Adeptus Mechanicus objectives troubleshooting

[Magos Takatus]

Hi all, just bringing this post from Here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/370300-getting-tabled-and-winning/

 

I started up discussion about my current gaming since my games of 9th edition have largely been me almost tabling my Tyranid opponent and then getting absolutely destroyed on primary and secondary objectives. Each game I win the battle but lose the war as the units I dispatch to capture any objective are overrun. I am aware we are about to receive a new codex so specifics will likely change but for general principles I'd like to know how not to lose right from turn as the Objective Markers are pried out of my hands.

 

Tyranids seem to be able to initiate turn 1 or 2 charges so it seems screening  is key here.

 

The balance is that I don't just want a castle army list because my friend will eventually get bored of playing it but our more mobile units appear to be really fragile so I am not sure how to use them.

 

Thanks for your time, any help will be appreciated.

[Black Knight]

Even though we are getting a codex next week we aren't a sitting duck right now and you should be able to compete with Tyranids.

 

Are you able to get up the board before you are beaten back or are you struggling with board control? What kind of squads are the Tyranids fielding?

[Magos Takatus]

Currently I have been trying to include elements like Dragoons to push back but I found them unreliable and fragile. I have a squad of Hoplites I can shove up the board with a Dunerider but I've not been able to achieve much with them so far. I do have units I can push forward with but at the moment it feels like I am feeding them to the hive mind when I try to. 

 

As for my rival's army it has varied quite a bit but in general it's melee focused. There are no Hive Guard or Exocrines like the lists I hear about currently. His forces usually have a large Genestealer brood with a Broodlord, Zoanthropes, some Hormagaunts, a Haruspex and a Carnifex Brood. He also uses a Mawloc and some Lictors to keep me on my toes. He uses the Swarmlord to catapult units around too. The are other units he fields but that's the core of his army. 

 

I know Admech is in a good place right now but whether it's poor army lists/deployment, forgetting rules or tactical blunders I am getting outplayed. I am considering expanding my Kataphron Breacher squad and switching to the Lucius Forge World so that I can place durable units on other objectives, but of course that is dependant on how the new codex pans out.

[Schlitzaf]

So Magos, if you look at my last post in Tabled Thread. May I ask how do you approach each thing in turn?

[Magos Takatus]

Here is advice one of my best friends have given me and a regular on the circuit:

40k is made of 3 parts (competitively)

List Building:

1) List Building obviously

•WT

•Relics

2) Gameplan

•How to you win

3) Mission

•Secondaries (5th and onward)

 

A bad player only considers the first one and tbe raw math. A good player considers the first and the bullet points. A great player considers how to do 1 and how he ennacts 2. A veteran player also understand you need to know how to win not just play your plan.

 

A competitive player realizes he need to figured out how the gameplan wins a the mission. A tournament player know that building for secondaries or with secondaries, how to achieve and deny them is how you win.

 

Deployment:

1) What you deployed

•Whose holding Homeplat.

•Securing the Center

•What ISN’T Deployed

•How your opponent deployed

-What they didn’t Deployed

2) What you cannot deploy (location of objectives, terrain if predetermind)

•How that the modifies your gameplan

•A mission that restricts certain unit deployment or otherwise

3) What your goal is?

 

A bad player will play or deploy their army the same way every game. A good player will understand and take in consideration all these factors. A competitive player will understand how these factors affect their opponent.

 

The best player realizes that “deploying” the same is correct because the most important goal is achieving your win condition. The specifics of tour deployment will change and exact method. But you can lose in deployment. And an army without goal and a wau in mind to achieve that goal no matter the situation will lose. And understand that.

 

The Game:

1) Tactical Engagement

-Weighing Risks

2) Strategic Risks

-Responding to Opponent

3) Luck

4) Playing the Mission

-Playing the Map

 

Every player regardless of skill does the first two the degree of success or failure varies by player skill and initution. And most good players are recgonizable by how unaffected they are by lady luck whims. Simply as players how adaptable they and the armies they play are.

 

The fourth is why someone is competitve. They don’t play the “game”, they play the mission. They play to take their objectives. They play to achieve their objectives they don’t play to beat their opponent. And then they use the map and play to the map to facilitate this.

