Paradigm Shift; Anti-Tank and CC: Scarab Swarms

Not so long ago the world firmly believed that antitank in CC was weak, unreliable and shouldn't be attempted. With the new necron codex, many players have pointed to scarabs and the awesome antitank that they are. The question is, what has really changed? Is there some fundamental reason why scarabs are that much more effective, or have people just simply learned to see the game in a different light as a result of the new necron codex?

One of the main reasons why people opposed antitank and CC was that in order to destroy a tank, you had to be in base contact with it. Thus, you are committing yourself in order to achieve the simple goal of destroying a rhino. With scarabs, that's no different. Scarabs do come in big units (especially with the help of 9 tomb spyders) allowing multiple combats, allowing you to attempt to destroy more then one vehicle once you commit. Is this really because scarab swarms are so much better, or because opponents don't what formation to adopt when fighting scarab swarms. By layering your vehicles (preferably with flamer-weaponry or otherwise threatening squads/tanks in front) you should be able to get the scarab player to either a) commit his scarabs to take out the first layer and be susceptible to the inevitable counterattack, or b) take those units to the face and try to get in range of the second/third layer of the tanks before commiting.

Scarabs are more cost effective then other units, that's a given. On the other hand, scarabs also require numbers to deal damage, due to the mechanic of entropic strike. In addition, when compared to a higher strength, entropic strike needs to roll a couple more dice to get the same results. This pretty much evens out, as scarabs throw down more dice to hit, penetrate etc., but require an extra phase to do damage. I still don't believe that scarabs are lightyears away from other armies with regards antitank in CC.

You can get perfectly good results in CC with units that are otherwise more diverse then scarabswarms. Scarabs just introduced a new mechanic that seems different. In the end, it's just a slight difference in probability. Same elements from a strategic point of view (you still suffer from an effective range of 0") and the same playstyle as any army that pops tanks in CC.

DE reserving when going second

When going up against a shooty army that wins the roll-off, it is often better for the DE player to reserve rather then deploy. Sometimes, you might be able to find enough los block or migitate the opponents firepower enough to deal with going second on the board, but even this has drawbacks. These drawbacks are most apparent with a venomspam list, which utilises mostly blasters for antitank. 18" range blasters means that you've just committed your models on the battlefield, but will have to zoom forward from that corner you're hiding in in order to get in range. Sometimes, this really isn't worth it.

When reserving you're always gonna be fighting with about 50% of your army against the entire opposing army when you come in on t2. However, DE have so many units placed in reserve, that you can expect pretty average results. It's easier to score that 50% average with over 10 units in reserve, compared to armies with less unit choices. The main advantage in reserving vs deploying in a corner is that you are not committing any of your forces in deployment, but you'll be able to strike anywhere across the entire board edge on t2. You're keeping the initiative in the game and aren't stuck in a certain place with your weapons. You wouldn't believe how many people come withing 32" of your board edge (range of disembarking blasters), meaning that you'll be getting all your shots off, just as if you were alphastriking a poorly deployed opponent. It's a difficult situation for your opponent. If he stays outside of blaster range, that's 2 turns of movement away from him.

It's good to remember that you don't have to fully reserve your army. If you have losblock in your deployment zone, you can stack the amount of venoms/lances that you'll be getting for your t2 betastrike(?). I would deploy units that have a longer range, like ravagers. Thus, you're still able to strike pretty much anywhere on the board and aren't limiting your options on t2. Deploying troops is a little risky. By deploying them, you are commiting them to a certain point on the battlefield. In objective missions, you might want to rather have them in reserve and see where you want to have them once they come on.

So, when reserving you want to maximize the gains from it. Steal 2 shooting phases from your opponent and maintain the ability to strike anywhere along your long board edge. When you come on, it's generally better to pick off a weaker side of your opponent's battleline and try to annihilate it first.

Although DE is one of the few armies that frequently goes into reserves when going second, the same applies to any army that is looking to go full reserves.

Daemons: Larger lesser daemon squads?

Although this talks specifically from a Daemons stand point, in my opinion the ideas are relevant to any foot lists. Feel free to ask me, if you want to talk about implementing these ideas in your lists.

Continuing on my voyage into the depths of the thorpe-doed Chaos Daemons codex, I'm here to report back on some things you might want to consider when building your list. As I mentioned earlier, Daemons have very few ways in which to affect their opponent's movement, CC being perhaps the most sure way. Tank Shocks will rip through anything but CC, and anybody locked in combat is restricted from doing anything else.

That's why I think larger lesser daemon squads (over 15) can be a good pick. They are easy to chain up to get potentially large multicombats going (a linker between your other CC units) and can lash out whilst still maintaining their tail within fateweaver's bubble. Ofcourse, a larger squad gives less killpoints (which is a strong point of daemons) and can be used as bubblewrap, stringed to take multiple objectives etc.. There is nothing more sweet than producing a 30" line of models, charging one end into a combat and watching your opponent's tanks wonder why they aren't allowed to run over these zombies queuing infront of them.

