Tau Empire Codex 2013 | Army Builder Program
Dark Angels Codex 2013
Chaos Daemons Codex 2013
Chaos Space Marines Codex 2012

Warhammer 40k Forum Tau Online

 

Warhammer 40K Forum

The tactical game of WH40k
Reply
Old 23 Jul 2008, 22:56   #51 (permalink)
Shas'La
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: So Cal
Posts: 359
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

Quote:
Originally Posted by manic-swede
Ok. Heres a tactic that im sure has been around but is really good with 5th edition.
Screen heavy weapons with a squad of cheap or tough men.
"Oh no." I here you say " the bad dudes get a 4+ cover save. But if i move the sheild out of the way the squad will get mauled".
Then move the squad six inches out of the way in the movement then after the shots are fired "Run" them back into place.
(please comment on this)
I have got more ideas but i will need to buy the 5th edition first to check them.
This is akin to the jump shoot jump tactic of the Tau using their drones to shield squishy units. However, I never thought about running a company of conscripts back and forth in front of las cannon teams. Or whatever that cheap unit happens to be.

Related Question: How would indirect fire be effected by intervening units? Since LOS is a non-issue, would they not get a 4+ cover save? I forgot if this is covered in the new rule book.

__________________
[img width=650 height=198]http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff173/Dantowen/JoshsMedicFinishedonBackgroundSigco.jpg[/img]
ShasOPeteDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Jul 2008, 23:33   #52 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,399
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

Indirect wpns use the center of the blast marker to determine if the unit gets a covering save or not. So in order to get one they have to be in cover not behind cover.
Hyena031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jul 2008, 03:19   #53 (permalink)
Shas'Saal
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 101
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

I've got pretty limited experiance in playing 40K but more in watching 40K...

I have seen some pretty 'tactical' games... but so much depends on the army and players....

What I find to be the essence of 'tactics' in 40K is getting your enemy to move his units in the wrong direction - more or less a bait and switch situation. What you want to do is spread out the enemy, then concentrate your forces, while at the same time making it as difficult as possible for they enemy to react to your moves, and concentrate his own forces.

I think... Think! mind you... that since 5th ed has made some units much more manouverable - that you have the option of playing a much more tactical game... and it may be that a really good player will be able to overcome even the most brutal form of 'just push the models forward' style of play... I just got the new Rule Book, and my son is re-working his Orks... we shall see..
Kazadvorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jul 2008, 05:50   #54 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sydney Aus
Posts: 7,853
Send a message via MSN to crazedmongoose2003
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

Okay okay, fine, since everybody is whining about it, FUNDAMENTALS in fifth ed.


Firstly, what I'd like to call the "manipular firebase".


This is where you deploy your speedbump units and your heavy weapons units in a checkerboard formation. Like so:


CC CC CC
CC CC CC

HHH HHH HHH

In your shooting phase, this will allow your heavy weapons to have a clear field of fire at the enemy. And then after you've shot, the run move for the speedbumps.


CCCC CCCC CCCC

HHH HHH HHH


Here's the kicker, not only will this grant your heavy weapons the 4+ cover save, the new rules have no allowance of consolidation. You can very easily deploy the speedbump just two inches before the heavy weapon, as long as they completely shield it, the enemy cannot initiate combat with both squads, and more importantly, after they go through your speedbump, cannot consolidate into your heavy weapon. The next turn you will be able to obliterate them point blank with your heavy weapons. Neat huh?

This will make for a very annoying/stable firebase. Especially on a hill so your heavy weapons gets all the advantages of elevation and none of the cons of the fact that hills are usually completely devoid of cover.

Next turn, just regroup your speed-bump in the movement phase again to provide your heavy weapons with cover.


However becareful of using this formation in annihilation. The large amount of cheap expendable speed-bump units will simply be easy kill points for the enemy.



Secondly, what I call "paper beats rock (...fortunately we don't need rock)"

With the new edition, it's indeed possible for infantry phalanx assault armies to advance in nice, stately formation towards your firebase, just by having a cheap screen of troops advancing at the same speed and giving the valuables behind them a 4+ cover save! Oh noes!

EEE EEE EEE EEEE
EEE EEE EEE EE

A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A


With twenty models deployed horizontally, they can concievably make a sturdy shield 40 inches long! A 20 inch shield will be even more sturdy as you can't break it's coherency as easily.

So now there's this giant sheet of annoying paper, what do we do? Simple, throw a rock at it.

Get a small, expendable and fast unit to rush into combat with this giant enemy paper. The new assault rules gives the enemy the ability to counter attack and mob up, do you see what I'm getting at? The "paper" will now wrap around our "rock". It doesn't even matter who wins or loses this combat. What matters now is that we've peeled away the paper and can now shoot the enemy's elite units.


