Tenets of 40k

[Jackelope King]

In a game of Warhammer 40k, you win or lose a game based on how many threats you can force on your opponent. This is the single most fundamental thing to consider at all stages of the game. We all have that vague sense of when we know we're losing, even the beginners among us. When we look across the board and see an enemy force that we simply can't deal with, the game is all but over. This is the classic example of when an enemy has too many threats for you to deal with.

 

What Is a Threat?

Threats can take many forms. The most obvious is an Offensive threat, from deadly units like Assault Terminators or a Hive Tyrant with Tyrant Guard or a squad of Thunderwolf Cavalry. These threats have the ability to quickly remove enemy threats from the table. But there are also other, more subtle threats.

 

A threat focused on Interference, for instance, can be quite crippling even without killing models. A classic example here is a screen of Kroot Carnivores and Kroot Hounds hunkered down in front of a Tau army: they Kroot are unlikely to do much damage to much of anything, and will die quickly, but they're also likely to buy the Tau another turn or two of shooting, which can be crippling to an enemy force.

 

Similarly, a threat focused on Support makes it easier for Offensive threats and often Interference Threats more dangerous or survivable. The obvious and most visible ones these days include Sanguinary Priests granting Furious Charge and Feel No Pain, Dark Eldar Homunculli providing friendly units early Pain Tokens, and Tervigons with Catalyst.

 

Finally, there are Scoring Threats. These threats may or may not matter on the battlefield, but when it comes time to tally scores at the end of the game, they count quite a bit, possibly far more than they'd matter otherwise! These usually only matter late game.

 

Everything is a Threat (But Not Necessary Threatening Enough!)

Every single unit you place on the table is a threat. Everything from the mightiest unit of Nob Bikers to the lowliest squad of Grots. However, not all threats are created equal. In order to be effective, threats must be, well, threatening. This means that a good unit will provide an effective threat for an acceptable cost.

 

When we measure cost, we have two parameters to consider. The first and most obvious one is the points cost attached to every unit you take. In low points-value games, this is probably the most important thing to consider. You want to maximize the threats you get out of each point you spend, rather than spending points on things that are less threatening.

 

The other measure of cost is less obvious, until you start getting into high points-value games. That measure is the Force Organization Chart Slots that a threat will cost you. For instance, Codex: Space Marines have a pretty nasty forward threat in Land Raider Crusaders, especially when they're transporting Assault Terminators. But where one squad of Assault Terminators can get their Land Raider without chewing up a Heavy Support Slot, your other squads will chew up your Heavy Support, denying you the ability to load up on Predators. On the other hand, you can maximize your threats per Force Organization Chart Slot with Assault Terminators by taking a single 10-man squad (1 Elites slot) and 2 Land Raiders (1 Heavy Support slot), then combat-squadding the Terminators, creating four threats for 2 slots, which is pretty nice.

 

When building your list, you want to make sure that for your particular force, you are optimizing your use of points and slots. Can a better threat (of any type) be had at a lower cost of points or slots?

 

This is just the beginning, of course. I'll be going through all the different kinds of threats you can provide, how to use them, and how to bring it all together in a cohesive strategy that helps you maximize your threats while minimizing your opponent's threats.

 

It's not a panacea to your game. I wish it were. But it is a way for you to start playing more competitively in 40k.

 

Contents for Tenets of 40k

1. Offensive Threats
   
2. Interference Threats
   
3. Support Threats
   
4. Scoring Threats
   
5. Projection of Threats
   
6. Multiple Small Units
   

[Jackelope King]

Offense is the art of removing enemy threats. Note that "removing" is italicized. That's because this is a key difference between another tenet we'll discuss later, called Interference. When you're going on the Offensive, you want to identify key enemy threats, identify what is the most effective way to remove them, then execute.

 

"Perfect Offense"

Let's start this discussion by assuming an ideal situation. You have a threat. Your opponent has a threat. A perfect offensive move would be for you to activate your threat, completely eliminate the enemy's threat, and suffer no attrition to your threat. Now you have one threat, and your opponent has no threats.

 

Obviously, achieving this ideal is very difficult. You will likely always have to sacrifice something to remove an enemy threat, whether it be models, position, or just the ability to threaten an altogether different enemy unit. So when you decide to go on the offensive, you need to weight the sacrifices you'll make by doing it, and the damage you'll deal to the enemy to decide whether your choice is the optimal one.

 

What Is an Offensive Unit?

In theory, and under the right circumstances, just about any unit at any time can qualify to be used offensively. But certain units really are built to beat face in. These are the units you select when you're thinking to yourself, "Now how am I going to actually deal damage to the other guy's army?"

 

An ideal offensive will be able to deliver a solid blow to an enemy unit in a single turn, with multiple kills. An ideal offensive unit will also be able survive inevitable counter attacks, thanks to some increased durability.

 

We classically tend to think of these units in terms of nasty close-combat units, like Assault Terminators with Thunder Hammers and Storm Shields, a Seer Council on Jetbikes, or Thunderwulf Cavalry. They hit like a ton of bricks, tear through unprotected infantry, and generally strike fear into the hearts of the enemy. But there are also shooty offensive. My other army is a Tau force, and I get most of my killing done thanks to Fireknife-pattern Crisis Suits, who put out an appalling amount of firepower. And there are plenty of weapons in the Imperial Guard arsenal which fit this role.