I personally am swaying towards daemonettes. There are a couple of reasons. First, they are cheaper. A large squad will cost a lot of points and although that can potentially be awesome in table quarter missions (depending on the format ofcourse) that is a lot of points away from the rest of the list. Second, they have grenades. When making these 30" lines of doom you get to attack first, and then remove casualties from the guys that just swung instead of from the back of the line (thus not shortening the congo line as much). Finally, the daemonettes have fleet. Not only is this another different threat range in the army, it allows you to better prepare your combats.

Against tanks and infantry alike, blood letters are just simply better then daemonettes. However, in the role that I am playing them, the daemonettes should be just fine. They are perfectly capable of taking on non-dedicated cc units. If in fateweaver range, I think they can drag down a lot of things in a prolonged combat. And they aren't the heavy hitter in my army, that's what I got a freaking crusher deathstar for.

I still need a lot more games under my belt, but these are the thoughts that have arisen from my trip into the eye of terror.

How viable are naked princes in fatecrusher builds?

I call him Mr. Muscle. He represents a Daemon Prince in my Lost and the Damned themed fatecrusher list. This idea came to me as I was thinking of ways to patch the weak points of a fatecrusher build: antitank and more importantly something to deal with walkers. Although Fiends are pretty good at charging walkers, doing some damage and then HnR out of there, the fiends might have better things to do. So, I started thinking of cheap ways to deal with dreads. MC attacks are probably one of the most reliable methods.

Taking into account the slots I have available daemon princes seemed like the best option. Their upgrades are just very expensive. That got me thinking, do they really need the upgrades for the role I'm playing them in? I'd just have them dropping down in the second wave (within fateweaver range) to potentially charge walkers that came too close. For 80 points they aren't such a bad buy. Since I'm gonna start with just one prince, I was thinking that I need to get results if I commit this guy, and the 15 points mark of khorne seemed ok. I think barebones is just viable an option, but 6 attacks on the charge means that I should be hitting any vehicle that moved fast in the previous turn.

For 95 points it's a decent bargain. They're nothing to rely on, but add another tool into my list that could potentially help me win games, I don't think that's a bad idea. It needs further playtesting but I think naked princes really have the potential to stay in my lists. There is enough resilience in the army already, so upgrades aren't necessary, and well wings are just too expensive imo.

Fatecrusher... first impressions

Well, I've been busy on my Lost and the Damned army, and I even played a game with them on wednesday. I lost. Played against Space Wolves and didn't destroy his tanks in time, he contested my objectives. It takes a lot of practice to suddenly switch to a practically complete CC army, and I wasn't expecting to do well in the first couple of games. Here are some things I picked up

How do Daemons influence the game:

-Movement - generally they are slow so using the Crusherstar's large footprint efficiently is crucial. At its best, the crushers can really prove a challenge to the opponent. In my first game, they didn't.

-Assault - Fatecrusher has minimal shooty elements (infact my list only had fateweaver) and all the damage is dealt in CC. This has some pros and a lot of cons. You can (and need to) use multiassaults effectively (and I found the 20 man letter unit very good for this role) to deal maximum damage and lock down the enemy.

Not only do you deal damage in assault, but that is the best way in which you can limit your opponent's movement. They literally can't move if they are in an assault. Fiends are very good at this, because they have HnR. They can go into combats that they wouldn't necessarily wanna stay in, and block your opponent's movement through it. Potentially you can do this to tanks aswell. They can't tank shock through combat so good strings are crucial to stopping tanks from moving.

As you can see, Daemons are completely missing shooting. This means that their threat ranges are shorter and they have to commit themselves in order to deal damage. This requires finesse to master, but as I've said before, combat has the POTENTIAL to be a lot more destructive then shooting, it's just getting there that's the hard part.

Mobile Melta Disruption Units...

Hi,
Yesterday I managed to paint up my piranhas in the new tau colour scheme I've had on the workbench since the summer. It also got me thinking about the uses of a unit like this, and decided to do a write up.

Mobile Melta Disruption Units (I'll just call them MMDU for short) are cheap, fast and disposable units (and inevitably small and rather fragile). Their popularity has declined lately but some armies, such as tau still utilise them often. The 3-man reaver units that I use in my VenomSpam are a similar unit, as are land speeders.

What are the advantages of these units? They are cheap and still provide a credible threat to any tanks in the game. Comparing a MM attack bike to a full 10-man tac squad in rhino is a good comparison. The tac squad should have atleast double melta, making it more reliable then the speeder. However, you are paying about double the price per meltagun. This is because there is more to a tac squad then just the melta. However, when you purely need the melta, the land speeder is more cost efficient. They are also fast, meaning that they are quick to redeploy, work pretty well from reserves etc.. However, here is a common misconception. Infact, the threat range of a melta squad in a transport is often longer then that of these units. The land speeder and attack bikes have multimeltas. so their threat range is longer, but comparing a piranha or reavers to other melta units shows that this is not always the case. It would seem that the first point is the main reason for why we would want to take a MMDU.

