How to equip your tried and true CSM squads

[d@n]

pintle-mounted combi-flamer.

I tend to find these are wasted, as you lose quite a bit of your template hitting your own vehicle, plus the 1" away requirement, that loses you a good 1.75" of template, if not more.

You should be mesuring from the hull not the actuel flamer

[Khestra the Unbeheld]

pintle-mounted combi-flamer.

I tend to find these are wasted, as you lose quite a bit of your template hitting your own vehicle, plus the 1" away requirement, that loses you a good 1.75" of template, if not more.

You should be mesuring from the hull not the actuel flamer

 

That would be illegal. On vehicles, fire is measured from the weapon mounting, not the vehicle hull.

[Shas'o R'Vre]

pintle-mounted combi-flamer.

I tend to find these are wasted, as you lose quite a bit of your template hitting your own vehicle, plus the 1" away requirement, that loses you a good 1.75" of template, if not more.

You should be mesuring from the hull not the actuel flamer

 

That would be illegal. On vehicles, fire is measured from the weapon mounting, not the vehicle hull.

Yeah, and TECHNICALLY that is illegal too :D

 

Page 29 of the BRB states that the template must be placed "with the narrow end touching the base of the model firing it" (so in our case, the pintle) and must "cover as many models as possible without also touching a friendly model." :RTBBB:

[Zhukov]

Thats been adressed in the new rulebook FAQ; you are allowed to touch your own vehicle now when firing. (if I remember right; not going to check it myself :RTBBB: )

[Shas'o R'Vre]

Thats been adressed in the new rulebook FAQ; you are allowed to touch your own vehicle now when firing. (if I remember right; not going to check it myself :) )

Yeah it has. Still, shows how rules contradict each other all the time.

[David the Despoiler]

Page 29 of the BRB states that the template must be placed "with the narrow end touching the base of the model firing it" (so in our case, the pintle) and must "cover as many models as possible without also touching a friendly model." <_<

:) I loved the look on the face of the Daemon Player I was facing when I told him that 3 of his 6 Flamers of Tzeentch couldn't fire the turn he deep-stroke with them, because their templates would be touching friendlies.

 

My favorite Chaos build as of lately is 10 CSM, Rhino, 2x melta. That's it. Relatively cheap and effective.

[diabloelmo]

How do people feel about mixing special weapons in the squads?

For example:

 

10x CSM w/ fist, plas, melta, fist, IoCG, Rhino.

 

I'm planning on having 3 of these squads in my upcoming Word Bearers army, and on paper at least it seems like a better idea than having each squad specialise too much. Also, since the plastic kit comes with one each of the three special weapon choices, it makes it simpler to build the army :tu:

 

Thoughts?

[Rik Riorik]

I think a lot of people would argue that specialisation is the way to go, assigning specific squads specific roles to fill. There is some merit in specialisation increasing effectivity but then again there is some merit in a certain amount of flexibility. Whether or not you work flexibility into the list as a whole or into some of the squads is open for discussion. But me I don't have anything against the approach you're looking to take, but then again my own playing experience is excruciatingly limited.

[the jeske]

There is some merit in specialisation increasing effectivity

problem is . weapon mixing does not increase anything. 2 melt is not bad against tanks a good support to the charging fist . ok against MC and gives some chance to ID mulit wound t4 stuff. single melta is crap of an anti tank weapon with a 1/3 chance of doing nothing at all and then you still have to roll on pen table and hope you actualy do something good .

same with single flamer . 2 at least force a more wounds on a meq unit and it helps against horde [but we dont realy need that ] , single flamer is crap against meq ,too random against t4 horde . single plas mixed with assault weapons makes no sense . It could be used in a AC/plas set up but then we are talking about an anti skimer and rather tailored list .

 

There is some merit in specialisation increasing effectivity

problem is . weapon mixing does not increase anything. 2 melt is not bad against tanks a good support to the charging fist . ok against MC and gives some chance to ID mulit wound t4 stuff. single melta is crap of an anti tank weapon with a 1/3 chance of doing nothing at all and then you still have to roll on pen table and hope you actualy do something good .

same with single flamer . 2 at least force a more wounds on a meq unit and it helps against horde [but we dont realy need that ] , single flamer is crap against meq ,too random against t4 horde . single plas mixed with assault weapons makes no sense . It could be used in a AC/plas set up but then we are talking about an anti skimer and rather tailored list .

[Rik Riorik]

Well it's not true that it doesn't add anything. It does add a weapon capable of firing 24 inches and Rapid Firing instead of one capable of firing only as Assault 1, up to 12 inches.

 

However the drawbacks it does give might be totally not worth it for the amount of times/situations you would prefer the Plasma gun to the Meltagun. I do like the argument however you are putting forth in defence of the 2xmelta set-up.

