[HH1.0] Raven Guard Tactics

[shandwen]

Btw, I just read the hate on the skyshield. As RG legion players you have the #1 tool against it: Kades Nex (I stink at spelling, sorry). Remember that anyone in contact with the pad can lower the walls: so mqke the enemy cry by infiltrating a dude to where he looses his invuln just in time for your shooting.

[Nusquam]

Btw, I just read the hate on the skyshield. As RG legion players you have the #1 tool against it: Kades Nex (I stink at spelling, sorry). Remember that anyone in contact with the pad can lower the walls: so mqke the enemy cry by infiltrating a dude to where he looses his invuln just in time for your shooting.

 

IIRC there can't be an enemy in contact with it to change it. Plus that game we counted it as derelict, not functioning, but he set up his aegis line(that he couldn't have taken anyway, didnt catch it til after) on it for a 4+ anyway.

[defl0]

Anyone try out the Liberation Force ROW yet? I'm assuming we can't take artillery? It's a little of a gray area. 

 

I wish they made it more like army of compliance ROW where you could take militia in your primary detachment. In the Liberation Force, we have to take them as allies, which gimps the possibilities a lot. 

 

It's really restrictive when you start trying to use it... 

 

I wrote a blog post, outlining my thoughts. 

 

http://www.petehappens.com/2016/02/raven-guard-30k-row-liberation-force.html

 

Let me know what you think. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

I mean, there's no restriction on artillery so why do you think so? The only restrictions is on immobile so no pods or tarantulas. Next, I'm not sure why included LoW for militia, as you don't get to take an allies LoW. Last you're not forced to take militia in this row, they just gain bonuses of you do

[defl0]

There is a special rule on the heavy artillery called immobile artillery :)

 

So it's not immobile by the sense of the vehicle rule.

 

Similarly I need to check but aren't drop pods immobile?

[SkimaskMohawk]

I'm only familiar with what's Immobile in the Legion list, which is Drop Pods of regular and dreadnought varieties and Tarantula sentries. 

 

I break it down very well in this thread here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/319919-dedicated-transports-and-row-foc-limitations/

 

But to sum it up here, Immobile is a special rule, while Immobilized is a vehicle damage result; the units with the Immobile special are the ones restricted.

[Silk]

Heyho guys,

 

I hope you can help me.

 

I plan to build up a Raven Guard force with Alvarex Maun.

 

So I have to ask, how do you play him?

Let you him alone, do you add him to a squad? What is your favorite tactic /play stile with him?

 

Best regards

[defl0]

Depends on the rest of my list. Usually I run some grav rapiers and he's chilling with them.

 

Seems to be pretty safe there, plus jess forward enough to use his rules but not in a squad that will want to move forward. He also adds a little hth protection against small skirmish squads that could tie up the artillery.

[defl0]

Just Wrote a Vigilator article, because I've started to use them. Let me know if I missed any tactics and I'll add them. 

 

http://www.petehappens.com/2016/03/raven-guard-30k-vigilators.html

[SkimaskMohawk]

Just some minor corrections. 

 

You could never pass Infiltrate off; the FAQ prevents you from joining an infiltrating and non infiltrating unit together in reserve.

 

For the sabotage you can't actually get first blood since it happens before the game begins and first blood specifies that it has to take place during the game. You can still get kill points though.

 

Also you may want to mention the vigilator combi-plas seeker combo of turn one 10 shots that hit and wound on 2s with re rolls to both, instead of a just in passing comment

[defl0]

Ok thanks. I'll update it. 

[Nusquam]

Heyho guys,

 

I hope you can help me.

 

I plan to build up a Raven Guard force with Alvarex Maun.

 

So I have to ask, how do you play him?

Let you him alone, do you add him to a squad? What is your favorite tactic /play stile with him?

 

Best regards

 

I keep him in infiltrated rapier squads or tacs(sometimes providing LoS to rapiers if I have them). If I have a lot to deepstrike and can keep him relatively safe I'll deploy aggressively to make use of his no-scatter bubble.

