To table or to take objectives

[jeremy1391]

Greetings all, I have come up with a conundrum in making my lists.... If I want a high troops hold lots of objectives army I am going to be massively losing out on hitting power, but if I take lots of hard hitting units like dreads and terminators I find I quickly run out of points for my objective holders..... I really like Imperial fists and love terminators so should I just say screw it and run as many terminators as I can fit into my list or should I be more reasonable and have lots of troops???? Those of you out there that like to go for a slaughter as opposed to winning strategically do you find it best to run minimal troops and maximum combat output??? Thanks in advance.

[Captain Idaho]

The best answer to match your style looks like a happy medium. Take yourself three Tactical squads, 2 of which are on foot to work together and then load up the rest of your points on killy stuff and filling the holes in your tactical capacity on the table.

 

Consider 6 or so Tactical Terminators to march alongside the Tactical Marines and support them, or go large and take 10 to dominate the mid-table, especially if marching alongside Lysander.

 

Don't fall into the trap of forgetting the Imperial Fists are tactically varied and profficient and don't just fight in sieges. They just happen to be really good at them!

[jeremy1391]

thanks. I plan on running lysander with a 5 man tac terminator unit, having another 5 man hammernator unit running beside them. and just locking down a part of the board.

[Axagoras]

my advise would be running just 1 10 man squad with lysander of tactical terminators instead of 2 units of 5, it will cost you 30 points more (buying the 2nd heavy weapon) but it will be way more survivable and deadly

[DarkGuard]

It really depends on your playstyle, but with the new addition I think objectives are a safer bet. Consider that each primary objective is 3pts, and if you don't manage to table your opponent he could beat you with those 2 models you couldn't kill just sitting on objectives. Factor in the fact that 5/6 missions are objective based, and you do need a solid scoring core to your list.

 

However, you do need those heavy hitters. Personally I'd say no more than 3 scoring units at 1500-1750pts, no more than 4 at 2000pts. Having combat squads means you can double your scoring units, while this will also give you enough room for some of the heavier hitters.

[Lord Ragnarok]

It really depends on your playstyle, but with the new addition I think objectives are a safer bet. Consider that each primary objective is 3pts, and if you don't manage to table your opponent he could beat you with those 2 models you couldn't kill just sitting on objectives. Factor in the fact that 5/6 missions are objective based, and you do need a solid scoring core to your list.

 

However, you do need those heavy hitters. Personally I'd say no more than 3 scoring units at 1500-1750pts, no more than 4 at 2000pts. Having combat squads means you can double your scoring units, while this will also give you enough room for some of the heavier hitters.

 

What about 1850 pts?

[jeremy1391]

It really depends on your playstyle, but with the new addition I think objectives are a safer bet. Consider that each primary objective is 3pts, and if you don't manage to table your opponent he could beat you with those 2 models you couldn't kill just sitting on objectives. Factor in the fact that 5/6 missions are objective based, and you do need a solid scoring core to your list.

 

However, you do need those heavy hitters. Personally I'd say no more than 3 scoring units at 1500-1750pts, no more than 4 at 2000pts. Having combat squads means you can double your scoring units, while this will also give you enough room for some of the heavier hitters.

 

Would 3 combat squading tac squads be good enough for a 2000 point objective based game? I really like all the other goodies that the codex can bring to the table and I am a firm believer in redundancy of units, again thanks for the help.

[DarkGuard]

It really depends on your playstyle, but with the new addition I think objectives are a safer bet. Consider that each primary objective is 3pts, and if you don't manage to table your opponent he could beat you with those 2 models you couldn't kill just sitting on objectives. Factor in the fact that 5/6 missions are objective based, and you do need a solid scoring core to your list.

 

However, you do need those heavy hitters. Personally I'd say no more than 3 scoring units at 1500-1750pts, no more than 4 at 2000pts. Having combat squads means you can double your scoring units, while this will also give you enough room for some of the heavier hitters.

 

What about 1850 pts?

 

50:50 IMO. Depends what fits best with your list. To be honest, I'd stick with 3 primary scoring units (as in three in my list, not counting the ability to split into combat squads), and concentrate more on support.

 

Would 3 combat squading tac squads be good enough for a 2000 point objective based game? I really like all the other goodies that the codex can bring to the table and I am a firm believer in redundancy of units, again thanks for the help.

