Making Troops awesome

[Frater Cornelius]

Lets face it. Troops are ... except they are not! Not when used in a certain way.

After thinking about it and I have come to the conclusion that Troops are awesome. But not for the same reason you would think.

Most people buy their troops backfield objective holders or as their main anvil (in pods). Alternatively, people see them as a tax and buy the cheapest things around.

That is just wrong! All three ways, backfield scorer, anvil or tax, is not how I would use mine.

This is how you use them: you send them into no-mans land. Full on Glory!

Why? Because they need to be dealt with.

Imagine the following scenario. You have a unit of 5 Blood Claws with Flamer advancing up the board. The opponent thinks 'they are just five guys, what the hell are they going to do', and he shoots your good stuff.

Next turn, those five guys are much closer. Now he looks at them and thinks 'If they make it into combat, they will cause me some trouble'. Now he has to choose. Will he continue to chow through your good stuff? Or will he shoot the Blood Claws that will hit melee against his Tank or dedicated ranged unit.

If you hold your troops back, I won't even bother with them. I will just come for them when I killed all your good stuff. But when 2-3 units of 5 Blood Claws stay ignored, they will cause some serious trouble. All while your TWC is rolling up the opponents flank and chewing through his lines.

So yeah, those are some setups:

5 BC with Flamer. Just deploy them and forget objectives. Go straight for the enemy.

5 BC with Flamer in Pod or Rhino. More expensive but useful when running a fast army.

5 GH with Melta and combi-Melta in pod. They will at least scratch a tank on arrival and then they will go around your back lines and throw krak grenades at stuff. Super annoying.

Also, if you are playing Space Marines, try not to take naked Scouts. Either take Scouts in LSS to be able to charge with them and be annoying, or take 5 Tacs in pod. Maybe even 10 Tacs combat Squad in pod and go around his back lines and disrupt them.

The verdict is that Troops are not very efficient when relegated as tax or backfield duty. 2-3x 5 BC with Flamers cost you 130-195. That is super cheap and they can super annoying for the opponent.

Seriously, try it. It is really irritating for the opponent, especially when he wants to shoot those Centurions or TWC but the BC are one movement phase away from the charge.

And if they will get shot away, they have either one unit's worth of dakka for 65 points. It is a win-win on so many levels.

[Rune_Priest_Rhapsody]

I like it!! I have been thinking of something very similar. 5 GH's in a rhino to throw at the enemy as yet another distraction. I am contemplating the inclusion of a battle leader with a power weapon because of cool.

 

I can finally get behind you on this one, Immersturm!! Well, I agree with a lot of what you say, but this I am right there with you.

 

I have thought about podding these units as well, but I have enough coming down that is of a much higher priority. A small pack of troops is nothing to scoff at but can easily beat the :cuss out of some Tau in close combat. I hate Tau.

 

End of Line

[Donkalleone]

You can use troops as cover/charge blocker making use of the 2"/1" rule. a wide cheap troop line in front can make certain approaches very difficult and so you can simply out manouver your opponent.

there are even kroot lines who won a whole game

[skeletoro]

I guess the nice thing about the blood claws is the low cost and the possibility of overkill. If those 5 guys are wiped out by a shooting attack that would have destroyed a 10 man unit, they've done well.

 

Also, it opens up a slotless lone wolf, making more relatively cheap units to suck up enemy fire.

[Frater Cornelius]

Exactly. You can have a small horde march across the field, holding objectives on the way for less than 300 points. this leaves you over 1000 points to put into your killy stuff. Sounds good to me.

[Nadir]

The only thing you can lose os the first blood...

[rgr_maddog]

The only thing you can lose os the first blood...

Ahh... but there in lies the strategy. Shoot this unit, get first blood, take full strength TWC charge vs. whittle down TWC, still take their charge, still have BC's restricting your own movement options and offering there own, albeit smaller, threats.

 

I feel like this is more a tactic to consider when facing certain armies. I'd like to have an alternative. I could see taking more BC's to footslog for a dedicated Stormwolf, or to get more DP's to push real DP's into the alpha strike, for example (keeping the option to ride or pod). I don't think building an army around it without the options would be optimal, but these are only my initial thoughts.

[Mal Luck]

Kill point games in general might hurt a little. But it sure as hell beats an inefficient troop tax. It just seems a shame however, that the codex with arguably the most to gain from non-troop allied slots (codex: space marines) has the least effective cheap assault troops- scout or tactical squads simply aren't as useful at the proposed strategy as blood claws or blood angel scouts). IMO at least.