 

If you play tje game ie destroy the enemy army. You are failing to play to the map or to the mission itself. Whicj means against someone who is. You lose.

 

Thanks for the reply, there is a lot to unpack here.

 

List building: 

Firstly I am limited by the models I have available. I have most of the Admech range, though I often only have a couple of units such as two Dragoons or three Breachers. I am also missing a few units such as Fulgurite Electro Priests. I have been using Secutarii Hoplites since I have the models but they aren't an ideal pick against Tyranids, and being unable to use Forge World Dogma is a disadvantage.

 

For Warlord traits and relics I have been using Cawl and the trait that he uses. I haven't been worrying about relics yet, it's just another thing for me to forget when trying to keep track of rules and unit profiles. I am sure they can help decide a close game but right now I need to get Canticles and Stratagems utilized. My game plan is vague and has merely been to try to hold home objectives and disrupt attempts to hold objectives in his backfield. They are normally held by Ripper Swarms or Lictors so it doesn't require too much effort to shift. It's more the main force bearing down on my front lines that I need to stall.

 

As for my secondaries, They have revolved around inflicting damage, since it is far easier for my army to achieve those than for capture-based objectives. Psychic-based secondaries are obviously off the table. 

 

Deployment: 

My deployment is generally pretty straighforward. I try to secure line of sight to as much of the battlefield as possible with a layered defence around my least mobile firepower units (typically the Robots and Servitors) Since I know my opponent will have minimal ranged weapons I have the luxury of not needing to deploy in cover, I can be sure the only fire coming my way will be a shooty Carnifex or a Tyrannofex, maybe the Zoanthrope's psychic attacks. With a more ranged opponent I would need to be more careful that my units won't be in trouble if I lost first turn.

 

I would like to secure the centre of the map, however in a world of turn 1-2 charges moving forward just makes it easier to get those charge rolls off against me. The best I seem to be able to do is area denial rather than being able to advance up the board.

 

As for units I do not deploy on the board, My Infiltrators (and last game my Sterylyzors joined their ranks) are set up in reserve. They are ideally used to combat lightly guarded objectives in the hostile deployment zone. Last game the Sterylizors had to be pulled back to prevent my castle getting locked up in melee. I also remembered to try the bonus movement of my Raiders to advance them toward the nearest neutral objective, but this merely led to them being surrounded and destroyed. They held up a big chunk of the enemy army so I'm not sure if that was a blessing or not. I will try to remember my friend's distaste for my Raiders in the future, hopefully they can lead him away from objectives rather than towards them! 

 

As for my opponent, he uses a lot of reserves in one form or another. He uses Lictors to tie up squads in combat or capture objectives, he reliably fields a Mawloc , in that last game it was the Mawloc that came up behind my Raiders and helped to surround them. He also has access to Gargoyles, though they aren't always in the list. The flying Hive Tyrant is also another threat that hits me pretty early from reserves.

 

This probably comes across as a fairly slapdash attitude to playing 40k but although I've been in the hobby since 2nd edition I've never really played the game regularly So there is a fair learning process with the rules. My friend isn't vastly more experienced than me but he has definitely got more games under his belt than I have. I still need to look into the Admech army list section since as I said earlier my collection is a little bit of everything (Which I'm sure would have worked fine with that old 7th edition formation that was so broken), as a result I could be fielding lists that are completely dreadful. Clearly, I need to put more thought into my games. I believe the losses I have sustained are more due to my inexperience than anything else but I will try to take you advice on board.

[Magos Guilderius Davvarel]

Very interesting thread, lots of good intel

 

Of course as I stated before, I'm returning to the hobby so I've yet to fully get a grasp on the new rules, still I cannot stop myself considering that AdMech are a great faction. I know that the new codex will shake things up a lot, but afaik from what I've been reading for several months, AdMech seem to be able to take down anything. They seem to have one of the best shooting in the game, and have A LOT of tricks up their mechanic sleeves.

