He mentioned battlecannons with his anti-tank options and I responded its best to keep the battlecannons on infantry. Val then gave a good answer which was sometimes there are only tanks to shoot at. Try to interpret things a little better please.Originally Posted by Lord Solar Plexus
Phil Kelly is Tzeentch!
I'm not saying that it will kill them all without breaking a sweat, nor am I saying that you aren't able to defeat such a foe. However, there is a point from which on your efficiency drops notably. Every army has such a breaking point, and killing "a couple" of transports every turn doesn't sound too good, not if you are left with but a few on turn 3 or thereabouts. That holds especially true when you figure in that these tanks do not need to be killed outright but can be rendered inefficient by other results as well, so don't focus so much on outright kills. You cannot use them as IFV's without the guns, and you cannot use them for mobility when they are immobilized.
Without a doubt.Target overload is *huge*.
The Germans are exceedingly fond of Rhine wines; they are put up in tall, slender bottles, and are considered a pleasant beverage. One tells them from vinegar by the label.
www.tablepott.de - Wir sind das Ruhrgebiet!
Is it possible to achieve target overload when everyone is bringing alot of anti-tank in the mech era?
Thats the wrong question why invest heavly in anti-infantry any more? Every army has cheap changes, that will deal with infantry such as taking heavy flamers on a chimera.
Phil Kelly is Tzeentch!
I personally do not think there is anything wrong with a mechanized army as such. In fact, it offers several opportunities, and it is nice to play the closest thing to a moving tank battle. What I find irritating - and before someone gets offended, this is not aimed at anyone in particular, and not meant to offend - is that every counter or skeptic look is brushed aside, as if a mechanized list would automatically have all the tools to deal with every possible situation. We all know that this cannot be true. Or not?
They can deal with light infantry because they all have heavy flamers, will simply tank shock and get into range. That an opponent could advance in a layered formation is probably meaningless.
They can deal with all infantry at range with two decent guns, despite the fact that they all carry HF.
They can deal with (heavy) infantry close up because of the multitude of meltaguns. At the same time, the passengers add considerable firepower at range.
They can do rapid drive-by's, even though these are more aptly described as stop-and-go-shootings, or require that one gets out.
They can avoid assaults and outflankers, or simply move fast, but somehow still shoot stuff to bits like there's no tomorrow. They will always present AV 12 (because doing something else is stupid regardless of the circumstances, and regardless of the opponent's moves or tactical acumen), even when disembarking (!), and yet be faster and better protected than infantry on foot.
They can crack heavy or light armour because they have so many meltas, AC and ML (probably while fighting infantry at the same time as the enemy will not be able to target overload).
They have ample supporting units which shield the transports for a cover save and are themselves somehow protected by something else again. They can stop and avoid multicharges, and the enemy will of course be unprepared to deal with this concept (that actually isn't new any way one looks at it).
Isn't that a bit much to ask? It sounds so perfect - as if MechGuard was the new double flying seer council or IW list of aulde...
Last edited by Lord Solar Plexus; 04-08-2009 at 07:19.
The Germans are exceedingly fond of Rhine wines; they are put up in tall, slender bottles, and are considered a pleasant beverage. One tells them from vinegar by the label.
www.tablepott.de - Wir sind das Ruhrgebiet!
I'm currently playing a mech list with everything in vendettas or chimeras (or are tanks) however, I'm considering in my 1750 list of dropping a couple of tanks and basically ahving two blocks of 30 guardsmen led by commissars on foot, whilst the command sections gets the chimeras. Using these infantry squads to sit back and hold objectives in cover.
Of course then this leaves the mech part (vendettas command squad chimeras) to advance onto opposing objectives.
Thoughts?
From Predatorsown
@Infernus you have earnt my first rotfl with that well done sir the thought of neutering space marines ammuses me so"Remember Team there's no I in Team America"From Reabe
Meh. I thought at the time "OH DEAR GOD! He's done the most evillest thing in the world! He's turned Earth into one, giant, awful disco!".
Since June 2007: Nidzilla W18/D5/L7 Guard W9/D5/L6 Lizardmen W4/D1/L4
My 1500 list features 2 30-man combined IG squads with heavy weapons, and they perform very well. They provide a long-range, reliable fire support to the mechanized elements of my army.
