Prot's Thin Grey (Knight) Line vs Tau (Very Pic Hvy)

[Lord Blackwood]

Cool Bat Rep Prot , Ill show this to my buddy who plays GK  and Tau 

Id play you if I  could D: If only because id get a cool bat rep written up  Fwuhahahaha

[SyNidus]

 

In this case, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quite literally strangers were walking up to the table who knew his army and were commenting (quietly) that it was really a nasty build.  A friend came in the store, when the guy was out of ear shot (this was just after I lost Driago's squad to the double flamer guy) the Enclave and just landed without deviation and I was still 'unaware' of what was about to go down... my friend leaned over to me and told me this was banned at the last tournament he was at....

 

It was about here that I knew how bad it was going to be. 

 

 

What I don't understand is why he let you go first if it was maelstrom. Interesting choice that backfired.

 

 

He was bloodthirsty, and he didn't want to waste a turn of shooting to annihilate Prot. Note how he doesn't seem to care for the objectives but instead goes straight for the kill.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

That's my problem with Maelstrom. For the armies that can table you with firepower, they just do that and ignore the mission. Tac Objectives are RNG anyway, so if you're dead, same difference. 

[Happy-inquisitor]

That's my problem with Maelstrom. For the armies that can table you with firepower, they just do that and ignore the mission. Tac Objectives are RNG anyway, so if you're dead, same difference. 

 

My problem is with people who think they play the same as the old scenarios, in the case of this BatRep the losing player acted like every game is Purge the Alien. Boring. Deserves to lose, did lose. I am not entirely thrilled with the randomness of Maelstrom or the book-keeping but I do like the way it plays so differently and turns old assumptions of how to win on their head.

 

Seriously; take infiltrating ObSec troops (Kroot in this case, Scouts are even better) and just go sit on all the objectives and smile when you go first against an empty table. Its like free VP and really forces your opponent to make that alpha strike pay dividends or play catch-up all game. That is a real problem for zero deployment GK tactics and one that we find hard to replicate - although if you are willing to spread out you can achieve a similar effect with shunt moves.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

My problem is with people who think they play the same as the old scenarios, in the case of this BatRep the losing player acted like every game is Purge the Alien. Boring. Deserves to lose, did lose. I am not entirely thrilled with the randomness of Maelstrom or the book-keeping but I do like the way it plays so differently and turns old assumptions of how to win on their head.

 

Seriously; take infiltrating ObSec troops (Kroot in this case, Scouts are even better) and just go sit on all the objectives and smile when you go first against an empty table. Its like free VP and really forces your opponent to make that alpha strike pay dividends or play catch-up all game. That is a real problem for zero deployment GK tactics and one that we find hard to replicate - although if you are willing to spread out you can achieve a similar effect with shunt moves.

 

It doesn't turn any assumptions on their head. You camp the objective markers, kill the enemy...it's Purge but with random bonus VP for being a shooty army with enough attrition to hold ground. 

 

We don't get infantry options that can be cheaply spammed onto objective markers. We're a tiny elite force, designed to be fired like a bullet into the opposing force. For us, every game is a variant of Purge, because it's our only winning strategy. Allies change that, but GK themselves don't do attrition, or camping, or even shooting contests (we're decent, but it isn't enough, we need melee to seal the deal). 

[Prot]

Firstly, I admit, I prefer Maelstrom. No it's not perfect, and it can be skewed. As I've mentioned before, we incorporated a House Rule where we discard any objective card that was impossible to complete when the game began.

 

Okay, secondly the reason I love Maelstrom is I personally feel the game in 6th was getting REAL stale for me. I've always played a lot... a lot of games, and with 6th it just seemed to reward the shooty, I'm not gonna move, repetitive lists. (IE Leafblower, etc,)

 

What I do love about Maelstrom is it adds a dynamic to the game that -most often- can punish the guy who just wants to deploy X models, sit in a corner and roll dice for 2 hours without moving off his chair. That old way was killing me in 6th.