 

When I was doing my list (with 8th ed rules so totally outdated of course), I realised that :

1- they are pricey as hell points-wise (and money-wise too, unfortunately)

2- they tend to have very specialized units but coming from the same set of boxes : best example being Skitarii that can go mid-range/melee with their rad-aura or full shootey with the awesome Transuranic Arquebuse. Too bad it's limited to only 2 per unit, these things are awesome. I'd love to build something focused on this + auras from TP Manipulus & Fabrication of the Artisans TP Dominus

3- I absolutely LOVE Belisarius Cawl (from lore and model and stats and all) ; still I tend to consider that he's not that great for adaptability : fixed WT can be a flaw after all

4- they are quite complex as they have tons of rules/buffs at their disposal, and I get that one must be really focused not to forget anything during a game ; and it seems that it'll become even more complex, based on what's been revealed since a few days^^

 

Of course these observations are not reliable at best as, like I stated before, I'm relearning a lot of things... And I'm eager to learn even more in the weeks to come :D

[Schlitzaf]

So securing the center might be less important because what is actually important about securing the center is “ability to project fire power anywhere on tje map”

[Magos Takatus]

So securing the center might be less important because what is actually important about securing the center is “ability to project fire power anywhere on tje map”

With our last battle we had one central tower blocking line of sight with smaller terrain scattered around it. Being able to secure that point would have granted line-of sight to most of the table and would have allowed me to get to grips with the Zoanthrope unit before they completed their psychic ritual secondary. Getting there was the hard part but I probably could have managed it if I'd have mechanized my Skitarii with Duneriders perhaps? I forgot to change my Kastelans to Protector Protocols turn one so that might have helped get that Haruspex out of my face a lot sooner.

 

I think I will play a few games against my Orks solo to try to get into a better rhythm and get a better idea of what each unit is capable of. 

[Schlitzaf]

So one thing to mention here this is part of what I mean with listbuilding. You said your secutari not benefiting from Dogmas is a “downside”. But espacially because you are Mars it isn’t. And in fact Hoplites are fantastic anti-Nid unit.

 

2 Attacks

5+ IV

Large Squads

Strength 6. Wounding Dudebros (Gaunts) on 2’s. Several Monsters on 4’s*

 

Now you mentioned screening to stop early charges stop that. Okay I lie don’t stop that. Stop approaching it from that angle “of screening to deny this opponent my T1 and T2 charge”.

 

Instead your approach should be “I am screening to protect my Important Dudebros”. And ask yourself why Cawl?

 

He is a cool model. But Cawl is almoat twice the cost of a regular Magos. Cawl has 9” full reroll aura. You need to use that effectively its why classically Mars list use Kataphron spam.

 

Otherwise he is godawful. Infact Mars in general is godawful. Mars has a mediocre to bad Dogma, has a reasonable WT. A meh relic and a very strong strategem (a strategem that pairs very nicely with Cawl).

 

Its alot like Ultras. If you look at the abilities of Ultras, they are frankly in comparison to other Marine factions godawful. A bad tactic (running away and pew pewing is meh given what is charge normally dead and msu spam), situational or expensive CP channigans. Their best claim to fame is how much CP Regen they have and Gulliman.

 

Mars is a similar position, they are average to awful except only Forge World with Full Rerolls on a character. To that end with Mars understand your Dogma is not “2 rolls on canticles” but “I can take Cawl”.

 

And in general AdMech is not Shooty McShootson. They like SoB and most Astartes factions are “Firefighters”. You want to get in danger close (12-15”) and go pew pew.

 

And here where MSU’ing is important. MSU exists for 2 reasons:

Slot Filler

Action Heroes

Diffusion of Firepower

Screening

 

Now rememeber what I said about using Cawl 9” Rerolls? MSU squads by nature have to be closer to Cawl for his rerolls. Also what are they screening? Are they screening Cawl? He is a character. Your tank? 2 5 Man’s vs 1 10 Man won’t make a difference. Infact 2 5 Man’s are worse because of how slingshoting combat works.

 

You are wasting Diffusion. Because you want units centrally located you cannot Action Hero with MSU. And well Slot Filler. If you have 6 Troops of 5 man do you need the slot filler?

 

But now you remember how you said Secutari not having Dogmas? They also don’t have MARS. What that mean?

 

They give a donkeybehind about being near Cawl or other support characters. They have a complete freedom of motion and movement to do whatever or wherever they want. They can function completely indepedently from your army. Not to say you are playing wrong but your mindset here is very important.