What other ways do we often utilise cheap expendable units? We use them as movement blockers, or as disruption. Especially with tau piranhas, I feel that very much emphasis has been placed on their ability to be used as disruption. The logic is to use the squads good movement and expendability to move up and disrupt your opponent's movement. Good manouvres can atleast delay your opponent to a great extent. Sometimes you might even be able to stop tanks from moving all together. However, I feel that this tactic is often overemphasized. You are placing your unit in harms way. Cheap, yes, but can we have a situation in which we can disrupt enemy movement and still preserve our melta unit?

This involves playing with threat ranges. Instead of driving your MMDU straight in your opponent's face, you place it in a position to threaten a certain area of the board. Thus, if your opponent wishes to move up the most desirable route for him, he will have to risk being shot by the melta squad(s). Alternatively, he can attempt to move around. This way your are better preserving your unit, even though it's cheap. MMDUs are the cheapest way to get credible threats to armour, not necessarily 'sure' kills, but a threat none the less and are a good way to get these sorts of 'threat bubbles' onto the battlefield for a very cheap price. This, combined with their ability to redeploy effectively (between 24"-36" a turn) makes them great for this purpose.

There are some direct downsides to this sort of indirect disruption. For one, if your opponent's aim is to bring that deathstar as close to you as possible, you would rather stop the tank as far away from you as possible. It is in your opponent's interest to ram that unit up your throat, regardless of the melta. Thus, physically limiting movement is the better alternative. This is often (but certainly not always) the case with tau, but not necessarily with more mobile armies. I feel that direct disruption techniques are often overemphasized.

That is not to say that setting up threat bubbles is a better tactic for MMDUs. As with so many other things, it depends on the given situation. I just feel that it is important to remember that alternative. It isn't necessary to drive up to your opponent's face to block his movement, in many cases simply exerting enough pressure to a certain area will guide your opponent to move around it. And it is in the movement phase that games are most often won.

Reaver Jetbikes in a Venomspam list

There are so many ways of playing dark eldar that instead of stating that "this way of playing reavers is the best", I'm gonna look at reaver jetbikes specifically in a venomspam list (which I've played the most).

Venomspam is pretty much the ultimate msu list. Unlike many other lists, Venomspam seeks to saturate your opponents shooting, because in order to fulfill that alphastrike, infantry need to disembark. That's why Venomspam is all about pushing too many threats down the opponent's throat.

Reavers should reflect this. I've learned to like 3-man groups. They are cheap and expendable (as is almost everything in a venomspam list). They are easy to hide due to their small size, and you can use them for less important jobs, like giving cover to some of your vehicles, without having to divert a 6-man group.

The main argument that I see for 6-man groups is that single blaster/melta is unreliable. This is very true, but once again we have to look at the reavers as part of a venom spam list. These lists boast well over 20 dark light weapons, and you will rarely find yourself in a situation where you are merely relying on the reavers to stop a vehicle, you will have other units in range aswell. In fact, shooting blasters one at a time is more efficient, because no blasters are "wasted" (e.g. shaking a vehicle twice). The only downside you get out of running 3-man groups is taking ld after the first casualty. That sucks, but the entire venomspam list suffers from ld, and squeezing in grisly trophies is something I haven't put enough effort into.

Which weapon: heat lance or blaster? I'm not sure yet. Blasters give you more freedom with its longer range and allow you to potentially get shots off on t1, but heat lances give your army ap1. Although I began playing reavers with blasters, I found myself using them more and more aggressively at the recent Turku Fanatic -tournament that I attended. This is because, when not firing at vehicles, it is much wiser to use bladevanes then fire the splinter rifles. against t4 (and especially t3) the bladevanes are simply better, and they give you a 3+ cover to boot. However, this strategy requires you to move quite close to your enemies (since the target unit has to be between the starting and finishing point of the squad's movement). This didn't really matter, since my opponent was anyway forced into making decisions (fire at the trueborns and get a lot my antitank down or shoot at 3-man reaver groups?) and the reavers survived surprisingly well throughout the tournament. Against IG, they even went on to beat the crap out of a lot of the IG infantry (after rolling pain token for combat drugs).

So, Reaver jetbikes work best in groups of 3, when played in Venomspam lists that seek to achieve target saturation. 3.man groups are small, cheap, expendable and still bring options and an extra special weapon to a dark eldar player's arsenal.

Painted Succubus. How would I play it?

There she is. I liked the Dark Elf Sorceress, and I thought she fitted well into the corsair theme of the new paintscheme. She isn't a gladiator, but a female piratelord. I chose to get this model so that I would have more choices with HQs. The 1850 list I've been throwing around lately needs 30 points for a fourth trueborn in one of the squads. I could get that by cutting the Baron. Anyway, I feel exploring all the different choices is a good idea. I could go with a haemoculus, but that maybe adds the least. A blasterchon is ok, I tried that out, but since I'm exploring all options I'm also gonna try the Succubus.

The traditional setup is with an agoniser. 85 points is pretty cheap for a girl with lots of high ws and ini attacks. 4+ invul adds survivability against basic troops. However, I don't have the points for that. What I'm looking for is a cleanup lady (similar to my wyches), but who can also joins squads (reavers and wyches) to add a cc boost.