 

It's depend on how you play your game. I think it could certainly work, but I reckon at 2000pts you'll definitely want that, no less. If I were planning a 2000pts list, I'd probably take 3 full strength Tactical squads, and a small Scout squad. Partly because of scoring ability and battlefield function, but also partly so I can access the extra force org roster as I'd most likely be taking two HQs at that point anyway. That's an important thing to remember about the 2000pt mark, the double force org chart. Taking 4 Troop units may make your army better because you can take more of the killy stuff if you're restricted by the force org chart.

 

 

Also, for those who like killy and scoring, remember Pedro lists. Very killy in focussing on massed Sternguard, and not too bad in combat with Pedro's aura, and they still score. So you're getting some of the best damage dealers in the Codex while making them scoring, meaning you can minimise your Troops to get more killy units.

[rubix41]

My advise would be running just 1 10 man squad with lysander of tactical terminators instead of 2 units of 5, it will cost you 30 points more (buying the 2nd heavy weapon) but it will be way more survivable and deadly

 

I second that :)

 

To table or not to table...that is the question. :P Technically, specialism in elite favours a tabling tactic but building an all-comers mean that you need to be able to control objectives. Depending on playstyle, like the other posters say, you should take something that controls objectives and that means general troops scouts or tactical squads but I find neither a disadvantage: you just need to make sure they fit with your play style.

[Warprat]

I've been running an all walking force of tacticals and tactical terminators for a couple years now. I really like the synergy they have together. I have been wanting a scout unit though. Something to grab un-defended or under-defended objectives. Seems like quite a few people, myself included sometimes... forget about some of the objectives when the killing starts. Those stranglers you just didn't quite finish off, turn out to be a real pain.

 

I'm thinking about taking 2 small scout squads to replace one Tactical Squad. There is only one mission in 6th where kill points matter, so probably not as big a disadvantage as in 5th. I think I have just enough points left over to squeeze out a LS Storm to support. Their roll would be to defend the back field objective, or threaten to take others. If something serious comes their way, the LS Storm can help them scoot. Or, they can add to an assault with open top and cerberus launcher.

[rubix41]

I'm thinking about taking 2 small scout squads to replace one Tactical Squad. There is only one mission in 6th where kill points matter, so probably not as big a disadvantage as in 5th. I think I have just enough points left over to squeeze out a LS Storm to support. Their roll would be to defend the back field objective, or threaten to take others. If something serious comes their way, the LS Storm can help them scoot. Or, they can add to an assault with open top and cerberus launcher.

 

I have also been thinking the same too - so I am interested in how you go with that - I am thinking, at least though, 2 squads with Power Swords and Heavy Bolter's OR barebone shotguns and powerfist in each.

[Warprat]

LOL, I've been going in another direction... my choice so far would be sniper rifles for one squad. And for the other, what? Bolters, another sniper squad? I want to try out each of the heavy weapons, but am leaning toward the missile launchers as I am not exactly very heavy on anti-tank.

 

Sniper rifles have a great range, and allow the unit to contribute to the total army's small arms fire power. They would be a welcome addition when battling tyranids and other high toughness models bolter's struggle with. On the other hand, bolters can rapid fire, and have a pretty decent range. For charging, their pistol and charge bonus should be enough.

[Schultzhoffen]

Three scoring units with the ability to Combat Squad is sufficient at 1850 points.

 

C:SM will struggle to table any opponent. The mission/objectives is what is important.

[Sons of the Forge]

I run at the moment 2 SM troops and 1 allies troops all scouting/infliltraters with 2 units of snipers and a single unit of scouts in a Landspeeder Storm. Not the best of troops but it fits my theme and gets the job done when I need to take enough objectives to pull a win. Sometimes though I do fall into the trap of kil kill kill when armies start fighting and forget about the objectives.

[rubix41]

LOL, I've been going in another direction... my choice so far would be sniper rifles for one squad. And for the other, what? Bolters, another sniper squad? I want to try out each of the heavy weapons, but am leaning toward the missile launchers as I am not exactly very heavy on anti-tank.

 

Ah, I need mine close thus the lack of Snipers. In the case of taking objectives, nothing is harder to shift than Camo. Cloak's + Snipe's in Ruins or them going GtG for that extra +1. Worse, with the night fighting rules too! If you are using them to capture objectives on base, go for 2 sniper squads - they won't let you down - but I am going up front so I guess, from a tabling aspect, they either table or BE tabled.

 

Sniper rifles have a great range, and allow the unit to contribute to the total army's small arms fire power. They would be a welcome addition when battling tyranids and other high toughness models bolter's struggle with. On the other hand, bolters can rapid fire, and have a pretty decent range. For charging, their pistol and charge bonus should be enough.