 

I did find one thing funny that I never mentioned.... after this game the Tau guy right away starts getting into the problems with Maelstrom. How it's too much luck based. I remind him we are playing a game based on dice, and he says why make it worse with Maelstrom. Then I look at how he played our game:

 

He made a tactical decision to try to table me. Objective wise, all he scored was what fell in his lap. When he -thought- he was going to table me, he paid even less attention to the cards. I saw a distinct moment right when he realized he was in trouble, and he started going through his cards. All the sudden, the cards meant something to him, but at this point the fact he basically ignored them, was now catching up to him.

 

This is the beauty of Maelstrom to me. It forces a pretty dynamic game. Honestly, I feel an army like mine has very little chance in a lot of old school type punch fests, but I LOVE trying to work tactical edges over my opponent. I think it's made some very mediocre armies playable again! Just my 2 cents.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Firstly, I admit, I prefer Maelstrom. No it's not perfect, and it can be skewed. As I've mentioned before, we incorporated a House Rule where we discard any objective card that was impossible to complete when the game began.

 

Well then you're not playing Maelstrom. You're playing a version of it. Which is fine, but I wanna be clear here. In a normal game of Maelstrom, the RNG deck can screw you Turn 1 and there is nothing you can do about it. It's not just the 'kill an enemy Flyer, oh wait they have none' stuff, it's the borderline impossible ones too. Like, 'hold all three objective markers', which unless you're tabling your opponent anyway, are stupidly difficult to achieve. 

Okay, secondly the reason I love Maelstrom is I personally feel the game in 6th was getting REAL stale for me. I've always played a lot... a lot of games, and with 6th it just seemed to reward the shooty, I'm not gonna move, repetitive lists. (IE Leafblower, etc,)

 

What I do love about Maelstrom is it adds a dynamic to the game that -most often- can punish the guy who just wants to deploy X models, sit in a corner and roll dice for 2 hours without moving off his chair. That old way was killing me in 6th.

 

I did find one thing funny that I never mentioned.... after this game the Tau guy right away starts getting into the problems with Maelstrom. How it's too much luck based. I remind him we are playing a game based on dice, and he says why make it worse with Maelstrom. Then I look at how he played our game:

 

He made a tactical decision to try to table me. Objective wise, all he scored was what fell in his lap. When he -thought- he was going to table me, he paid even less attention to the cards. I saw a distinct moment right when he realized he was in trouble, and he started going through his cards. All the sudden, the cards meant something to him, but at this point the fact he basically ignored them, was now catching up to him.

 

This is the beauty of Maelstrom to me. It forces a pretty dynamic game. Honestly, I feel an army like mine has very little chance in a lot of old school type punch fests, but I LOVE trying to work tactical edges over my opponent. I think it's made some very mediocre armies playable again! Just my 2 cents.

 

I've had the exact opposite experience, after multiple games in the format. The sit back and shoot lists do great. So long as they don't camp all game, and make a move for the mid-field markers at like...Turn 3 or 4, they're fine. Most gunline armies include a faster element anyway for objective grabbing, there are very few true static lists anymore (5th and 6th made the game a lot faster and more mobile). 

 

Anyway, if you're having fun with it, that's great. But I find the format dumb and the idea of random mission objectives to be abhorrent to the whole concept of tactics and strategy. 

[Happy-inquisitor]

 

Firstly, I admit, I prefer Maelstrom. No it's not perfect, and it can be skewed. As I've mentioned before, we incorporated a House Rule where we discard any objective card that was impossible to complete when the game began.

 

Well then you're not playing Maelstrom. You're playing a version of it. Which is fine, but I wanna be clear here. In a normal game of Maelstrom, the RNG deck can screw you Turn 1 and there is nothing you can do about it. It's not just the 'kill an enemy Flyer, oh wait they have none' stuff, it's the borderline impossible ones too. Like, 'hold all three objective markers', which unless you're tabling your opponent anyway, are stupidly difficult to achieve. 