The Venom blade is nice for 5 points, but I got my eyes on razorflails. 10 points and weaker average of wounds against t4, but smaller deviation. The razorflail has rerolls and isn't so prone to failing horribly due to badd to hit rolls. The razorflails are a sure investment. This is a difficult decision, but atm I'm leaning for the razorflails. Dark Eldar are brittle and I need to know that the Succubus doesn't fail horribly right when I most direly need her. The venom blade's advantage isn't much against 3+ marines, so for I'm gonna try the flails first.

Midfield presence, is it important?

So, how important is midfield presence to an army in the game of 40k?

Well, we can first look at the pros. You have a shorter range to points on the board (objectives, opposing forces etc.) and you increase your threat range to cover a rather large area. This does give an advantage to almost every army. There are few armies that can really deal damage efficiently just from a corner of the board, and that can snatch objectives effectively without midfield presence.

In addition, midfield supposedly gives you the advantage of better using terrain. This is especially true on boards that have losblocks in the middle of the table etc.. The theory is, that by being close to the terrain, one can take cover from it and shoot without giving cover, or atleast only pop out of cover once you want to melta stuff etc.. In my view, this is more situational, but a good point to keep in mind.

Having a strong midfield presence not only gives advantages to you, but puts your opponent at a disadvantage. If you can dominate midfield, your opponent will have more inefficient threat ranges and a harder time making it to objectives.

On the negative, some armies suffer from giving away side armour shots. This depends on the army, but can have a major impact on the game. It also puts you in harms way, placing you essentially within small arms fire. Sometimes it is better to preserve your forces, deploy back (or possibly even refused flank) and try to outshoot your opponent (or outlast him). Some armies are better at staying back and disrupting the opponent (like tau). Against CC armies, this is especially true. You'd rather hang back and shoot for as long as possible.

My observations have shown that most armies gain an advantage from holding the midfield. Most marine armies are unaffected by side shots (due to the nature of a rhino hull) and armies like DE Venom Spam need to move up to get those blasters in range. Towards the end of the game the player that holds the midfield has an advantage in objective games, as he has more objectives within reach, and can extend his threat range further to stop the opponent from taking objectives.

Baron+Incubi, Is there synergy?

I don't think you've seen my baron yet? There he is, hanging out with the incubi. I feel kinda funny for not thinking of this before, but the baron works well with incubi. The baron is a good addition to any DE army, because it gives you a higher chance of deciding who starts the game. However, it's good to also make use of the baron on the table. Hellions are ok, but I personally don't like them (expensive, not a true cc unit, rather a midfield shooty unit). Incubi work pretty well. They get stealth to make them a little more survivable (although they already have 3+ against small arms fire). More importantly, however, the baron gives ld buff, grenades all around and can block out power fists or power weapons with his shadowfield. Worth giving it a spin.

GUEST POST: Tyranids: Both sides of the table

"Hmm.. Facing the 'Nids. Those dirty little buggers. The models look so tangled too. What should I shoot.. Or assault? Can I assault? What can they actually do.."

"Damn those tankparks.. How should I deploy to counter those blasts and get cover, too.. Should I infiltrate or outflank the 'stealers.."

Tyranids, with their 5th edition codex, are not an army that is to be taken lightly when playing against. Or with. The Codex isn't nearly as good as the Imperium books, but really has it's tricks when facing the tankparks of 40k nowadays. The codex does "rock" in some way, but definately does not autoplay the games. That's part of the magic, I quess. Good listbuilds are not so variable as they could, too. In my opinion, the "Best" list atm contains some 55 genestealers, 9 hive guards, tervigons and few gaunts. Prime is a good addition, too. Let's look at the topic first from the Nid-cam. A list example:

HQ:
Tyranid Prime: Pair of boneswords 95
Tervigon: Catalyst, Sacs, Glands, Spines 195

Troops:
Genestealer Brood (20) 280
Genestealer Brood (20) 280
Genestealer Brood (15) 210
10 Termagants 50
Tervigon: Catalyst, Sacs, Glands, Spines 195

Elites:
3 Hive Guards 150
3 Hive Guards 150
3 Hive Guards 150

= 1750

So, at first how to deploy, and whether to go first or second? These questions are always important, but how to deal with them?

Who goes first: In general, a good tip is that in objectives, you shouldn't go first as you get the last turn. But how about your genestealers? Do you want them to be shot at 1 extra turn? And pushed back too? Probably you do not. So, a good advice with this list is to go first when you can, ofc depending on your opponents firepower. If you think you can take the extra turn of shooting against you, go for the last turn, and you get better chances to clean up those rhinos and chimaeras having tank shocked into objectives.

How to deploy then: When going first, deploy your Hive guards front, and because of the seize in cover, if the worst case scenario happens. You definately want to harvest that rhino-parking lot or venom-thicket in the enemy deployment zone, and to do that being in range helps. A centrally based formation is well fit, and leaves you with more options. In objective games one would really like to secure the objects to own end of the table to be able to swarm the midfield efficently. 20+20 genestealers probably want to inflitrate to cover in a string, bases 2" apart if your opponent has template weapons. Remember to leave a tail on the units so the tervigons are able to throw FNP to genestealers every turn. The small unit usually should outflank, ofc depending on the opponent. When going second, be wary you are going to be shot before throwing FNP or moving to cover, so make sure genestealers get the 4+ coversave or they are screwed. There are times you just have to hug cover and hope you don't lose that bad, and it's ok. Daemons deserve a special note on deployment. String your units in a string 12" from table edge (pitched and DOW). Then string the stealers in evenly spaced strings through the field. This SHOULD give the Daemon player some headache with deepstrikes. Worked somehow against me when I played Daemons against nids, atleast. This tactic ofc should be varied on Spearhead.

