How to: winning with CSM in 7th

[incinerator950]

Ghostery keeps failing to block their join redirect, so I didn't take a look at it.

[Tenebris]

I have one Land Raider and I refuse to buy more. More ofen than not it is 250 points that are simply a glorified delivery system since we do not have the access to various patterns.

[Sheesh Mode]

It is still the cheapest landraider in the game and ignores anything under S8 without the lance rule. Landraiders are the most durable transports in the game thanks to their new rules. I suggest giving it a try against the humans. 

[Zhukov]

Tenebris: It seems that you pretty much know then what goes 'wrong'. You choose to play Chaos the way you do, there isn't much to do then. I could tell you that I deem it unwise to put so many points in CSM squads and to run things like Terminators in a Land Raider and a Dark Apostile, but you know this.

 

Trying to compete against things like Unbound lists (really, Unbound is ridiculous, not even gonna discuss this) and multiple Imperial Knights... yeah, no.

[Sheesh Mode]

As far as I know the only way to compete against multiple knights is to take Lords of War. If I had the money for a Lord of Skulls I would field it against a friends 3/4 knight list. But normal infantry are insufficient against 2 or more knights. 

[Dorrance]

We are very specialized (like Eldar of yesteryear) I like to at a minimum have a primary and an alternate for the big categories when I build my list:

 

Anti-Tank. Anti-Infantry. Anti-Heavy Tank (13 and up), Anti-Monstrous Creature. Anti-Air.

 

Then look at your army and find a way to overload a category effectively.

 

Also, it helps to discover a niche in your area. Generally speaking people do not have a lot of answers for AV13 and up and flyers. If you can gain an edge in selecting a Land Raider, Predator and Fiends then use it. Just know where your inherent risks are in your army.

 

Like Zhukov said, Choosing chaos puts you on the back foot from the beginning, so everything after choosing chaos needs to be a deliberate system of selecting the most effective options.

[daboarder]

Tenebris: It seems that you pretty much know then what goes 'wrong'. You choose to play Chaos the way you do, there isn't much to do then. I could tell you that I deem it unwise to put so many points in CSM squads and to run things like Terminators in a Land Raider and a Dark Apostile, but you know this.

 

Trying to compete against things like Unbound lists (really, Unbound is ridiculous, not even gonna discuss this) and multiple Imperial Knights... yeah, no.

While these are fair statements, a list is only a segment of the game, lists do not win games or lose them, they merely fascilitate.

 

I believe what is being requested is ideas that are less strategic and more tactical.

 

The HOW, to use units, what do you go for, how do you respond to situations, whats a good way to move your units so that they support each other.

 

Its a wide spread failing of 40k tactics articles to merely focus on the hyper efficient list design and ignore the application.

[Sheesh Mode]

This is true. I actually raised a question like this in the Chaos Tactica sticky. How do use the units we have and against what? In my experience, a group of chosen in a landraider is sufficient to kill most guard squads, or damage them enough that by my turn I can keep on going to destroy their vehicles. The same applies to Tau. 

 

We need to analyze the abilities of each unit that we have and what it can do. Then the players will decide what to do for themselves.

[Tenebris]

Well effectively if I analyse the main problems I have with the above lists are the following:

 

- the entrenched platoon with lascannons, Divination Primaris Psyker and an Inquisitor, hiding in a ruin. Those 30+ models are a pain to shift and they offer a perfect buffer zone between my advance and the Wyverns.

 

-  the wraithguard in Wave Serpents with those nasty AP2 flamers of theirs supported by a host of nigh unkillable Wraithlords and Wraithknights due to the Iyanden rules. It has a superb offense as well as a high defensive power. 

 

- the mass of ork bikers who can shoot and glance things to death all the while they are a devastating unit in close combat. Very hard to remove and even tougher to fight head on.

 

- Drop Pod lists, the drop pods are scoring, this lists usually force you into a defensive game from turn one and you have to outlast their payload for the first three turns in order to get to the grips with the really juicy things hiding across the table in some ruins. 

 

 

In the end I get it, we have a subpar book, we had it since the 4th, and the main chance is to get stuck in melee, but this is the main problem. Be it Land Raider, Rhino or on foot, the life expectancy for an average CSM unit is around two turns when out in the open, and considering the mass of Ignore Cover things heading our way, we are always without the benefit of cover. One could argue for an in your face list with the Mayhem pack and several Maulerfiends but they do not last long. As it is, the best hope I have is that it turns to be Maelstrom of War missions for I have a wealth of experience to counter most of the threats, which are forced actions for the player. 