 

You are thinking in internet terms of how things work. You are nothing in terms of your army or your mission. Your mission isn’t to screen or deny your opponent munchie. Your mission is to win tje mission. If he goes and first turn charges your Dunecrawlers. Okay so what. He gave up battlefield control to do that.

 

You need to dictate the flow. Right now your are letting your opponent dictate the flow.

 

 

*I forget if multidamage is vehicle only

**Also don’t get me wrong secutari getting Dogmas or MARs would be nice. But because they don’t you have in a sense a freedom of movement you don’t have otherwise

***Also one of my best friends, had in 6th edition beaten full power GK 5th Edition army. With two marine halves of assault on black reach. Model variety matters. Buts you can win with even worst army of you know what you are doing.

Edited May 20, 2021 by Schlitzaf

[Magos Takatus]

Thank you for the advice. You've made me reconsider my stance on Hoplites. Because they can't fish for mortal mounds I suppose they aren't a popular as Fulgurites but getting a 4+ melee invulnerable for doing nothing is a reasonable trade compared to having to wipe out a unit to get a 3+ Invulnerable. The addition that they can attack at range has proved useful even if not devastating. I just assumed that because they don't get the bonus vehicle damage verses Tyranids that they were a bad pick. Being able to act independently without losing efficiency is a different way of looking at it for certain. 

 

I have plenty of HQ models for my Mechanicus army so picking Cawl was more for consistency than anything else. He is a big chunk of points and I shouldn't have him holding my hand/mechadendrite all the way. 

 

This is a quick reply to thank you for your time but I assure you I am mentally taking notes of your advice. I understand the "Firefighter" aspect of the army, a ten-machine squad of Vanguard may not be the sexiest unit in the codex but thirty str3 shots with the change to cause D2 wounds can sometimes surprise people. Upgrading them to plasma or arc weapons are nice options too.

 

Obviously I will be waiting until the codex lands but unless one of the "successor forges" themes takes my eye narratively* I may be looking into teleporting assets around with Lucius. being able to drop something like a decent-sized unit of Breachers into the enemy backfield might be a way to split up his forces and force him to commit to defending his own objectives with more than just Rippers. Whatever direction I pick It's certain to mean a lot more painting for me in the future! 

* I am looking to play fairly casually but not get trounced every game so competitive advice is still much appreciated. 

 

Edit: There was one main reason I was really experimenting with MSU Skitarii in my most recent game and that was trying to fit my army into a Brigade detachment to see if I could save CP and save points for other aspects of my army but the minimum requirements to fill the detachment made me decide very quickly that I'd rather just take a Battalion and another smaller detachment because it meant I had to cut down on my other assets to fit into the detachment. Cutting my Hoplite squad into half to squeeze them into my list was a compromise too far. I'm going to spend some time researching army lists and try to understand why they work rather than just throwing stuff at a wall to see what sticks. Magos Guilderius Davvarel has provided some links that may help out.

Edited May 20, 2021 by Magos Takatus

[Schlitzaf]

Honestly half of competitive play is mindset and approach. Secutari are easy examples of this. As I already described and you understood. A unit is only bad or good in the context of what you intend to use it for. Every unit is “good” and every unit is “bad” its all context, understanding and appreciating that. Its #1 mistake casuals make is look at raw stats (the “I thought Secutari were bad because no bonus in this context”) without taking a step back and seeing the bigger picture. If you want another example is classic Primaris vs Firstborn. The raw stats Firstborn lose. But the nuance here matters alot. Primaris don’t have BigGun outside Melee. While Firstborn can bring variety of specials to leverage.

 

Primaris are Jack of All Trades. Firstborn specialize etc.

 

If nothing else, mindset, mindset and mindset. Ask yourself why “is this bad or good” and then ask why it matters. And are you making decisions based on how you win, or simply how to not lose yo your opponent.

[TrawlingCleaner]

To add to Schlitzaf's point, tournament/competitive meta and your local/group meta are wildly different. It's a mindset I'm really trying to change myself. Just because a unit isn't efficent or has counters in a tournament setting, doesn't mean it's a bad choice for your army/playstyle/local meta

[Vanger]

As for my secondaries, They have revolved around inflicting damage, since it is far easier for my army to achieve those than for capture-based objectives. Psychic-based secondaries are obviously off the table.