 

Types of Offensive Units

There are a few different types of offensive units you can use. I'll go into detail on these at a later date:

• Rock: A Rock unit is, well, hard as a rock. Does serious damage (usually during the assault phase) without taking much in return, because it's so hard to harm models in a Rock unit. Usually an expensive investment. Examples include Assault Terminators (with Thunderhammers and Storm Shields), a Seer Council (usually on jetbikes), and a Wolf Lord with a Thunderwolf and Saga of the Warrior Born.
  
• Glass Cannon: A unit that hits inordinately hard for how fragile it is. It might have a small number of relatively vulnerable models, or a low armor value on a vehicle, but it is capable of lots of destruction. The Thunderfire Cannon and to a lesser extent Sternguard Veterans in a Drop Pod are like this, but so too are Eldar Aspect Warriors like Howling Banshees and Fire Dragons and Thunderwolf Cavalry light on upgrades.
  
• 
  Shooty Unit From Hell: A unit that puts out a ton of firepower and is expected to rack up the wounds on enemy models. They might torrent shots really well (like Ork Lootaz or Tau Crisis Suits) or just deal a lot of wounds that need to be saved (Sternguard Veterans in a Rhino). They're deadly when used correctly.
  

Going on the Offensive

Remember the key: you win when your opponent can't deal with all of your threats. So your goal in going on the Offensive is to kill enemy threats in such a way that you come out with more threats in the end. First, this means picking the right units for the job. You don't send a Land Speeder Typhoon to blast a Kroot Squad out of cover with Krak Missiles. You just roll the Sternguard's Rhino up and unload with Heavy Flamers and Dragonfire rounds.

 

Generally, know which units you have that are optimal against Light Infantry (armor save 4+ or worse, Toughness 4 or worse), which are good against Heavy Infantry (armor save 3+ or better, Toughness 5 or better), which are good against Monstrous Creatures, which are good against Light Vehicles (AV12 or worse, especially if open-topped) and against Heavy Vehicles (AV13 and 14).

 

After that, it's all a matter of prioritizing threats. Which ones can you ignore, which can you settle for running interference (more on that in another article) and which ones do you need to kill ASAP? Bigger threats to your army need to be dealt with sooner. A mech-heavy army, for instance, will need to deal with enemy units that carry autocannons or missile launchers or other long-ranged means of blasting transports before they worry about dealing with fast melta, while an army with a small number of heavy vehicles (like a Land Raider army) will prioritize that fast melta for destruction.

 

This is a starting point. We'll expand on it more in the future.

[Jackelope King]

Our next stop in exploring the fundamentals of 40k is the concept of Interference. This is a critical role that armies can benefit from. Whereas Offense is the art of removing a threat, Interference is the art of denying your enemy the ability to utilize his or her threats.

 

The key to realize is that in 40k, it's often cheaper point-for-point to throw Interference at your enemy than it is to throw true Offense. As a basic example, take a squad of Kroot Carnivores from Codex: Tau Empire. They're dirt cheap, fairly fragile, and have weak firepower at best. So why would a shooty army like the Tau waste points on them? Pretty simple: they stand in front of the shooty parts of the Tau army and provide you an extra turn or two of shooting (which, if you know Tau firepower, is absolutely deadly).

 

A Kroot screen in Codex: Tau Empire serves to deny an enemy army the ability to close with the Tau firebase, thus denying the enemy the ability to utilize threats. This is classic Interference.

 

Interference Reduces Enemy Options

When you use Interference correctly, the enemy has fewer threats to call upon on a given turn. In the above example, a threat to a Tau army is one that can reach out and touch their firebase. A Kroot screen prevents close-ranged and melee threats from becoming a respectable threat to the Tau firebase, thus reducing the options that the enemy has to threaten the Tau firebase with.

 

But it doesn't just come down to a line of meat shields. Interference also includes tying up an enemy unit, such as sending a Dreadnought to assault a squad that lacks power fists. It can even include something as simple as scoring a "shaken" result on a Leman Russ battletank. In many of these cases, you are achieving this lesser-but-satisfactory goal of temporarily removing an enemy threat with a less-powerful threat of your own.

 

The Virtual Threat-Advantage

This gives you a de facto advantage in threats for the next turn. Consider a Marine army laid out in front of you, with say three Predators. Rather than focusing all your firepower on destroying one Predator, and still having two to deal with the next turn, what if you could score a "Shaken" result on each one (remember, 50% of glancing hits give the "Shaken" result on most vehicles)? That would mean that for one turn, you've effectively reduced the number of threats you have to deal with by three, versus having only reduced the number of enemy threats by one.

 

To be sure, it's only a temporary solution. Interference buys you time and gives you a temporary advantage. It's up to you to capitalize on that advantage to make solid gains. While this enemy threat is temporarily tied up, you can use the rest of your army to get rid of that threat once and for all, so you'll be able to breathe easier next turn.