Gameplay: Move aggressively and time your assaults well. The field works in waves of infantry models working in synergy. Gaunts shouldn't be spawned first turn, but later on because they are easily shot down first turns. The gaunts linger midfield or in your own table-edge, and tervigons go where needed. Hive guard should be in cover, or behind a LOS-block using their wonder-aim, especially against Dark Eldar and Grey Knights which can blast the bugs to next week. Prime offers either psydefence or reinforced combat abilites, or just synapse. He's the everyman of the list. Genestealers are rocking against almost anything, but are pretty fragile in the end. Be careful not taking on too much same time. The outflanking unit hopefully assists the weakened flank of genestealers. It's common to deploy using refused flank tactic against nid who have deployed in the middle, and the outflankers balance this out 2 times out of 3. Ahh, sound so Daemonic... ANYWAY, keep focused on distances all the time, remember your Move Through Cover, Fleet rolls and Synapse tricks, and don't get stupefyed by the firepower thrown at you. It'll weaken when you get to harvest the parking-lots.

Winning: Objective games require contesting and clearing out the field with genestealers while taking the objectives with tervigons and spawned gaunts. Beware of the tank shocks, which shift your infantry pretty badly off the targets. Just charge the tanks with wrong facings so they can only shock forwards which should help. Also keep on blasting them with hive guard. In kill points you should be careful on those spawn-gaunts, as they offer up pretty easy points. Just be more careful and try not to give anything voluntarily. Playing 10-10 right from the start and then aiming higher if the opportunity rises is a good tip.

This is just the basic overview. Everything varies depending on what you face, but as a smart player one should be able to figure out what to do every game ;) Be strict and focused on the movement and target saturation, and things should turn out well. And yeah, beware land riders. There is very little you can do exept maybe stun or shake, with luck immobilize these hulks. Tervigons can bust through them, but good luck with that. Those nasties really give Nids hard time. Again, sounds like Daemons... Really, what's wrong with me always playing these move and get shot + Land Rider allergic -armies... : P How about the Opponent-cam then?

Going First or Second: Going first is good as your get more shooting phases before assault units reach you. But, usually with tanks in your army, you probably want to get the objectives too. So don't be afraid to get the second turn and slow those stealers down with sacrificial units, leaving stealers in the open against your full wrath, and later on tank shocking to contest the objectives. Whatever you do, plan it ahead.

Deployment: Against 'stealers you should really try to push them back. Scout moving units are great for this, but starting the game also works. Also a sacrificial rhino or chimaera or whatever is good. Put those units on the edge of deployment zone, to push the 18" inflitrate range further away. Then zoom back to your table edge and watch them crawl under your firepower. It's great to position yourself in the corner or in the middle, depending on the terrain and your army. Ah, everything depends on everything, doesn't it.. Beware the outflankers.

Gameplay: Hard to cover out everything but in general preserve your units and try to keep your firebase(s) up as long as you can. Going to melee against Genestealers requires dedicated assault troops, and maybe additional support of another units. Thinning the tide with shooting and assaulting weaker genestealer units also works. After you have dealt with stealers, move midfield to push the Nids off the table and start cleaning up the trash. Missiles and lascannons, lances etc are best to be pointed at those tervigons and hive guard. Target saturation is really important here, and so is planning your movement. If the stealers die but you are stuck in the corner you are not in a good shape.. Try to remove their antitank as soon as you can.

Winning?: Play your own game, and ofc, avoid mistakes. Make those shots count, and try to set up certain counter-attacks and charges. I can't underline the target saturation enough. Keep the game in your hands and don't be the passive reacter, and you have the game in your oyster. If the dice are against you, look Aleksi's post on law of large numbers to find the solution ;) If that doesn't help, don't mind. It's a game, after all! Tyranids want to win sometimes too, youknow! x)

Whew. This turned into a wall of text. Hope you find something useful out of it. I probably have forgotten to mention so many things, but anyway... Try to fill the holes with your own knowledge. Remember that things mentioned here are sometimes one of the options, and the game-situation demands to do it differently. If you see the opportunity, just jump for it! Sometimes something off-the-box is the essential key to win.

Toni Salenius, aka Joo-o

Quantity is quality; a look at basic probability

Hi guys,
This post will be concerned with what is called the law of large numbers in mathematics. According to this theory, the larger the sample size, the closer to the expected average (or mean) the results' average should reach. As an example, rolling 2d6 repeatedly has an expected average of 7. However, if there is a small sample size, and you roll snake eyes (which has a very low probability) it will immediately affect the average of the results (and give an impression that the average is lower then 7).

