Is this viable?

[Kingkaneda]

I love playing space marines, all their units seem viable if used correctly. Most people hate the assault marines/vanguard veterans. I hated them too. What good is deepstriking if you cant charge? Way too vulnerable to move around the table freely. But then this idea hit me: HIDE THEM BEHIND 3 BAREBONES PREDATORS! Thats a moving transportkilling wall, wich your assault marines can jump over when the opportunity to kill some troopers arrives. Anyone tried this or faced this? I would always put a chaplain with the assault marines to increase their killyness btw. Hiding behind terrain is also viable, but less flexible. Im really warming up to the assault marines!

[JamesI]

I've played that style with the BA codex. Make a wall of vindicators with assault marines massed behind it. Move up shooting and assault after.

[Koremu]

Just don't scatter...

[JamesI]

Just don't scatter...

It wasn't that much of a risk since the assault marines are behind the Vindicators. Generally the Vindicators died or lost their gun about the time the assault marines were ready to jump over and assault.

 

I don't play that style currently, but could go back to it sometime.

[thade]

I love playing space marines, all their units seem viable if used correctly. Most people hate the assault marines/vanguard veterans.

I love them. I field one or two assault squads in every list, and I frequently use a vanguard squad.

 

What good is deepstriking if you cant charge?

To be fair, I half-agree with you: DSing is a very large risk as it exposes your unit to fire if you are not very careful (and/or very lucky with scatter). This is - like many things - because many of us use DSing incorrectly. DSing is meant as dynamic deployment: you're not sure where to put your marines now, not sure what flank may need support later? You can put them in Reserve (jump infantry have a delicious 18" threat range when they come in off the table edge out of standard Reserves) and even decide to DS them (they lose their "assault off the table edge" ability but now can be placed many more places).

 

If you run a Drop Pod list and/or Scout Bikers, you can get some Locator Beacons on the table in order to mitigate DS scatter. Land the assault team near a beacon and they don't scatter, allowing you to place them where they might lay down their flamer templates and their bolt pistols.

 

But then this idea hit me: HIDE THEM BEHIND 3 BAREBONES PREDATORS! Thats a moving transportkilling wall, wich your assault marines can jump over when the opportunity to kill some troopers arrives.

I assert that hiding your assault teams behind your gun lines - whatever form the gun lines take - is the proper way to leverage them. :D

 

Anyone tried this or faced this?

Not directly, but they're always behind my Rhinos, Land Raiders, Vindicator, Dreads, terrain, other infantry...they have jump packs and that means they can quickly hop in front of my line or beside it if I want them to fire or even charge at something.

 

I definitely support the usage of a chaplain. If you're using the vanilla codex, here's something I miss: Cassius, a packless assault squad, in a Land Raider. It's a fun time.

[spartan249]

Let's take a look at the pros and cons of your idea, shall we?

 

This configuration brings quite a few models for a low price which, while perhaps not as shockingly effective as the more expensive options, is certainly enough to get the job of clean-up done. This formation will cost roughly 400 points, all things considered, more if you're planning on putting your HQ in it. When going for numbers in a C:SM list, it's not a bad option.

 

However, there's something I think you should consider about this idea. The opportunity cost of taking these units is positively correlated to the points limit you are playing. Bare Predators are cheap for a reason: they only boast a single autocannon. It's not impressive firepower by any means, and this fact becomes more and more glaring as the points level goes up. This configuration may work well enough at 1000 points, but go up to 1500 points, and it's very likely that your opponents will be bringing an army configuration or set of units that will dwarf the effectiveness of your chosen predator strategy.

 

But the points limit goes both ways, you may say. Yes, that is certainly the case, but now we come back to the opportunity cost. You are spending 1 FA slot and ALL of your HS slots on this unit block. As the points go up, you have to either compromise your formation or upgrade it in order to keep up. If you compromise it, then it defeats the purpose of even trying that strategy, and you may as well scrap the idea altogether in favor of something else because skimping out on even 1 predator will mean that the assault squad will have less space and quite possibly less time as those 2 predators will be disabled/destroyed much faster then a formation of 3.. If you're going to upgrade it, then you're looking at two options: upgrade the predators or upgrade the Assault Squad to a Vanguard Squad. What does this mean? It means that the points cost of this formation will skyrocket, in some cases, to twice the original amount.

 

Consider this: does the additional cost of the unit block reflect the increased performance of the unit in the field?

 

The answer to this question will of course vary based on what your opposition looks like and how you decide to upgrade the formation. Choose to upgrade the predators, and your assault squad will suddenly seem very lackluster in assault power when compared to some of the things that show up in higher point limits. Upgrade to vanguards, and you will suffer tremendously on your points budget in return for a minimal increase in combat power and no change in their defensive ability. In addition to this, Assault/Vanguard marines are only really effective at engaging light and medium infantry , and it's not guaranteed that you'll have such targets all the time.

 

You could also try including more assault marine squads, but that bites into what little space you have left to fulfill a POU that is already covered well enough by tactical squads, which is the anti-light~medium infantry POU. Granted, Assault Marines excel at disruption, and including extra assault squads might help if you are facing an army that forgoes close combat for more shooting ability (like Tau). However, including extra squads of assault marines means that you are putting your bets down on the assumption that you will be facing enemies that are weak to close combat, which is, at best, a 70/30 bet in favor of the opponent, given the increased effectiveness of close combat in terms of decisive damage and the amount of codices that include powerful close combat options and army builds.

 

Also consider this: Will you be even moving those predators to actively try to create those opportunities for the assault marines to start working?

 

With C:BA, you would most certainly be doing so, as Predators are Fast vehicles and Assault Marines are Troops and are more versatile, giving you much more reason to keep them moving at all times. With C:SM, however, you're looking at a static weapons platform (at higher point levels, that is. The bare predators have no problem with this since they only have one gun to begin with) and a unit that can not score and can not bring any meaningful anti-vehicle firepower to contribute.

 

In other words, C:BA can use this formation to great effect because of the greater mobility and the increased utility of the star unit, the assault squad. C:SM configurations will be much less effective using this strategy because of the limited options and greater opportunity costs associated with it.

 

End Conclusion: This configuration has merits in a lower points limit, as the opportunity cost is low and the competition is limited by budget as much as you are. At higher point limits, think very carefully about how you are going to scale the unit block to keep up with the higher limit, what your most probable opponents will be (as this will influence your decisions about how to upgrade your units), and whether or not another unit block with similar upgraded cost would do the job much more effectively.