If running planet strike or other rseserve ehavy lists like orbital I'll put him in a Darkwing with a full complement of tacs and an apothecary. Then have heavy hitters like termis and/or dark furies come around him to maximize threat saturation.

[GreyCrow]

Hello crows ! The Ravenspire seems more quiet than usual, I'm sure that the operations are going well and you're keeping radio chatter to a minimal for strategic purposes :p

 

I wanted to have your opinion on some outlandish idea I had while reviewing my last 40k battle with the Raven Guard Talon Strike Force. I was mainly testing some ideas for the detachment, most notably opening up several fronts from different angles to make the opponent cringe, and while it bought me time early game, the Tau player still removed my models with a shovel. Not taking the piss at all, it's been a while since I fielded the army and I wanted a test game to try out a few stuff and got plenty of data.

 

There was something that bugged me however and I feel I was missing a piece of the puzzle. Then, it struck me ! I noticed that although my opponent killed plenty of models in the early game (about 55% of my army in the first 2 turns, I also forgot to bring 8% of my army off reserves even though I rolled for it. yep, stupid :p ), he had a lot of trouble killing them in the 3 last turns.

It was completely weird for me, because the units I fielded weren't inherently more resilient than the units I had previously on the board (mainly MEQ and some landspeeders), so I was puzzled that he had such trouble finishing me off. To compare, he killed about 30 models in the first 2 turns, and killed 14 in the last three (so effectively 15 models down per turn in the opening phase down to 5 per turn in the last game turns, which is quite a drop in effectiveness...).

 

Even more outlandish was that despite having less models on the board than when I started the game, I was killing more of his. Then, the weird revelation happened : my Raven Guards were doing better because I actually had less of them on the table, and the smaller unit and army footprint meant that I was completely able to avoid his firepower entirely either by being out of range or by being out of line of sight when I was in range.

 

____

 

Now, why is that 40k experience relevant to 30k tactics you might ask ? Well, it's because the Talon Strike Force in the 40k Raven Guard is the closest in terms of gameplay with the Marines that you can get to the Legiones variant. Instead of having Infiltrate though, the detachment allows to start rolling for reserves turn 1, meaning you can have a complete null deployment then bring units on the table.

 

The cool bit about the reserve T1 is that while you can build an Alpha Strike army on pods, it also means that you can use that to position footsloggers in counter deployment, albeit with a much more limited range than Infiltrate.

 

But I drew the parallel to the 30k Legion Infiltrate and wanted to ask you guys if you were purposefully diminishing your army's footprint when not playing Pods (because you need quite a punch with the Pods), and using Infiltrate to get yourself in positions where your army simply just could not die (because it couldn't be targeted :p ) and you would make it the hardest possible for the enemy to actually reach you.

 

With the goal of not using it to do more damage with damaging units, but to completely negate the enemy's firepower advantage as much as possible. Playing with range, angles of fire, etc. Obviously, one would have to take into account possible movement from the enemy units !

 

But picture this, having only 5 Mor Deythan infiltrated close to an objective in a position where the opponent wouldn't be able to get them and certainly not bring to bear any Fury on them because they can't see them. Using their Stealth as a secondary benefit if by any chance they manage to target them. Then, throwing the Mor Deythans on them if they ever get close with the full fury of their rending combi-flamers.

 

Something similar can be done with Assault Marines as Troops : holding them in reserves or placing them really far/hidden, then moving them only when safe and necessary..

 

It might not be the most straightforward or honourable approach, but as someone said : Victory is Vengeance.

[SkimaskMohawk]

If they have barrage you can always be targetted because 7th ed threw all the terrain rules out the window. So hiding out of LOS under a roof means your unit can still get pummeled by all the phosphex rapiers.

 

Assault marines.....250 minimum for what, an out of the way late game objective holding unit/disruption? 10 tacs in a rhino is cheaper and with outflank, can do the same job while being more survivable.