 

Types of Interference

The main types of Interference are:

• Blocking: This is what I described above with the Kroot screen. You position a less-threatening unit in such a way that the enemy has to first deal with that unit before it can properly attack a real threat. This art has been called everything from "screening" to "putting up speed bumps" to whatever else you might like to call it, but the concept is all the same. A lesser threat protects a greater threat. You can also completely block an enemy with a unit that is simply invulnerable to their attack while protecting a vulnerable unit (such as a Rhino pulling up alongside a Tactical Squad in the open to block line of sight from enemy anti-infantry weapons).
  
• Fire Suppression: This is one that many players miss, and these are the players who Mechdar players prey upon. A transport that can't move, or a gunboat-type vehicle that can't shoot, is a threat that's been removed. So too is an infantry unit that's been pinned, but these days pinning isn't an easy thing to achieve. Fire Suppression aims to damage a unit in such a way that its presence as an offensive threat is temporarily removed.
  
• Tarpitting: One that many players know of, but few truly use effectively. "Tarpitting" seeks to lock an enemy unit in an Assault that they can't break out from. It's especially effective when tying up an enemy shooting unit (such as Tau Crisis Suits, Space Wolf Long Fangs, Ork Lootaz, etc.). Tarpitting allows you to set aside one of your threats to lock out one of your opponent's threats, potentially for multiple turns. As an added bonus, your unit is now immune to shooting attacks... at least for as long as the melee lasts.
  

Being able to use Interference effectively is one of the key steps to improving your game in 40k.

[Jackelope King]

Support is one of those critical threats that many people don't quite grasp, because until recently, they have indeed been few and far between. Only recently have modern 5e Codicies started including a strong emphasis on supporting units.

 

A support threat might do very little offensively (remind you of Interference any?), but still plays a critical role in your army. In a very basic sense, Supporting threats make the rest of your army more threatening. They don't necessarily remove or limit enemy threats; instead, they multiply your own threats. The obvious examples spring to mind here: Tyranids have Tervigons who can grant nearby units Feel No Pain with Catalyst, Blood Angels have Sanguinary Priests who create bubbles of Feel No Pain and Furious Charge. This type of support directly increases the threat-level provided by several nearby units. Buy one Supporting threat, increase the threat of all other nearby units (which still cost the "base" amount).

 

But there are other, less obvious types of Support that we need to discuss to fully grasp the impact of these types of Threats and how they integrate with your army as a whole.

 

Redundancy Is Support

I have a favorite rule that I always like to reference: Lanchester's Square Law. Put simply, each additional threat you put on the table increases the threat provided by every other unit. This is most directly apparent with redundant units (a concept I'll touch more on later). Say you have one tank on the table, and your opponent has enough anti-tank weaponry to destroy that tank in one turn. It'll fire once, then be destroyed. But now take two tanks, and you'll get to fire them a total of three times before they're destroyed. Take three tanks, and now you get six chances to shoot before they're gone. And with five tanks, you get fifteen shots before they're wiped out. One tank is one tank, five tanks are fifteen tanks.

 

But this is true with every threat you put on the table, thank in large part to the shooting rules in 40k. Most units can only target one enemy unit per turn, so they're limited in how many threats they can manage on a given turn. Each additional unit is an extra threat that the enemy must deal with, and it serves to further saturate enemy firepower (and enemy assault potential). That means your other units are de facto more durable: fewer enemy shots to deal with equals increased durability.

 

Support the Right Guys

Let's try a little thought-experiment. I'm going to take a bog-standard Tactical Squad from Codex: Blood Angels, and assign it a largely-arbitrary threat value of 4. Now place a Sanguinary Priest nearby, and suddenly the unit gains Feel No Pain and Furious Charge. The latter is decent enough, but the former is pretty nice, making the unit harder to dislodge with small-arms fire. However, the squad still isn't really geared up for close combat, and on a charge they still only get a pair of S5 attacks at I5 that get saves. Let's arbitrarily knock their threat value up to 5.

 

Now let's try it with an Assault Squad, and give them the same arbitrary threat value of 4 (less shooty, a little more assaulty). But they get more bang from the Sanguinary Priest buck in two ways: they're designed to operate at a closer range to the enemy (and thus be more likely to be in an assault or within range for enemy anti-infantry firepower), and they have an extra attack each to reap the benefits of S5 I5 with. So their threat value is increased more than a Tactical Squad's with the same Sanguinary Priest: from 4 to 6. So the Sanguinary Priest costs the same in both scenarios (a lie, by the way... he'll need a jump pack if he's hopping around with Assault Marines, but a good enough simplification for this), but he increases the effectiveness of one unit more than he does another unit.

 

What we learn from this is that Supporting threats don't support everyone equally: to use them correctly, and really multiply our threats, we need to make sure they can support the right units.

 

The More, the Merrier

With anything called a "Force Multiplier", it should be obvious that the more units and more models that benefit, the better, since you pay one cost to boost as many units as you can. So they get better when they have more threats to support. Hmm... so threats win games, huh? Where have we heard that before?...

 

Of course, as we already learned, they have to be the right threats. And this is where listbuilding becomes an art. When we start putting force multiplying Support threats on the table, we need to get some good bang for our buck and make sure they're boosting as many units as we can.