 

That card works great if your opponent is null deploying, just go and get all the objectives and sit there scoring them all for a turn or two. Null deploy is a tactic that works fine in "grab all the points at the end of the game" can backfire really badly in a game where points can be earned at any time, one of the little ways in which you have to re-think your approach to the different scenario.

 

As for random - its not like random game length is not a thing and totally skews results or anything. It is just different random. What you have to do in both types of scenario is play the percentage game to maximise your chances.

 

I am in two minds about the discard impossible cards house-ruling. If I bring no heavy support I deny you VP in Big Guns; if I bring no flyers I might deny you VP in Maelstrom - I am not clear why everyone is cool with one of those and thinks the other is unplayably ridiculous.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

That card works great if your opponent is null deploying, just go and get all the objectives and sit there scoring them all for a turn or two. Null deploy is a tactic that works fine in "grab all the points at the end of the game" can backfire really badly in a game where points can be earned at any time, one of the little ways in which you have to re-think your approach to the different scenario.

 

I don't see many null deploy lists anymore. Mainly because 6th punished Reserve armies so hard, and people are still burned by it (I know I was). So yeah, hypothetically Drop Pod lists and the like can suffer if they're late to the 'sit still and print VP' party. But that's not a common issue in Maelstrom. More commonly, your opponent blows your army off the table with guns, and quietly collects random VP by sitting still. 

As for random - its not like random game length is not a thing and totally skews results or anything. It is just different random. What you have to do in both types of scenario is play the percentage game to maximise your chances.

 

I plan every game to run to Turn 5, and have contingencies for Turn 6/7. There is enough random stupid stuff in 40k already, without making objective scoring RNG as well. 

I am in two minds about the discard impossible cards house-ruling. If I bring no heavy support I deny you VP in Big Guns; if I bring no flyers I might deny you VP in Maelstrom - I am not clear why everyone is cool with one of those and thinks the other is unplayably ridiculous.

 

What army doesn't bring Heavy Support? Answer, none, they all do, because Heavy Support is the most powerful army slot in the game. I've never fought a 'Big Guns' mission without the enemy having Heavy Support choices. It just doesn't happen. No Fast Attack? Sure, I only field Interceptors infrequently, and other armies generally don't use theirs either (unless they're money, like Vendettas or something). 

 

The thing is though, not bringing Heavy Support is penalised in different ways already by the game (ie enjoy having no fire support). You're not penalised anymore for it except in Big Guns. Whereas in Maelstorm, if you don't have cheap Troops to squat on objectives and the firepower to clean enemy forces off the table, you're already the underdog. Add in the random VP, the likelyhood of drawing stupid or unachievable Tac cards, and the intense bias 40k already has towards shooting anyway...yeah, gg unless you're a shooty army. That's why I call Maelstrom Purge, with a side of RNG. If your army already excels at 'table wipe them' style victories, Maelstrom is the same idea, but you also rub salt in the wound with random bonus VP doing what you already do best. So, comebacks become even more unlikely. Eternal War at least has the possibility of comebacks, because objectives are either earned only once (First Blood, Slay the Warlord) or only determined at dice down (Linebreaker, objective markers, Relic etc). 

[Happy-inquisitor]

 

What army doesn't bring Heavy Support? Answer, none, they all do,

 

My Tau would like to have a word with you, if you were not the wrong side of the planet :)

 

Heresy aside I think we are drifting a little off-topic. The BatRep is about a shooty Tau list that tried to play Maelstrom like it was Purge and Prot beat it by playing the mission. Null deploy really worked here, I was really just pointing out that against an opponent who understands and plays Maelstrom better that null deploy is  a very risky tactic.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

My Tau would like to have a word with you, if you were not the wrong side of the planet

Wait, you don't take Broadsides or Skyrays?

