Tallarn

[Mitchverr]

For models, I'm going with a modern look. As fate would have it, a number of modern militaries have spent a little time in the desert...

 

Go for your modern look, meanwhile on the planet of Du- i mean Tallarn..... :D

 

Theres deffo plenty of choices out there, if you find anything really good, always remember to share with the class.

[Kimbo]

My friend played tallarn last night and im.just curious regarding the grinding advance rules and outflanking russes...can they still fire twice after they use the 3cp stratagem?

[Mitchverr]

So long as they move less than half their move distance(not including their order btw), I would say yes.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Mitchverr

[Kimbo]

 

Another question. When going for russes as a tallarn player. What do you guys recommend? Both main gun and sponsors ..top 2 pic?

Edited October 4, 2017 by Kimbo

[Mitchverr]

Main gun, I would say punisher and battlecannon, least thats what i am looking at for my tallarn armoured regiment. Dependant on how much AT you have, you could look at others, but the punisher has anti infantry dealt with (move less than half, 40 shots?) and the battle cannon is a nice mixer between AT and anti infantry. There was a list i saw somewhere showing the best to worst turrets to use for specific targets, will look around (if anyone knows of it do post it though)

 

Sponsons, H.bolters are always a tried and true weapon, hull lascannon and hunter killer missile too ofc (and maybe even h.stubbers). But other hull weapons are viable such as melta due to the ability to move move fire.

 

 

 

My main thing right now is which super heavy tank works best with a tallarn armoured group and with tallarn rules in general.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Mitchverr

[Lemondish]

So long as they move less than half their move distance(not including their order btw), I would say yes.

Well, they're arriving as reinforcements, so they can't be moving at all if I understand the rules correctly. Now, we know arriving as reinforcements allows them to shoot, but that those weapons should be treated as having moved for rules purposes (e.g. heavy weapons). The question is then "does arriving as reinforcements count as having moved your maximum distance, or just having moved at all?"

 

I am inclined to believe the latter, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is eventually tackled for clarity.

Main gun, I would say punisher and battlecannon, least thats what i am looking at for my tallarn armoured regiment. Dependant on how much AT you have, you could look at others, but the punisher has anti infantry dealt with (move less than half, 40 shots?) and the battle cannon is a nice mixer between AT and anti infantry. There was a list i saw somewhere showing the best to worst turrets to use for specific targets, will look around (if anyone knows of it do post it though)

 

Sponsons, H.bolters are always a tried and true weapon, hull lascannon and hunter killer missile too ofc (and maybe even h.stubbers). But other hull weapons are viable such as melta due to the ability to move move fire.

 

 

 

My main thing right now is which super heavy tank works best with a tallarn armoured group and with tallarn rules in general.

The punisher is great and should be the number 1 choice for anything anti-infantry. The shot volume means its also no real slouch against armour if you have to target that. While the battle cannon is versatile, if you're ambushing with it you're probably not making the best use of its massive range. Which is why I'd say, for ambush purposes, the demolisher is a smart complement to the punisher as they work within the same limited range but each excel at a different target type. Demolishers help you add additional damage to those big infantry blobs too, which adds versatility, but it's there to cause some hurt on armour.

 

I had a friend ask if sponsons were even necessary because a Tallarn armoured force should try and put as many hulls on the field as it can. I feel he's part right, in that number of hulls for Tallarn would give you more strategic options than a single superheavy might. However, after ensuring he was punished for his heretical views on sponsons, I pointed out that the Tallarn gain more from sponsons because they don't have to worry about the impact of moving. As such, I feel a superheavy isn't necessary if you can provide part of an additional spearhead detachment with those points, specifically for more obsec.

 

Now, folks like to downplay obsec on tanks by pointing out that a single LR on an objective won't ever secure it against any sort of enemy troop unit. As a response, I'd like to say that troop units can't secure anything if they're dead.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Lemondish

[NatBrannigan]

Outflanking Super Heavies? Creed of Arabia!

[Mitchverr]

True, more hulls is usually better, though currently im looking at 4 tank commanders, 3 russes in heavy support (with obsec) 2 hellhounds with the change left for either more vehicles (2-4 more vehicles pending what i select) or a super heavy to distraction fex/give a big ball of pain (like say, a shadowsword/valdor or something to insta gib enemy vehicles/mortarians).

 

So my list is currently at 9 hulls, more hulls needed?    (going off 2k points btw)

 

I also wouldnt be too big a fan of outflanking leman russes myself, it leaves them very exposed out on their own in my view, I would keep ambushing to other units.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Mitchverr

[mika_angelus]

You could ambush 3 russes,then take the dagger on a commissar and ambush him and 30 cultists to give those russes some bubble wrap.