 

In the end I lament the same and usual things I have been denouncing the past two years, the lack of transportation, the lack of discipline and the lack of some serious support in the form of either shooting or melee units, dedicated and not. 

[Zhukov]

 

 

The HOW, to use units, what do you go for, how do you respond to situations, whats a good way to move your units so that they support each other.

 

Its a wide spread failing of 40k tactics articles to merely focus on the hyper efficient list design and ignore the application.

 

Because it is way harder to improve people their play. I cán improve people their play, but on the internet it's difficult and not really rewarding. In my actual club I helped and practised with a friend a lot. It resulted in him becoming so good he won Best General on the yearly GT. But then we're speaking about hours and hours. (I learned from him as well, great player)

 

Actual articles about tactics are also way more time intensive, at least if you want to do it properly. I'd have to invest multiple hours in it, without getting payed for it (What I write in here is always written in 1 go, straight from my thoughts, so that's a couple of minutes at most), so there is that. Depending on how much free time I'll have in the next months I might decide to do some proper Battle Reports. Not the usual "this and this happens" report, but ones where I explain the 'why' and general thoughts/analysis as well. But I ain't promising anything, I've done that before and it ended up in me not producing anything for over a year lol. Again, what's the gain for me? Nothing, except for the 'fun' of doing it and it's not that much fun.

[Prot]

I think something important here is defining the differences between winning at the old missions, and winning at the new ones... Maelstrom

 

I think this is very important because if we are talking Maelstrom I like Chaos' chances a LOT better. The thing I hate about the old style missions is it was far too easy to sit in a corner, spamming similar units, and shooting your opponent to death.

 

With Maelstrom I feel you have to think your way through the game, as well as list building a lot more. Here's where I'm going with this and Chaos...

 

Please don't take this the wrong way, but allow me to be blunt to make the point: I have friends that would crush me pretty good with certain types of lists (mostly net listing crap) Buff-mander, IG parking lot, etc, etc.

 

When we changed to Maelstrom I started annihilating these guys. I mean annihilating. I was never a pushover, and I always handicapped myself with something that was more challenging (if I ever won too much with an army, I moved away from it or sold it.)

 

Maelstrom changed the landscape of the core game. Finding a unit that does one thing well, multiplying it by 'X' and rolling dice in a corner of the table while you both could be eating Cheezies and watching Game of Thrones in the background is over. 

 

So this is why I think it's important to differentiate. Because if we're talking Maelstrom, Chaos reminds me a lot of Dark Angels... and no I don't mean 'they're both terrible'... I mean they both have access to very flexible units and are going to cost a lot of points to put on the table.

 

In Maelstrom flexibility, speed, survivability, and then perhaps damage output is really big. 

 

I didn't want to make this post because 1) people loved to hate on the codex, ESPECIALLY those that play it. 2) I know the codex has some real issues. We agree on that. 3) I know we aren't top teir, but you know what? Very, very, very few codexes are! (the same thing we moan about is repeated in several other forums here.)

 

Finally, I don't like saying this because I realize meta's are different, but I've been having a really good run with Chaos, as mentioned against opponents that gave me a real hard time (they still can). 

 

I have helped my opponents tweak their lists, and have made strategic suggestions based on Maelstrom (some guys are literally still playing 6th edition lists in 7th Maelstrom and they do  not work.)

 

The thing with Maelstrom is you need to look at your units differently. If you can get to mid table, and own the map for 2-3 turns (I do this more times than you'd think), it's a different game. And although unbound lists are indeed stupid, super scoring units are king in Maelstrom. 

[Sheesh Mode]

 

- the entrenched platoon with lascannons, Divination Primaris Psyker and an Inquisitor, hiding in a ruin. Those 30+ models are a pain to shift and they offer a perfect buffer zone between my advance and the Wyverns.

 

- Drop Pod lists, the drop pods are scoring, this lists usually force you into a defensive game from turn one and you have to outlast their payload for the first three turns in order to get to the grips with the really juicy things hiding across the table in some ruins. 

 

Here are my suggestions: get stuck in to those guardsmen, kill them then move on. This is entirely feasible with a dedicated assault unit, my chosen do it a lot. 