Heresy aside I think we are drifting a little off-topic. The BatRep is about a shooty Tau list that tried to play Maelstrom like it was Purge and Prot beat it by playing the mission. Null deploy really worked here, I was really just pointing out that against an opponent who understands and plays Maelstrom better that null deploy is a very risky tactic.

But the point is, the Tau player very nearly succeeded. Prot did win by getting Tac VP's, but he also had a fair amount of luck and 'Vortex' shenanigans as well. 7 models is getting close to where I would concede, because at that point you have no ability to dominate the battlefield or hold ground, and you're at serious risk of failing a few saves and just being wiped. The Tau player also made a few mistakes and had he been a bit more conservative (ie actually got some random VP's as well, which is kinda the point in Maelstrom, you stay ahead on the random VP game while blowing your opponent off-table), I doubt Prot could have won. Which makes his victory all the more remarkable and commendable, because he was most assuredly at a massive disadvantage.

[Happy-inquisitor]

My Tau would like to have a word with you, if you were not the wrong side of the planet

Wait, you don't take Broadsides or Skyrays?

Heresy aside I think we are drifting a little off-topic. The BatRep is about a shooty Tau list that tried to play Maelstrom like it was Purge and Prot beat it by playing the mission. Null deploy really worked here, I was really just pointing out that against an opponent who understands and plays Maelstrom better that null deploy is a very risky tactic.

But the point is, the Tau player very nearly succeeded. Prot did win by getting Tac VP's, but he also had a fair amount of luck and 'Vortex' shenanigans as well. 7 models is getting close to where I would concede, because at that point you have no ability to dominate the battlefield or hold ground, and you're at serious risk of failing a few saves and just being wiped. The Tau player also made a few mistakes and had he been a bit more conservative (ie actually got some random VP's as well, which is kinda the point in Maelstrom, you stay ahead on the random VP game while blowing your opponent off-table), I doubt Prot could have won. Which makes his victory all the more remarkable and commendable, because he was most assuredly at a massive disadvantage.

I do not think we are disagreeing that much. The mindset of just shooting your opponent off the table is the wrong one for maelstrom and results in bad play. Prot got caught out by not knowing what a Y'vara can do which left him short on models but played flexibly and stuck to the mission to earn the win. Perhaps it is not any one mindset that is poor maelstrom play, more that coming to the table with a rigid game plan that does not respond to events will lose more than it will win even if it is a decent game plan.

And no: both are fantastic units in isolation but are too static for my tau army. The skyray does add something different and is tempting, broadsides just do nothing good for me.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

I do not think we are disagreeing that much. The mindset of just shooting your opponent off the table is the wrong one for maelstrom and results in bad play. Prot got caught out by not knowing what a Y'vara can do which left him short on models but played flexibly and stuck to the mission to earn the win. Perhaps it is not any one mindset that is poor maelstrom play, more that coming to the table with a rigid game plan that does not respond to events will lose more than it will win even if it is a decent game plan.

 

It works incredibly well against Grey Knights and other elite armies however. I agree it's far less effective against an army that can spam cheap units to hold ground, like say IG, or Daemons, or Tyranids, even Orks etc. 

And no: both are fantastic units in isolation but are too static for my tau army. The skyray does add something different and is tempting, broadsides just do nothing good for me. 

 

Fair enough. I wonder how Tau armies are gonna change now that Eldar are running rings around gunlines. Maybe more Crisis-heavy builds. 

[Prot]

I keep thinking about this game.

 

I know the guy thought I was slaughtered, BUT it's important to note he did something I see a lot of people do in Maelstrom. He lost his patience with the long term goal, and went short term goal.

 

Honestly, I am very happy when someone is playing me in maelstrom and decides to stop halfway and take a stand on the table. He kind of did this.... yet after he is very quick to blame the "maelstrom format" for his loss.

 

I replayed this game many times... he got greedy, and lost patience with the 'format'. He did get Warlord (by accident, never went asking for him), never got line breaker, he never got half his cards. With our house rule, there is far less luck involved. If he picks up 'Destroy a gun emplacement' he gets a free discard right then.

