Vanguard Veterans

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Ok so apparently I have too much free time.......... and I ran an experiment 'for fun'.

 

6th Edition rules have improved Vanguard Veteran's ability to suceed on the charge when they land via Heroic Intervention. Being able to pre-measure (you will never fall off the table ever again) and having 2D6 charge range means that chances have never been better.

 

I wanted to run a purely mathematical statistic calculation, but since that pesky scatter-dice is directional I realized the formula would put me into the realm of statistical calculus. Not that I *couldn't* do it..... it's just that my calc is so dusty I'd rather just use the brute-force method of sampling.

 

MATERIALS: 3x 25mm bases, 2x D6 dice, 1x Scatter dice, Tape ruler.

 

EXPERIMENT PARAMETERS:

 

The Target was a 25mm base, placed on the table with its back edge tangent to the edge of the center of the table.

 

Then a 25mm base was used to represent the VV Sgt as he deepstrikes in, as well as one more to represent the advantage of 'building the ring' as close as possible to the target when needed.

 

"VV Sgt" rolled scatter dice + D6 to find the landing spot. If he landed within 1" of the target or the edge (to potentially represent other models in an enemy unit) it counted as a FAIL.

 

After landing spot was determined, charge range of 2D6 was rolled, and measured to the target for chance of SUCCESS or FAIL.

 

The experiment was run 75 times: 25 times with -starting landing spot- at 3.01" from the target, 25 times at 4.01", and 25 times at 5.01"

 

 

 

Here are the results:

 

Dropping at 3.01" from Target: 21 Successes, 4 Failures

Dropping at 4.01" from Target: 18 Successes, 7 Failures

Dropping at 5.01" from Target: 22 Successes, 3 Failures

 

TOTAL: 61 SUCCESSES 14 FAILURES

81.33% chance of Success, 18.67% chance of Failure

 

 

 

As always, the sample can skew one way or the other and 25 at each distance is a little low. However, I can see why they aren't more popular--- if the chance of success is ~80% under 6th Edition, then they must have been worse under 5th (conjecture).

 

I understand this experiment has no way to measure the effects of overwatch--- a qualitative observation I noticed however is that the 'extra man' to 'build the ring' closer was rarely needed for a charge to succeed, so that helps draw down a little against a conjecture that overwatch killing the closest man would make the charge fail too much more often.

 

All in all, I think I'm going to have to try them out now. Not as a powerhouse but as a 5-man light-hitter squad to handle back-edge units that try to hide from the main force assaulting from the front. Catching a hiding scoring-unit in the back could go far towards a win sometimes.

[Leksington]

6th Edition rules have improved Vanguard Veteran's ability to suceed on the charge when they land via Heroic Intervention. Being able to pre-measure (you will never fall off the table ever again) and having 2D6 charge range means that chances have never been better.

I disagree. A 6" charge has almost a 27.8% failure rate. ~30% failure rate is unacceptable for me, and I won't feel comfortable charging more than 5" (which carries a 16.7% failure rate).

 

Edit: I'd point out that you can do the exact math for the scatter range/direction, combine it with the statistical probabilities for the charges and pick out the exact optimal range to target for a drop, and the exact chances for success (balanced with chances for catastrophic failure). One day I'll sit down and do this; but not today. :)

[Gregornet]

I think it's an incredibly viable tactic and one that could turn the tide of a battle.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

6th Edition rules have improved Vanguard Veteran's ability to suceed on the charge when they land via Heroic Intervention. Being able to pre-measure (you will never fall off the table ever again) and having 2D6 charge range means that chances have never been better.

I disagree. A 6" charge has almost a 27.8% failure rate. ~30% failure rate is unacceptable for me, and I won't feel comfortable charging more than 5" (which carries a 16.7% failure rate).

 

 

AH see hence why I ran this experiment in the first place.

