Spawn and FOC

[techsoldaten]

Do Spawn take up FOC slots in the new edition? There's nothing in the rules that says they don't, but I wanted to make sure.

 

There's a rumor going around that you can give them a save by taking Ork Allies with Grotsnik as the HQ, who can give them Cybork bodies for a certain amount of points. If so, that plus Mark of Nurgle would actually make them pretty horrible to have to face on the battlefield.

[Azekai]

Yes, they take up a slot, sadly, and no, ork doks are not able to do that. Being allies does not allow you to take upgrades from another codex.

[techsoldaten]

Yes, they take up a slot, sadly, and no, ork doks are not able to do that. Being allies does not allow you to take upgrades from another codex.

That's settled then, 6th edition codex completely invalidated my favorite army list. I guess it's on to heretics now.

[Verythrax Draconis]

Not exactly, since you can put 3 squads of 5 spawns, or double FOC with 6 squads. And they are better than before.

[Azekai]

The list he is referring to will not really work, regardless of points value. 6 squads of spawn at 2000 pales in comparison to 11 at 1750. The idea is target saturation, and that is just not going to happen. At 2000+ the enemy will have more than enough shooters to destroy 6 spawn squads. That is not really possible with 11 squads at 1750. The enemy just won't have that many units.

[the jeske]

same slot as meltagun bikers , kills spawn as a viable choice under 2k pts.

[Iron Sage]

6 units and 900 points worth of spawns is not a walk in the park in terms of target saturation..

I`d say thats comparable target saturation to 11, given that they move 12" now, and not 6" with no posibillity of sweeping advance and no running.

 

Spawns are pretty good now, and they completly sucked before.

[techsoldaten]

The list he is referring to will not really work, regardless of points value. 6 squads of spawn at 2000 pales in comparison to 11 at 1750. The idea is target saturation, and that is just not going to happen. At 2000+ the enemy will have more than enough shooters to destroy 6 spawn squads. That is not really possible with 11 squads at 1750. The enemy just won't have that many units.

Yeah, the reason that list worked was because of the number of units.

 

In the 3 games where it was fielded, it was clear I was gaming the rules around targets, spawn movement and wound allocation severely enough to ensure there would never been enough firepower in place to stop the massed Spawn from getting into CC. I wasn't just winning games with that list, the Spawn were taking out 800+ points of opponents minimum before I lost a unit. Even massed Basilisk shots from an IG armored company were ineffective at stopping it.

 

The FOC slot exception is a rule I would rather not have changed, I painted too many of the things to ever use them all again. It took years to figure out, but this was the reason to use Spawn in 5th edition.

[Iron Sage]

The list he is referring to will not really work, regardless of points value. 6 squads of spawn at 2000 pales in comparison to 11 at 1750. The idea is target saturation, and that is just not going to happen. At 2000+ the enemy will have more than enough shooters to destroy 6 spawn squads. That is not really possible with 11 squads at 1750. The enemy just won't have that many units.

Yeah, the reason that list worked was because of the number of units.

 

In the 3 games where it was fielded, it was clear I was gaming the rules around targets, spawn movement and wound allocation severely enough to ensure there would never been enough firepower in place to stop the massed Spawn from getting into CC. I wasn't just winning games with that list, the Spawn were taking out 800+ points of opponents minimum before I lost a unit. Even massed Basilisk shots from an IG armored company were ineffective at stopping it.

 

The FOC slot exception is a rule I would rather not have changed, I painted too many of the things to ever use them all again. It took years to figure out, but this was the reason to use Spawn in 5th edition.

 

Why is 6 X 5 Spawns of the new and far better type of spawns crap in comparison ? I`d say it`s far better. Your old spawns were also 40 points in additon to being extremly slow.

In the new and improved codex, you can have 30 spawns, which while less than in your total spawn spam, is enough for saturation, and your probably going to want some heavy weapons anyway in addtion to cultist or marines.

[the jeske]

Why is 6 X 5 Spawns of the new and far better type of spawns crap in comparison ?

because in 5th flyers didnt exist . if necrons were some sort of obscure FW army then one may ponder the viability of an army that has an auto lose build in against flyers . As this is not the case spawns spawned x6 are a bad choice for a 2k pts army .