 

That said, you will reach a point of diminishing returns with many kinds of support. Consider our friend the Sanguinary Priest. We can surround one of them with 6 big squads of Assault Marines, which means 61 Marines getting the benefits of Feel No Pain and Furious Charge. And we've said that these benefits are nice. But we've also clustered a lot of models into a relatively small area, thus hampering our mobility and increasing susceptibility to blasts and templates. Plus, our saturation of power weaponry is still low. And of course, that Priest is all alone supporting the Blood Angels. One stray krak missile and that's all she wrote. Even Support units benefit from Redundancy.

 

Types of Threats

There are a few different types of Supporting Threats that we can discuss briefly:

• Durability Support: These threats make other threats harder to remove. Classic examples include an Ork Big Mek with a Kustom Force Field, which grants all nearby vehicles a 4+ cover save, a Tyranid Tervigon with Catalyst, giving nearby bugs Feel No Paint, and a Blood Angels Sanguinary Priest, who grants nearby units Feel No Pain.
  
• Offensive Support: These threats make other threats more dangerous offensively, allowing them to deal more damage than usual. Tau Pathfinders are quite obvious in this role (stripping away cover and boosting the BS of friendly models), but other great units in this regard are the Space Marine Librarian with Null Zone (which decreases enemy durability) and Vulkan (who lets your weapons deal more damage more reliably).
  

We're starting to build a cohesive set of concepts to guide how we approach the game, but there's still another type of threat we need to discuss. That'll come next time.

[Jackelope King]

The final type of threat that we need to talk about is a very important one, but unusual in that it is only a threat after the game ends. During gameplay, this quality itself is irrelevant. A Scoring Threat only matters... well... when you're tallying the score. And everyone is shouting it from the rooftops: Troops! We need more Troops!

 

Yes and no. Scoring threats are unusual in many ways, and we'll analyze the long and the short of them in the course of this article.

 

Scoring Threats Don't Always Matter

Let's very quickly review the criteria that a unit must meet to count as scoring:

1. The unit must be a Scoring unit (either Troops or a non-Troops unit with a special ability that counts that unit as Scoring).
   
2. The unit must be in-tact at the end of gameplay, with at least one model still available to claim an objective.
   
3. The unit may not be fleeing.
   
4. There may not be any enemy unit within 3" of the objective to contest the objective.
   

This means that there are many situations in which a unit's scoring threat is zero, and there is exactly one factor which we have no control over (the first, whether or not a unit is Scoring in the first place).

 

Among other things, this means that if a Tactical Squad in a Rhino is 30" away from an objective, even going at top-speed and with a perfect run result of 6", they still won't be able to qualify to grab the objective if they only have one turn to reach the objective.

 

Durability is Key

Durability matters in all threats, of course, but Scoring units present our first real chance to discuss the concept of durability. A unit's durability is its ability to maintain its threat profile into the next game turn, and across the entire course of a given game. There are obvious measures of durability (the unit's Toughness, its save, or its armor value for vehicles), some more situational ones (the presence or absence of cover), and some that are more difficult to fully grasp at a glance (the benefits of range, for example, which we will explore in greater detail in an upcoming article on projection of threats).

 

Strong list-building will seek to maximize the durability of units while minimizing the cost, your scoring units especially. Remember, at least one of your scoring threats needs to survive until at least the end of turn 5 to be eligible to score. So how can we increase the durability of a unit when considering a scoring threat?

 

Within the context of the unit, more bodies are better. Enemy units can only inflict so many wounds per turn, so the more wounds you force the enemy to shoot through, the harder it will be for the enemy to remove your scoring threats. Our ability to select tougher units with higher saves is of course limited by our Codicies, but clearly these sorts of units will have more durability.

 

But we can also invest points in many Codicies into buying Scoring Threats a ride, with Dedicated Transports (like the Rhino in Marine Codicies). These only cost points, not Force Organization Chart slots, making them very economical buys. A Transport increases mobility, but it also increases durability by making a unit far less vulnerable to anti-infantry weaponry, and requires the enemy to first shoot through their ride before they can be shot or assaulted.

 

Range is also key to consider. If your threats can engage the enemy from a distance that the enemy can't return fire or assault, their durability goes up as well. Remember, we define durability as a unit's ability to maintain their threat-profile into subsequent turns. If a unit can't be targeted successfully, then we have to consider that an improvement in durability!

 

Mobility Matters

And now for our other big scoring concern: can our scoring threats reach their objectives by the end of turn 5? A unit can roll onto an objective early and sit there, or it can swoop in at the last minute to claim the objective. In general, the latter will often hold more strategic advantage (as you are able to apply the scoring threat as another sort of threat elsewhere in the game before applying the unit as a scoring threat at the end of turn 5), and will make the unit's threat-potential as a scoring unit less obvious to the enemy. This is a favorite of armies like Mech Eldar and Marine Bikers, who maneuver around the board, then fly flat-out or turbo-boost 24" onto an objective for the end of turn 5.

 

However, slower units will indeed just want to "camp" an objective, especially of that objective offers strong cover, or is positioned so as to block line of sight from the enemy. A camping unit will depend more on range to stay out of the enemy's way, and will require more direct durability (with good cover, saves, toughness and numbers) to hang in there, an obvious threat as they are.