[Mitchverr]

You could ambush 3 russes,then take the dagger on a commissar and ambush him and 30 cultists to give those russes some bubble wrap.

 

I guess i cou- hang on a minute, cultists.... Im going to keep an eye on you....

 

[Lemondish]

True, more hulls is usually better, though currently im looking at 4 tank commanders, 3 russes in heavy support (with obsec) 2 hellhounds with the change left for either more vehicles (2-4 more vehicles pending what i select) or a super heavy to distraction fex/give a big ball of pain (like say, a shadowsword/valdor or something to insta gib enemy vehicles/mortarians).

 

So my list is currently at 9 hulls, more hulls needed? (going off 2k points btw)

 

I also wouldnt be too big a fan of outflanking leman russes myself, it leaves them very exposed out on their own in my view, I would keep ambushing to other units.

Yeah, that's probably enough. I'm going to toy with a Spearhead list with squadrons. It is certainly limited in CP, so that may turn out to be what does me in.

 

But! I figured ambushing with a unit of 3 punishers, a unit of 3 demolishers, and a tank commander would be glorious. The target saturation alone is fantastic. Yeah, without bubble wrap an ambushing Russ might be weak, but...there are so many of them.

 

Also have a Battle Canon Russ and Tank Commander dropping alongside 3 autocannon scout sentinels at the beginning. Sentinels create a bubble for deep strike denial and the two long range tanks fire from massive range. That's 5 drops, which for now is as close to a first turn guarantee Guard will see until Chapter Approved. My meta likes lots of LoS blocking terrain, which both protects me if I'm seized on, but can also limit the impact of the tanks.

 

I don't expect this will win competitively, nor do I think it'll be that deep, but I gotta do it once. Especially since the tanks are going to be the easiest thing to put together.

[Mitchverr]

Hey good luck with it man!

 

Also if your local meta has a good deal of LoS blockers, I would consider something simular to mine, I have a vanguard and a HQ detatchment (the hq 1 which allows 3-5 hq and a low) and do a buddy system of generic tank with command tank, generic tank goes round corner, tallarn order, fire, run to safety, extremely effective if you use the terrain well and your opponent isnt mobile enough to follow around corners or if they position units in such a way to block themselves in.

[mika_angelus]

 

 

You could ambush 3 russes,then take the dagger on a commissar and ambush him and 30 cultists to give those russes some bubble wrap.

I guess i cou- hang on a minute, cultists.... Im going to keep an eye on you....

 

Oh I wrote cultists...

 

Well, is there a difference? :D

Edited October 4, 2017 by mika_angelus

[bozo69pd]

 

 

You could ambush 3 russes,then take the dagger on a commissar and ambush him and 30 cultists to give those russes some bubble wrap.

I guess i cou- hang on a minute, cultists.... Im going to keep an eye on you....

 

Oh I wrote cultists...

 

Well, is there a difference?

 

My Tallarn Traitors of Nurgle give a nod in your direction.

[Kimbo]

 

So long as they move less than half their move distance(not including their order btw), I would say yes.

Well, they're arriving as reinforcements, so they can't be moving at all if I understand the rules correctly. Now, we know arriving as reinforcements allows them to shoot, but that those weapons should be treated as having moved for rules purposes (e.g. heavy weapons). The question is then "does arriving as reinforcements count as having moved your maximum distance, or just having moved at all?"

 

I am inclined to believe the latter, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is eventually tackled for clarity.

Main gun, I would say punisher and battlecannon, least thats what i am looking at for my tallarn armoured regiment. Dependant on how much AT you have, you could look at others, but the punisher has anti infantry dealt with (move less than half, 40 shots?) and the battle cannon is a nice mixer between AT and anti infantry. There was a list i saw somewhere showing the best to worst turrets to use for specific targets, will look around (if anyone knows of it do post it though)

 

Sponsons, H.bolters are always a tried and true weapon, hull lascannon and hunter killer missile too ofc (and maybe even h.stubbers). But other hull weapons are viable such as melta due to the ability to move move fire.

 

 

 

My main thing right now is which super heavy tank works best with a tallarn armoured group and with tallarn rules in general.

The punisher is great and should be the number 1 choice for anything anti-infantry. The shot volume means its also no real slouch against armour if you have to target that. While the battle cannon is versatile, if you're ambushing with it you're probably not making the best use of its massive range. Which is why I'd say, for ambush purposes, the demolisher is a smart complement to the punisher as they work within the same limited range but each excel at a different target type. Demolishers help you add additional damage to those big infantry blobs too, which adds versatility, but it's there to cause some hurt on armour.