[the jeske]

Well it's not true that it doesn't add anything. It does add a weapon capable of firing 24 inches and Rapid Firing instead of one capable of firing only as Assault 1, up to 12 inches.

aha and for it to work as single your now within 18-12"[rhino/no rhino] and double taping with it[lets ignore the overheat for a sec here] . you fire the plas , get 1 more shot [but no ID] then a melta [but if your runing something like plas/flamer you dont realy have more shots] in a +4 cover go to the ground enviroment . cool. only when the majority of chaos players uses their 2 melta guns they can charge . you get that one plas shot more and you may as well staty static because you cant charge . and when you go static you may as well take a hvy weapon, get extra range and use the full range a plasma gun has .

that is why mixing rapid fire and non rapid fire special is a bad idea. if it was a good one people would be doing it en mass in all armies that can run dual specials.

[Zhukov]

There is some merit in specialisation increasing effectivity

weapon mixing does not increase anything.

Disagree. Duality is overall good, if you specilise all your squads into specific roles, it makes it easy for your openent to set target priority. He can just focus on the 2x melta squad, while the 2x flamer squad wont be able to touch his tanks. I would rather go with 4x melta/flamer, instead of 2x flamer/flamer + 2x melta/melta.

Its about the threat for your openents; 1 meltagun can still damage any tank with relatively good odds.

 

Hower, in this specific case I wouldnt roll with any flamers at all; as I want that 2x melta shot too. But you could go with flamer/melta + combiemelta. Or melta/melta + combieflamer if you need those flamers. But completely specializing isnt that good (anymore) in 40k and that goes for almost every army/unit. All good lists nowadays run loads of units which can do different jobs, although there are a few exceptions.

 

Mixing meltagun + plasmagun is bad though, it doesnt really give you any good new options. (the guns look too similar for that, while having some annoying differences)

[Shas'o R'Vre]

Hower, in this specific case I wouldnt roll with any flamers at all; as I want that 2x melta shot too. But you could go with flamer/melta + combiemelta. Or melta/melta + combieflamer if you need those flamers. But completely specializing isnt that good (anymore) in 40k and that goes for almost every army/unit. All good lists nowadays run loads of units which can do different jobs, although there are a few exceptions.

Personally, I find that flamers are actually rarely needed by CSM's. 10 man squads put out more than enough Bolter fire to kill off hordes, and can handle themselves in an assault (1 +1 for two weapons is not to be sniffed at). But the real strength of anti-horde comes by the specialist troops we put out (Zerks can eat hordes, whilst PM's/NM's/Sons can Bolter/Sonic hordes with ease)

[the jeske]

Disagree. Duality is overall good, if you specilise all your squads into specific roles, it makes it easy for your openent to set target priority. He can just focus on the 2x melta squad, while the 2x flamer squad wont be able to touch his tanks. I would rather go with 4x melta/flamer, instead of 2x flamer/flamer + 2x melta/melta.

Its about the threat for your openents; 1 meltagun can still damage any tank with relatively good odds.

but would you run flamers at all ? I mean If I had the options [as in models] and could either play flamer/melta builds or melta/plas builds then I would go for the other one . And if someone realy realy wants flamers then there is always the option of ploping a combi flamer on the asp champ . Also I on the other hand disagree that a single melta is a good enough support weapon . In fact I would even go to say that a single flamer is better then a single melta , because it works more offten then a melta gun[i dont mean the times being used , but the effective use against different kind of units].

[Brother Aiwass]

Well, I'm seriously thinking in use Plas/AC for my CSM units and a combi weapon (flamer mostly, melta in second place) for my champs, then use other units to get AT punch (termicide, oblits).

 

*hides under the table*

[the jeske]

A you shouldnt be able to find points for those and B if you do a AC/plasgun build then go for combi plas , not flamers or meltas you will rarely use.

[Zhukov]

but would you run flamers at all ? I mean If I had the options [as in models] and could either play flamer/melta builds or melta/plas builds then I would go for the other one . And if someone realy realy wants flamers then there is always the option of ploping a combi flamer on the asp champ . Also I on the other hand disagree that a single melta is a good enough support weapon . In fact I would even go to say that a single flamer is better then a single melta , because it works more offten then a melta gun[i dont mean the times being used , but the effective use against different kind of units].

I think we misunderstood eachother here, as I dont want flamer/melta CSM either...And indeed a single meltagun isnt reliable Anti-tank, but that was not my point. My overall point was that mixing jobs on as much units as possible is needed. Why? Because so many codices have builds which just spam vehicles, having enough AT in total AT isnt the only thing you need anymore. You need to have that Anti-tank spread over units so you will keep AT even though your openent kills some units. 6 Oblits + 1x2 melta squad is not enough AT for 1750 for example. Currently I would advocate to take AT on all your troops units at least (and maybe even on all your units)...so that would rule out 2x flamer squads for sure.

