Tactica: Deathwing 5th Edition

[samiens]

Agreed completely. Players who leave winning as an activity to perform in the game have already lost. At the end of deployment it's already 90% decided assuming vague competency on both sides.

Objection!

I've thought about this a lot recently, because I win a lot yet I actively choose to play reactively and its fair to say im not the worlds greatest deployed.

That said, list building is still a massive part of the game even for me- its just im building for capability, not specialisation.
This also impacts on how you can play the game- modern style msu armies have lots if small specialised units that really can only do one thing, taking the tactics out of the game. Multi-capable units, on the other hand, can fulfil mltiple roles in the game and deciding what to do and when, gives you a great opportunity to frustrate the more obvious behaviour of opposing specialised units.

Oddly, the current Deathwing build (that is by far the best list for them) kind of lacks flexibility- every unit has very specialised ways to play. Doesn't really impact upon their effectiveness but an interesting aside.

[Kelanen]

That said, list building is still a massive part of the game even for me- its just im building for capability, not specialisation.

Exactly - you are still engineering your wins in list building. Your method requires you to then follow up on that more on the field than the typical power army (and dare I say it: that's why those 'power' armies are tier 1 - they reduce the opportunities for mistakes).

I'd agree that your philosophy is less skewed maybe List/Deploy/Game of 55/20/25 instead of 65/25/10 but the List is still the biggest factor by far. And whilst I know that style is your personal hobby horse, the fact remains that most (not all) of the best players/armies don't follow it. And I'm not denigrating you as not a good player, because I know that you are.

Reactive play is far harder, and in truth I suspect shows you a better player because you have to work harder for a given win percentage. It certainly makes it easier to beat bad players/lists by capitalising on their mistakes, but you have to work hard against good ones, unless they are naturally the prey to your list.

[samiens]

That all sounds about right- and undoubtedly listis the biggest factor no matter how you play. Also totally agree that most players (including top ones) play a very 'scripted' game with specialised units- again not a criticism, its undoubtedly effective and really ramps up the efficiencies. Its nice to throw them a curve ball though!

Back more specifically to Deathwing, I used to play them back when storm bolters made sense and they worked nicely as a reactive (if inefficient) list. Nowadays I find the hammer spamisnt so effective that way- each unit really ha a defined role and does it well. This in turn explains why we've pretty much run out of list idea on here- aside from the predator sponson debate (im an autolas man myself) its pretty much settled how to optimise the units for their role.

[Russell's teapot]

I'm not convinced that any of our units are particularly specialised. I see every unit in the army as a very good generalist.

TH/SS with CML is a good tank killer at range. It's a very good close range infantry killer. It's a very good melta range tank killer. It's a very good movement denial tool. It's a very good 'soaker' for deathstars. The only thing it isn't good at is long range infantry killing, but it's passable.

The MM typhoon has all the shooting benefits with a melta weapon should you need it. And it has the manoeuvrability to be able to exploit restrictions in an opponent's movement.

The AC/HB predator is a passable tank killer and a good wound forcer, giving the ability to force saves on specialists in opponent's squads.

All the units in the army have the ability to act in almost every role you could possibly need. To me, that's the definition of flexibility...

That said, it has the weakness of a low model count, meaning that one or two rounds of anomalous rolls will punish the army more than most.

[Droma]

Agreed on pretty much all points that have been made the last two pages. As for the deployment vs tactics debate I think deathwing has a roughly even split between the two. As RT pointed out hammernators with cyclone missiles are so versatile they give us a lot of opportunity to force and capitalize on mistakes compared to the very specialized units of most top armies. That being said most players outside of a tournament setting and even most in the lower tournament brackets will be beaten in deployment. So for the remaining 10-20% of games we play we have options tactically.

On to a different topic. I'm interested in seeing the full rules of the new stormtalon. I'm assuming dark angels will get access to them as well but I'm wondering if they will be a useful model to us. They won't be replacing typhoons but they may be worth taking in place of preds depending on how much the cyclone upgrade costs. Currently I'm thinking it will be another useless unit though.

[Bartali]

All depends on 6th edition's rules for fliers. I predict they will either be awful or the best thing ever

[TheDoctor]

I think the rules for flyers will be pretty good. The cynic in me says so because GW wouldn't want to lose out on such a lucrative market.

Also, as a theoretical brain exercise, what do yall think about the rumors for allies? Obviously they have no place in a "pure" deathwing list, but, for example, drop podding sternguard could be useful for taking out priority targets, or an IG platoon could help bolster our numbers.