 

A rather large problem with your idea as general tactics goes, is that it really depends on the type of terrain people have. Most GW ruins are super bad for blocking LOS and are only good as area terrain and a lot of places only have ~5 pieces of terrain per board.

[GreyCrow]

If they have barrage you can always be targetted because 7th ed threw all the terrain rules out the window. So hiding out of LOS under a roof means your unit can still get pummeled by all the phosphex rapiers.

 

Assault marines.....250 minimum for what, an out of the way late game objective holding unit/disruption? 10 tacs in a rhino is cheaper and with outflank, can do the same job while being more survivable.

 

A rather large problem with your idea as general tactics goes, is that it really depends on the type of terrain people have. Most GW ruins are super bad for blocking LOS and are only good as area terrain and a lot of places only have ~5 pieces of terrain per board.

 

My group plays with ETC conventions, so Barrage weapons are still the same as 6th, which is why I didn't mention them;

 

Exactly my point for the Assault Marines (late game objective grabbers/disruption). I disagree about your poitn with the Tactical Squad : they are cheaper, yes, but they lack the ability to charge 2 turns after coming out of reserves, and the lack the extra attacks/power weapons that will help win out the combat and sweeping advance the enemy you want to get out of an objective.

I'd rather have something like 10 Bolt Pistols + 30 attacks some of which AP3 than 20 Boltguns getting out of a Rhino. Both have the same reach, but different uses and I wouldn't discount them simply based on the points.

Obviously, Dark Furries are more efficient than ASM even with the added cost, but as a base Troop this could be interesting when played in small squads.

 

Agreed with the terrain being the key aspect of the strategy. Which is why you don't plan it before the battle, but as soon as you have data for this :p Outranging is also a good idea, and choosing which objectives to go for and which to leave out. But I wouldn't see the Raven Guard accept to fight in a terrain that isn't stealth capable. When I see the opponent set up the terrain in such a way so that it gives him a clear advantage, I just outright refuse the battle if he doesn't accept to modify it so as to be fair to both.

[Nusquam]

It would depend on what you're facing. There's a lot of barrage options as well as typhons that gunline armies use. When facing armies like IW and IF, you have to eliminate quickly the ranged threat rather than try to avoid it. Threats like Iron Havocs, Phosphex rapiers, typhons, etc; they'll take your army apart piece by piece because there's no place to hide. Unless you take the new Drop Assault Vanguard and they don't have interceptor in droves. But that's threading a fine needle even then and the current only reason to take AMs beyond narrative. AMs are just too expensive to feed into 30ks high attrition rates.

 

The same goes for some AdMech armies. They have interceptor in spades, cover reducing and ignoring tech, plenty of barrage and so forth.

 

Speed is the key to facing those armies. They have more firepower and range. Your units will die, but the trick is to spend them trading up. Blow up the Spartan, and whittle down the contents, mor deythan scouring backfield units to make a path for furies, etc. Other Legions can stay on top of objectives all game or run into them, but RG are the best at straight killing. Even Corax is geared for maximum casualties. Mechanically RG are about getting into position, and then eliminating as many hostiles as possible, as quickly as possible. The best part about that is that our style caters to the core game, thus making RG great. Unlike poor WE who need CC.

 

I find all of my games are decided, in the most part, during deployment and sometimes before turn 3.

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

My group plays with ETC conventions, so Barrage weapons are still the same as 6th, which is why I didn't mention them;

 

Exactly my point for the Assault Marines (late game objective grabbers/disruption). I disagree about your poitn with the Tactical Squad : they are cheaper, yes, but they lack the ability to charge 2 turns after coming out of reserves, and the lack the extra attacks/power weapons that will help win out the combat and sweeping advance the enemy you want to get out of an objective.

I'd rather have something like 10 Bolt Pistols + 30 attacks some of which AP3 than 20 Boltguns getting out of a Rhino. Both have the same reach, but different uses and I wouldn't discount them simply based on the points.