 

Their are many complex variables that are co-dependent: how far you choose to pick from target, if you roll a 'hit' marker, if you DO scatter D6 [remeber Descent of Angels] either towards or away from target, and then the actual 2D6 charge range you roll

 

All these together make for an extremely complex statistical problem. I tried to handle that through multiple trial sampling, and the results are ~80% chance of success. I may run more trials to see if that steadies or drifts up or down.

 

A ballpark guess is 80% success though.

 

 

Edit: OH and I forgot to mention the deepstrike table is more forgiving now. Dropping in at 3.01" is probably what I'll do that most since it never failed due to distance, it only failed due to drift too close to the target&edge. I'd rather go back into reserves and try again later rather than too far away and get shot up--- but even then there are situations where I'd do a 5.01" drop (like all things, its up to my decision combined with the situation :) ) The 'how' you implement has opened up a lot in viability due to safer table and statistically longer charge ranges.

[Gregornet]

80% chance of success is better than a 3+ armor save. Just sayin.

[Leksington]

AH see hence why I ran this experiment in the first place.

 

Their are many complex variables that are co-dependent: how far you choose to pick from target, if you roll a 'hit' marker, if you DO scatter D6 [remeber Descent of Angels] either towards or away from target, and then the actual 2D6 charge range you roll

 

All these together make for an extremely complex statistical problem. I tried to handle that through multiple trial sampling, and the results are ~80% chance of success. I may run more trials to see if that steadies or drifts up or down.

 

A ballpark guess is 80% success though.

As I pointed out in my edit you could run the exact math instead of trials with just a handful of tries.

 

The variables aren't as complex as you think they are because we are dealing with whole number charge ranges.

-Pick a spot you are charging to.

-Pick a trial spot to drop to.

-Draw a circle around that landing spot with a 1" radius.

-Measure distances from the charging target to all along the circumference of the circle, marking the spots where it is a whole number inch value.

-Draw radii going from the center of the circle to the points you marked.

-Measure the angles between these radii as a percentage of 360 degrees. (this is going to get you percentages of going in random directions) You could do this mathematically with your handy dandy trigonometry if you prefer.

-Calculate the chances of landing in each section of the circumference of that 1" circle and combine them with the success rate of charging at that range.

Note: remember that you can fudge your charge range by +1 inch depending on how you surround that initial model.

-Combine the chances of charging in each section with the chances of success from that whole number charge range.

 

-Repeat this with circles of radii from 2 to 6 inches.

-Don't forget to include the hit result.

 

-Repeat this whole process for different trial drop spots.

Note: find a smart method of recursively adjusting your trial landing spot.

 

Heck, this problem nearly does itself. ;)

[Gregornet]

Okay now that I have a moment. I will be running a small vanguard squad in the next few games and will keep track of heroic intervention results through the games. I have a feeling it's quite viable and I know we all like guaranteed success but come on this is 6th edition lets forge a narrative!! But honestly in thinking about it, the chance of a larger assault range is quite tempting. It's not something to base a tourney list on but for those of us that play beer and pretzels perhaps we should record results for posterity and perhaps can show this to be a competitive tactic.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

AH see hence why I ran this experiment in the first place.

 

Their are many complex variables that are co-dependent: how far you choose to pick from target, if you roll a 'hit' marker, if you DO scatter D6 [remeber Descent of Angels] either towards or away from target, and then the actual 2D6 charge range you roll

 

All these together make for an extremely complex statistical problem. I tried to handle that through multiple trial sampling, and the results are ~80% chance of success. I may run more trials to see if that steadies or drifts up or down.

 

A ballpark guess is 80% success though.

As I pointed out in my edit you could run the exact math instead of trials with just a handful of tries.

 

The variables aren't as complex as you think they are because we are dealing with whole number charge ranges.

-Pick a spot you are charging to.

-Pick a trial spot to drop to.

-Draw a circle around that landing spot with a 1" radius.

-Measure distances from the charging target to all along the circumference of the circle, marking the spots where it is a whole number inch value.

-Draw radii going from the center of the circle to the points you marked.