[Frater Cornelius]

Kill point games in general might hurt a little. But it sure as hell beats an inefficient troop tax. It just seems a shame however, that the codex with arguably the most to gain from non-troop allied slots (codex: space marines) has the least effective cheap assault troops- scout or tactical squads simply aren't as useful at the proposed strategy as blood claws or blood angel scouts). IMO at least.

Too bad BA lost ASM troops, but hey, someone's gotta sell that new tacs kit :D

[Mal Luck]

Too bad BA lost ASM troops, but hey, someone's gotta sell that new tacs kit

$$$, the ultimate GW balancing and playstyle decider. Also works for Forgeworld and their recent decision about Sicarians, eh.

More broken up about the lack of Cents they'd have made perfect allies otherwise.

[Wulfgar Ironmane]

Aye it is pretty nice.

I myself got two razorbacks with 5 GH in em. They go along forward shielding my twc and vindis but at turn two, split apart and go about their merry harassement way

Sure a razoback is more expensive, but it can add alot of firepower. But that depends on the list. (mine needed it)

[TopToffee]

My only question is (and bear in mind i've had precisely one game since coming back to 40k after more than a decade and a half) - when is the opponent ever going to legitimately need to decide between (for example) shooting your TWC, and shooting your little mini blood claw pack?

 

Let me explain what i mean.

 

Turn One, it seems like a complete no brainer: the Blood Claws are probably a minimum of 24" away from your lines - they're going to be moving 9.5" per turn on average, assuming they don't want to shoot - so you obviously shoot the TWC.

 

Turn Two, one of two scenarios: Either the TWC are an average of (about) 16-17") nearer your lines or they're already in combat. Meanwhile the Blood Claws are still probably a full turn at least away from hitting you.

 

In scenario 1, obviously you have a last attempt at shooting the TWC. In scenario 2, you CAN'T shoot them, so can turn your attention to the Blood Claws.

 

I don't really see how walking some Blood Claws up the board forces the opponent into tricky decisions.

 

Not saying I'm right, btw, more looking for people to find the holes in my logic - every day is a school day, as they say!

[Leif Bearclaw]

My only question is (and bear in mind i've had precisely one game since coming back to 40k after more than a decade and a half) - when is the opponent ever going to legitimately need to decide between (for example) shooting your TWC, and shooting your little mini blood claw pack?

 

Let me explain what i mean.

 

Turn One, it seems like a complete no brainer: the Blood Claws are probably a minimum of 24" away from your lines - they're going to be moving 9.5" per turn on average, assuming they don't want to shoot - so you obviously shoot the TWC.

 

Turn Two, one of two scenarios: Either the TWC are an average of (about) 16-17") nearer your lines or they're already in combat. Meanwhile the Blood Claws are still probably a full turn at least away from hitting you.

 

In scenario 1, obviously you have a last attempt at shooting the TWC. In scenario 2, you CAN'T shoot them, so can turn your attention to the Blood Claws.

 

I don't really see how walking some Blood Claws up the board forces the opponent into tricky decisions.

 

Not saying I'm right, btw, more looking for people to find the holes in my logic - every day is a school day, as they say!

No, you're pretty much spot on. This seems like a tactic that would only work on bad players. If the opponent knows what they're doing with target selection there's no tricky decision. 5 footslogging Marines are slow and pointless. A gunline army will probably have more than enough fire-power to annihilate them in short order, and it's quite likely that there'll be some guns that can't draw LOS to the TWC (or whatever), leaving them no real difficult decision. Best case scenario you get a turn 3 charge, and that's assuming the opponent doesn't redeploy to leave your little BC packs in the lurch.

 

There's more mileage in distraction squads in Pods, but even then, 5 Marines is not a lot, better to use a Dread, or a bigger squad, that's a lot more likely to break your opponent's composure, and force bad decisions.

 

Or, if you want little on field distraction units, just use Lone Wolves.

[Frater Cornelius]

 

My only question is (and bear in mind i've had precisely one game since coming back to 40k after more than a decade and a half) - when is the opponent ever going to legitimately need to decide between (for example) shooting your TWC, and shooting your little mini blood claw pack?

 

Let me explain what i mean.

 

Turn One, it seems like a complete no brainer: the Blood Claws are probably a minimum of 24" away from your lines - they're going to be moving 9.5" per turn on average, assuming they don't want to shoot - so you obviously shoot the TWC.

 

Turn Two, one of two scenarios: Either the TWC are an average of (about) 16-17") nearer your lines or they're already in combat. Meanwhile the Blood Claws are still probably a full turn at least away from hitting you.

