Jump to content

Foot slogging army Questions


For the Horde

Recommended Posts

Yay a 3++ shoutout and reference! Now I have to go tell the great Pink one...

 

On the topic of YTTH, Stelek has great ideas and theories, and I followed him for a long while, it's just his delivery can be off-putting at times. With that said, I stopped following mainly b/c I just stopped 40K in general (and Kirby offered me a chance to write occasional articles on his blog), but I've heard Stelek's quality articles and analysis has increased a lot as of late and all the e-drama has subsided, so I think I'm going to start checking it out again.

 

As for viable foot lists, there is one with Wolves: Loganwing. Chumby brought it to the NOVA tournament last year and did really well, and Kirby and Stelek both have articles discussing it's strengths/weaknesses and viability as a tourney army.

 

Basic concept is Logan, Njal, a bunch of Wolf Guard in TDA with cyclones, some Lone Wolves, some Wolf Scouts, some small TWC squads, and LFs with missiles.

 

You all over at 3++ have been pretty helpful in my world, credit where credit is due. Thank you.

 

Thade, there's actually a lot of conversation floating around the blogosphere regarding tournament format, scoring, etc. Both sites I've linked in this thread have some good articles discussing it.

 

Everyone else, oddly enough, I've been eating popcorn and reading this thread and others while I kill the rest of my work day. Thanks for the entertainment.

Simo and mavgirl do not respond to each other unless it is completely clinical and without personal commentary.

If you cant do that please stay out of the thread.

 

All, keep the debate civil and polite and within the rules of the board.

If that is how tournament scoring works, it's a wonder we don't spend more time complaining about that than anything. Imagine if baseball worked like that. People would get shot. Even more cars would be flipped. (Sorry, Boston and Canada...but flipping cars over sports is dumb.) I understand that there aren't many formats that would work in a single day, and that a single day can only have so many games in it (not to mention how many tournie-style games each of us could stand in a day) but, really? This is not the environment in which I find I enjoy the game. I do fine there, but if I have to annihilate every opponent to advance, I won't be the only one that's not having fun.

I do complain about that, though mostly its 'comped' tournaments I dislike. Ive yet to see a single comp system that wasnt horribly biassed against atleast one army if not towards a couple others, and just ruins the experience for me.

 

In a perfect world wed be able to get a game in against every other person at the tournament, however theres rarely time for that at even the smallest of tournies, so I give that bit a pass. What gets my goat is when people actively bargain- we had a bit of a scandle at my LGS when a guy actually bribed two people into being tabled so he could go to the denver tournament! Needless to say theyve been blacklisted from my group, and get no end of :) at the LGS.

 

I do enjoy some 3++ now and again. We dont always agree, the lists tend to be a bit 'spammy' for me as an example, but they tend to talk about solid stuff.

I am going to take anything you say with a mountain of salt Simo.

 

Your breakdown on FA options in your blog post regarding this topic was laughable to say the least and seeing the reasons for your last ride of the thunderwolves, it is clear that you do not understand their role or capabilities.

 

I can understand a person not agreeing with a build, based upon their own extensive research and testing, however not when I can see and read the faults that lie within your own game style on your blog.

Take it how you want, I don't write to get plaudits for the great player I am because I'm not I write because it allows me to be reflective.

 

Again the fast attack choices in the space wolf codex aren't ones that have the most points spent on in the vast majority of armies, why because we have better choices elsewhere.

 

As already said I may not be the greatest 40k player but how many thunderwolf heavy armies do you see coming top tables at British tournaments? Few because the day of the death star has gone. How many lists with sky claws come high up or swift claws for that matter? What about blob squaded fenrisian wolves? The main fast attack choice used in space wolf lists is the speeder to deal with heavy armour and to jump on objectives at the end of games and contest.

 

Perhaps this whole debate has been fruitless because I forgot a key point in all of this, the american tournament scene is very different to the british one. You play higher points limits where it becomes easier to write lists. Personally I hate playing the 1500 points that WHW put on because the lower the points limit the harder it is to write a list.

 

Your reasoning is at fault when you want to label TWC as only deathstar units.

 

With the release of our new codex, the TWC/Thunderlord deathstar dominated the table tops on both sides of the pond for awhile due to people just not knowing how to deal with them. As the game progressed, people that did not adapt found their TWC deathstar units getting burned quite badly. That is why NOW you are not seeing any deathstar units dominating any tournament top tables. Just this past weekend, I saw the typical TWC deathstar player launch into group of Paladins and then questioned the rules for NFW when the entire pack went up in a swirl of nether. Really? You charge your huge pack of TWC into Paladins? The era of the deathstar unit is over.

 

Like I said, I read some of your blog posts and when you called your last ride for thunderwolves, it wasn't because TWC are useless or cost too much, it is because you failed to adapt to the game changing to deal with the TWC deathstar tactics. It seems like you jumped on the bandwagon, but then jumped off when it stopped working as well as you thought they should or had in the past.

 

I am trying to figure out how you spend 560pts on 5 TWC models.

nothing has changed my opinion on foot sloggers and until I see them do well at tournaments or across a table from me it won't.

This is basically a discussion killer. The combo can only win if you see it win.

 

I love a good back and forth but if nobody is open to ideas the exercise is fruitless.

 

No amount of theory crafting was every going to sway you?

 

Maverik girl used her responses to bait this out of you in a round about way...she has you quoted in one thread saying just target the LFs...then another thread basically saying ignore the LFs.

 

You wolves should just settle this in the next tavern brawl

In a mainly foot sloggin list your forced to think faster and ahead of your opponent.