How does all this translate to WH40K? Well, in it's most basic form, the more you are rolling, the less of an impact one bad die roll will have. You should be expecting to achieve results closer to average. Lets look at two weapons: a bs3 shuriken cannon (guardian), and a bs3 missile pod (tau). The missile pod has a probability of 0.5 at glancing a rhino, meanwhile the shuriken cannon is marginally worse (about 0.49). Which one do you think is going to perform better over the course of the entire game? The missile pod should be better, as it has a higher probability, but it rolls less dice (and thus at least in theory would take longer to achieve its expected average). The shuriken cannon, on the other hand, rolls an extra die. This means that one roll, whether good or bad, has less of an impact on the entire results. If the missile pod is rolling well, then it's a good thing, if it has some bad rolls, they will have a larger effect then with the shuriken cannon. At least in theory.

However, this perhaps works better when viewing the army as a whole. An army that rolls lots of dice (like venomspam) will be more reliable in its anti-infantry fire then an army that rolls less dice (e.g. paladins). I have really liked the predictability of my venom spam when it comes to cleaning up infantry. It allows you to better plan your shooting phase, moves etc.. For a strategist, migitating chance is an important factor. Chance is random and cannot be affected. By limiting chance, a player has more control.

This doesn't only hold true in the shooting phase. An army that has a lower model count, will generally suffer more from bad rolls then an army with a high model count. A paladin army will be greatly hindered by a bad ld test or bad armour saves. On the other hand, grey knights msu will be less hindered by the loss of one of its squads to bad armour saves. This has less to do with the law of large numbers, but has a similar mentality. One random event will have less of an impact on your entire game if the procentage of your army affected by that roll is low.

How scientific is all of this? Not very. Just some thoughts and feelings I've been having lately, justified by wikipedia ;).

Tank shocks to break up infantry formations

If playing a strongly close combat orientated army, minimising your opponents counter-attack is key. You are giving your opponent the chance to decide the momentum and way the game will play out, by playing an army that has a much shorter threat range. Minimising your opponent's choices and making the conditions as favourable to you as possible, is key. I talked about the problems with CC armies, and the fact that mech is making CC armies very prone to being counterattacked off the board, in an earlier post.

Tank shocks are a very good way to ensure that your troops can assault without the risk of being overwhelmed by a counter-attack. Some armies are better at this tactic (such as dark eldar and orks) and some have to use infantry bubblewraps, that are much harder to perfect (I'm looking at you tyranids). This is also why moving 12''+disembarking and running should be considered when running trukk or raider spam. It allows your tanks to move flatout in the following movement phase (giving you more reach).

Say for example, that your opponent is playing Grey Knights and has disembarked all his forces to shoot at your disembarked wyches and beastpacks (or in the case of orks: boyz, kanz etc.). Once in range to charge with your infantry, you can zoom your raiders to essentially cut in half your opponents forces (thus making any counter CC elements left in the backfield or on the other flank out of charge range for the turn). This ensures that you don't get mass charged by e.g. those purifiers, death cult assassins or paladins.

In many ways, the latest list I wrote yesterday seeks to use this tactic. It is one that I learned when playing my Orks MSU list. The list has a lot of dark light weapons to bring the initial punch, trying to pop open transports and make holes in the opponent's battleline. You can then use these holes to charge the infantry spilling out, or to cut off the rest of the army with your raiders. I still think that the shockprows are good antitank, and if your first turn's shooting doesn't produce enough results, you may well need to try and pop a couple of more tanks in the movement phase before deciding other movement, but against effective counter-attack armies, breaking up infantry formations is really key.

Ofcourse, Orks and DE aren't the only armies capable of utilising these tactics, Any CC army with access to vehicles should be seeking to utilise this tactic. Those transports are not only a faster way to transport men and protect them from small arms fire. Those transports might just be the safety net you need to cut off those TWC or other nasty counter-attack units that can punish you for committing yourself to the battle.

The 40k status quo - what armies are currently successful?

Of course, we all know that mech has prevailed in 5th edition, but lately I've being seeing (as I'm sure many of you have also) a preference towards gunlines. In an edition were cover saves were increased and run-moves became universal it might be surprising that infantry CC armies are not doing so well. The simple answer, is mech.

You see, full mech is 'an army within an army' as Kirby likes to call it. When playing an assault force, not only do you have to reach your enemy to damage him, but you have to first destroy his tanks, survive the counter attack and then munch through the infantry. With a shooty army, you are not as prone to being counter-attacked by the infantry pouring out.

But, when looking at the true 'top-tier' armies, one sees that they often are also capable in assault. Space Wolves and Grey Knights are in my opinion the two most powerful codices in the game, at the moment. Both have infantry that doesn't only buy you a transport (like say vanilla marines), but bring something to the table, and more importantly aren't too bad in combat. They aren't great but good at counter attacking wittled down enemies. Even mech guard might use blob squads to tie enemies down.

And that is really why I think that we are seeing a decline in CC armies. The best codices really have the perfect tools to annihilate a CC army, and any army that is meched up will have a distinct advantage against CC armies. It's not that you can't win with CC armies, infact I would dare say that a CC army has potential to do more damage then a shooty list, but meched shooty list are at an advantage against CC lists.