Obviously, Dark Furries are more efficient than ASM even with the added cost, but as a base Troop this could be interesting when played in small squads.

 

 

 

Best not to use any format rulings as these boards do cover a huge amount of different groups.

 

For AM vs Tacs; not sure what you're talking about as you can come in 6" off the edge and disembark and then be able to charge the next turn, exactly like AMs. In reality you wouldn't even do that if you're using it as true disruption/objective grabbing; you'd always stay in the rhino and just tank shock to contest/score the objective, preferably on the bottom of the turn. You have more options with tacs in rhino compared to AMs, and as soon as you add power weapons you get to a point where you ask yourself "what could I get for ~250-300 points that can disrupt backline objectives?" The answer is a lot. 

[GreyCrow]

With the Assault Marines, you can Deep Strike, which mitigates a taf the Outflank risk. You don't know if you'll end up precisely where you want, but you can not mess up the table edge completely.

On top of that, if you want to charge with your Outflanking Tacticals, you have to disembark like you said. What you're forgetting is that you have 6" less effective charge range than the Assault Marines due to them moving 6" more in the turn where they will charge ;)

 

The unit is also ensured to move 12" as long as there is a guy alive, over LOS blocking terrain and impassable terrain, while the Tacticals are slow when their Rhino eventually blows up. What that means is that you don't have to stretch your deployment in order to get a charge : move in 12" behind LOS blocking terrain from reserves, then jump over it and get to charge with 6" more range if in a straight line, and a lot more if they are hiding behind impassable terrain (like big walls).

 

You definitely don't have more options with either, you have different options ;) I'm definitely not arguing whether Assaults are better than Tacticals because the answers always depend on the subjective criteria people use to determine which criteria they will measure the unit's performance against. I just take a cold objective look at what they can do with their kit.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Outflank is a 66% chance to get the right side while deepstrike is a 33% chance to roll a hit. The rest, sure you're slower when the rhinos popped, but that's at least one unit worth of shooting that never targeted them, which is kind of important. With all the new ap 3 barrage you want to stay alive as long as possible. You never want to actually charge or disembark so the comparisons there are a tad moot. 65 points for a less threatening (i.e. Lower target priority),backfield contester with more flexible deployment options, that's more survivable is a no brainer

[GreyCrow]

Outflank is a 66% chance to get the right side while deepstrike is a 33% chance to roll a hit. The rest, sure you're slower when the rhinos popped, but that's at least one unit worth of shooting that never targeted them, which is kind of important. With all the new ap 3 barrage you want to stay alive as long as possible. You never want to actually charge or disembark so the comparisons there are a tad moot. 65 points for a less threatening (i.e. Lower target priority),backfield contester with more flexible deployment options, that's more survivable is a no brainer

 

Like I said in my previous post, I'm in no way trying to make the ASM the best backfield contester, and you're only looking at the difference of deployment options between these two units under the goal of "making a backfield contester". Did I argue with you that ASM were better at contesting backfield objectives ? No, I was merely detailing what you could do with them regardless of what people are trying to achieve with them. ;)

 

I have to say I have trouble understanding why you are fixated on making a backfield contester :p I never even mentionned backfield contesting in my posts before you did, so I don't see how it is relevant here :p

 

Regarding the differences (once again, I'm looking at it from a differences perspective, not a strength/weakness perspective) between Outflank Tacticals and Assault Marines :

 

Outflank still 33% chance to fail your deployment, while with Deep Strike you have an 67% chance of finishing within 7" of your initial drop point and 33% chance to end up between 8 and 12". But you have no chance of ending up at the complete opposing side like with Outflank. When you are looking to invest a general area (considering you have run moves later on), you have less chances of completely screwing up with Deep Strike than with Outflank, and it also allows to select zones of the board in the middle.

What the latter point means is that you can have them Deep Strike in the middle of your DZ if that's the most appropriate place at any given time. Should you do it ? I don't know, it depends on the battlefield. Should you Outflank ? I don't know, it depends on the battlefield too.