There's variants of this of course. In fantasy (and I'm sorry I'm bringing fantasy into this again :P) there's the tactic where you just stick a unit of fast cavalry right in the face of the enemy's battleline. They either will charge in which case you flee, or they'll try to maneuver around you, in which case you harry them with short ranged weapons and generally be a nuisance. In 40k there isn't the march/move difference but you can still do it to great effect. Eldar players, try this on for size. Rush a unit of three to four jetbikes directly into the face of the enemy formation, turboboost it and maybe fortune if you really feel nasty. The enemy's large orderly phalanx will now face an annoying block of what is essentially 10 inches of impassable terrain. You can even create an artificial bottle neck if you sacrifice TWO jetbike units. They can't move within 1" of you. They can try to shoot you but 3+ cover save (rerollable with fortune) is no easy thing to get through. So they have to assault. Either way they're losing a valuable turn of move if you do this right and for horde armies you essentially just choked them with their own numbers.

And then it's time for the pieplates to fly.

But say, what if they're high and mighty MEQs? They're few enough in numbers to just move through the gap or whatever. Or if there's just too much ground to block. No biggie, fly your jetbikes 10" or 11" behind their enemy lines next turn and just start pouring TL shuriken catapult and shuriken cannon shots into them. Oh yeah, they can get rid of it, it'll just take them an entire turn of moving back and charging you. Earning you another precious turn of shooting them with your firebase.




These are the types of 40k tactics I use when the situation allows it. And these two tactics I just listed may be used in 5th ed. As I said, none of them are that obvious when you just look at the rules. That's what I mean when I say "flair". It's a bit of creative thinking.
__________________
Holding a Tau Online Vassal League, click here for more info:

http://forums.tauonline.org/index.ph...c,86474.0.html
crazedmongoose2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jul 2008, 08:03   #55 (permalink)
Shas'Ui
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Denmark
Posts: 954
Send a message via MSN to Esque
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

Thats what I mean, saying "elaborate on flair"

Nice posts Mongoose and Hyena. As I was saying, this is about the fundamentals. Everything that is not fundamental, would usually be army specific. This is not about the armies, so its perfectly ok to provide the basic tools to maneuvering, closing in, shielding, cover usage et.c.

Fx:

Firebases that are shielded with harder/cheaper units is nothing new. But mongoose's "manipular firebase" is nice, and vary greatly from 4th. Both in the way it's used, but also the little note on "no consolidation".

Anyone else?
__________________
Esque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jul 2008, 16:06   #56 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,399
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

With IC being subject to enemy fire one is forced to place them into a squad to keep them protected (unless they have a crazy sv or are next to immpossible to wound). For armies that need to protect them the enemy will surely target the squad they are with in a hope to gun him down. When that squad start to get low and being with them is no longer a benefit detaching him puts him at risk as well since he cannot detach and attach in the same turn. However the new LOS rules can be used to protect him. By using a vehicle or a solid piece of terrian you can detach the boss behind that alllowing him to be out of sight. Next turn he can join a beefier unit.
Hyena031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 Jul 2008, 20:51   #57 (permalink)
Shas'Saal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Otley, Yorkshire, England
Posts: 206
Default Re: The tactical game of WH40k

There we go! That's the sort of thing I was hoping to get from slogging my way through this

Also, has anyone considered using the objectives themselves as bait? This works best in the mission with lots of objectives, but probably could be applied to the other as well.

If you put a strong (but importantly mobile) defense on one of two of the objectives, the enemy will most likely do one of two things. Firstly, they may throw everything they have at those objectives, in which case you can split off and move to the other objectives, and hopefuly do some damage in the process.

on the other hand, they may just split and go for the other objectives. in this case, they have split up their army, letting you pounce on parts of it one by one. To keep the objectives you can leave a unit behind each one you capture, or if you are maneuverable enough, move back to them later.

Of course, while al this is going on, you can have the odd other unit kicking up a fuss to further split up opponents.

And yes, I am a Tau player. These objectives make for perfect patient hunter tactics!

Unfortunately, I hadn't thought of this during the one game I have played of fith, and managed to scrape a loss from the jaws of victory :s

In my opinion, the game has become a lot more tacktical. Maybe looking at the individual aspects of it doesn't necessarily reveal that much, but when you are there at the table, it is subtly different. One thing I did notice, is that it isn't quite so much of a blood bath as it used to be. Which is a very good thing in my opinion! In fourth, so many battles ended up with one or both armies mashed beyond recognition. Now, it seems you can get away with less destruction. To me a much better game.
Aun shi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ME Strategy Game Thread 2 - GAME FINISHED - End of Game Reports Up majonga Serious Roleplay 174 03 Jun 2009 15:04
Tactical advise on the end-game Slind Craftworld Eldar 6 16 Mar 2009 23:14
New to WH40K davidgr33n Introduce yourself 9 04 Dec 2007 15:53
Is there too much AP2, AP3 in WH40K? daniel.wilson Tau 34 05 Aug 2007 22:20
Presenting Sloop of War: my forum based tactical ship combat/RPG/trade game crazedmongoose2003 Enclave Talk 16 09 May 2007 10:24