I personally enjoy CC armies, there are much more diverse in game, as your game doesn't revolve around movement and target priority, but includes more subtles variables that have to all be factored in. However, if looking for the highest powerlevel, I would build an army that revolves around shooting, is meched and brings to the table some counter attack for mopping up (which is easiest with ba, sw and gk, although de are also very good at it, just harder to play).

Ork Boyz: Sluggas or Shootas?

EDIT: I messed up the font-sizes (blogger isn't co-operating with me to change them back) so sorry for the Orky text :D .

This is a topic that is immensely debated, and every ork player seems to have a preference. How to equip your boyz? I personally think there is no single answer, but it rather depends on the size of the Boyz units and what kind of list you are using them in.

The Green Tide

In a mass-ork list, I would personally use shootas. You see, often you are not goin gto be able to get all ork mobs into CC, atleast not against a single unit, so in order to apply the necessary pressure, one must use shootas. In a list like this, and with slow units such as foot slogging orks, I see the value of shootas.

Battlewagons

In Battlewagons, I use sluggas and choppas. This is because, you will not be slowing down to 6" (a requirement for firing shootas) and on the turn that you disembark, you will most likely be fleeting to maximise your threat range (this is why Ghazghkull is so great in Battlewagon lists). In addition, to smaller squad size (~20-man) means that you are more likely to need those extra attacks in CC. That is why in BW lists, I use sluggaboyz.


Trukk-Boyz

It would be easy to repeat myself here again, as trukk-boyz are very similar to battlewagon boyz. On the other hand, trukkboyz are more prone to get their rides shot off under them (and get kareened 18" in the wrong direction) so getting those charges off isn't that easy after all. It really depends on the rest of you list. If you are spamming trukks, then most likely shootas are better, since you can charge multiple mobs to take out any tougher targets and give supporting fire with the rest. On the other hand, when playing only a couple of trukk-mobz, you might well need those extra CC attacks to take on more opponents.

Night Shields - when to use them

There are a lot of people who really see Night Shields as a bad upgrade. They are very expensive, but in my opinion, most people just don't use them correctly.

Night Shields aren't meant for those backfield tanks like ravagers, where the 6'' range decrease probably won't have a big difference. They are shooting 48'' range weapons at you, and you're shooting 36'' range weapons back at them. Instead, Night Shields are good on those tanks that are gonna be going upfield towards the enemy, namely your blaster tanks. -6'' makes a bigger difference to weapons that already have a pretty short range. Meltaguns become kinda lol, and it works well on 24'' ranges such as multimeltas, psycannons and plasmaguns.

You can cut down on the amount of shooting going into your venoms. That is really key in a list that uses ~100 poisoned shots a turn as a lynchpin. I've tried them out in my latest list (the one with the shockprows) and have been positively surprised by them.

Shockprows? Dark Eldar Anti-Tank

Hi guys,
So, I've been lately thinking about the controversial tactic of consistently ramming vehicles with my shockprow raiders to get damage results. The philosophy is to gain as much momentum and advantage early on in the game (something that imo dark eldar need to do well). You exchange your raider for a sure damage result on most vehicles.

I'm sure many have rammed a raider that lost its dark lance into the side of a rhino or land speeder. I've been lately trying out playing a list that aims to ram its raiders into opposing tanks right on t1.

Baron Santhonyx @ 105pts.

3 Trueborn with 3 blasters @ 81pts.
Venom with 2x cannons and night shields @ 75pts.

3 Trueborn with 3 blasters @ 81pts.
Venom with 2x cannons and night shields @ 75pts.

3 Trueborn with 3 blasters @ 81pts.
Venom with 2x cannons and night shields @ 75pts.

5 Wyches incl. hekatrix with power weapon @ 70pts.
Raider with disintegrator, shockprow and enhanced aethersails @ 70pts.

5 Wyches incl. hekatrix with power weapon @ 70pts.
Raider with disintegrator, shockprow and enhanced aethersails @ 70pts.

5 Wyches incl. hekatrix with power weapon @ 70pts.
Raider with disintegrator, shockprow and enhanced aethersails @ 70pts.

5 Warriors with blaster @ 60pts.
Venom with 2x cannons, night shields @ 75pts.

5 Warriors with blaster @ 60pts.
Venom with 2x cannons, night shields @ 75pts.

5 Warriors with blaster @ 60pts.
Venom with 2x cannons, night shields, grisly trophies @ 80pts.

Ravager with flickerfield @ 115pts.

Ravager with flickerfield @ 115pts.

Ravager with flickerfield @ 115pts.

Total @ 1748pts.

Lets look at the cons of shockprow madness:

• You are giving away killpoints and vehicles early on
• You can't have any squads inside (means you have foot units in the army)

Then the pros:

• Ignores cover
• Easier to angle side shots
  
• str10 means sure results

In my opinion, the cons aren't even that bad. It's great to get some str10 hits into those dreads/predators that are hiding behind cover/other tanks.