 

Moreover, with the Run move you can mitigate the scatter by anything between 1 and 6", while moving Flat Out after Cruising Speed won't get you anywhere close to the most advantageous spot you wanted.

 

It is ludicrous to Deep Strike and banking on a Direct Hit result :p But as long as you are aware of the general scatter probability and choose your location accordingly, you're good.

 

Finally, Deep Strike also has an advantage over Outflank : you don't broadcast that you will actually Outflank, meaning you can choose the most opportunistic place on the battlefield at any given time. Because you have to declare that, you're giving ample time for the opponent to prepare to the Outflank. While Deep Striking is more flexible, because you choose on the spot where you'll want to go.

 

If you don't feel Assault Marines are capable for your strategy, that's fair enough and I won't argue with that ;) If there was an optimal way to play Raven Guard, and an optimal build for that playstyle, then yes I would maybe agree with you, but there isn't.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Well first of all "late game objective grabbers/disruption" usually turns into contesting enemy backfield objectives as they've usually extended up the board. If you meant stuff for your own deployment or the middle of the board, then I'm still not sure 250 for a mediocre unit that does to phosphex mortars cuts it. As for deepstrike, you seem to be ignoring the very real occurrence of mishap and augery scanners. Until assault marines get their price dropped considerably then they're just too expensive for dudes with jump packs who's biggest positive is "I guess they fill a compulsory slot"

[GreyCrow]

Well first of all "late game objective grabbers/disruption" usually turns into contesting enemy backfield objectives as they've usually extended up the board. If you meant stuff for your own deployment or the middle of the board, then I'm still not sure 250 for a mediocre unit that does to phosphex mortars cuts it. As for deepstrike, you seem to be ignoring the very real occurrence of mishap and augery scanners. Until assault marines get their price dropped considerably then they're just too expensive for dudes with jump packs who's biggest positive is "I guess they fill a compulsory slot"

 

That's the thing about Assault Marines, you don't deep strike them into Augury Scanner range :p No wonder you find them subpar, you're trying to make them do something they weren't meant to :D

 

Late game objectives can also mean reinforcing the fight to somewhere that was breached in your line. There are many possibilities and no battle is similar unless no one changes their tactics. What if you're playing against a nasty gunline that completely wrecked your own objective holders ? Would you want to lose the ability to recapture your own points to score some, or just contest the opponents ?

Regarding mishap, I did not consider them in that analysis, because the goal was to Deep Strike the Assault Marines somewhere they can't be targeted effectively. This rarely includes being 12" from a unit ;)

 

You cite Phosphex Mortars and that is a very real threat to the Assault Marines. Unfortunately, you can't defend against everything, so it's better to be able to choose what you can defend against. Even Tacticals in Rhinos are vulnerable to Scorpii and to Medusae.

Finally, as you must know, there are ways to mitigate the damage of Blasts, the trick is to apply the right stuff at the right time.

 

Once again, Assault Marines aren't the be all end all of Troops that's for sure, but no unit is. It's possible to win with all units as long they're played to their strengths (and Assault Marines have strengths) and to negate the enemy's opposition.

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

That's the thing about Assault Marines, you don't deep strike them into Augury Scanner range  No wonder you find them subpar, you're trying to make them do something they weren't meant to 

 

Augury scanners give area denial which is very important as controlling the board is what wins games. Any form of support squad or apothecary/Forgelord-accompanied squad is going to command an additional 18" in terms of push back which hurts any deepstriking unit, but we'll get to that later. Assault marines are subpar because you pay for 10 what you can get 20 despoilers for, not because people haven't been enlightened as to their true use.

 

 

Late game objectives can also mean reinforcing the fight to somewhere that was breached in your line. There are many possibilities and no battle is similar unless no one changes their tactics. What if you're playing against a nasty gunline that completely wrecked your own objective holders ? Would you want to lose the ability to recapture your own points to score some, or just contest the opponents ?