[aekold666]

If allies are allowed I would go for grey knight psifledreads. The amount of firepower they bring to the table will be a very nice addition to any army.

[Bartali]

IG Meltavets immediately spring to mind to plug a couple of weak links for DW

[starlight]

...as long as you remember to purge all non-DW units at the end of the game...just in case...

[samiens]

On the flexibility of our units:

Im not terribly convinced that we have that much flexibility of use.

Using the termies as an example: Sure a CML provides moderate ranged punch and TH/SS do nicely in combat but there's nothing much inbetween- which means the behaviour of the unit is pretty much dictated by how close the opposition are. So basically I find them tied into very specific roles at different points in the game. Undoubtedl more flexible than a mono-purpose msu style build but not truely flexible by my standards.

[Russell's teapot]

samiens, agreed, but that pretty much sums up the tactical 'depth' of 40k.

1) write good list
2) deploy well
3) blow up transports from long range
4) kill stuff & get to objectives
5) don't die
6) win

did I miss anything?

[samiens]

As mentioned earlier, I play a reactive game and its the lack of a 24"-13" utility that I'm missing with Deathwing (shame I love the guys)- which is a big part of the game.

But yes, what you've outlined is the basic strategic overview of 40k (tactics are how you do it ). In fact its why I would argue that in many ways the act of playing 40k is more about tactics than strategy- beyond the list building there's a very limited set of strategies available to use (unless you deliberately build lists to utilise different strategies) but you can still make tactical choices to maximise your efficiency in carrying out the above strategy.

But this is kind of splitting hairs and I do agree, and I build armies to play very differently to the majority of competitive players.

[Russell's teapot]

I'm afraid for that sort of range you're looking at stormbolters & crusaders, which fare pretty badly next to stormshields, preds & typhoons.

We used to be a very reactive army in that configuration, but we weren't all that good either. A good club army, but a middling to bad tournament list.

In its current guise, other than working out how many missiles to throw around the place, and at which targets, there really isn't much to actually think about in-game beyond walking to the objectives & smashing anything that comes near us with a hammer.

I prefer the old play style, as I like to be challenged (and I learned most of what I know about how to win at 40k playing the old DeathWing), but in terms of efficiency, you can't argue with the current lists.

[Bartali]

In a way it shows how valuble mobility is in 40k - with a fast army deployment doesn't matter so much, and more options are available to you in game.

In multiple objective games, the slow foot DW deploy opposite an objective, and then walk up to it. A fast army can ignore objectives until later in the game, making the DW army vulnerable to having units picked off by a fast armies entire list.

Foot TH/SS is one of those things that looks good on paper, but in reality is boring to play and is vulnerable to faster moving opponents. Raiders open up different tactical possibilities, but as discussed many a time on here, come with their own problems

[samiens]

Absolutely. I too preferred the storm bolter style lists but they just don't compare and I hate to say it but that has made Deathwing very boring for me and stalled my building if a new Deathwing army as a result.

[Bartali]

I should add that I only think foot DW are dull to play in objective missions. They're tons of fun in KP based games.

[Lion El Jason]

I recently filmed a battle report with a properly old school Land Raider/Stormbolter army. It looked great and was very nostalgic but those lists are really struggling these days and I don't think I've played a modern codex and not felt like it was an up hill struggle.

I'll post the batrep here as soon as the editing is done.

[Royals]

Absolutely. I too preferred the storm bolter style lists but they just don't compare and I hate to say it but that has made Deathwing very boring for me and stalled my building if a new Deathwing army as a result.

I play a footslogging DW force with a mix of Stormbolter/Pfists and SS/TH units. It's not the most competitive build but it is definitely fun. Nothing beats Drop Podding in a Dreadnought and fighting hordes of Orks and Tyranids.

Also, I finally finished painting my Belial model. I can say I am quite pleased. I tried to take a picture with my phone but it wouldn't do it justice.

[Captain Collius]

I play a footslogging DW force with a mix of Stormbolter/Pfists and SS/TH units. It's not the most competitive build but it is definitely fun. Nothing beats Drop Podding in a Dreadnought and fighting hordes of Orks and Tyranids.

Also, I finally finished painting my Belial model. I can say I am quite pleased. I tried to take a picture with my phone but it wouldn't do it justice.

i play a hybrid mix that uses the same and a few lcs and i find it to be great fun. Whereas when i provy all th/ss it is just so boring