 

IE: every card he picks up is accomplish-able. If it's not to his preference, he still has his end of turn discard.

 

Once he decided the short term goal of killing me was to his preference he was in quite a good mood. Catching me off guard with that ridiculous jumping flamer dude.... destroying my Warlord/Termie squad in a drop of his reserves.

 

He was quite happy to play short term thinking like this. It takes real patience to play Maelstrom right. I STILL have friends that make what I call '6th edition' lists that are just meant to wipe you off the table. That's fine for the Eternal War missions, but I just think after all this time I can honestly say it doesn't work....

 

It didn't here, and the guy walks away saying 'maelstrom sucks'. To me there's a lot of irony in that statement.

 

But he can walk away with that mentality. I'm fine with it, heck I won because of it.

[SyNidus]

That mindset is actually quite rare in my meta, most of the players here focus on objectives while I focus very much on destroying the opponent's key units. In the games I've played, I've noticed that compared to my RG army, I've been tabling opponents more than before. Often times the first few turns would be spent manoeuvring into position then destroying key units in the remainder whilst grabbing objectives from there. Usually I don't get many points early on, but when my boys get stuck in, things quickly turn around.

 

Now people are starting to think that the trick against me is to stay back, away from my army, which works in my favour because I have more map control and I can grab objectives that way.

 

Then there are people who are deceived by the low model count and think that it means that I can be tabled, only to invest in that and find that my boys are far more resilient. Then I take advantage of the mobility and close combat powers to dismantle their army.

 

It works both ways I guess, in the beginning stages I find myself going "okay, I can't get objective X because I'm too far away or I can't get through because of the units he has there...Screw it, I'll kill em all." And it's only after I've made more space that I can move more freely.

[Prot]

hehe... yea that is completely understandable and I see my opponents reacting that way too.

 

I'm now calling Grey Knights my 'sore back' army. Some people who just aren't sure what to do just hug their rear deployments so hard I end up playing almost entirely on their side of the table.

 

Some people just go all out in suicide mode. It's interesting to me that one of my most effective opponents has been a friggin Ork player. lol

[SyNidus]

Speaking of orks, yes they can be a major pain in the behind. But cleansing flame and incinerators really make short work of them. I've found that a good tactic is to dive into one side of their army and beat them down there. While he's trying wheel the rest around to get into close combat, I'm chewing through those boys. Although the opposite can also be done.

 

You can stay at a distance kiting them a bit. But make sure you destroy whole units so that when they do reach you, it's with significantly less numbers.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Orks are interesting because unlike Nids, they'll actually engage you in melee as a first preference to shut down your Shooting and Witchfires. They can tie up and drag down your tiny handful of infantry as well, massed S4 does kill Terminators (slowly, but still). I find MANZ really annoying, as only DK's can safely engage them. Lootaz kill PA squads by drowning you in wounds, and I've had them nickle and dime my DK's off the table. 

 

It's a bad matchup for them, but if you don't hit a flank and sweep them, they can swamp you. But yeah, if you play smart and bring Purifiers, it's GG so long as you deploy and execute your punches well. 

[Prot]

Yea Purifiers are quickly becoming my favorite unit. What an incredible pain in the butt that they don't deep strike. It's just maddening since it is the theme of the army overall...

This would be a good unit for a command vehicle of some sort. But yea with 2 Warp Charges, and Cleansing Flame ensured, I'm starting to use CF almost as much as Vortex!

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Yea Purifiers are quickly becoming my favorite unit. What an incredible pain in the butt that they don't deep strike. It's just maddening since it is the theme of the army overall...

This would be a good unit for a command vehicle of some sort. But yea with 2 Warp Charges, and Cleansing Flame ensured, I'm starting to use CF almost as much as Vortex!