 

 

Sure, what you said can mean anything, given context, but still why would you use them over tacs in a rhino? Tank shock is extremely strong for getting people off of objectives, rhinos can provide mobile cover for your squad and you can score one objective with the tacs while contesting another with the rhino. You could even just infiltrate them on the board in the same out of the way spot you would have deepstruck on and shore up your line from there.

 

 

 

Regarding mishap, I did not consider them in that analysis, because the goal was to Deep Strike the Assault Marines somewhere they can't be targeted effectively. This rarely includes being 12" from a unit 

 

Yea, you know terrain triggers it too right? And one huge disadvantage to boards with really good LOS blocking terrain is that it tends to limit "safe" deepstriking positions. As soon as the base to base circle is broken then its a mishap; mishaps are always a danger unless you're a pod.

 

 

You cite Phosphex Mortars and that is a very real threat to the Assault Marines. Unfortunately, you can't defend against everything, so it's better to be able to choose what you can defend against. Even Tacticals in Rhinos are vulnerable to Scorpii and to Medusae.

Finally, as you must know, there are ways to mitigate the damage of Blasts, the trick is to apply the right stuff at the right time.

 

Sure, scorpii and medusas can kill a rhino and then squad that was in it, but it just took them 2 turns of shooting at the rhino and guys inside it, which is the whole point of the transport. And when it comes to spreading out to avoid blasts its mitigated by needing a good run off your deepstrike.

 

 

Once again, Assault Marines aren't the be all end all of Troops that's for sure, but no unit is. It's possible to win with all units as long they're played to their strengths (and Assault Marines have strengths) and to negate the enemy's opposition.

 

 

Whenever you analyze a unit you need to ask a few questions. Among those;

1. Does this bring anything new?

2. If no, are other units better at the same role

3. Is it cheaper than those similar units

 

If the answers are No, Yes, No then theres no reason to take them. The Assault Marine's only strength currently is that they're troops, but other than that Dark Furys are infinitely better as jump pack assault units and Tacs are better as melee Troops. Its like trying to argue for hypothetical Recon Marine uses in a Raven Guard list army when in general Vets and Mor Deythan do their exact same job, for the same price, better. It is possible to win with all units, but why use the worst option when you can use a better?

Edited April 5, 2016 by SkimaskMohawk

[GreyCrow]

 

 

Whenever you analyze a unit you need to ask a few questions. Among those;

1. Does this bring anything new?

2. If no, are other units better at the same role

3. Is it cheaper than those similar units

 

If the answers are No, Yes, No then theres no reason to take them. The Assault Marine's only strength currently is that they're troops, but other than that Dark Furys are infinitely better as jump pack assault units and Tacs are better as melee Troops. Its like trying to argue for hypothetical Recon Marine uses in a Raven Guard list army when in general Vets and Mor Deythan do their exact same job, for the same price, better. It is possible to win with all units, but why use the worst option when you can use a better?

 

 

I'll just quote that part of your post to begin with. The word "new" is not the way to objectively analyze a unit. When you mean "new", you are subjectively analyzing it compared to the "old" in which case the "old" is Tacticals in Rhinos because you run them almost dogmatically (and I didn't mean that as an offense, what I meant is that Tacticals in Rhinos are sanctified within your combat doctrine).

 

Your analytical framework for a unit is looking at it from a "manager" perspective (once again, no offense). You have a job in mind for each unit, and you judge amongst all the roster which is more appropriate to do that job, much like you would recruit someone for some specific job in a company and you weigh it against the competition.

 

It is a fair approach and I'm not telling you to change it. The way I look at units is to look at them for their characteristics and see everything that I can do with them effectively, rather than measuring them against my assumptions of the characteristics of the job I'd like them to do (because when defining a unit role, it's just an assumption until the battle actually begins because you have estimated data but no concrete data about how the batlte is going to unfold).

