Tanking characters (the insanity of 3++)

[Morticon]

Doesn't work with Corbulo either by the way.

 

Actually it works famously with Corbulo (and other 3+ save guys)

 

Saves are defined as: Armour, Cover and Invulnerable. So, yes- he can tank - take the hits, do his FNP and then LoS it as per same save allocation.

 

In the event of AP1/2 and 2xT weapons, you just LoS from the start.

 

It's poor use of Corbulo. If he fails that 2+ roll he's dead against a lot of common weaponry - the humble krak missile for a start. Then you've lost your FNP/FC bubble, reroll if unused, and all that Combat capability.

 

If you can guarantee you won't get shot by Str8+, maybe, but how rare is that?

 

Battlecannon? Free Corbulo kill.

 

In assault, tanking is more viable yeah. Still, I don't think you'll see more SS assault sarges than you did in 5th :/

 

:P

Why would we put corbulo out in front if we were facing battlecannons, though?

After having played exactly this way, and limiting incoming fire, and then using corbs, I think its a very, very good use of corbs. Worked like a charm.

 

Obvs if you have Long Fang missile spam heading your way, you may not try the same thing. That would be nuts, but for the ability to soak everything else - why not take a 50% chance increase to save your guys from anything not double toughness?

[Mezkh]

I thought you were putting him up front all the time everytime :) Obviously vs Psycannons and the like it's good.

[DominicJ]

Well, this has been argued a lot, I just dont see how you can justify trying to save a 17pt model by risking a 55pt model.

 

I suppose only gaming will prove it one way or another, but my sarge and his special weapon buddies will be winning wars from behind the red shirts.

[benation]

I disagree with what people have said about the way Look Out Sir works.

 

It says in the rule book the following: "When a Wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters, and there is another model from the same unit within 6", he is allowed a Look Out, Sir attempt."

 

To me, that part in brackets obviously allows for a Look Out Sir roll to be made before or after rolling your save.

 

Eg: Wound is allocated to the nearest model (Storm Shield Sergeant for example), said wound is a Las Cannon, the Sgt. rolls a 4 and saves it with his Storm Shield. Fine! The next Las Cannon hits and he rolls a 2, this now counts as an unsaved wound allocated to him, now he rolls his Look Out Sir roll to shift the wound to a model within 6". If he rolls a 4+ a Marine in the squad dies, if he rolls a 1,2 or 3 he bites the dust.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Doesn't work with Corbulo either by the way.

 

Actually it works famously with Corbulo (and other 3+ save guys)

 

Saves are defined as: Armour, Cover and Invulnerable. So, yes- he can tank - take the hits, do his FNP and then LoS it as per same save allocation.

 

In the event of AP1/2 and 2xT weapons, you just LoS from the start.

 

It's poor use of Corbulo. If he fails that 2+ roll he's dead against a lot of common weaponry - the humble krak missile for a start. Then you've lost your FNP/FC bubble, reroll if unused, and all that Combat capability.

 

If you can guarantee you won't get shot by Str8+, maybe, but how rare is that?

 

Battlecannon? Free Corbulo kill.

 

In assault, tanking is more viable yeah. Still, I don't think you'll see more SS assault sarges than you did in 5th :/

 

:)

Why would we put corbulo out in front if we were facing battlecannons, though?

After having played exactly this way, and limiting incoming fire, and then using corbs, I think its a very, very good use of corbs. Worked like a charm.

 

Obvs if you have Long Fang missile spam heading your way, you may not try the same thing. That would be nuts, but for the ability to soak everything else - why not take a 50% chance increase to save your guys from anything not double toughness?

 

 

Corbulo can always use his Far Seeing Eye to re-roll a failed Look Out Sir--- that will save him quite a bit; essentially on average it will take ~12 AP3 Str8 HITS to kill Corbulo out front like that (~6 to fail LoS, then Far Seeing Eye, then ~6 more to get him to fail LoS again). As ALWAYS your dice can betray you but the law of averages, I'd say 12 shots is not too bad a risk. Add a cover save to Corbulo and your odds are even happier :lol:

[Morticon]

I disagree with what people have said about the way Look Out Sir works.

 

It says in the rule book the following: "When a Wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters, and there is another model from the same unit within 6", he is allowed a Look Out, Sir attempt."

 

To me, that part in brackets obviously allows for a Look Out Sir roll to be made before or after rolling your save.

 

Eg: Wound is allocated to the nearest model (Storm Shield Sergeant for example), said wound is a Las Cannon, the Sgt. rolls a 4 and saves it with his Storm Shield. Fine! The next Las Cannon hits and he rolls a 2, this now counts as an unsaved wound allocated to him, now he rolls his Look Out Sir roll to shift the wound to a model within 6". If he rolls a 4+ a Marine in the squad dies, if he rolls a 1,2 or 3 he bites the dust.