Take Allied Blood Angels. It's what I'll be doing. The Librarian has Divination and is cheap for a Mastery 2 in TDA with storm shield+force axe (plus he has 'Furious Charge', so once you add 'Hammerhand' you're looking at effectively another nemesis hammer on the charge). Scouts seed teleport homers as close to the enemy as possible, letting your Turn 1 Deepstrike land in their face with perfect accuracy. And finally, FA Drop Pods to land Purifiers out of.

The reason Purifiers don't Deepstrike is the same as Purgators. GW explicitly want you to buy a Raven to transport them in.

[Prot]

I do see your point. I have to get over the fact of 'soiling' my Grey Knights with Blood Angel devices. lol

 

I don't know why, but I have a lot of trouble bringing myself to do this.

 

I agree it would be a great force multiplier, but could I live with myself in the morning?

[Reclusiarch Darius]

I do see your point. I have to get over the fact of 'soiling' my Grey Knights with Blood Angel devices. lol

 

I don't know why, but I have a lot of trouble bringing myself to do this.

 

I agree it would be a great force multiplier, but could I live with myself in the morning?

 

I know, it's very annoying. But GW made this Deepstrike focused, Turn 1 alpha strike army...and then gave us zero Deepstrike support. It's stupid, but we need Allies and Fortifications to function as intended. Otherwise you're at the tender mercies of both Reserve, Scatter and Mishap rolls. 

 

BA simply have the best tech, from what I can tell. Especially the Angel Wing, it's something we really should've had TBH. 

[Happy-inquisitor]

I do see your point. I have to get over the fact of 'soiling' my Grey Knights with Blood Angel devices. lol

 

I don't know why, but I have a lot of trouble bringing myself to do this.

 

I agree it would be a great force multiplier, but could I live with myself in the morning?

 

After you put Quickening on an NDK so it can smack a Wraith Knight silly you would will be too busy smirking to care.

[TheMostGood]

 

What army doesn't bring Heavy Support? Answer, none, they all do, because Heavy Support is the most powerful army slot in the game. I've never fought a 'Big Guns' mission without the enemy having Heavy Support choices. 

 

I'm an avid Tau player and I often do not take any Heavy Support options. In fact, the last two major tournaments that I've followed had only one Tau army that brought heavy support. In the 2014 NOVA Open it was lots of suits and triple riptides (I've run this before and it's very strong). In the LVO (earlier this year i believe) it was a crazy combo of Tau and tyranids. He brought two sky rays with that group.

 

As far as the competitive meta goes, it seems that the top players only bring sky rays for their heavy support. Broadsides are too slow and bulky for what they offer, and hammerheads are not as good anymore. If you're going to take anything in heavy support, you take Sky rays, and even then it isn't always auto include. 

 

[Reclusiarch Darius]

After you put Quickening on an NDK so it can smack a Wraith Knight silly you would will be too busy smirking to care.

 

Assuming you roll that on the Blood Angel Librarian and he's in range (I think it's only 12" range). 

I'm an avid Tau player and I often do not take any Heavy Support options. In fact, the last two major tournaments that I've followed had only one Tau army that brought heavy support. In the 2014 NOVA Open it was lots of suits and triple riptides (I've run this before and it's very strong). In the LVO (earlier this year i believe) it was a crazy combo of Tau and tyranids. He brought two sky rays with that group.

 

Weird. Broadsides are one of the power shooty units of the codex, they're better than Riptides at AA and they handle infantry of all kinds very efficiently. 8 shots per battlesuit is serious damage output, even Terminators don't like getting shot that much. I am seeing more Skyrays though, for various reasons. 

As far as the competitive meta goes, it seems that the top players only bring sky rays for their heavy support. Broadsides are too slow and bulky for what they offer, and hammerheads are not as good anymore. If you're going to take anything in heavy support, you take Sky rays, and even then it isn't always auto include. 

 

Being slow isn't an issue, so long as you shield them from enemy melee units and they're in a good firing position. If the FW variant Riptides are on offer though, I can see arguments for not taking them.