 

How Many is Enough?

This is the last big question with Scoring Threats. Many Marine players go by the old adage of one Tactical Squad per 500 points. A fair rule of thumb, but Tactical Squads in particular, as with many Troops units out there, don't bring a tremendous amount of Offensive or Interference or Support threat to the board. Remember, threats win game, so we want more threats and stronger threats. Pouring points into scoring threats that only matter on turn 5 runs counter to this tenet.

 

There are some advocates for minimizing your Troops, and maximizing killing power elsewhere. I do this in some of my armies (including my Tau, with two big squads of Kroot that will serve as a screen and likely die quickly and a minimum-sized squad of Fire Warriors to grab objectives in a Devilfish). That said, it's a risky gamble, as your risk for losing your scoring threats before turn 5 increases. Generally speaking, if you can manage to put down 2 durable units of troops to score objectives, you're strongly-positioned. You'd rather spend more points on more offensive, interference and supportive threats than more scoring threats, but for less-durable armies, I'd be comfortable with more scoring threats on the table. Basically, do what you have to do to keep your scoring threats on the table until turn 5. Now if your scoring threats also bring good offense or interference or support to the table, then feel free to bring more of them. But don't go overboard: many Codicies have cheaper threats in other Force Organization Chart slots.

[Jackelope King]

One of the most important things to consider when building your army is how you'll use the models you put in your deployment zone to make the models in your opponents' die or at least flee in terror. All the killamajigs in the world aren't going to do a thing until you can get the business end of those killamajigs close enough to reduce the enemy into something that vaguely resembles extra-chunky meat sauce. We've already discussed your various sorts of threats, but now it's time to take the next step and talk about how you use movement, positioning and range to get the most bang for your buck.

 

Projection of threats comes down to two key factors: range and mobility. In each case, more is better, to put it simply. The further away you can apply hurt to an enemy unit, the better. If you have a weapon with range sufficient to threaten most of the enemy models on turn 1, in theory, this can give you five turns of your threat being projected onto the enemy. Compare this to a unit that takes two turns of movement to get into range, which gives four turns of threat.

 

I'm Goin' Mobile

Since the turn order dictates movement before shooting, we'll start with the concept of mobility. There are three factors that impact on a unit's mobility: their base movement range (6" for most infantry), what sorts of weapons they carry, and how much they are slowed by intervening terrain. Many very fast units (like fast skimmers) combine both, creating an extremely mobile unit that has great speed and ignores intervening terrain.

 

Mobility has the advantage of letting you compensate for short-ranged threats. Many armies know about the importance of "Fast Melta", with the ability to quickly and easily get into range for the short-ranged anti-tank weapons. Mobility also gives you the chance to maneuver and try to get around to side-armor shots on vehicles or to deny enemy models their cover saves.

 

The other factor to consider is how a model's mobility impacts its ability to threaten the enemy. For instance, a Tactical Squad with a Multi-Melta can't shoot that heavy weapon if the squad moves. On the other hand, a fast vehicle can more 12" and still fire one weapon and all Defensive weapons. So even a very mobile unit on paper armed with weapons that it can't fire while using that mobility would likely be considered "slower" than a unit that can move and shoot. Meanwhile, even a walker, which goes at a full-ahead waddle of 6", can move those 6" and still fire all its weapons. For a unit like the Rifleman Dreadnought, the mobility is fair and doesn't compromise any shooting.

 

All the Range

The other major consideration with projection of your threats is the range of your threats' weaponry. Obviously something like a Tau Broadside Battlesuit with a 72" ranged Railgun can reach out and touch most enemy units, while a unit with 12" ranged meltaguns will have a more difficult time dealing with enemies at range.

 

I like to divide weapons into very general range-bands. 12" or less I consider to be close-ranged weapon, like meltaguns, flamers, rapid-firing, and the like. You have to get close enough to the enemy that your unit is at risk of return-fire, and it risks exposing itself. I also consider assaulting for most units to fall into this close range-band. Once you get to 18-36", I consider this a healthier medium-range. An enemy unit will need more effort to fully threaten a unit firing these sorts of weapons. Above 36", you're looking at long-ranged weapons, which only very mobile units or other long-ranged weapons will be able to retaliate effective.

 

Potential Versus Immediate Threat

It's through the projection of our threats that we force the enemy to deal with them. But there is another wrinkle to consider: is the threat we're projecting an immediate threat or a potential threat?

 

For instance, I think everyone would be worried about a Land Raider Crusader full of TH/SS Terminators in the enemy deployment zone. But is it an immediate threat or only a potential one? By which I mean, will it be able to disgorge its cargo and start carving up your lines on the enemy's next turn, or do you have 1 or more turns to deal with it?

 

An immediate threat will cause you harm on the enemy's next turn, whether that threat is Offensive, Interference, Support or Scoring. (Note that this means Scoring Threats are only immediate on turn 5 or later.) Anything else is a potential threat, and it should rate lower on your priority list (this includes units you have used Interference to block or stun or tarpit).

 

This may seem like common sense, but start by knocking out the most immediate threats first, with a few exceptions. If the only immediate threat is a weak threat (I wouldn't be worried about a couple of Grots wandering up to my lines), you can probably ignore them and focus more energy on dealing with a bigger potential threat first. In general, take a threat down a notch for each additional turn you have to prepare for it.