 

 

Matey- this is a common misconception. You need to read that sentence in conjunction with the previous pages Mixed saves allocation and same save allocation - as they're different. The way you describe in your example is not how it is explained for mixed saves.

 

Essentially, if you have different saves, then once the wound is resolved it is too late to LoS.

 

When you read those two and immediately read the sentence you quoted, it makes much more sense.

Otherwise, you can essentially have a 2+ armour save for your entire 3+ squad, that makes nooooo sense and was cleverly thought of.

[Taranis]

I disagree with what people have said about the way Look Out Sir works.

 

It says in the rule book the following: "When a Wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters, and there is another model from the same unit within 6", he is allowed a Look Out, Sir attempt."

 

To me, that part in brackets obviously allows for a Look Out Sir roll to be made before or after rolling your save.

 

Eg: Wound is allocated to the nearest model (Storm Shield Sergeant for example), said wound is a Las Cannon, the Sgt. rolls a 4 and saves it with his Storm Shield. Fine! The next Las Cannon hits and he rolls a 2, this now counts as an unsaved wound allocated to him, now he rolls his Look Out Sir roll to shift the wound to a model within 6". If he rolls a 4+ a Marine in the squad dies, if he rolls a 1,2 or 3 he bites the dust.

 

 

Matey- this is a common misconception. You need to read that sentence in conjunction with the previous pages Mixed saves allocation and same save allocation - as they're different. The way you describe in your example is not how it is explained for mixed saves.

 

Essentially, if you have different saves, then once the wound is resolved it is too late to LoS.

 

When you read those two and immediately read the sentence you quoted, it makes much more sense.

Otherwise, you can essentially have a 2+ armour save for your entire 3+ squad, that makes nooooo sense and was cleverly thought of.

 

I'm afraid that I agree with benation. Having read page 15+16 several times I still believe it. Each wound (or group of similar wounds) is resolved one at a time against nearest model. Then LoS.

I'll try browsing the OR for it also.

 

In regards to tanking ill use Dante to lead a vanguard squad and a Captain or other 2+/4++ to lead my DC. Astorath I think. Add priests naturally. Those are our fastest hard hitters in cc if I'm going light on vehicles.

[wabbitrage]

How this works is straight forward.

 

The first line of Look Out, Sir says...

 

"When a Wound (or unsaved Wound) is allocated to one of your characters, and there is another model from the same unit within 6, he's allowed a Look Out, Sir attempt."

 

I can see why this is confusing but its simple why those brackets are there.

 

1st example.

A squad with a captain using artificer armour (2+ save) comes under fire. For arguements sake lets just say its normal bolter fire. for whatever reason the captain has been allocated a wound which he has not rolled to save yet (hence the first part of Look Out, Sir). He can then decide to take a Look Out, Sir roll, then roll to save on the appropriate model.

 

2nd example

A squad with a captain using power armour comes under fire from bolter fire. since the whole squad including the captain is 3+ save. you roll all the dice at once (as stated in fast dice). Due to bad rolling or poor position of your captain your captain has just been allocated an unsaved wound (hence the bracketed part of Look Out, Sir). You may now roll for your Look Out, Sir.

 

You can't have your captain take a 2+ save as in example one. fail it, then decide to take a Look Out sir roll.

 

Anyone who tries that is knowingly cheating or oblivously cheating.

 

Edit - grammar / added a sentence for clarity

[Morticon]

well summed up wabbit !!

[Taranis]

That is a great explanation. I'll stick with that. Copy, paste to notebook.

Thank you very much.

[Remmy]

While this is going to be a very common tactic for us. Other armies can do it better (dark eldar + eldrad ally fortuning multiple HQ models for 2+ rerollable invulns). I was thinking of ways to counteract this strategy.

 

What do you guys think about intentionally giving the leading HQ model cover with your own models. Then leaving the rest/most of his squad out of cover. Followed up by implementing the new concentrated fire rule.

 

Is this viable/legal?

[Mezkh]

While this is going to be a very common tactic for us. Other armies can do it better (dark eldar + eldrad ally fortuning multiple HQ models for 2+ rerollable invulns). I was thinking of ways to counteract this strategy.

 

What do you guys think about intentionally giving the leading HQ model cover with your own models. Then leaving the rest/most of his squad out of cover. Followed up by implementing the new concentrated fire rule.

 

Is this viable/legal?

 

Yes absolutely legal, and viable. It was called sniping back in 4th, and it's back in 6th.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

While this is going to be a very common tactic for us. Other armies can do it better (dark eldar + eldrad ally fortuning multiple HQ models for 2+ rerollable invulns). I was thinking of ways to counteract this strategy.

 

What do you guys think about intentionally giving the leading HQ model cover with your own models. Then leaving the rest/most of his squad out of cover. Followed up by implementing the new concentrated fire rule.

 

Is this viable/legal?

 

Yes absolutely legal, and viable. It was called sniping back in 4th, and it's back in 6th.

 

 

The only way this work is by the opposite of what you said.