Flickerfields would be pretty sweet, but in the end I decided that it wasn't worth it. Shockprows and aethersails are mandatory. aethersails give t1 reach. I went with disintegrators because your raider should be ramming on t1 until it gets wrecked (the str is reduced once your distance is reduced) and in a match where there are no tanks, the disintegrator is probably better.

Tau Battlesuit equipment options

The fireknife (plasma/missile/multitracker) suit configuration seems to be almost every tau commanders favorite option. I for one believed that the most versatile configuration would fit best in any tau list. In the new broadside list I've been working on, I tried out some other configurations.

When I playtested the burst cannon/missilepod/multitracker suits I was very surprised. In general, most sources will say that burst cannons on suits is crap. Those suits however, were on fire. I decided to crunch some numbers. It turns out the burst cannons are better then the fireknives at MEQs in cover when allowed into their "optimal" range of 13"-18". And the squad costed 36 points less.

This post isn't really about trying to sell burst cannons to you (although chainguns are freaking awesome!), but to motivate you to try different options. The broadside list I'm playing doesn't deploy its crisis suits, and thus needs to provide enough firepower in a couple of shooting phases. Fireknives are so effective because they are flexible, and can provide weight of fire at range that should over the course of the game destroy enemies. They wouldn't fit aswell into a list that utilises a positional relay,

Crisis suits are some of the most flexible options in the game, and every commander should look at the rest of their list to decide what kind of suits to take.

Tailoring lists or countering the meta? Tau armylist

In your opinion, wherein lies the difference? Meta is a word that many gamers avoid, and imo we first need to define meta. For me, meta means characteristics that are (almost) universally found in armylists at a given time in a given place. I think it would be safe to say, that mech is a strong characteristic of most armies in 5th edition. There is the counter to the trend, horde armies, which have done well at times, but as grey knights become more popular, purifiers will begin to pose a serious problem. At the very least, there is a good chance that horde lists will get knocked out of the competition in the first rounds by Grey Knight players.

Grey Knights require a lot of dedicated anti-tank firepower (preferably with ap1) to take out, meanwhile hordes laugh at that. The question really is, how much are you ready to emphasise antitank and anti-MEQ to help against GK and other marine armies (which are very common).

One of the largest tournaments in Finland is being held at the end of July, and of course I need to start thinking of a list to take there. The tournament might be running ATC-style missions, meaning that there are three objectives (killpoints, 3 obj, bases) each worth 10 battlepoints to the winner (giving a possible max of 30 points). Draw in a win-con is worth points, and a loss 0 points.

Dark Eldar would have serious problem with scoring points from the killpoints department. So, we need a list that can consistently win on objectives and killpoints, is capable of taking 3 objectives (winning objectives 2-1 and at least tying bases), and should be good against the most likely opponents, which is mech and MEQ. I want a list that can really go up against grey knights.

Is this list tailored, or designed taking in mind the current meta?

Shas'el with positional relay, twin-linked flamer @ 71

2 Crisis suits with 2 fusion blasters, 1 plasma rifle and multitracker, 1 twin-linked flamer @ 105pts.

3 Crisis suits with 3 fusion blasters, 3 plasma rifles, 3 multitrackers @ 186pts.

3 Crisis suits with 3 fusion blasters, 3 plasma rifles, 3 multitrackers @ 186pts.

6 Firewarriors with devilfish incl. disruption pods @ 145pts.

6 Firewarriors with devilfish incl. disruption pods @ 145pts.

10 Kroot Carnivores @ 70pts.

3 Broadside suits with advanced stabilisation systems incl. leader with 2 shield drones and hardwired target lock @ 280pts.

3 Broadside suits with advanced stabilisation systems incl. leader with 2 shield drones and hardwired target lock @ 280pts.

3 Broadside suits with advanced stabilisation systems incl. leader with 2 shield drones and hardwired target lock @ 280pts.

Total @ 1748pts.

A Balanced Dark Eldar list?

All the lists I've made, and most that I have seen on the internet, tend to try to win the game in one phase of the game. There are no half measures. Is this the way Dark Eldar should be played? The benefit is focus, the drawback is RPS-syndrome. What happens when your venom spam comes up against post-FAQ deathwing? What happens when your raider-rush crashes into something that can defeat it in CC? This is my attempt at a more balanced list. It has ok CC elements, and pretty good firepower. Give me some feedback!

3 Haemonculi with shattershard, 2 liquifier guns @ 185pts.

5 Incubi with klavex in Venom with 2x cannons @ 190pts.

4 Trueborn with 4 blasters in Venom with 2x cannons @ 146pts.

4 Trueborn with 4 blasters in Venom with 2x cannons @ 146pts.

3 Wracks in Venom with 2x cannons @ 95pts.

3 Wracks in Venom with 2x cannons @ 95pts.

7 Wyches with haywire grenades incl. hekatrix with agoniser in Raider @ 174pts.

7 Wyches with haywire grenades incl. hekatrix with agoniser in Raider @ 174pts.

7 Wyches with haywire grenades incl. hekatrix with agoniser in Raider @ 174pts.

Ravager @ 105pts.

Ravager @ 105pts.

Ravager @ 105pts.

Total @ 1748pts.