-Measure the angles between these radii as a percentage of 360 degrees. (this is going to get you percentages of going in random directions) You could do this mathematically with your handy dandy trigonometry if you prefer.

-Calculate the chances of landing in each section of the circumference of that 1" circle and combine them with the success rate of charging at that range.

Note: remember that you can fudge your charge range by +1 inch depending on how you surround that initial model.

-Combine the chances of charging in each section with the chances of success from that whole number charge range.

 

-Repeat this with circles of radii from 2 to 6 inches.

-Don't forget to include the hit result.

 

-Repeat this whole process for different trial drop spots.

Note: find a smart method of recursively adjusting your trial landing spot.

 

Heck, this problem nearly does itself. ;)

 

 

Well done Sir, I applaud, I really am impressed! Very Elegant-- I'm sadface I didn't think of it. Idk though, I still think calculus is required to find the sigma of the probabilities of drifting in any of the 360 degrees (or fractions thereof).

 

Just remember on that third step to draw a 0.5" radius circle to represent the deepstriking Sgt's actual base then 1", 2", ... 6" past that. Also you gotta think about failures due to scattering within 1" of the target or a member of the target's unit.

 

 

If you have done this math, please post your results! because I'll run some more trial samples and we'll compare results ;) . Over to you! ;)

 

Edit Again: sorry missed your edit saying you can do this but won't do it today lol.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Ok apologies for the double post but I've run double the trials now, so I have 50 attempts at each of 3.01", 4.01" and 5.01"

 

 

Dropping at 3.01" from Target: 39 Successes, 11 Failures (78% SUCCESS)

Dropping at 4.01" from Target: 37 Successes, 13 Failures (74% SUCCESS)

Dropping at 5.01" from Target: 40 Successes, 10 Failures (80% SUCCESS)

 

TOTAL: 116 SUCCESSES 34 FAILURES

77.33% chance of Successful charge.

 

 

Looks like its drifting down a touch.

 

 

Edit: And a 2+ save is 83.33% ... Just sayin. Cheers Gregornet! :cuss

[Gregornet]

Ok apologies for the double post but I've run double the trials now, so I have 50 attempts at each of 3.01", 4.01" and 5.01"

 

 

Dropping at 3.01" from Target: 39 Successes, 11 Failures (78% SUCCESS)

Dropping at 4.01" from Target: 37 Successes, 13 Failures (74% SUCCESS)

Dropping at 5.01" from Target: 40 Successes, 10 Failures (80% SUCCESS)

 

TOTAL: 116 SUCCESSES 34 FAILURES

77.33% chance of Successful charge.

 

 

Looks like its drifting down a touch.

 

 

Edit: And a 2+ save is 83.33% ... Just sayin. Cheers Gregornet! :cuss

 

I did some rough experimentation with this theory and found that targeting 4.5" or so from the closest enemy model was ideal. I didn't run any math this is just what I experienced from rolling and measuring it all out. So really the odds of making a charge with a VV unit in this fashion is almost as reliable as terminator armour. Can't get much surer than that. And it's way better than a normal 3+ save as previously mentioned.

 

Even if not used as an HI unit, Vanguards can also be used as a linebreaker or objective denial unit with teeth.

[knife&fork]

Not as a powerhouse but as a 5-man light-hitter squad to handle back-edge units that try to hide from the main force assaulting from the front. Catching a hiding scoring-unit in the back could go far towards a win sometimes.

 

And here's the real issue with vanguards... Despite being better than in 5th they still cost too much for what they do. At least if you run them with packs for the HI. A dread in a pod is less than the minimum 165 you pay for a single power weapon and 4 naked guys.

 

Fun unit perhaps, but not a good ROI.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Not as a powerhouse but as a 5-man light-hitter squad to handle back-edge units that try to hide from the main force assaulting from the front. Catching a hiding scoring-unit in the back could go far towards a win sometimes.

