy to take them out.

I've never had a problem with mine living most of the time, sure if all you do is shoot at them they'll go down, but there's usually too much else making itself known to deal with them alone.

 

Most of the time my opponents are outflanking/reserving them anyway, often using them to try and take important objectives from me, at which point both the vendetta and its cargo are forced to get close to my units, making it easy for me to pwn them all in close combat or rapid fire range. In other words, I think vendettas are fine for what they do. They die rather easily due to the lack of cover saves and high armor, and the fact they're transports means they are going to be moving a lot and thus not taking advantage of all their guns (much like land raiders). They should be a little more expensive perhaps, but that's it.

That sounds like people are using their secondary role (transporting) as their primary role, and their actual primary role (gunship)as a secondary role. Transporting is more suited to a Valkyrie that can move 12" and fire to full effect and/or isn't a fearsome anti-tank/MC platform. A Vendetta should only be outflanked if you aren't going 1st and there's a good chance the enemy will do something nasty to them turn 1. Otherwise they sit in the back and blaze away with lascannons or scout up to drop off melta troops into melta range turn 1 and lascannon the crap out of stuff.

 

Using them as outflanking transports primarily and gunships secondarily will see their usefullness and lifespan greatly decrease. If they sit in the back amongst the tank gunline as another heavy shooting platform they'll be much more annoying to deal with, or if they are used as Scout transports to drop dudes off turn 1 and then revert to gunship role they are really useful, but they are not going to be used to their full potential when used as reserved/outflanking transports.

 

TL:DR the Vendetta should be used like a mobile tri-las predator that *can* transport stuff and outflank in a pinch, not as an outflanking transport that also has guns. Used in the latter role, of course it will die quickly quite often.

[Hellios]

That sounds like people are using their secondary role (transporting) as their primary role, and their actual primary role (gunship)as a secondary role. Transporting is more suited to a Valkyrie that can move 12" and fire to full effect and/or isn't a fearsome anti-tank/MC platform. A Vendetta should only be outflanked if you aren't going 1st and there's a good chance the enemy will do something nasty to them turn 1. Otherwise they sit in the back and blaze away with lascannons or scout up to drop off melta troops into melta range turn 1 and lascannon the crap out of stuff.

 

Using them as outflanking transports primarily and gunships secondarily will see their usefullness and lifespan greatly decrease. If they sit in the back amongst the tank gunline as another heavy shooting platform they'll be much more annoying to deal with, or if they are used as Scout transports to drop dudes off turn 1 and then revert to gunship role they are really useful, but they are not going to be used to their full potential when used as reserved/outflanking transports.

 

TL:DR the Vendetta should be used like a mobile tri-las predator that *can* transport stuff and outflank in a pinch, not as an outflanking transport that also has guns. Used in the latter role, of course it will die quickly quite often.

 

I must say when I use my air cav list so far I've brought my Vendettas on 6 and then let off 3 TL-LC on the side armour (or if I can get a great position on the rear) of my opponents vehicles, if they also have a unit near the board edge I come on I might also disembark troops who can destroy pretty much anything with an AV of 12 or less and wipe out pretty much anything that hasn't got a good invulnerable save, unless the person gets really lucky :<. Obviously a lot depends on deployment and how bad I fluff :P but at something like 2,500pts if half my reserves came on in turn 2 you could be looking at up to about 4-5 anti-tank units probably being where they want to be and they will shoot over trying to steal objectives... your then also looking at 3-5 infantry units that may or may not be in a position to mess light armour or infantry up 2-3 vehicles that are not dedicated anti-tank but can potentially damage Land raiders along with a few other vehicles that are designed to blast infantry but could be turned on light transports in dark times or in the case I have no other targets.

 

So I'm agreeing with the above... my air cave is different from a standard guard lists but vendettas should be used as gunships where the abillity to strike side or rear armour and having the most reliable lascannons in the guard army really shines.

[Giga]

Well, it's possible that my opponents aren't using them properly (gotha admit guard players at my LGS aren't the finest strategists out there), but in those few games where the vendettas were used as mobile predators I usually had them going down/being unable to shoot early on.

 

I think Hellios's idea, the one with vendettas outflanking to get side and rear armor shots and deliver squads of veterans close to objectives or into melta range, is a far better way to use it.

 

Damn, how I wish I had access to stormraven gunships. :(

[Koremu]

Damn, how I wish I had access to stormraven gunships. :(

Do as I'm planning to; ignore Matt Ward and use them anyway.

 

Same goes for PotMS on Predators (which is what preds nowadays really lack).

[Giga]

The problem with that is that I'd first have to get my opponents to agree to actually let me use that sort of homemade rules. :)

 

And then there's the problem of converting the thing. I'm not such a good modeler that I'd dare take up such a project without seriously planning it first.

[Koremu]

It's not homemade. It's GW rules. It's no less legal or fun than agreeing to play with a superheavy per side, which plenty of people do.

 

And the conversion aspect is why I said "as I'm planning to" - I am a good modeller, but the work and expense of it would be insane, and would probably take longer than waiting until the second wave of BA releases.

[Giga]

Well, mixing codexes IS a home made rule. I don't think any of the people at my LGS would accept it.

[Koremu]

Get a better LGS? :) Or just do it for the next 3k Spearhead/small Apoc type game. A Stormraven is the least of anyones worries in Spearhead, let alone Apoc.

 

I really think GW would be well served by releasing real rules guidelines for game types, similar to the M:TG system of Limited, Extended and Unlimited games.