[Verythrax Draconis]

Why is 6 X 5 Spawns of the new and far better type of spawns crap in comparison ? I`d say it`s far better. Your old spawns were also 40 points in additon to being extremly slow.

In the new and improved codex, you can have 30 spawns, which while less than in your total spawn spam, is enough for saturation, and your probably going to want some heavy weapons anyway in addtion to cultist or marines.

 

Completely agree, and at his actual 1750pts, he's not that far from getting the minimum for a double FOC, anyway. His list suffers more from the new meta than the FOC rule for spawns, since he will need anti-flyer units now, and will need to invest more on other types of units to stay competitive. And 6th (specially CSM) gears the game to bigger lists, as jeske had pointed several times in the other threads - that's a clear case of that.

 

EDIT: Ha! Didn't had the last post from jeske when I was writing this ;)

 

But anyway, he'll need to increase his army point size, and adding anti-flyer units can be a very good use of the extra 250+ pts needed. And jeske, his list would "suck" in the 6th anyway, even if the codex kept the number of spawn units unrestricted - he needs to round it better and add other units than the spawn-spam, anyway.

[techsoldaten]

Why is 6 X 5 Spawns of the new and far better type of spawns crap in comparison ? I`d say it`s far better. Your old spawns were also 40 points in additon to being extremly slow.

In the new and improved codex, you can have 30 spawns, which while less than in your total spawn spam, is enough for saturation, and your probably going to want some heavy weapons anyway in addtion to cultist or marines.

Just guessing here, but the reduced number of squads means opponents are going to be able to focus their fire more effectively, thus reducing the number of spawn that get into cc.

 

Just to be clear, I lost maybe 5 spawn squads total to shooting under 5th edition in 3 games against SoBs, SMs and IG. They cleaned up in cc because they were bringing so many attacks each round, in some cases, more than 100 to hit rolls per turn. They were able to get into cc because opponents could focus on one or two squads per round, allowing everything else to advance.

 

I could still try it, but 6 squads just seems too low. Maybe if they had a saving throw, but that's about all I can imagine.

[Iron Sage]

Why is 6 X 5 Spawns of the new and far better type of spawns crap in comparison ? I`d say it`s far better. Your old spawns were also 40 points in additon to being extremly slow.

In the new and improved codex, you can have 30 spawns, which while less than in your total spawn spam, is enough for saturation, and your probably going to want some heavy weapons anyway in addtion to cultist or marines.

Just guessing here, but the reduced number of squads means opponents are going to be able to focus their fire more effectively, thus reducing the number of spawn that get into cc.

 

Just to be clear, I lost maybe 5 spawn squads total to shooting under 5th edition in 3 games against SoBs, SMs and IG. They cleaned up in cc because they were bringing so many attacks each round, in some cases, more than 100 to hit rolls per turn. They were able to get into cc because opponents could focus on one or two squads per round, allowing everything else to advance.

 

I could still try it, but 6 squads just seems too low. Maybe if they had a saving throw, but that's about all I can imagine.

 

*Nods*

 

If you have the models, do try! I mean, your old spawn list was surely far slower? You can then comparativly take less fire now before you get into assault.

[Verythrax Draconis]

Just guessing here, but the reduced number of squads means opponents are going to be able to focus their fire more effectively, thus reducing the number of spawn that get into cc.

 

Just to be clear, I lost maybe 5 spawn squads total to shooting under 5th edition in 3 games against SoBs, SMs and IG. They cleaned up in cc because they were bringing so many attacks each round, in some cases, more than 100 to hit rolls per turn. They were able to get into cc because opponents could focus on one or two squads per round, allowing everything else to advance.

 

I could still try it, but 6 squads just seems too low. Maybe if they had a saving throw, but that's about all I can imagine.

 

You can try marking them, for added survivability, but the total cost can be prohibitive, despite the marks being quite cheap.

 

*Nods*

 

If you have the models, do try! I mean, your old spawn list was surely far slower? You can then comparativly take less fire now before you get into assault.

 

And not you only gets less shots, but since you'll engage in CC quicker, you'll be taking a squad out of the shooting phase earlier as well ;)

 

But overwatch can still be a pain, though.

[techsoldaten]

*Nods*

 

If you have the models, do try! I mean, your old spawn list was surely far slower? You can then comparativly take less fire now before you get into assault.