 

In scenario 1, obviously you have a last attempt at shooting the TWC. In scenario 2, you CAN'T shoot them, so can turn your attention to the Blood Claws.

 

I don't really see how walking some Blood Claws up the board forces the opponent into tricky decisions.

 

Not saying I'm right, btw, more looking for people to find the holes in my logic - every day is a school day, as they say!

No, you're pretty much spot on. This seems like a tactic that would only work on bad players. If the opponent knows what they're doing with target selection there's no tricky decision. 5 footslogging Marines are slow and pointless. A gunline army will probably have more than enough fire-power to annihilate them in short order, and it's quite likely that there'll be some guns that can't draw LOS to the TWC (or whatever), leaving them no real difficult decision. Best case scenario you get a turn 3 charge, and that's assuming the opponent doesn't redeploy to leave your little BC packs in the lurch.

 

There's more mileage in distraction squads in Pods, but even then, 5 Marines is not a lot, better to use a Dread, or a bigger squad, that's a lot more likely to break your opponent's composure, and force bad decisions.

 

Or, if you want little on field distraction units, just use Lone Wolves.

 

 

You guys are jumping to conclusions fairly quickly for someone who never tried it. You have not thought it through at all.

 

Now try looking at it in a real setting, not a vacuum where the opponent is playing a gunline and you are playing kill points.

 

For one, the setup matters. Are you playing on 2x2 table or a 2x3 table. I would rarely run foot BC on a 2x3 table, but I like them well enough on a 2x2 table.

Second, gunline armies are very rare these days. More often than not, the enemy army will move to the mid field, where most of the objectives will be. So assuming that BC will need to run inside the enemy deployment zone is false more often than it is true.

Thirdly, in Maelstrom objectives matter most. So if you place your objectives inside your deployment zone or choose the side where the enemy has them in their zone, you have no right to complain about long distances.

And lastly, other people here and myself have also mentioned Rhinos and DP for BC and GH. One of my favourite setups is infact 5 BC with Flamer in a pod. 100 points and amazing to push things off an objective.

 

So if you do not want to run foot BC, use those alternatives. Besides, everything I said about foot BC that you so readily criticized was aimed at their midfield performance. That is where most armies operate these days.

 

And as a final note, we are not talking about general strategies, but about the troops tax. Troops are the most useless section in almost every book. Trying to get mileage out of them is difficult. This is one of the ways to make them useful. Of cause they will not outperform TWC or other Deathstar units. But you can still try to use them to get some mileage out of them, rather than sticking them into roles they perform suboptimally in.

[Donkalleone]

 

One of my favourite setups is infact 5 BC with Flamer in a pod. 100 points and amazing to push things off an objective.

 

Funny how Opinions change. 2-3 Weeks ago u said 5 BC in a Pod are Trash and wasted points.

[Frater Cornelius]

 

 

One of my favourite setups is infact 5 BC with Flamer in a pod. 100 points and amazing to push things off an objective.

 

Funny how Opinions change. 2-3 Weeks ago u said 5 BC in a Pod are Trash and wasted points.

 

 

It depends on the context, bud. Do not misconstrue it. To those that I said it did not use them as dedicated capping units.

It was either 10 BC in pod as a character bus or tried to use them as their main hammer by podding them down together with 10 GH. When you are going for a podding strategy and you include BC where you could have included 10GH with full gear, it is a waste.

However, if you are running a Wolf Allied detachment or need to fill the troops in a non-pod army, then 5BC in pod made sense. Any more than 5 and it gets too expensive.

 

Same with 5 BC in a Stormwolf. Using them as dedicated cappers to either start on the field or disembark on an objective is awesome. Having 10 or more inside as one of your hammers is bad.

 

It all depends on context.

[rgr_maddog]

@Lief and TopToffee:

That's why I suggest it as a tactic to employ situationally. If you are facing an opponent with only a few long range threats, like ork lootas, or minimal ap3, such as SM Alpha strike, why not give them something to shoot at other than your expensive units? BC's are cheaper than storm shields, and could even snag an objective or two. I doubt I'd charge a gunline, however.

[Frater Cornelius]

@Lief and TopToffee:

That's why I suggest it as a tactic to employ situationally. If you are facing an opponent with only a few long range threats, like ork lootas, or minimal ap3, such as SM Alpha strike, why not give them something to shoot at other than your expensive units? BC's are cheaper than storm shields, and could even snag an objective or two. I doubt I'd charge a gunline, however.