 

And that's what I mean: Specilizing into 2x flamer squads is kinda bad.

So load up on 2x melta squads instead then? Well probably, but then you might have the problem that you dont have enough infantry killing anymore which also hurts. So if somebody needs some flamers, then flamer/melta + combiemelta or 2x melta + combieflamer is an option. I did not say flamer/melta is good setup; just better then 2x flamer + 2x melta.

2x plasma is alright for extra AT too of course, as S7 can still hurt most vehicles (notably transports) well enough.

[the jeske]

aha I understand now . And it is true that spaming does sometimes ends up with stuff like razorbuilds having huge problems with foot IG builds , because they spamed just anti tank to counter mecha and meq but cant deal with 120+ IG dudes shoting at them.

 

sometimes I find it sad how most weapon options are sub optimal for our squads. well at least flamers are not viable , but also not needed , would be far worse If we needed them but they wouldnt work . now that would suck hard.

[Brother Aiwass]

Thanks for the tips, combiplas then.

[Zhukov]

Wait what? No combieplas...it might kill your champion (and that WILL happen) which off-sets any potential gain.

[Brother Aiwass]

Shame on me! :P

 

I have my brain scorched... 3 days designing cards for 40k leaved me out! Thanks for point Zhukov.

[Baragash]

I was running:

Melta, Flamer, IoCG, AC w/ PF & Combi-Melta, Rhino

 

However, I've now switched to:

2xMelta, IoCG, AC w/ PF & Combi-Flamer, Rhino

 

I rarely found that I got to fire the Flamer more than once in a game anyway.

[Xeonic]

I use three configurations in my CSM depending on the situation.

10x man, x2 Melta, IoCG, Fistychamp in a Rhino is my tried and true staple squad. I take two squads any game over 1k pts.

10x man, x2 flamer, IoCG, Fistychamp in a Rhino is my anti infantry specialist squad, over 1k pts this is the third squad I take.

10x man, 1x flamer, 1x melta, Fistychamp(w/optional combi-melta) in a Rhino is the configuration I take in games of less than 1k pts, because then each squad can do anything.

 

I find that chaos glory rerolls are a must for any squad that has the potential to be locked in CC, as is the powerfist. Meltaguns are the logical choice as they work well with the CC potential of the squad and are also able to handle anti MEQ/TEQ/armor duties as well, while flamers are their anti infantry counterpart, and great for rooting hordes out of cover.

 

Been itching to try replacing my standby third flamer squad with a dual plasma unit with otherwise the same setup just because dual flamers only ever seem to get to fire only 1-2 times per game at best. Well, plus I face a lot of MEQ and plasma would have the killing edge there. I'm a little spoiled by my ultra tac squads with plas cannon/plas gun though and fear this config will compare unfavorably though.

[BDS]

I recently ran a fluff based list at a local tournament...The 12 Days of Chaos.

 

My one Chaos marine squad I ran was this: 10 man, Icon of chaos glory, autocannon, melta gun, PF champ.

 

It was an infantry theme so no rhinos.

 

The unit struggled, I did get feedback from this board (The Jeske) recommending not to mix the Autocannon and melta gun. I have to admit he was correct, the unit was confused as to what to do much of the game.

 

My future infantry based CSM squads will be either:

 

10 man, Autocannon, Icon of Chaos Glory, Plasma gun in cover at 24" for as much of the game as possible.

or

12 man, 2 melta gun, Icon of Chaos Glory (possibly Khorne or Slaanesh), PF champ (If going with Slaanesh possibly power wpn)

 

On a side note with running infantry...I found the power fists a waste of points. Part of the problem was wound allocation...I literally failed every save I had to make on a PF guy and would have liked the Power wpn strikes.

 

BDS

[Dark Apostle Thirst]

I recently ran a fluff based list at a local tournament...The 12 Days of Chaos.

 

My one Chaos marine squad I ran was this: 10 man, Icon of chaos glory, autocannon, melta gun, PF champ.

 

It was an infantry theme so no rhinos.

 

The unit struggled, I did get feedback from this board (The Jeske) recommending not to mix the Autocannon and melta gun. I have to admit he was correct, the unit was confused as to what to do much of the game.

Ummmm... Why? If it's more valuable to target an infantry squad, target the infantry squad. If it's more valuable to target a vehicle, target the vehicle. You took the wargear you took so that you could deal with both.

 

Really, it's not about if it's super-effective, does it matter so long as you get the job done? With a meltagun + powerfist and a autocannon + bolters, you should have been able to do what was necessary on a turn by turn basis.