 

I had a friend ask if sponsons were even necessary because a Tallarn armoured force should try and put as many hulls on the field as it can. I feel he's part right, in that number of hulls for Tallarn would give you more strategic options than a single superheavy might. However, after ensuring he was punished for his heretical views on sponsons, I pointed out that the Tallarn gain more from sponsons because they don't have to worry about the impact of moving. As such, I feel a superheavy isn't necessary if you can provide part of an additional spearhead detachment with those points, specifically for more obsec.

 

Now, folks like to downplay obsec on tanks by pointing out that a single LR on an objective won't ever secure it against any sort of enemy troop unit. As a response, I'd like to say that troop units can't secure anything if they're dead.

I had the same thoughts when we played...it feels like they should not be able to do it...but i can not find something that says hes wrong for doing it either...an FAQ might change this...because i feel this is really unclear

[sunspear]

I'm just getting into the game, I've been away for a few years. I'm trying to wrap my head around all the new doctrines as I have an idea for a AM regiment of my own. What I am trying to understand is how I would use infantry with tallarn. I understand they can move and shoot without penalty. But how would you use them? Advance through cover? Is there an advantage to using infantry squads in the reserves rule tallarns have? What makes them different than Steve legion as far as the infantry part of the army is concerned?

As you can tell, I like the footsloggers. Any advise is greatly appreciated.

[Mitchverr]

Honestly, if you enjoy footsloggers, I would say tallarn might not be the doctrine for you, it is heavily setup around armoured warfare with a limited infantry contingent(enough of a rule that your infantry doesnt fall behind really).

 

If you go tallarn infantry, I would personally say to keep them in cover and the few further forward ready to move and advance into objectives or as bubblewrap to your armour.

 

How do you see yourself using your army/the proportion of infantry to armour? I would say with guard as it is now, its better to pick how you want to play and then find the doctrine that is right for you over picking a doctrine and trying to play around that myself.

 

 

As for comparing to steel legion, steel legion has more range advantage on lasgun fire and also has a better co-operation with transports overall and light vehicles needing to ignore AP-1. Meanwhile tallarn tend to me at least look like an army that doesnt so much need transports but just run around everywhere firing at long range trying to keep away from the enemies heavier fire.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Mitchverr

[Tyr13]

Tallarn seems to be the more mobile option compared to SL. SL heavily emphasises using transports as semi-mobile bunkers, whereas Tallarn actually allows vehicles to move around without sacrificing damage.

[Lemondish]

Hey good luck with it man!

 

Also if your local meta has a good deal of LoS blockers, I would consider something simular to mine, I have a vanguard and a HQ detatchment (the hq 1 which allows 3-5 hq and a low) and do a buddy system of generic tank with command tank, generic tank goes round corner, tallarn order, fire, run to safety, extremely effective if you use the terrain well and your opponent isnt mobile enough to follow around corners or if they position units in such a way to block themselves in.

Didn't even think of that. Great idea!

[Lemondish]

 

 

So long as they move less than half their move distance(not including their order btw), I would say yes.

Well, they're arriving as reinforcements, so they can't be moving at all if I understand the rules correctly. Now, we know arriving as reinforcements allows them to shoot, but that those weapons should be treated as having moved for rules purposes (e.g. heavy weapons). The question is then "does arriving as reinforcements count as having moved your maximum distance, or just having moved at all?"

 

I am inclined to believe the latter, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is eventually tackled for clarity.

I had the same thoughts when we played...it feels like they should not be able to do it...but i can not find something that says hes wrong for doing it either...an FAQ might change this...because i feel this is really unclear

The only way he could move would be if the tank was ordered to do so I guess. Check the BRB around page 177 for the reinforcements rules. Or like page 4 or whatever in the free PDF. Units arriving this way are treated as having used their entire movement phase to deploy, but the order should allow them to move in the shooting phase.

[narcolepticltd]

One thing that I haven't  yet seen brought up is how the tallarn doctrine affects artillery pieces... especially those that ignore line of sight - manticores, wyverns, and basilisks all sit on a chimera hull and have the same movement of 12" and are now able to move that full 12" and still fire w/o penalty. That's almost, broken :) 

 

Add to that the ability to outflank those units, and you now have your choice of board edge to deploy them from, as well as being able to hold them back till turn 3 if you like. If your local meta uses lots and lots of LoS blocking terrain then this might cause quite a bit of tears. Also, that manticore can sit on the bench the first turn or 2 and then become a late game threat instead of blowing its wad early. 

[Mitchverr]

Taken from the free PDF, I dont know if its the same in the proper book.

 

Many units have the ability to be set up on the battlefield mid-turn, sometimes by usingteleporters, grav chutes orother, more esoteric means. Typically, this happens at the end of the Movement phase, but it can also happen during other phases. Units that are set up in this manner cannot move or Advance further during the turn they arrive – their entire Movement phase is used in deploying to the battlefield – but they can otherwise act normally (shoot, charge, etc.) for the rest of their turn. Units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved in their Movement phase for all rules purposes, such as shooting Heavy weapons. Any unit that has not arrived on the battlefield by the end of the battle counts as having been destroyed.