 

You also need to use projection adequately. With proper projection of your threats, your goal is to maintain the pressure of as many threats as possible on your enemy at all times. I've described the use of threats as "choking" the enemy. The more immediate threats you have for your opponent to deal with, the more that are likely to still be threats on your turn, and the more likely you are to start pulling away in terms of threats on the table and leaving your opponent behind.

 

Nowhere to Run...

The final art to projection of threats is to not just project them where your opponent is, but where your opponent is going to be. Rather than just making your tactical decisions from turn to turn, you need to learn to predict your opponent's moves, and set up counters. A very basic example is identifying the fastest route for the enemy's transports to come to midfield. If you set your firebase up to target that as their main firelane, you've wisely projected your power in such a way that you threatened that approach before the enemy even arrived.

 

This is by far the hardest part of projecting your threats, because it involves not just knowing your own army, but that of your opponent. And to a degree, it even involves being able to know your opponent, even if just making predictions based on his or her deployment.

 

When predicting an opponent's moves, keep these concepts in mind. Use your knowledge of range and movement to predict where the opponent will go, and cut your foe off. Think two and three turns ahead (a difficult feat, I know... I still struggle with this myself). Start by playing out your moves and then your opponent's likely responses in your head, and play it out as far as you can. As the game plays out, compare your predictions to what actually happened. You'll improve your predictions with time and practice, and you'll learn to really project your threats.

[spartan249]

Shh! You're giving our secrets away!!!

 

Just playin man... Good summary of winning concepts.

[Br0ther Rafen]

Thats a very complete, thorough and useful guide that you have given us Jackelope King, which covers all the bases and i think will help people who are new to the game to win their games (Ie noobs :tu:).

[Fintan]

A very eloquent guide to the basics of 40k. Well done that man. :)

[Captain Juan Juarez]

Bravo, that man.

 

I've had thoughts of a similar line over the last few months, but never had the energy or willpower to do something as comprehensive as this.

[Jackelope King]

Glad you folks find it helpful.

[barek]

Nice! Thank you! :rolleyes:

[DarkGuard]

A fantastic guide about a central aspect of 40K. I'll dissect it more when I have the time :rolleyes:. Thanks for taking the time to write it JK.

[Warp Angel]

Very complimentary to (and often less confusing than) my Killhammer philosophy.

 

If I ever get around to polishing Killhammer to v2, I'm going to want to borrow your idea of a "Hunter" as an "Interference" threat. Because that's really what it is.

 

Well done.

[LardO'Blood]

Very nice job, Jackelope King!

A bit long for my attention span, but it was helpful all the same.

[Shadowstalker Grim]

Its very nicely written JK, you should be proud of it! I take it you are since its in the signature :RTBBB:

 

I suppose the only thing I can think of is that you talk from a BA and Tau perspective (largely because I guess you use those armies) and are talking from what you know! Indeed the examples you have given are concise and yet incredibly insightful, but in the section 'Support the right guys' and 'The more the merrier' you make reference to support threats and force multipliers, I was wondering if you could shed more light on these for regular codex marines.

 

The reason I ask, is because beyond characters such as chaplains and librarians and some special characters, I cannot think of a unit that operates in a similar fashion to a sanguinary priest! Nor really in a force multiplier capacity in the same sense. Do we rely soley on those few single models to be our force multipliers?

[Jackelope King]

... but in the section 'Support the right guys' and 'The more the merrier' you make reference to support threats and force multipliers, I was wondering if you could shed more light on these for regular codex marines.

Well, you sort of hit the nail on the head: Codex: Space Marines doesn't have a tremendous amount of pure Support threats. Of course, as I already said, these aren't categories you put units into, but how you can use them at the table. Some, like the Sanguinary Priest, are just so obvious that they're convenient to talk about.

 

But there are some decent support options in Codex: Space Marines. You already picked out one of 'em: the Librarian. Librarians can come with, hands-down, one of the strongest Offensive Support powers in the game. Null Zone really is just that good. It turns super-durable units into weaker units, both against shooting and melee. It brings powerful units like TH/SS Terminators, Seer Councils, a tricked-out Dark Eldar Archon with a Shadow Field (who really hates rolling 1s) and really anything that relies on Invulnerable saves down a notch of two in durability. It's a 24" bubble, which means you've got a 36-38" range of potential denial if you've mech'd up. As an added bonus, it simply ends Daemon armies. Anyone shooting at a unit debuffed by Null Zone or assaulting such a unit, and ignores normal armor saves, gets a massive boost to killing power.

 

So discussing this unit in terms of "Supporting the Right Guys", a Librarian with Null Zone wants to be close enough to debuff units which your power-weapon or low-AP Offensive threats can reach out and touch. That is generally why I prefer the Avenger for the Librarian's second power. Have him ride up in a Land Raider with Assault Terminators, flip on Null Zone, then wait in the tank while the Terminators wreck face.