 

You must give the squad cover, but leave the Character with no cover. Read the focus fire rules carefully-- you have to pick a cover save value, then shoot at all models who have that value or worse of a cover save.

 

So if half a squad is in 5+ cover, the other half is in 4+ cover, and 1 guy is in the open, then you declare "I'm targeting 5+ cover or lower" then the 4+ cover guys are untouchable but the 5+ cover and the guy in the open are fair game.

[Mezkh]

You can declare 'no cover save' as well, for Focus fire.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

You can declare 'no cover save' as well, for Focus fire.

 

Yes exactly

 

Best implementation of this---- 2x RAS and multimelta attack bikes.

 

Position the RAS so that only a 'window' of clear a shot exists to the model you want to snipe. Move the Attackbikes to fire through that window--- hey presto! Goodbye PF-Sgt/AssaultCannon Termie/Psycannon Paladin/etcetcetc

[wabbitrage]

You can declare 'no cover save' as well, for Focus fire.

 

Yes exactly

 

Best implementation of this---- 2x RAS and multimelta attack bikes.

 

Position the RAS so that only a 'window' of clear a shot exists to the model you want to snipe. Move the Attackbikes to fire through that window--- hey presto! Goodbye PF-Sgt/AssaultCannon Termie/Psycannon Paladin/etcetcetc

 

if its a sergeant or IC you can still Look Out, Sir roll it

[darth_giles]

Position the RAS so that only a 'window' of clear a shot exists to the model you want to snipe. Move the Attackbikes to fire through that window--- hey presto! Goodbye PF-Sgt/AssaultCannon Termie/Psycannon Paladin/etcetcetc

How does that affect blasts, though? If I have a Vindicator and leave a window it has LOS to everyone but Sergeant Tank, does that mean everyone dies but him, even if he's under the marker too?

[wabbitrage]

Position the RAS so that only a 'window' of clear a shot exists to the model you want to snipe. Move the Attackbikes to fire through that window--- hey presto! Goodbye PF-Sgt/AssaultCannon Termie/Psycannon Paladin/etcetcetc

How does that affect blasts, though? If I have a Vindicator and leave a window it has LOS to everyone but Sergeant Tank, does that mean everyone dies but him, even if he's under the marker too?

 

you wouldn't do it with a vindicator. no real advantage, from what i can tell? not sure if you can actually do focused fire with blast weapons

[Mezkh]

If the marker is over him, it counts as a wound for the unit, but he cannot be allocated wounds, unsaved or not.

 

edit: You can declare focus fire for blast weapons - especially good with Plasma Cannons ;)

 

Basically the Blast Marker is only used to work out how many hits you get on a unit, you can count models out of LOS or in a different cover value, it doesn't matter.

 

When it comes to saves/removing casualties, you follow all the normal rules for allocation, so closest first - if you've declared focus fire no cover, closest with no cover save, etc.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

You can declare 'no cover save' as well, for Focus fire.

 

Yes exactly

 

Best implementation of this---- 2x RAS and multimelta attack bikes.

 

Position the RAS so that only a 'window' of clear a shot exists to the model you want to snipe. Move the Attackbikes to fire through that window--- hey presto! Goodbye PF-Sgt/AssaultCannon Termie/Psycannon Paladin/etcetcetc

 

if its a sergeant or IC you can still Look Out, Sir roll it

 

 

Great point! Still a good trick for the tactics toolbox-- There's plenty of stuff you'll want to prune with that won't have LoS, and a 4+ LoS will still wiff sometimes obviously.

[darth_giles]

If the marker is over him, it counts as a wound for the unit, but he cannot be allocated wounds, unsaved or not.

Excellent. I think I just found my way around the shenanigans. Muahahahaha

[Zynk Kaladin]

Woa woa wait a minute. Models under a blast marker aren't allocated wounds, just the unit in general? So if a blast marker scatters to the back of my squad, I would have to allocate wounds to the front? Say whaaa...

[darth_giles]

Woa woa wait a minute. Models under a blast marker aren't allocated wounds, just the unit in general? So if a blast marker scatters to the back of my squad, I would have to allocate wounds to the front? Say whaaa...

But you can't allocate to a model that's out of LOS. BYB, p.16. Also the Vindicator is a special case because its hull-mounted Demolisher Cannon is limited to a 45-degree LOS, unlike most other weapons in the Space Marine arsenal.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Woa woa wait a minute. Models under a blast marker aren't allocated wounds, just the unit in general? So if a blast marker scatters to the back of my squad, I would have to allocate wounds to the front? Say whaaa...

 

Unless it's a barrage weapon-- then the attack 'originates' directionally from the center of the blast marker.

[darth_giles]

Unless it's a barrage weapon-- then the attack 'originates' directionally from the center of the blast marker.

Good catch. I'd missed that. Looks like IG allies have a way around it as well. Earthshakers are still barrage weapons. So are our Whirlwinds, but their AP is awful low.