And here lies you problem. First of all, what are your opponenets secondaries? Is he better at picking secondaries? Do you give up easy points? Secondly kill seondaries are sub par choices.

Best secondaries in the game right now are those where your opponenet cannot interact with it and it's scored at the end of your turn.

 

Slay the Warlord is a good example as your opponenet can easily deny you VPs by hiding his warlord. Engage on All Fronts is a good secondary, because you just need the ability to place units in specific places and you score that a the end of your turn. Of course your opponenet can still deny you points, if he plays a horde army and is able to control the table.

 

In previous editions it was enough to bring your most killy units and just be faster at killing. In 9th edition, you have to score primary VPs and deny your enemy primary VPs and you have to score secondary VPs and deny your enemy secondary VPs.

 

Since the last reinforcements, AdMech received much needed mobile units, so board control secondaries aren't off limits to the army.

 

All that aside do you remember how many points you scored for each category last game? A common mistake is that people try to maximise their points and overcomit. With priamries, you don't have to always go for 15 points every turn. Sometimes Hold 1 and Hold More are better if that enables you to deny your opponenet points.

[Magos Takatus]

 

As for my secondaries, They have revolved around inflicting damage, since it is far easier for my army to achieve those than for capture-based objectives. Psychic-based secondaries are obviously off the table.

And here lies you problem. First of all, what are your opponenets secondaries? Is he better at picking secondaries? Do you give up easy points? Secondly kill seondaries are sub par choices.

Best secondaries in the game right now are those where your opponenet cannot interact with it and it's scored at the end of your turn.

 

Slay the Warlord is a good example as your opponenet can easily deny you VPs by hiding his warlord. Engage on All Fronts is a good secondary, because you just need the ability to place units in specific places and you score that a the end of your turn. Of course your opponenet can still deny you points, if he plays a horde army and is able to control the table.

 

In previous editions it was enough to bring your most killy units and just be faster at killing. In 9th edition, you have to score primary VPs and deny your enemy primary VPs and you have to score secondary VPs and deny your enemy secondary VPs.

 

Since the last reinforcements, AdMech received much needed mobile units, so board control secondaries aren't off limits to the army.

 

All that aside do you remember how many points you scored for each category last game? A common mistake is that people try to maximise their points and overcomit. With priamries, you don't have to always go for 15 points every turn. Sometimes Hold 1 and Hold More are better if that enables you to deny your opponenet points.

 

I don't remember all of my opponent's secondary objective, the only one I  remember was the Psychic Ritual which he was just able to passively activate behind cover. I was already divided between trying to keep my army intact and trying to deny him scoring Primary objectives in his deployment Zone so unfortunately that was just free points for him. I think one of his others was Engage on all Fronts. 

 

As for my secondary point score we were in a hurry to get packed up and my opponent was so far ahead in the primary objective it was hardly worth bothering to work out the secondaries. I would have scored highly on Abhor the Witch since by the end of the game I had killed the Swarmlord, a flying Tyrant, a Broodlord and I finally took out the Zoanthropes after they had done the damage with their secondaries. I also would have scored pretty well for Bring it Down. My First turn was a disaster of poor dice rolling and bad target priorities so First Strike was well out of my hands.

 

I think I will have to paint up some more Breachers and use the Lucius Forge World to teleport them into my opponent's backline in future since my Infiltrators and Sterylyzors would be able to remove targets off primary objectives but would not be durable enough to hold them, especially from the Acid Spray weapon the Tyrannofex was using. If I put enough threats in his part of the board I could go for Linebreaker I guess? It will have to be through Strategic Reserve though, there wasn't really room to sneak past his army unless I focused my firepower on only one half of the board rather than picking key threats.

 

Many thanks to Schlitzaf who spend an afternoon messaging me on Discord to help me with upping my game. Also thank you to everyone who is contributing to this thread. I have been in the hobby for a very long time but for the actual game I clearly have a lot to learn. :)

[Vanger]

I do not advicate for tailoring lists against specific opponents, but there is a reason why Imperium armies can bring Inquisitors without remorse :D

[Magos Takatus]

Good point. I was taking a real hammering in the Psychic phase in many games. I suppose it's payback from when I used to play Eldar in 2nd edition.