 

Do not play a defensive game against drop pods. Force them to spread their forces out. After they drop down they are just footslogging infantry. The more spread out you are the better your chances of out maneuvering him with your tanks. 

 

Keep in mind it's still possible to win. Don't get down on yourself because your opponent has 'stronger lists and codex;s' that's crap. The moment we start pitying ourselves instead of planning is when we have lost. 

[Dallas Drake]

I think something important here is defining the differences between winning at the old missions, and winning at the new ones... Maelstrom

 

In Maelstrom flexibility, speed, survivability, and then perhaps damage output is really big. 

 

The thing with Maelstrom is you need to look at your units differently. If you can get to mid table, and own the map for 2-3 turns (I do this more times than you'd think), it's a different game. And although unbound lists are indeed stupid, super scoring units are king in Maelstrom. 

 

Yeah, totally. Maelstrom is all I've been playing in 7th and I am finding that CSM have a better chance in it than in say the scouring or crusade on dawn of war deployment. I find most of the 6th edition missions benefit castling and gun-lines more than Maelstrom does. Having to react to changing objectives means that, for example, IG players can't just castle up all game then drop their Valks out of zoom turn 4/5 to deploy Vets onto an objective & win the game. Having to have fluid army design & fast-ish OS troops is important.

 

The questions is, what OS units (and what load-outs of those units) are available & what are the best for CSM?

 

Cultists - Too slow & can't take or dish out damage so only useful for min troops or camping rear objectives.

Min CSMs with special weapon (Rhino) -  Not bad, 2 scoring units but not fearless and not able to take too much fire. Cost effective?

CS Possessed (Rhino or foot) - Fearless scoring and can be fast/resilient but have no shooting attacks & cost lots.

BL Chosen (Rhino) - 2 scoring units but expensive and not fearless; however, they do have access to improve their damage output significantly.

 

Then it's down to unlocking OS via Lords.

Min Noise Marines (either Blastmaser/Doom Siren & Rhino) - Fearless scoring (2 units) and significant AP3 damage output. Ignores cover helps too.

Min Plague Marines (Rhino, dual Plasma) - Fearless scoring (2 units) again, tough and can take more AP2 shooting; sadly they get expensive fast!

 

Personally, I'm veering towards Possessed or Noise Marines as my troops. I think it was Zhukov who posted a min NM squad list, I can see basing troops on this quite competitive and in a rush list (Maulers/Spawn/Bikes) I do see Possessed as an option, keep them as cheap as possible and run them in squads of 5-8.

 

I also think we shouldn't totally ignore Daemons allies. Daemonettes as Slaanesh get fleet + D3" run so Daemonettes move similar (not quite as fast) to Beasts, they are quite killy too although they fold to very, very little firepower.

 

Dallas

[BrainFireBob]

Tenebris: Are you looking for a TAC list, or answers?

 

I've been putting a lot of thought into revamping my CSM for 7th. Like you, I have a large and flexible collection, so this topic is of extreme interest.

 

Some things I've been considering using as army cores:

 

1) Bunker+19 CSM blob (L. Claw, m. bombs)+Apostle (Add axe)+Escape Hatch. I have the models to drop everything except the Apostle twice and still have a couple of Rhino squads/Havocs.

 

2) 2x LR with 8x Berzerkers, Icon, Warpsmith w/Mark of Khorne combined with a 3x multi melta Mayhem pack to give them some "Shoot this first!" cover.

 

Not sure where to go on from in either list.

 

Also, a question about Battleforged. As I understand the matter, you can take multiple CADs in a single battle-forged army, and each will have Objective Secured. Has anyone tried, and/or had any success, with using multiple CADs, each led by a differently marked Lord? Effectively, it's multiple FOC below 2000 points, which is a new option.

[the jeske]

 

The HOW, to use units, what do you go for, how do you respond to situations, whats a good way to move your units so that they support each other.

wasn't that done for chaos in 5th ed? I don't think anyone who plays chaos needs to be told how to use chaos units. There is no BB synergies or multiple specials rules overlocking. There aren't many armies more simple to play.

 

 

While these are fair statements, a list is only a segment of the game, lists do not win games or lose them, they merely fascilitate.

 

not for chaos , because the codex is wack. But I have seen enough unskilled/new players play power list and do realy well. And if someone is half decant at playing , picking up something like draigo wing or various star builds wasn't hard and gave huge success. Build that were able to win by having a much higher avarge offense and defense are the same. Give one player an eldar list and another a csm one at you will see.