They moved pretty quick up the table, actually, due to the rules around movement for beasts. I was probably moving 10 inches per unit average per turn. I think that's about what I would get under 6th edition rules.

 

I have about 22 spawns painted and the rest were by proxy. So yeah, it might make some sense to try this at some point. I just don't see it as being semi-invincible anymore.

[Iron Sage]

I don`t think its invincible either, but I think it could work against a lot of lists. 6 units of 5 spawns are difficult to control when they move as beasts and are far more dangeorous now in hand to hand. They also happent to be able to wreck most tanks.

 

Not only that, but i also supect having 30 spawns is more fun than having only spawns ;)

[Kristoff]

Still, 6 full squads now are almost the same number as 11 squads before, the main difference being target opportunities and spreading your opponent's fire. Of course, the larger squad size, and the ability to take multiple small squads alongside the Marks is a bonus, too. Overall, I think they got better, but I'm not sure they will have a place in my FOC except for replacing unlucky characters.

[techsoldaten]

I don`t think its invincible either, but I think it could work against a lot of lists. 6 units of 5 spawns are difficult to control when they move as beasts and are far more dangeorous now in hand to hand. They also happent to be able to wreck most tanks.

 

Not only that, but i also supect having 30 spawns is more fun than having only spawns ;)

Well, tanks is what the Winged Daemon Prince was for. I switched up to one after I wrote the original list by dropping the Chaos Lord and one of the spawn.

 

I would keep him back for a couple rounds then bring him out once the Spawn were close enough to charge. After that, there was nothing to shoot at the DP and he could just eat the tanks.

 

But now he's more expensive, and, to run 6 spawn, you would have to take 2 HQs. Even with a chaos lord with no upgrades, that's still a lot of points to sink into something that does not contribute to the overall strategy.

[Excessus]

New codex kills a gimmick list, surprise surprise...

[Azekai]

Gimmick? A new, decent list gets made for the crappy 4th ed dex and it is derided as gimmicky. It was creative. Techsoldaten did well to shake up the rote oblit spam and twin DP builds while still having a competitive list.

[Excessus]

Gimmick? A new, decent list gets made for the crappy 4th ed dex and it is derided as gimmicky. It was creative. Techsoldaten did well to shake up the rote oblit spam and twin DP builds while still having a competitive list.

Unit spam such as that is surely a gimmick, although a creative one, I admit that. But I am not a bit surprised that it is not possible to create in the current codex...

[Brother Ambroz]

For HQ choices, what about a khorne lord on a jugger? Give him some sort of weapon to keep his initiative and have him hangout with a spawn squad? They'd both move as beasts. For the other HQ maybe a barebones khornate DP with wings. Have him hang back until the spawn are close then fly out and murder tanks or devs.

[techsoldaten]

Unit spam such as that is surely a gimmick, although a creative one, I admit that. But I am not a bit surprised that it is not possible to create in the current codex...

Call it what you want, I was only interested in exploring ways of making spawn a useful unit. The RAW impose limits to how you can target that were being exploited, so I feel like this was really a situation where I was screwing with the rules of the game moreso than spamming units.

 

I seriously doubt game designers had situations like this in mind when writing the 6th edition. AFAIK, spawn rush was one of a kind, and, honestly, double FOCs at 2000 points naturally create similar scenarios. I could see the potential for someone to try and max out their available troop and elite slots with small, cheap units to create situations where it's impossible for an opponent to effectively counter their attacker in the absence of a similar force composition.

 

To help you visualize: think about how you would counter a list with 12 CSM units and 6 chosen units, or one with Abaddon and 10 plasma + ML chosen units. The sheer number of targets you would need to deal each round would be hard for most armies, and about half the units would be shooting back uncontested. Against an army built around tanks, upgrades and fewer models, those lists would win a high percentage of the time just because their opponents cannot shoot back fast enough. There could be a lot of variation around the specific units selected, but the effect would be similar so long as each one was kept small and the total number of units remained high. This would actually be the ideal counter to Death Stars, as there would not be enough turns for them to do their thing.

 

The big change is really that you can't just use spawn anymore. They were the absolutely ideal unit for target saturation under 5th edition rules against everything except vehicles. *sigh* I can't believe it took me so long to realize this.