10 Man Tactical: A Thing of the Past?

[Mattias]

Against an assault based army presumably it could be worth splitting a ten man squad into two combat squads but deploying them together with their models interspersed in order to benefit from the multi-charge rules by forcing them to charge two units and loose their assault bonus attack?

[march10k]

Against an assault based army presumably it could be worth splitting a ten man squad into two combat squads but deploying them together with their models interspersed in order to benefit from the multi-charge rules by forcing them to charge two units and loose their assault bonus attack?

 

Where does it say that you're forced to charge both units?  Interspersing like that gives the enemy options.  If he's just trying to score first blood, for example, then he merely declares against one of the two squads, and keeps his models out of base to base contact with the other squad.  Those models from the engaged squad that are "buried" are then forced to pile in, and the unengaged squad has its LOS and maneuver options compromised for no gain.  If he knows he'll eventually beat both squads, or he wants to deny the countercharge, or whatever, he can choose to charge both...but your suggestion doesn't force anything, it gives him options!  If anything, screen one squad with the other, so that only one can be charged...and then be wiped out, leaving the enemy charging unit vulnerable to shooting or a charge of your own...or both.

[Mattias]

Sorry you are quite right, I had missed that the charge move allows them to move within 1" of all enemy models not just those enemy models in the unit they are charging.

[Tamwulf]

Great post so far! Lot's of good information to think about.

 

Only thing I can add at the moment is about splitting into Combat Squads against an assault army. Only one squad gets to Overwatch when charged. 10 models snap firing will hit at least a couple guys, and you might even kill a model or two before they hit you. 5 models? Not so much. Including the Standard of Devastation may up your chances... but brings up once again, that it's a "must have" standard in your army.

[Brother Amarel]

 

I use a 10-man Tac to travel with Azrael due to the Inv Save, but apart from that I'd rather have a pair of 5-man Tac's doubling up on a Special or a Heavy weapon. It's almost like being able to have two Specials or two Heavies in a single Tac Squad. 

...except for the double kill points, and the fact that if you want to actually hold an objective, you still have to use both of them.

 

1 Mission out of 6 uses destroyed Troops for Victory Points. First Blood is also, potentially, easier to lose.

 

5 Missions out of 6 use some form of Objective that is claimed or controlled by Troop Choices. While it is easier to destroy a 5-man squad, you can double up on an Objective or claim individual Objectives more easily.

 

If you're really short of Troop slots, then maximise Squad sizes, otherwise I find the mix and match approach far more beneficial (generally two 5-man Squads for each 10-man Squad).

[Brother Immolator]

unless you have bigger and meaner things on the table

No, actually its all the time. Firstblood is too good to resist.

[Tiger9gamer]

unless you have bigger and meaner things on the table

No, actually its all the time. Firstblood is too good to resist.

Dang, your right X-X Usually it's my vindicators that get blown up first turn, so I', a little jaded for it...

[Onisuzume]

I took 6x 10 man tactical squads with a plasma cannon in each and a command squad with a standard of devastation. Anyone want to know what happens to Marneus Calgar when he's shot 216 times in one turn?

Same thing as what happened to him on Macragge during that Tyranid invasion?

If the answer to that is "rended limb from limb and bleeding like a moldy piece of swiss cheese" then yes.

Well, they could barely save him, so I guess that'd be close enough.