That challenge there is where its appeal lies. Maybe we should view transports - not as a necessity - but as a crutch.

agreed! and as mentioned before by Ramses at a different thread shows the "synergy between units" http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=232911 and yes, I was paying attention Ramses :P

At the moment, due to lack of funding, my SW are pure foot sloggers. Occasionaly I have trouble (massive lack of terrain at the club) however I am getting used to feinting, bluffing and countering. Ive WON games using:

 

Rune Priest

WP w/ JP and skyclaws

WP and 5 PA WG w/ Frost

IP and 4 wolves (good fire magnet)

2 squads of 9 GH with plasmas and PFs and WG w/ Frost

6 LF w/ rockets

13 BC and WG w/ frost

 

Vassakov has gotta help me a little yet, but Ill get there. Foot sloggers can be effective though.

Footslogging is not a weak list by any means but I wont blow smoke up your arse and put it as a competitive build. It definitely has it's place in the hands of a skilled commander which MavGirl is becoming in her own right.

 

The chief disadvantage that a footslogging army faces is lack of mobility. With Space Wolves, putting chainsword to flesh is a pretty high on the to do list, but with a footslogging force it is practically paramount because it serves a dual purpose; offensively killing your enemy AND defensively making you untargetable. Now with lack of mobility you need to rely on maneuver.

 

Now with this game we are in a bit more control of maneuvering then what would take place on a real battlefield. We have defined borders to the battlefield and defined deployment zones. With proper planning both deploying first or deployong second, you can somewhat dictate just how much mobility your opponent will be able to employ as well as maximizing how effective you will be able to maneuver.

 

Think about these things padiwans.

I realise my lack of mobile firepower is a downer. I am planning on 2 typhoon squadrons and a couple of whirlwinds to solve it though.

 

With a footslogging list the lack of mobile/armored firepower can be an intentional choice.

 

Every long range AV selection by your opponent is sub-optimal if you have no vehicles to target

 

 

 

It all depends...so many variables including but not limited to your play style and preferences

it's diffinatly a harder list to play correctly, specialy if your opponent knows the strenghts and weaknesses of your army, and knows which units to target first. then again, you probalby know the strenghts and weaknesses of your army too, and know which should be targetted first, so you're bound to adapt your playstyle to what you suspect them to do, and plan a few nasty surprises. (a RP with a combiweapon can seriously bugger up your opponents tactics, for instance, or a simple meltabomb on your WP
Footslogging is not a weak list by any means but I wont blow smoke up your arse and put it as a competitive build. It definitely has it's place in the hands of a skilled commander which MavGirl is becoming in her own right.

 

What do you do against Guard or Vanilla Marines bringing a lot of guns?

How about Tau, Bike Marines and Eldars who are faster than even a Meched Wolf force, and now have very small movement restrictions against them with Wolves being on Foot and not even getting extra deployment advantages from DPods.

A least with Tacticals [who I think are inferior to Greys] you can pewpew with their heavy weapon.

Greys have one weakness, and that is short reach. The Rhino overcomes that. By not taking the Rhino, you allow the foe to cash in on the one handicap Greys have. DPods also overcome that short reach.

 

I realise my lack of mobile firepower is a downer. I am planning on 2 typhoon squadrons and a couple of whirlwinds to solve it though.

 

In my armies, my Speeders have survived because I bring much Mech to the table. If all you have is those items, you make target priority quite easy for your foe:

"I have las cannons.... ummm, I guess I shoot the Speeders" -_-

Speeders are not tough, but they survive by being one of many things that require AT shooting. In a Foot list, your Infantry doesn't require AT shooting....

 

With a footslogging list the lack of mobile/armored firepower can be an intentional choice.

 

Every long range AV selection by your opponent is sub-optimal if you have no vehicles to target

 

By not being Meched up, you have given away a large strength. Brother Ramses acknowledges this.

Yes, a Las cannon is going to kill Greys quite slowly. But is a frag missile actually going to kill MEq that much faster?

The template is 3" so if you string your men 2" apart, he might be catching two Marines under the template anyway. s4 against MEq isn't great.

So whilst his Las cannons are sub optimal against your Foot list, you have already taken a sub-optimal list in the first place.

Bear with me, lest I get flamed: Ramses said "Footslogging is not a weak list by any means but I wont blow smoke up your arse and put it as a competitive build. It definitely has it's place in the hands of a skilled commander which MavGirl is becoming in her own right."

 

So Foot is not weak, cool, but it is not competitive, according to Ramses. If you are on $100K, but your friends are on $200K, you are at a disadvantage in paying your mortgage off, right? It doesn't matter that $100K is a great wage, $200K is even better.

Same with Foot versus Mech. Foot might be good, but Mech is better.

 

The power that those simple metal bawkses bring to your unit is impressive. I pay 58 pts for a Templar Rhino. And I get the Righteous Zeal move whenever a Marine dies. So I pay more than a Wolf does for a transport AND I get a mobility bonus even for my guys getting killed, which Wolves do not. Yet even with those positives for being Foot, I still do not regard it as being as solid as Mech.

 

+++

 

Let me say this; isolating a tactic is a very good idea. By not taking Mech, you become a better player for those situations when you get deMeched, which happens every game to at least one of your units, if not all of them.

 

On the Wii, I was beating my brother in table tennis with my strong backhand. But my forehand was not so strong. My brother would deliberately target my forehand. When I play against the computer, I deliberately use my forehand for serving and returns to get it stronger.

 

This is what I believe playing with Foot is like. Foot is not as good as Mech, but you gain mastery in situations where Foot is inevitable.

A player who has played both with Foot and Mech 'should' be a better player than one just played Mech.

 

Those are my thoughts on the matter anyway. :)

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.