 

Sure you do. Force them to waste Overwatch on them ;)

[rgr_maddog]

I considered that, but I like our wolves for that. Cheaper, can stay in front of TWC without slowing them down, and cheaper (okay, might have said that twice, but I'm nothing if not frugal to the point of handy-capping myself with points!).

[Frater Cornelius]

I considered that, but I like our wolves for that. Cheaper, can stay in front of TWC without slowing them down, and cheaper (okay, might have said that twice, but I'm nothing if not frugal to the point of handy-capping myself with points!).

 

Aye, FWolves are good at that. However, they take up FA slots, which is a big downside, depending on how to look at it. I now completely stopped using them, despite having quite a few from 5ed where I ran them as troops almost exclusively (either them or WG with Logan).

[rgr_maddog]

The draw back being wolves are a fast attack slot, but I'm not TWC heavy.

You snuck it in before i could!

[Leif Bearclaw]

 

You guys are jumping to conclusions fairly quickly for someone who never tried it. You have not thought it through at all.

 

Now try looking at it in a real setting, not a vacuum where the opponent is playing a gunline and you are playing kill points.

 

For one, the setup matters. Are you playing on 2x2 table or a 2x3 table. I would rarely run foot BC on a 2x3 table, but I like them well enough on a 2x2 table.

Second, gunline armies are very rare these days. More often than not, the enemy army will move to the mid field, where most of the objectives will be. So assuming that BC will need to run inside the enemy deployment zone is false more often than it is true.

Thirdly, in Maelstrom objectives matter most. So if you place your objectives inside your deployment zone or choose the side where the enemy has them in their zone, you have no right to complain about long distances.

And lastly, other people here and myself have also mentioned Rhinos and DP for BC and GH. One of my favourite setups is infact 5 BC with Flamer in a pod. 100 points and amazing to push things off an objective.

 

So if you do not want to run foot BC, use those alternatives. Besides, everything I said about foot BC that you so readily criticized was aimed at their midfield performance. That is where most armies operate these days.

 

And as a final note, we are not talking about general strategies, but about the troops tax. Troops are the most useless section in almost every book. Trying to get mileage out of them is difficult. This is one of the ways to make them useful. Of cause they will not outperform TWC or other Deathstar units. But you can still try to use them to get some mileage out of them, rather than sticking them into roles they perform suboptimally in.

 

And you're jumping to conclusions about what I've tried in the past and how much thought I've given the subject. While I haven't run 5 man BC packs, I have played with footslogging Power Armour pretty frequently, and in my experience advancing on foot with Marines is a terrible idea 9 times out of 10.

 

What the devil are 2X2 and 2X3 tables? I'm going to assume you mean 4'x4' and 6'x4'. And you are right that infantry tend to perform better on the smaller table, but I'd still consider such small units something of a waste, fodder for any spare guns the enemy has. And if you assume you're playing against IG (which I tend to find is a good litmus test for a list's viability), there will be spare guns.

 

As for midfield vs backline, what sort of enemy force are you assuming to face? Mech Marines will contest midfield, Tau/Guard will generally be reluctant to close and Pod/GK armies will probably try to take to fight to your deployment zone, and a good list needs counters to all of these. My point was footsloggers are slow, and 5 man BC packs don't have the best offensive output, therefore will struggle to have an impact on the game, beyond objective camping. They will struggle to reach anything with any mobility, and if they get there they'll struggle to kill stuff (killing less than 2 Marines on the charge, or stripping 1.5 HPs on average). They're simply not threatening enough to offer a legitimate distraction for your more dangerous stuff. I'd expect them to boil down to a target of opportunity, targeted by the squad that can't see the TWC etc., and quickly snuffed out.

 

You'd be better off taking larger squads and decent transports, but then you're probably going down what you called the 'anvil' route. Or if you want to play the midfield objective contester game, Hunters in Razorbacks are a better shout, more mobility, and better fire-power, which makes them more dangerous, and therefore more likely to be a distraction to the opponent.

[TopToffee]

 

You guys are jumping to conclusions fairly quickly for someone who never tried it. You have not thought it through at all.

 

Now try looking at it in a real setting, not a vacuum where the opponent is playing a gunline and you are playing kill points.

 

For one, the setup matters. Are you playing on 2x2 table or a 2x3 table. I would rarely run foot BC on a 2x3 table, but I like them well enough on a 2x2 table.

Second, gunline armies are very rare these days. More often than not, the enemy army will move to the mid field, where most of the objectives will be. So assuming that BC will need to run inside the enemy deployment zone is false more often than it is true.