 

And here's the real issue with vanguards... Despite being better than in 5th they still cost too much for what they do. At least if you run them with packs for the HI. A dread in a pod is less than the minimum 165 you pay for a single power weapon and 4 naked guys.

 

Fun unit perhaps, but not a good ROI.

 

 

Never meant to tout them as a tournament-unit :tu: K&F I agree with you. 3x MM attbikes are a FAR better way to spend points. That dreadnought though is gonna get some form of melta/AT death before he gets his chance. Not to go tit-for-tat with ya either-- it's just an apples and oranges thing (in my mind). Because HI Vanguard can do something that nearly no other units in the game can do at all-- they can charge a key unit without your opponent 'getting a vote.' And BA can deliver chargers-from-reserves better than any other codex period (get outta here with that FW dreadpod crap---- nobody likes or wants you! lol)

 

With outflank chargers gone, there is a ability-vacuum.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think VV will ever achieve top-tier status.... but I want to reinvestigate because 6th ed rules helped them out a ton and I feel there's some potential there.

 

6 RAS and VSgt w/PW costs 151pts: 18 norm attacks 4 PW attacks on the charge

 

4 VV and VVSGt costs 165pts: 16 norm attacks 4 PW attacks on the charge

 

 

So you're paying 14 pts for 2 less wounds, 2 less attacks, but you get to charge on arrival. This is my position.

[Bloodsurfer]

I can say that in nearly every game of 6th Ed my unit of Vanguard Vets have more then pulled their weight. It provides an excellent way to tie up one or more of your opponents units at the most tactically advantageous moment, or at the very least to take an objective at the last moment if the fight is going south. I always take a unit of Vanguard as I have found that the ability to strike so successfully at a predetermined target provides an amazing level of tactical flexibility. I will admit, despite all of this, that they are not a top tier unit and should not be used as such. Their limits and purpose must be understood, but once this is established they will perform admirably.

[knife&fork]

And BA can deliver chargers-from-reserves better than any other codex period

That's debatable :tu: , but we certainly have the most reliable delivery.

 

With outflank chargers gone, there is a ability-vacuum.

Yes, but is that ability needed when we have shooty options to accomplish the same end goals?

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think VV will ever achieve top-tier status.... but I want to reinvestigate because 6th ed rules helped them out a ton and I feel there's some potential there.

Agreed. I just think it's good to consider the alternatives in order to get a true picture of their capabilities.

 

6 RAS and VSgt w/PW costs 151pts: 18 norm attacks 4 PW attacks on the charge

 

4 VV and VVSGt costs 165pts: 16 norm attacks 4 PW attacks on the charge

 

So you're paying 14 pts for 2 less wounds, 2 less attacks, but you get to charge on arrival. This is my position.

 

vs MEQ that's only 2 unsaved wounds on average. With a possibility of failed charge or reduced effectiveness thanks to overwatch or losing combat in your turn, leaving the unit you were supposed to tie up free to act in his.

 

On to my my suggestion, heavy support dread in pod. TL-HF and HF ends up at 150 pts with the transport. With a 6" disembark getting 4 models under each template seems reasonable and vs MEQ that means the same number of unsaved wounds on average. The difference would be that the dread is virtually guaranteed to still be standing around being a general PITA come the enemy turn. It's also better at dealing with anything 4+ and up compared to the vets and marginally better vs 2+ saves.

 

To really put the hurt on infantry you need to invest ungodly amounts of points in those vets, however, since vehicles are not much easier to hit in CC a VV squad with melta bombs is now a very dangerous unit to parking lots and vehicle squadrons. Even walkers are in deep trouble. This is where the 6th ed VV really shine IMHO. I can't quite think of anything else in our dex that can deliver that kind of hurt on multiple targets.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

AH see hence why I ran this experiment in the first place.