 

 

 

From that, I would argue that its movement phase is used to do it, but not that its moved its maximum distance. Its the problem with reguards to min movement flyers not being classified as "moving minimum distance" if they deep strike or outflank.

 

Given you can move a maximum of what is it, 6 inches into the board, if you only go 5, you aint gone the max you can into it either.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Mitchverr

[CoffeeGrunt]

One thing that I haven't yet seen brought up is how the tallarn doctrine affects artillery pieces... especially those that ignore line of sight - manticores, wyverns, and basilisks all sit on a chimera hull and have the same movement of 12" and are now able to move that full 12" and still fire w/o penalty. That's almost, broken :)

 

Add to that the ability to outflank those units, and you now have your choice of board edge to deploy them from, as well as being able to hold them back till turn 3 if you like. If your local meta uses lots and lots of LoS blocking terrain then this might cause quite a bit of tears. Also, that manticore can sit on the bench the first turn or 2 and then become a late game threat instead of blowing its wad early.

Why would you do that? The whole point of artillery that ignored LoS is to be firing from turn one while at a distance and preferably out of LoS.

 

Plus why would you have artillery off the table? Why would you outflank it closer to the enemy?

 

You know the Manticore can only fire one Rocket a turn for four turns of continuous fire, right? If you hold it off for two turns, then in a five turn game you won't even get to fire one of them.

[narcolepticltd]

 

One thing that I haven't yet seen brought up is how the tallarn doctrine affects artillery pieces... especially those that ignore line of sight - manticores, wyverns, and basilisks all sit on a chimera hull and have the same movement of 12" and are now able to move that full 12" and still fire w/o penalty. That's almost, broken

 

Add to that the ability to outflank those units, and you now have your choice of board edge to deploy them from, as well as being able to hold them back till turn 3 if you like. If your local meta uses lots and lots of LoS blocking terrain then this might cause quite a bit of tears. Also, that manticore can sit on the bench the first turn or 2 and then become a late game threat instead of blowing its wad early.

Why would you do that? The whole point of artillery that ignored LoS is to be firing from turn one while at a distance and preferably out of LoS.

 

Plus why would you have artillery off the table? Why would you outflank it closer to the enemy?

 

You know the Manticore can only fire one Rocket a turn for four turns of continuous fire, right? If you hold it off for two turns, then in a five turn game you won't even get to fire one of them.

 

 

 

Outflanking them is an option but not the entire point of my post - but I would argue that it really depends on the army that you're facing... main point being that you don't have to be stuck in one spot firing every turn but can instead move around and potentially stay behind cover while still being able to fire - and the 12" movement on these pieces is 

 

I may have not been clear with 'a turn or 2' - not saying you'd hold it back that long in most scenarios but depending on the situation you do have the option. The main advantage on the outflank of these pieces is being able to deploy them from any board edge...While outflank is usually synonymous with getting into your enemy's back line and as close as possible, I'm pointing out that it can to open up where you would field them instead of everything in your own deployment zone, even if it's done on your first turn at the end of your movement phase where you're still getting the same number of turns to fire everything. It's just one more piece your opponent would have to consider when they deploy their units as well.

 

Also, the way the strategem is written it doesn't say that the units selected all have to come in from the same board edge, or even the same turn. 

[mika_angelus]

 

One thing that I haven't yet seen brought up is how the tallarn doctrine affects artillery pieces... especially those that ignore line of sight - manticores, wyverns, and basilisks all sit on a chimera hull and have the same movement of 12" and are now able to move that full 12" and still fire w/o penalty. That's almost, broken :)

 

Add to that the ability to outflank those units, and you now have your choice of board edge to deploy them from, as well as being able to hold them back till turn 3 if you like. If your local meta uses lots and lots of LoS blocking terrain then this might cause quite a bit of tears. Also, that manticore can sit on the bench the first turn or 2 and then become a late game threat instead of blowing its wad early.

Why would you do that? The whole point of artillery that ignored LoS is to be firing from turn one while at a distance and preferably out of LoS.

 

Plus why would you have artillery off the table? Why would you outflank it closer to the enemy?

 

You know the Manticore can only fire one Rocket a turn for four turns of continuous fire, right? If you hold it off for two turns, then in a five turn game you won't even get to fire one of them.

Just 3 reasons from the top of my head :

- to protect your artillery from alpha strike

- to counter deploy them in a game when you have less drops then your opponent

- to make better use of terrain that is for example just outside of your deployment in those arrowhead maps.

 

This is probably the best stratagem in the codex. It has so many tactical applications you could probably write a book about it.