 

Yes, 20 Despoilers are a better melee units than 10 assault marines. But you can't be sure that you will need your 20 despoilers in melee before the battle begins. If you know that you will need your melee unit during the battle before the battle begins, it can mean only one thing : you have designed your list so that these despoilers carry the damage, and if you don't have that damage applied effectively, you're losing the battle. This not only limits the set of tactics available to this specific units and makes your overall plan predictible and counterable. 

 

It's really a case of two different approaches :

- Here is what I want to do, here is what I need to do it, here is the optimal way

- Here is what I have, here is what I can do with it based on the battle conditions, here is what I do with them to win the battle

 

The first approach works best when you have the capability to influence your entire environment, the second approach works best when you have the means to read and adapt to your environment. The good thing with Legiones is that they have both capabilities due to the large roster, especially Raven Guard

I find that the second approach tends to work best however (at least for me), because I don't have any capability to influence what opponents I face or what they bring to the table, nor can I change the mission parameters

 

I hope that this helps you understand how I see things, and why I make outlandish comments about what the Assault Marines can do

 

To get to your points before that one (this time in a chronological order) :

 

1) Regarding the augury scanners, I completely agree that there is area denial against Deep Strike. So ? If there is an Augury Scanner on the board, I'll just make up a plan using coming from regular reserves outside the range of this squad and work my way from that, or simply plan to Deep Strike in my own deployment zone. If there are no augury scanners, then I have a circle 36" wider to deploy in.

(See how I use the second approach to strategy rather than the first, because at the list building stage I have no control over whether my opponent will have augury scanners)

I don't take Assault Marines because I want to Deep Strike them. I can take Assault Marines because they can do any or several of the following : Score Objectives, Deep Strike, Move 12", Move 12" and charge, Hammer of Wrath, Move over Impassable Terrain, Do mediocre damage against other MEQ.

The point is, before the game begins, I can't have any idea what of these different abillities I will use. I can spend games just moving my Assault Marines about and kiting the opponent. I can Deep Strike them, all dependanton context which leads me to my answer to your second post :

 

2) Of course it's all about context I agree that I lose Tank Shock in my toolbelt for my Troops, and it's indeed a cool tool. I gain better chances to wipe out an enemy unit on the charge after moving 12" without paying for an Assault Transport, which is a cool tool as well. Will I need to use it ? I don't know, but much like tank shocks.

Your point about the line is very telling that you use the first approach to strategic thinking, because you made the decision while in the list building process, that you would want to have a battle line. Indeed, you can Infiltrate your squad in the same out of the way spot and have a forward spot to your battle line, I'm not arguing that in this scenario an Infiltrated Tactical Squad is the better choice.

But, how can you be sure that first a battle line tactic will be the best scenario, and second that the battle line unit you've designed in the list creation will be appropriate ?

 

3) Can't argue with your analysis about mishap there. It's a risk I'm willing to take though. I haven't had very frustrating mishap moments, but I did have very frustrating Outflank moments which I don't want to have again (to be fair, the Outflank side should be decided by the player and written secretely on a piece of paper, I find it ludicrous that professional soldiers would have an "Oops, sorry chief, we went the wrong way !" moment in the Legiones Astartes).

 

4) It is indeed mitigated by the risk of rolling a bad run move. To mitigate that, I'd throw out another tempting/threatening target for the Scorpii or Medusa to shoot at so that either is a bad decision for him and a good decision for me. Sacrificing units is sometimes the name of the game, unfortunately.

Also, if the opponent fields Medusas and Scorpii, I'll make sure to not necessarily Deep Strike unless absolutely necessary and see how I can work with coming from regular reserves.

 

My point is, it's always context dependent, which is why it's not productive to argue about which unit is better unless there is a clearly defined tactical situation  We can brainstorm endlessly on what units can and can't do effectively however long we want though, because it's always productive both for the speakers and the readers if a cool unexpected idea comes in.

Edited April 5, 2016 by GreyCrow

[Nusquam]

I don't think anyone is going to think AMs are viable strategically until they get a huge price reduction, thus making their cost at least acceptable,  let alone worth taking.