Thirdly, in Maelstrom objectives matter most. So if you place your objectives inside your deployment zone or choose the side where the enemy has them in their zone, you have no right to complain about long distances.

And lastly, other people here and myself have also mentioned Rhinos and DP for BC and GH. One of my favourite setups is infact 5 BC with Flamer in a pod. 100 points and amazing to push things off an objective.

 

So if you do not want to run foot BC, use those alternatives. Besides, everything I said about foot BC that you so readily criticized was aimed at their midfield performance. That is where most armies operate these days.

 

And as a final note, we are not talking about general strategies, but about the troops tax. Troops are the most useless section in almost every book. Trying to get mileage out of them is difficult. This is one of the ways to make them useful. Of cause they will not outperform TWC or other Deathstar units. But you can still try to use them to get some mileage out of them, rather than sticking them into roles they perform suboptimally in.

 

 

 

Ok, first things, seems a little bit needlessly confrontational to say "you haven't thought it through at all", when I openly admitted I'm a newcomer to the game (or may as well be, when I haven't played in so long). As for "never having tried it", that's true, but I've also never played Premier League football, but i can still comment that i don't think playing a 1-1-9 formation is a solid basis for a tactic.

 

Secondly, I focused on footslogging them across the board because that is what you spent most of your original post talking about. I can see how drop pods would be a little more useful, but i was questioning the footslogging variant.

 

Thirdly, is 40k ever played on a table as small as 2'x2' (unless you're using a different unit of measurement there, that seems REALLY small compared to every game i've ever seen played apart from kill team.

Lastly, especially for Wolves, if you are already conceding that troops are "the most useless section", then surely it makes more sense to just not take them at all (CoF) rather than taking them and trying to engineer a role for them with points that could be spent on a superior unit choice?

[Frater Cornelius]

By 2x2 (2 modules x 2 modules) I mean 48" x 48". Mostly used for games between 750-1250. Any bigger would be spread for too thin. Slogging BC here is not such a big deal. I agree that when playing bigger games, you have the points to invest in a Rhino or a Pod. But not all games are played at 1750+.

 

Secondly, I also mentioned that there are scenarios where Troops are unavoidable. SW allies, SM allies, wanting to take codex relics, banned supplements, just to name a few.

 

It also wasn't supposed to be an attack directed at you or at your skill. Your question was legitimate, and I tried to answer it. All I tried to say was that you should try to think further. While making a comparison to a static gunline scenario where no objectives are placed is easy, there are far more factors, especially in Maelstrom, that need to be considered.

Most of the time it is safe to assume that armies meet outside of their deployment zones, rather than one needing to go fetch the other.

 

If you are truly facing a static gunline, you can safely deposit your BC on a midfield objective. If the opponent does not want you to hold it, he will waste fire on them.

I guess I should have made it clearer in the OP, that the point is not to get a charge off ASAP. The point is to not have them stand back, but play risky and aggressively (which also includes capping midfield objectives), because getting them shot is a good thing.

[Rune_Priest_Rhapsody]

Gentlemen, gentlemen!! Put down the power swords!! Drink some Mjod.

 

With this tactic, I personally would never footslog them. I agree that they are just too fragile. A dedicated transport not only gets them closer to the enemy or midfield, but it can also serve as an extra layer of protection and line of sight blocker. For me the tactical benefit from such a pack is simple. It's a unit that will get ignored and cannot be all at the same time. Of course your opponent will shoot at your TWC/BlizzDread/etc!! And go ahead and whittle those units down and fire your overwatch at them. Once the BC/GH (GH being my option, at least in my head) get into combat they are still resilient and can pack a punch. If you are throwing a troop choice at a much 'harder' unit, then you may want to rethink your tactics!!

 

I think all of this is self explanatory. It's nothing that has not been said or thought over already. In any edition. I do think this concept is more about point allocation vs thread density. The Grey Hunters are not as big of a threat as a pack of TWC, but for the points they cost they can still play a sufficient role in an army. Not all armies, but certainly some builds. And of course, yes, certain enemies. I agree with Immersturm in that most armies (that I see being played at LGS) are no longer centered around a gun line. There are too many fast moving units seeing a lot of play.

 

For me this strategy is the best idea in a strong alpha strike list. While you are throwing hard, tough packs against their lines, the troops can grab objective as they near the fray. They can shield harder packs. They can still be a jack of all trades. I think as long as you keep them cost efficient, they can still be used. Of course, I would prefer to run the CoF for the elite slots. But this concept is still a viable one.

 

End of Line