[Emperors Immortals]

@zhukov After we decide the most efficient way to do it, I'd be willing to pay (or enumerated) for a professional series on CSM tactics for public use.

 

This and a couple of other threads made me try my CSM again, plus I can't go without the models, dammit.

[Vorenus]

I am on something of a hot streak with my pure (i.e., no allies) Chaos Space Marines army lately.  I have won my last 7 games in a row, and usually won by a lot.  I've been playing variations on a theme with my lists, and the games have ranged from 2200-3000 points.  I play almost exclusively at the GW battle bunker relatively close to where I live, and my opponents have for the most part been at least above average in skill (i.e., no newbs).  My opponents' armies have included:  Eldar, Dark Eldar, Iron Hands Space Marines, Necrons, Tau (Farsight Enclaves), Dark Angels allied with Imperial Knights, and Dark Angels allied with Necrons (rolls eyes).

 

I won't post all 7 lists with their full minutia (unit and model upgrades, etc.), but the basic approach is to build a "modular" army built around a few "core" units, including the following:

 

HQ1:  Khorne Lord--usually either Khârn or a Chaos Lord on a Juggernaut with the Axe of Blind Fury, Sigil of Corruption, Mark of Khorne, and sometimes also throwing on the Burning Brand of Skalathrax

 

HQ2:  Tzeentch Sorcerer -- at higher points I use Ahriman, of course

 

Troops:  2 squads of Berzerkers, mounted in Chaos Land Raiders with Dirge Casters; 2 squads of Thousand Sons in Rhinos with Dirge Casters

 

So that's the core.  I've had that same core in all 7 games.  In addition, I have played around with adding other units depending on how many points we were playing.  The other "modular" variables have included adding Abaddon and the Bringers of Despair (upgraded Terminators from the Black Legion supplement; not really sure they're worth their points, but they sure were fun to play!) either arriving via Deep Strike, or riding in a third Land Raider (with Dirge Casters again), fielding Helbrutes and/or Maulerfiends, and on 4 of the 7 games fielding a Defiler.  Oh, and if I have the Juggernaut Lord I always take a squad of Bikes with the Mark of Khorne to be his escort/meat shield.  (I never used allies, by the way.  No Soul Grinders, nothing.  Just straight Chaos Space Marines.)

 

Like I said, I won't get into the minutia, I just want to touch on broad themes of why I think these armies work so well for me. (I was going to start my own thread about this, but then decided it was a good fit into this existing thread.)

 

Theme 1:  Brutal, killy troops (the Berzerkers) to CLEAR/TAKE objectives, followed by tough, durable troops (the Thousand Sons) to HOLD objectives.  This one-two punch combo has worked 7 games in a row, whether in Eternal War or Maelstrom of War missions.  The Berzerkers are excellent at wiping enemy squads, I've slaughtered dozens of different squads with these guys.  (The only unit I've had trouble with were Dark Eldar Incubi, because they have the same WS, higher I, and their weapons are AP2.  So if I fight Dark Eldar, I actually use the Thousand Sons' AP3 bolters to clear the Incubi out instead.)

 

Theme 2:  FAST units:  Unless I take Helbrutes and/or Defilers (see # 4 below), generally speaking the whole army can move 12" per turn.  If I move my vehicle flat out I can get 18", and I can turbo-boost the bikes to go a total of 24"  (obviously--I'm not telling y'all anything you don't already know).  This means I'm ready for a turn 2 assault in just about every game.  (This is something of a meta-theme, I'll discuss this a bit more later.  Suffice it to say I absolutely love cramming a huge chunk of chaos assault goodness into my opponent's lines as fast as possible.)

 

Theme 3: Aggressive use of Dirge Casters:  Rather than relying on the (arguably) underwhelming shooting from Chaos vehicles, I often choose to forego shooting so I can move flat out to get better positioning of Dirge Casters.  I wiped out a 3000-point Tau army (from the Farsight Enclaves) because by turn 2 I was in his lines and had pushed him into a kill box.  None of his units were able to provide supporting fire because I had three vehicles crammed into his lines throwing their Dirge Casters around in 6" arcs.  He resigned the following turn (but not a rage-quit, he's a good sport and it was a fun, if short and brutal, game).  I don't count on my vehicles surviving very long, but they don't have to:  Their job is to get my dudesmen across the field fast, then provide Dirge Caster support long enough to land a charge or two.  If the vehicles all get destroyed in round 3 that's okay because they've already done their jobs pretty well by then.