 

There are also some special characters who provide Support Threats. This is, in my mind, Pedro Kantor's big plus, but he requires a high points-value game to really be effective, because he depends on being surrounded by units that will become brutal tarpits and cheering for a big squad of TH/SS Terminators who wade in, kill whatever the rest of the army has pinned down, then run off to the next fight. A strong Pedro army, in my mind, comes up around 2500 points and turns midfield into a bog of death and carnage as tiny combat squads of Sternguard and Tactical Marines hold the enemy up indefinitely until TH/SS Terminators on foot can run up and kill everything in the area.

 

Tech-Marines, which inexcusably chew up a whole Elites slot for one Marine (1-3 for one slot would be passable), also provide a decent little boost in Bolstering Defenses (a little too situational for me to describe as a strong choice... as you noted, I play Tau and get a little depressed when my Kroot can't have a Forest to use Stealth in). Their big brothers the Masters of the Forge can do this too and unlock a whole new army list in addition to bringing decent shooting-power. Codex: Space Marines generally depend on moving to midfield, so even if we do have ruins to bolster, we don't get a lot out of it (unless you use Scouts to camp your home objective, which isn't a bad thing, honestly). Repairing vehicles is also decent, but they have such a hard time getting around that I just can't depend on it. Note that this means both of a Tech-Marine's support options are Durability Support.

 

We don't have a lot of other heavily-Support-based threats. Many of them buff only the unit for which they are purchased, and are often either costly for what they do, or simply want for "the right guys" to support, which we are sadly lacking. The Chaplain, in my mind, falls squarely into the latter category. Getting to reroll S4 non-rending non-power weapon rolls to-hit is like winning three bucks in the lottery. They'd love to run around with Vanguard Veterans or Honor Guard and go choppy choppy, but that cost starts getting absurd. They'd also love running around with Assault Terminators, but how dead do you need the other guy to be? Were I redesigning the Codex, I'd love to give the Chaplain a simple once-per-game chance to give all units within 6" rerolls to hit and make him really deserve that price tag and HQ slot. (That'd be after I fixed the pricing on Vanguard Vets Jump Packs and/or gave them access to cheaper power weapons like Tactical Squads get cheap special and heavy weapons).

 

I'd also call Lysander's Support Threat this sort of thing. He's a little schizophrenic: he wants to make a shooty unit shootier, but also is aching to go punch your enemy's face off. He's not usually worth the premium of making Bolters better. That's just an added bonus to the fact that he can hit you so hard that your great-grandchildren are born with the bruises.

 

Note that I do not consider army-wide changes like Chapter Tactics, Mounted Assault, or other Force Organization Chart reshuffles to be Support Threats. Threats aren't just a tool for you to use while building your army, but also for you to analyze your opponent's forces and decide how to go about destroying the enemy. Killing Vulkan doesn't suddenly make a Salamander's flamers worse, so Vulkan's threat would be considered based primarily off of the Offensive threat he presents, in addition to the Interference he can run with a 3++ save.

 

For Codex: Space Marines, we're more dependent on more "ordinary" modes of support. Remember that Redundancy is Support, so don't take a one-of when you can take two-ofs or three-ofs. Park one Rhino in front of two Predators, creating Interference and Support by counting both of those Predators as Obscured while letting the Predators fire their turrets unabated.

[Zynk Kaladin]

You should make a book: Jackelope King's Art of War. Very enlightening and clear. I always forget to predict my opponent's moves. Thinking in the "here and now" is nice, but I always seem to do so much better when I remember to play out the future of the battle in my head.

 

I look forward to more tenets. Maybe one on how to design a list that allows for flexible, synergistic threats and tactics?

[Shadowstalker Grim]

Thank you JK, that was pretty much the exact answer I was hoping for!

[Warp Angel]

You should make a book: Jackelope King's Art of War. Very enlightening and clear. I always forget to predict my opponent's moves. Thinking in the "here and now" is nice, but I always seem to do so much better when I remember to play out the future of the battle in my head.

 

I look forward to more tenets. Maybe one on how to design a list that allows for flexible, synergistic threats and tactics?

 

For a slightly different perspective from JK's take on how to design lists, browse the Killhammer links in my sig. He and I think along similar lines - though, to be honest, he's a bit easier to read and understand a lot of the time.

[Algesan]

One issue I can see skipped (or not clearly spelled out), but unfortunately is it wholly part of the "art" and none of the "science" of tactics. Player morale can be impaired and/or broken also, resulting in substandard playing on the table.

 

Psychological threats, which I'd consider a subcategory of "support" threats and depend entirely on the mindset of both you and your opponent. It is when any player values any unit (on either side) as a higher threat level than it actually is. I include "you" because you might have this problem and not realize it and an observant opponent might use it against you.

 

Chess is an easy example, especially the Queen, although some players can focus on Knights or Bishops. Depending on the skill level of the player, they put far too much value on the piece(s) and if you can eliminate them or "interfere" by restricting their scope of action, you "cripple" the player's entire game by making them feel defeat. Alternatively, by getting your queen (or other "special" piece(s)) in a secure and commanding position can do the same thing in reverse to your opponent. Usually this is considered a n00b error, but isn't always so. In college I had a friend who played in tournaments. He readily beat me (and everyone else in our group) until I noticed that he loved his knights too much. By attacking/threatening his knights, even when not the "smartest" move, I cramped his game enough so that I could pull out wins against him.