 

Their are many complex variables that are co-dependent: how far you choose to pick from target, if you roll a 'hit' marker, if you DO scatter D6 [remeber Descent of Angels] either towards or away from target, and then the actual 2D6 charge range you roll

 

All these together make for an extremely complex statistical problem. I tried to handle that through multiple trial sampling, and the results are ~80% chance of success. I may run more trials to see if that steadies or drifts up or down.

 

A ballpark guess is 80% success though.

As I pointed out in my edit you could run the exact math instead of trials with just a handful of tries.

 

The variables aren't as complex as you think they are because we are dealing with whole number charge ranges.

-Pick a spot you are charging to.

-Pick a trial spot to drop to.

-Draw a circle around that landing spot with a 1" radius.

-Measure distances from the charging target to all along the circumference of the circle, marking the spots where it is a whole number inch value.

-Draw radii going from the center of the circle to the points you marked.

-Measure the angles between these radii as a percentage of 360 degrees. (this is going to get you percentages of going in random directions) You could do this mathematically with your handy dandy trigonometry if you prefer.

-Calculate the chances of landing in each section of the circumference of that 1" circle and combine them with the success rate of charging at that range.

Note: remember that you can fudge your charge range by +1 inch depending on how you surround that initial model.

-Combine the chances of charging in each section with the chances of success from that whole number charge range.

 

-Repeat this with circles of radii from 2 to 6 inches.

-Don't forget to include the hit result.

 

-Repeat this whole process for different trial drop spots.

Note: find a smart method of recursively adjusting your trial landing spot.

 

Heck, this problem nearly does itself. :lol:

 

 

Ok Leksington... I can't sleep, the math problem you drew out has me in contortions...... my mind weeps at how much trig and geometry it's lost. I used to be SO great at advanced math and now......... all gone. I haven't attempted a problem of this caliber since college (graduated 4 years ago.... my degree is chemistry not mathematics.... but still). So sad how if you don't use it, you lose it.

 

The best my atrophied brain can handle anymore is reverting back to the basics: the dice themselves.

 

There's a 12/36 chance of no scatter at all. (33%)

16/36 chance of 1" scatter or less (44%)

20/36 chance of 2" scatter or less (56%)

24/36 chance of 3" scatter or less (67%)

 

 

So if you pick your dropspot at 4" and a smidge away from the target, then you have a raw 67% chance to land somewhere between 1" - 7" (actually 6" due to ring-building) from the target. I think this might be what you were inferring to when you raised your first qualm (although idk, I don't want to put words in your mouth).

 

When I was rolling the test trials, I can remember a few of the outlier cases though--- such as a far scatter 6" away at an angle but then rolled 12" charge..... but there were also a few no-scatters that rolled snake-eyes and failed too.

 

All in All, I think Vanguard Vets should be re-categorized "useable." They have a terrible reputation for failing their HI charge and being too expensive when they do it. Now that there's a slightly higher overall chance for them to make the charge: (if we use the 150 trials to project) ~77% success which improves on their 5th edition <67% chance.

 

Of course that 77% came from 3 different distances--- Leks, if you can use your math to find that 'sweet spot' distance then I'm certain it can be as high as 80%.

 

 

 

Edit: @Knife&Fork--- I hear all of what you are saying, I do. I think I mis-represented how you can use VV. Sure, they can charge a unit all by their lonesome-- and I even mentioned doing that in the OP. BUT the most powerful way to use them will be in combination charges--- RAS with Priest or Libby charges a unit from the front, and then SUPRISE the Vanguards hit them from the side or rear with no overwatch! They are an amazing example of flexible force to aid the Turn 2 assaults that JP armies *should* be pulling off.

[wabbitrage]

I completelty agree with VV bring something to the table that can't be measured with stats or probabilities. If your enemy knows you have an 80% chance of a turn 2 charge on his heavy weapon squads surely that is going to hinder his game. Having that X-factor can be all the differance.

 

I think there is a place in a blood angel army for 1 naked squad only. if you felt advanterous you could even deep strike an assault squad with a sang priest nearby for the extra shots + Furious charge on the VVs. Actually as i'm typing this i just thought, wouldn't it be funny if you could cause a break test and make them fall back closer to your VVs... that could cause a few laughs.