 

Theme 4:  Unconventional/less commonly used units:  Defilers are a perfect example.  I've used them 4 out of 7 games, and my opponents have struggled with them.  Partly this may be due to the more forgiving vehicle damage table of 7th edition, but also I think it is that they just aren't used to seeing them.  I did not use Plague Marines or Heldrakes, arguably amongs the most common CSM units used, in a single game (in fact, I had no flyer support or AA support at all; if my enemy fielded flyers I generally just ignored them and killed everything on the ground as fast as I could and that seemed to work out all right).  Thousand Sons and Berzerkers seem to see battle a lot less than Plague Marines; people have learned how to handle PMs, and I'm sure they'll eventually figure out Berzerkers and Thousand Sons, too, but right now my opponent's have been struggling with them. 

 

Theme 5:  Play to the mission.  This is really basic, but you'd be surprised how often I could trick my opponents into doing what I wanted them to do rather than focusing on what really mattered.  As an example, one mission featured my full 3000 point list led by Abaddon and the Bringers of Despair (arriving via Deep Strike; no third Land Raider in this game) vs. Dark Angels allied with Necrons (eye rolling).  The mission was the Relic.  By turn 2 I had pushed half my army (the Berzerkers and Bikers) into his army (he had mostly Ravenwing bikes and Deathwing Terminators, plus a Land Speeder, a Land Raider Crusader, and a Dark Shroud [not sure what that's called], while his Necrons had an Annihilation Barge and Ghost Ark) while a squad of Thousand Sons grabbed the relic and moved slowly, slowly back into my deployment zone.  By the end of turn 5 most of my army was dead, having thrown them all into the meatgrinder--but I still won the game because I had the relic.  He focused exclusively on the threat in his face, and forgot to get my Thousand Sons squad with the relic.  I was able to pull variations on this theme in several games.  Remember:  Play the mission.  Ignore the Distraction Carnifexes!

 

Theme 6:  No Death Stars, but lots of fairly expensive units:  A squad of 10 Berzerkers with an Icon of Wrath is 215 points with no other upgrades (and I usually had at least a few upgrades).  Throw in the Chaos Land Raider with a Dirge Caster and we're now at 445 points, which is not quite Deathstar level, but is an expensive unit.  10 Thousand Sons in a Rhino is well over 300 points, too.  But you know what, these expensive, "pseudo-Deathstar" armies worked well for me, and they made for fun games, too.

 

Theme 7:  The list fits my play style:  Rather than worry about taking "the best" or the "most optimal" unit, I just took units I thought would be fun to model, paint, and play.  And guess what?  They were!  My opponents enjoyed battling my army because it is fully painted, with some characterful conversions (the Juggernaut Lord especially), and I enjoyed fielding fast, brutal, aggressive units because it fits my aggressive play style. 

 

Theme 8:  Remember it's a game, and the point is to have fun:  Don't argue about every silly little rule, especially if you're winning.  I'm reasonably sure that although bikes couldn't go up floors in a ruin in 6th, they can now in 7th, because the rules don't say anything about that now (and they used to).  But when I went to do that and my opponent objected, we took maybe five minutes looking in the rules, he was adamant that it was in there, I was pretty sure it wasn't, but I didn't want to bog the game down so I just agreed with him and we moved on.  I still won, so what harm was done?  I don't think of myself as a "WAAC" player, and in all 7 games, even though I won (often after brutally crushing my opponent), we still had a good time chatting and discussing things.  None of these guys rage-quit or stormed off, even after losing (sometimes quite brutally, as I said).

 

I'm going to stop with 8 themes, because, you know, sacred number of Chaos and all that.  Besides, that's all I can think of right now; if I come up with more I'll add more in a future post.

 

As a final note, I have not yet had the opportunity to use my modular army list (incorporating the themes I discuss above) against Daemons, Grey Knights, Orks, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or other Chaos Space Marines.  If/when I do, I will add a note to let y'all know how these themes played out.  Who knows, I may even get around to doing battle reports at some point.

[the jeske]

What kind of a build does the eldar player use ?