 

Now, think in terms of a Land Raider. Threat level is high, mainly from its durability and ability to deliver a heavy assault unit in your face. Shooting threat isn't bad, but twin heavy bolter and a pair of twin lascannons, while nothing to sneeze at, can only put out a max of 5 hits (although 8/9 chance of hit is solid), which is a bit weak for infantry killing and good for the lightest armor (AV 10/11), decent for AV 12 and declines up to AV 14. However, it is a hefty inventment (at least 250-300 + any rider) and getting an early pop on it is worth a shot if you feel that a player is tying up too much of his army around it. Note that simply getting a stun/shaken result is in keeping with the Interference threat concept because you defer the threat for another turn (because it is a threat).

 

The converse is that your opponent may overfocus on on your LR and spend lots of long range AT firepower on it at the expense of ignoring the Rhinos charging forward around it because they simply "must" kill it. Consider what it will take to kill a LR (yes, some nice dice rolling, one shot, one kill with the right weapon) with BS 4 Lascannons or melta outside half range. That is a huge amount of threat reduction to your force solely by the level of threat in the opponent's mind. Call it support or call it interference, it is definitely a force multiplier if you see it and use it.

 

Jackelope King did clearly spell out the solution to remove this as an issue for any player:

An immediate threat will cause you harm on the enemy's next turn, whether that threat is Offensive, Interference, Support or Scoring.

Rational evaluation of incoming threats and correct disposition of forces to counter those threats will remove psychological weakness in any player.

[Shadowstalker Grim]

I've enjoyed looking at some of warp angels principles on kilhammer too, but I think that whilst both you and JK bring up some fantastic points you fail to look at the downsides to your arts in some ways.

 

For instance I wholeheartedly agree that threats win games, it cranks up the number of units, guns and problems for an enemy and this makes it easier on you. Sadly this is also around another £20-40 you could be spending, if not more for individual bits and what not. Which makes some of the information provided hard to adhere to and goes against a strong principle of mine, which is to enjoy what you have.

 

This costing side I think is the harshest killer to many a battle plan as it can really rip the heart out of playing with larger numbers!

[Jackelope King]

For a slightly different perspective from JK's take on how to design lists, browse the Killhammer links in my sig. He and I think along similar lines - though, to be honest, he's a bit easier to read and understand a lot of the time.

Thanks, Warp Angel. Yeah, your approach is what made me sit down and break down how I perceive the game and how best to approach it. There's still more to come, but I think the basics are there, at least.

One issue I can see skipped (or not clearly spelled out), but unfortunately is it wholly part of the "art" and none of the "science" of tactics. Player morale can be impaired and/or broken also, resulting in substandard playing on the table.

The psychological game is an important one, and one I'll get to later, but you describe a big part of it. Perceived threat and actual threat are two very different things. If your opponent perceives a given threat as more threatening than it actually is, you come out ahead in the virtual threats as inordinate firepower is expended on a weaker threat.

I've enjoyed looking at some of warp angels principles on kilhammer too, but I think that whilst both you and JK bring up some fantastic points you fail to look at the downsides to your arts in some ways.

 

For instance I wholeheartedly agree that threats win games, it cranks up the number of units, guns and problems for an enemy and this makes it easier on you. Sadly this is also around another £20-40 you could be spending, if not more for individual bits and what not. Which makes some of the information provided hard to adhere to and goes against a strong principle of mine, which is to enjoy what you have.

 

This costing side I think is the harshest killer to many a battle plan as it can really rip the heart out of playing with larger numbers!

Oh, absolutely. This game costs an arm, a leg and a kidney. However, my suggestions for saving money belong more in the hobby forum than the Tactica forum (including buying from online suppliers like TheWarStore, buying used in bulk off of eBay, converting certain units from cheaper models, etc.).

[Shadowstalker Grim]

Wheras i'd say buying tactically is all part of the game! :tu:

 

Well...it has to be for me, i don't have enough money to throw round on things, i pretty much live off of xmas! Still...i'll get my many threats eventually....but spending time here and honing my theory and lists to figure out the best personal buys should pay off! In perhaps a more literal sense as i should save myself at least the kidney! :blush:

[Algesan]

I've enjoyed looking at some of warp angels principles on kilhammer too, but I think that whilst both you and JK bring up some fantastic points you fail to look at the downsides to your arts in some ways.

 

For instance I wholeheartedly agree that threats win games, it cranks up the number of units, guns and problems for an enemy and this makes it easier on you. Sadly this is also around another £20-40 you could be spending, if not more for individual bits and what not. Which makes some of the information provided hard to adhere to and goes against a strong principle of mine, which is to enjoy what you have.

 

This costing side I think is the harshest killer to many a battle plan as it can really rip the heart out of playing with larger numbers!

 

Play what you are comfortable with and what you can afford/convert. No problem at all. Any decent tactics write up or "rules of war" thing apply even if you have "substandard" troops. The principles work for any group of troops. Since we are in JK's thread, you simply have to maximize your actual strengths and minimize your enemy's while attacking his weaknesses. If you do this, then your chances of victory will increase, no matter your enemy.