 

With all that said i'm not sure they'll be solid performing unit. I think a good player will just account for them in deployment to mimimise the impact. Its hard to say on the viability of VVs, maybe if your nemsis army consists of dev squads or IG heavy weapons then maybe VVs are your answer. The majority of times i think they're just a point sink.

[DominicJ]

Its a bit beyond my math, but 20% fail feels right.

Either you scatter (broadly) towards, away from, or parralel to the target.

 

If you scatter away you are safe, if you scatter towards, either you dont get close, you overshoot, or you die

 

i make it 19 in 24 you dont scatter towards the enemy,

one in six you hit, ninety in threesixty you scatter towards. maybe evens you dont hit them if you do, maybe worse

[wabbitrage]

Its a bit beyond my math, but 20% fail feels right.

*snip*

one in six you hit

*snip*

 

you know a scatter die has 2 hits on it right?

[wabbitrage]

The way i imagine my deep strike chances are to think of 6 rings around my target LZ.

 

I imagine that those rings are where I could land. I then colour the rings red (in my mind obviously) where I will mishap or where I will be more than 7" for the charge.

 

I then move LZ to where I can get the most non-red in my ring mental picture.

 

I know this isn't an ideal soultion but it might help some people get an idea of the chances to suceed

[CitadelArmyGuy]

I completelty agree with VV bring something to the table that can't be measured with stats or probabilities. If your enemy knows you have an 80% chance of a turn 2 charge on his heavy weapon squads surely that is going to hinder his game. Having that X-factor can be all the differance.

 

I think there is a place in a blood angel army for 1 naked squad only. if you felt advanterous you could even deep strike an assault squad with a sang priest nearby for the extra shots + Furious charge on the VVs. Actually as i'm typing this i just thought, wouldn't it be funny if you could cause a break test and make them fall back closer to your VVs... that could cause a few laughs.

 

With all that said i'm not sure they'll be solid performing unit. I think a good player will just account for them in deployment to mimimise the impact. Its hard to say on the viability of VVs, maybe if your nemsis army consists of dev squads or IG heavy weapons then maybe VVs are your answer. The majority of times i think they're just a point sink.

 

 

Totally agree, except the points-sink comment. Points-heavy, yea I'll agree. But a sink? At very best, they can pull something amazing---- but at their worst, they pay 14pts for -2attacks/-2wounds but simply act as RAS with a 'suprise attack'. Does every list need them, or even use them? No no not by any means, but in some lists they can add a lot.

 

And something they DO add without a doubt: Flavor! True Blood Angel players LOVE fun and unique units that separate us from other MEQ :P Things like watching a blendernaught furioso tearing through an IG blobsquad, seeing a Baal Pred gunning down Orcs in the open, or gleefully charging the Death Company into.... well anything. :)

 

Vanguard Veterans (to me) are the spiritual decendants of the old VAS from codices past, and it seems fitting they make appearances from time to time in my more fluffy lists.

 

 

Edit: and Knife&Fork's comment on meltabombs (maybe just 2 or 3) certainly gives them a GREAT chance to make their points back in certain situations. Death Company has to assault across open ground while staring down a LemanRuss/FirePrism/LandRaider/Monolith? Vanguard Vets say "hey let me take care of that for you...."

[Chairman_woo]

I'm rather supprised at all this "not a top tier unit" talk, they have been a staple in tourney DOA lists for some time now! I realise 6th ed threw a few spammers in the works but if your going drop/jump heavy they are worth their weight in gold! As previously mentioned they can shut down dangerous enemy units for that turn your jump marines etc. Are standing around unable to charge. The classical builds I'm familair with are a semi barebones team which is fairly cheap and great for going after devestators, lootas and the like which has been mentioned but the other staple is 2-3 storm shields and the odd fist.