[Vorenus]

I don't remember the exact list, it was about a month ago, but this particular Eldar had a bunch of Wraith type units:  Wraithguard, Wraithlords, Wraithblades, a Wraithknight.  He had a couple of Spiritseers/Wraithseers.  It was actually a fun army to play against as it was different from what I usually see from Eldar (i.e., Wave Serpent spam).  Sorry I can't provide more details than that, it was a month ago as I said.

[Trevak Dal]

I have one Land Raider and I refuse to buy more. More ofen than not it is 250 points that are simply a glorified delivery system since we do not have the access to various patterns.

 

The other day I played my friend's space wolves (he's excited about storm claw) and it did okay.  He didn't have a squad full of Melta Guns (Fire Dragons) or some Monstrous Creature that has an assault 2 melta gun shot that's immune to melta.  I'm like-"As long as Khârn and his cronies got to charge and killed some badguys-I'm happy"

 

The Landraider lasted all game, and only had 1 hull point lost.  It rolled over onto an objective and held it, popping off a lascannon shot or two throughout the game.  Then again, his Space Wolves have always suffered in the face of vehicles (foot space wolves, and he's yet to build the drop pods I bought him for a Birthday or Christmas).

 

Against Space Marines (Space Wolves, Codex Marines, Blood Angels, and Grey Knights) it always feels like...well a Fight.  And that's what I want:  A good fight.  Against Eldar...it feels like I'm reenacting the scene from Void Stalker and the games tend to go like how Gears of War trailers go (particularly against Wraith Heavy lists-it feels like the GOW1 trailer where Marcus hops through a building and is facing down 3-4 Corpsers...) and the one from GoW 3 where Delta is surrounded as the Locust and Lambent close in.

[the jeske]

I don't remember the exact list, it was about a month ago, but this particular Eldar had a bunch of Wraith type units:  Wraithguard, Wraithlords, Wraithblades, a Wraithknight.  He had a couple of Spiritseers/Wraithseers.  It was actually a fun army to play against as it was different from what I usually see from Eldar (i.e., Wave Serpent spam).  Sorry I can't provide more details than that, it was a month ago as I said.

No problem I can imagine how a 2000+pts  supplement build should look like , although ghost armies spam serpents the same way codex build do. I can imagine him losing if he took a slow foot army.

[Prot]

I have no luck with landraiders.... they are my bane to field. Even my Dark Angels' 4++ Landraiders.

 

Last game I moved 6", Orks rolled up, flip-flopped out of a Battlewagon, hit me with a bunch of nobs with junk and pen'd me 7 times in assault. I couldn't believe it.

 

The only opponent I've had good luck with my Landraider(s) is Tau. Against necrons, forget it. I think if you go to a tournament with a Landraider in 7th it's a gamble of extremes. You either roll through your opponent with it, because he has nothing to deal with it properly; or you play against 'crons or perhaps a melta-pod army.

 

The Orks took me by surprise. It was a super fast army, and the Nob squad was much better equipped for Landraider killing than I had experienced before.

[Vorenus]

It occurred to me today that perhaps another reason why this particular "modular" army list works so well is because I never, ever have to take a Morale test.  100 percent of the units are Fearless (the Bikes and the Terminators don't start Fearless, obviously, but become Fearless by adding a Chaos Lord or Abaddon).  That means I never "lose" an assault, something that has come in handy when I fought a list of Dark Angels allied with Imperial Knights:  My opponent had 2 Imperial Knights, which he scrupulously kept within the 3" bubble of 4++ generated by some Dark Angel relic.  I knew I couldn't survive their shooting very well, but Thousand Sons tied up both Knights in melee with their Invulnerable saves quite nicely.  (This wouldn't have worked in 6th edition, though--D weapons were more powerful in 6th, ignoring Invulnerable saves 5/6ths of the time.)  I also never had a unit fall back from taking too many casualties from shooting or psychic attacks.  Anyway, an entire army that never has to take Morale tests seems to work pretty well for me.

[Lord Asvaldir]

 Against necrons, forget it. 

 

You could have 20 armor, wouldn't matter against necrons because of gauss. 

 

Vorenus that's a very interesting army list and sounds pretty cool. I imagine throwing 2-3 land raiders on the table is fun. It surprises me you have zerkers/sons working so well, but it does show that CMS really can shine in the assault phase. Lot of interesting ideas your list brings up, I hope you report more on how it fares against different lists. 

[incinerator950]

This isn't a set in stone meta. Playstyle, terrain, luck, and your opponents determine how well something performs.