 

How about;

 

Solar - Core rules only, no special characters

Pacificus - Core Rules and Special Characters

Tempestus - Special Scenario games (Spearhead, Battle Missions, etc)

Obscurus - Homegrown and/or depreciated rulesets (old codicies etc)

Ultima - Apoc & Anything goes

[Giga]

The Solar ruleset would be horribly imbalanced for some armies who rely on their SCs to give them some much needed punch, or who just happen to have crappy generic HQs.

 

Either way, I'm prolly gonna be getting myself a stormraven or two even before the next vanilla dex comes out. Still, it'd be so neat if they *updated* the vanilla dex to add the vanilla stormraven version. Would make ironclad dreadnoughts helluva lot better.

[Koremu]

That leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the 'dex in question is terrible. If the tactical process revolves around a specific one-trick pony, it's a poor tactic.

 

I really dislike the character-driven trick lists. Vulkan He'Stan, I'm looking at YOU.

[Grey Mage]

That leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the 'dex in question is terrible. If the tactical process revolves around a specific one-trick pony, it's a poor tactic.

 

I really dislike the character-driven trick lists. Vulkan He'Stan, I'm looking at YOU.

Some just cant be done otherwise- Im looking you Deathwing and Ravenwing.

 

It was interesting seeing how we didnt have a single person playing either of those armies for the two years that my LGS banned SCs. It sucked, theyre fun to play against.

[Koremu]

That leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the 'dex in question is terrible. If the tactical process revolves around a specific one-trick pony, it's a poor tactic.

 

I really dislike the character-driven trick lists. Vulkan He'Stan, I'm looking at YOU.

Some just cant be done otherwise- Im looking you Deathwing and Ravenwing.

 

It was interesting seeing how we didnt have a single person playing either of those armies for the two years that my LGS banned SCs. It sucked, theyre fun to play against.

Doesn't change the fact that the Special Character driven mechanic SUCKS.

[Grey Mage]

That leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the 'dex in question is terrible. If the tactical process revolves around a specific one-trick pony, it's a poor tactic.

 

I really dislike the character-driven trick lists. Vulkan He'Stan, I'm looking at YOU.

Some just cant be done otherwise- Im looking you Deathwing and Ravenwing.

 

It was interesting seeing how we didnt have a single person playing either of those armies for the two years that my LGS banned SCs. It sucked, theyre fun to play against.

Doesn't change the fact that the Special Character driven mechanic SUCKS.

I agree, I just think telling someone they cant play their otherwise legal army because it requires a SC- no fault of theirs- also sucks.

[Koremu]

That leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the 'dex in question is terrible. If the tactical process revolves around a specific one-trick pony, it's a poor tactic.

 

I really dislike the character-driven trick lists. Vulkan He'Stan, I'm looking at YOU.

Some just cant be done otherwise- Im looking you Deathwing and Ravenwing.

 

It was interesting seeing how we didnt have a single person playing either of those armies for the two years that my LGS banned SCs. It sucked, theyre fun to play against.

Doesn't change the fact that the Special Character driven mechanic SUCKS.

I agree, I just think telling someone they cant play their otherwise legal army because it requires a SC- no fault of theirs- also sucks.

So institute a sensible workaround. Take a Terminator Captain and a bunch of Terminators, and play a game.

 

I guess that kind of attitude has gone by the wayside with the focus on tournament play. I played from the days of Rogue Trader, so the ethos of "make some scenarios up" is still with me.

 

That's one of the reasons I was so pleased to see Spearhead in WD - whole new pack of rules with a different game subtype. They should encourage more variations on playing 40k. I think that the aforementioned segmentum system would help to encourage that by the very act of defining it.

[Giga]

Armies sporting SCs aren't one-trick ponies. If anything, the SCs add a lot of variety as they unlock additional playstyles and allow you to create armies that work in unique ways (Khan with his outflanking marines, Shrike with fleeting marines, Wazdakka with his bikerz as troopz, Astorath with a death company army, Logan/Dante with veterans army, etc.).

[Grey Mage]

So institute a sensible workaround. Take a Terminator Captain and a bunch of Terminators, and play a game.

 

I guess that kind of attitude has gone by the wayside with the focus on tournament play. I played from the days of Rogue Trader, so the ethos of "make some scenarios up" is still with me.

 

That's one of the reasons I was so pleased to see Spearhead in WD - whole new pack of rules with a different game subtype. They should encourage more variations on playing 40k. I think that the aforementioned segmentum system would help to encourage that by the very act of defining it.

Oh Im with you on bending the rules- Im just saying if were going to makeup new ones we should think them through so others dont have to do the same thing.

 

After all, thats some of peoples biggest complaints about GW- that their rules can be a pain in the arse to use sometimes, I wouldnt want to follow in those footsteps.

[Koremu]

Armies sporting SCs aren't one-trick ponies. If anything, the SCs add a lot of variety as they unlock additional playstyles and allow you to create armies that work in unique ways (Khan with his outflanking marines, Shrike with fleeting marines, Wazdakka with his bikerz as troopz, Astorath with a death company army, Logan/Dante with veterans army, etc.).

None of which is in any way contrary to my point - IMO Those kind of abilities should be more generally available for play.

 

Consider this; If Khan were the only biker Captain who made Bikes Troops choices, it would detract from the overall quality of the 'dex. Precisely the same point can be made regarding TDA Captain making Terminators Troops, Jump Packs for Assault Marines etc.

 

I dislike the "well just represent this with X 'dex" approach.

 

Vulkan OTOH is just poor because he pretty much defines the army build around him. L. A. M. E.

 

Oh yeah, and Shrike needs to not work with Terminators. Sorry, but once again, skill-less and LAME.

 

 

 

For reference, the best SC in C:SM is Sicarius, in my opinion. That's the kind of character style that should be used more.