The storm shield version is designed to hold up big nasty units for atleast a turn, they aren't usually there to win just hold them over for that vital turn you drop, so next turn death co. Sanguard or whatever jump in and give them a pasting. Cc deathstars are a problem if the enemy knows your going to drop in with half your army. You need a way to deal with them or your often getting charged by their big nasty on their terms (bad news for BA).

If you don't have a ranged solution you are confident can defang a deathstar or nasty MC, unlikely with a drop/jump list, then a shield toting vanguard squad can do wonders. Nob bikers, terminators etc. Can be dealt with by our own cc units provided they get to charge in decent numbers and get all their buffs (esp. Death co) but those units are often going to be waiting for you for that very reason. Tarpit them in vanguard and you can buy the time to position the units you need to put then down (or if you think the vanguard might last then you free your assault units to go after the rest of the enemy army.

 

The alternative is to do the same job with firepower, plasma honour guard, bikes or possibly devs might be able to plug this gap, but through experience I've come to trust my vanguard to get the job done in style!

 

Check out 3++ is the new black, Kirby has done quite a few articles on this style of BA Vanguard squad & DOA lists in general. Some things will have to change for 6th, I'm thinking some drop pod units along the jumpers but the benefits of vanguard stand imho.

[Blindhamster]

For what its worth, I've ran Vanguard in most games, for a long long time, and only had them fail their DS charge once.

 

I've yet to play 6th ed, so cannot really comment with any authority on that, however using a pod or scouts with locator beacon.... thats what it's all about for VV IMO. giving you that nice 'i dont scatter' bubble is amazingly useful, couple that with the fact scouts can get further up the table quickly, or a pod using its drop pod assault rule, it works really well.

 

Obviously if the pod/scouts die before the VV come down its a bit of an issue, however with how easy it is to turn up this addition, coupled with VV (all packers in BA) to reroll reserves, and you're usually golden.

[Mezkh]

The new black for Vanguard this edition is really Meltabombs.

 

Meltabombs are Meltaguns that ignore vehicle cover saves.

 

Consider the Honour Guard unit with 4 Meltaguns that was semi-popular last edition. 205 points.

 

5 Vanguard with 5 Meltabombs are essentially that unit, +1 Meltagun, ignores vehicle cover saves, and the option to split fire (multicharge) for 15 points less. A bargain by any reckoning.

 

Not only that, they bring further utility with the option to easily get into combat with non-vehicle fire support like Devastators/Lootas/Artillery, and win.

[Gregornet]

I saw some interesting results with a vv squad in my game tonight. I ran a six man squad with jps, a glaive on the sarge, 3 power swords and two power axes. Against a bike heavy list, the squad entered play on turn 2. I placed the center model 3.75" from the closest enemy model and had favorable terrain coverage. After declaring HI, I rolled scatter. Five inch scatter, diagonal to the unit I intended to assault. Luckily, I avoided terrain and was able to place all models without a mishap or dangerous terrain.

 

At this point, I took a break to pursue other ventures until the assault phase rolled around. I then proceeded to roll snake eyes for the assault move. Somehow, my closest model was only 1.5" away from the enemy. So, in some of the worst rolling a general could encounter with this particular scenario, the squad still managed to pull off their HI and suceed in their entire purpose. They earned three victory points that turn, as it was purge the alien, they slew the warlord, got the vp for the kill, and that was actually first blood as well. That event completely influenced the entire game. Not to mention that they then chewed up bikes turn after turn and half the squad survived the game.

 

I believe I will be running this squad more often from now on.

[daveclark890]

I know no one has posted anything here for months but we have had a chance now for a lot more testing of HI and VanVets.

 

How are they performing and what are people sticking on them? I have not played much 6th and not at all with  my old DoA list which used to have a 5 man VV squad with 2 shield and BP and 2 BP and power sword armed guys with a PF/shield sgt. They are a lot of points but in 5th I had them hit almost every single game and I ran them with a shooty honour guard squad.