 

I am still a little unsure for bolter's for scouts - you see, it makes them a poor man's tactical squad and a tactical squad would do a better job. Although a big fan of missile launchers for my scouts, I am actually looking at the humble Heavy Bolter as my main scout weapon because I can still move and shoot (abeit at 6's) but when I stand still, I am firing the template.

 

If you are fighting orks/nids/I.G, the Heavy Bolter Hellfire round is good on paper but it's only 1 blast a turn so I go for multiple blasts from more than one unit of scouts. B) Running bare bone scouts in small squads (keep them cheap) is flexible (bolter for mid range or CCW/Shotguns for close combat) and versatile (esp. with camo cloaks) but the fragility is a very big issue (You need the cover)

 

As a complement to Snipers, the HB has the same range - perfect for using them to hold objectives and sitting in buildings. I am playing aggressive but I would take a HB still if trying to table my guy or girl. :(

[Haranin]

Really it depends on the terrain, mission and enemy. Its hard to make a blanket statement about cookie cutter tactics in isolation regardless of those three factors.

[DarkGuard]

Really it depends on the terrain, mission and enemy. Its hard to make a blanket statement about cookie cutter tactics in isolation regardless of those three factors.

 

But when making a balanced list, you will probably weigh yourself towards one of these just in making the list. For example, in deciding to take more Elite units and less Troops you're looking to table. In taking more Troops you're looking to take objectives. The final decision comes in the game, but the actual list building also contributes a lot to it.

[Warprat]

I am still a little unsure for bolter's for scouts - you see, it makes them a poor man's tactical squad and a tactical squad would do a better job. Although a big fan of missile launchers for my scouts, I am actually looking at the humble Heavy Bolter as my main scout weapon because I can still move and shoot (abeit at 6's) but when I stand still, I am firing the template.

 

If you are fighting orks/nids/I.G, the Heavy Bolter Hellfire round is good on paper but it's only 1 blast a turn so I go for multiple blasts from more than one unit of scouts. :D Running bare bone scouts in small squads (keep them cheap) is flexible (bolter for mid range or CCW/Shotguns for close combat) and versatile (esp. with camo cloaks) but the fragility is a very big issue (You need the cover)

 

As a complement to Snipers, the HB has the same range - perfect for using them to hold objectives and sitting in buildings. I am playing aggressive but I would take a HB still if trying to table my guy or girl. :D

 

They ARE inferior to a tactical squad, as far as armor and whatnot goes. Which is why I have been going with 4 tac squads. But with 6th, objectives become even more important. What I give up, is small, compared to the mobility gained. I hope... LOL!

 

Hmm, hvy bolter with snipers, I will have to think on that. Walking hvy bolter seems like it would fit better with walking bolter scouts. While the missile launcher likes to stand still with snipers. Snipers can also fire at light vehicles in a pinch.

[rubix41]

They ARE inferior to a tactical squad, as far as armor and whatnot goes. Which is why I have been going with 4 tac squads. But with 6th, objectives become even more important. What I give up, is small, compared to the mobility gained. I hope... LOL!

 

Hmm, hvy bolter with snipers, I will have to think on that. Walking hvy bolter seems like it would fit better with walking bolter scouts. While the missile launcher likes to stand still with snipers. Snipers can also fire at light vehicles in a pinch.

 

I am hoping for that too! But scouts work well in numbers - a 10 man Scout squad has the same strategic and strength values of the 6 man Tactical because of numbers - you can spread the scouts on an objective for a cover save while you can risk a bit with the Tactical squad. You do miss the 3+ armour/to-hit on BS though so I tend to spam to get the most out of the 4+ to hit and numbers to negate some of the 4+ armour.

 

If you are firing at light vehicles with your scouts, sure the missile launcher, but I would be attacking infantry with my sniper scouts - the pinning test is worth it alone in a big unit of scouts firing on a unit - the heavy bolter is just icing on the cake.

[Warprat]

If you are firing at light vehicles with your scouts, sure the missile launcher, but I would be attacking infantry with my sniper scouts - the pinning test is worth it alone in a big unit of scouts firing on a unit - the heavy bolter is just icing on the cake.

 

Well, infantry targets first. But you never know what you will be facing. Sometimes you need to pop a transport to get to the goodies inside. Or maybe a speeder... etc.

 

I really like flamers, and they have no trouble with BS. So maybe something like a LS Storm with hvy flamer, sarge with combi-flamer, 3 bolters and a hvy bolter. Maybe add melta bombs. Not exactly awe inspiring. But what more can you expect from a small scout squad?