I have similar thoughts. I though about a setup of something like:
PCS, 4 GL Chimera
1 Inf Squad, AC+GL+Vox
2 Inf Squad, AC+GL+Commissar
3 Inf Squad, Ac+GL
The role of the PCS should be to support the combined squad with orders and then go for late turn objective grabbing. The Infantry platoons role is mainly to hold the own objective, possibly providing cover for some mortar teams. The other option is making the PCS more offensive with flamers and leaving the orders to the CCS.
The advantage of this is of course that it's unnecessary to spend points on mobility for holding static objectives and that objectivs often themselves give good cover.
Yeah I'm not going to preach and expect you to be converted. It took me a long time to grow to like Vendettas, overcoming my gut feeling about them and early experiences.
We seem to have crossed wires as to the purpose of the vet squads and Chimeras. I would never consider shooting my Chimeras and Vet squads at that unit of hunkered down lootaz unless I had nothing else to shoot at. The fire power niche Chimeras and Veterans cover in my list is to deal with light armour at range and some melta units deal with armour up close with more reliability. So I would agree with you then when you say the Chimeras don't have a lot of fire power in this respect but thats not their intended role. When firing at truks, kans or bikes the array of high strength multiple shots is formidable. I have Griffons and Leman Russ to deal with infantry, that is their niche, I'd similarly not fire them at light vehicles as it is not their ideal target.
Example.
Infantry Platoon 2
Command Vox 2xFlamer. 45pts.
Squad, Autocannon, Plasma. 75pts.
Squad, Autocannon, Plasma. 75pts.
Squad, Autocannon, Plasma. Vox 80pts.
Squad, Autocannon, Plasma. Vox 80pts.
355
Veterans 3xPlasma Autocannon.Vox 130
Chimera with hull Heavy Flamer. 55pts.
Veterans 3xPlasma Autocannon.Vox 130
Chimera with hull Heavy Bolter. 55pts.
370
I've taken these two units as examples as I have taken and used both in their respective armies for the same role of capping objectives and providing range light vehicle and MC fire support. I tend to merge the squads into pairs. Yes I know it's a selective example, but for the same fire power niche that's the best a Platoon can offer.
Both are similar points, both carry the same amount of weaponry, while the Vets are BS4. Both require the same amount of orders and both need a CCS to give them the useful "bring it down!". The platoon has a lot more flashlights and a lot more bodies. The Veterans are smaller in raw numbers, but they take their resilience from the Chimeras making them immune to small arms fire and crowd control, they concentrate their guns into a smaller footprint and are easier to deliver. The veterans are harder but more brittle, the grunts are nowhere near as hard but can take more delibitating shots. The grunts are tied to cover to maintain their resilience. The Chimeras aren't necessarily and have the reliable speed to reposition. To go and capture another objective the infantry player would need a transported squad anyway or a blob squad with flamers.
The vets can sit still and fire at range to match the output of the grunts, all those lasguns are wasted against light vehicles so aren't necessary for me. The grunts heavy weapons aren't disabled by a single lucky glance, but a single lucky blast or template is just as much to worry about as a lascannon or melta for the Chimera with the added worry of not being able to move as reliably, presenting a target for anti infantry fire and being able to be locked in combat. The joy of the Chimeras is that AT fire needed to bring them down has to choose between them and Leman Russ or other AV12 hulls. It's down to personal preference, your meta game and your army list. I value the vets as they contribute to my armour saturation while still putting out respectable fire power in a niche I require.
Yup it is a challenge to keep the Chimeras safe, that is the crux of the list. Yes they will see close range engagement most games. I don't see this as a problem as the movement phase is one where I have the most control over, there is little random intervention. If I find myself out thought in the movement phase then fair play I lost but whatever list you use you'll have lost if your opponent out moves you. The nice thing about the Mech option is that you have more movement options and good resilience to give you an edge over infantry formations.
I'd love to use my hundreds of infantrymen more often and I shall go write up a new combined arms list and try again. However at the moment in my experience the mechanised list has been more effective for me in the "take yer gloves off we are playing mean today" games. The problem I found with combined arms lists was that it was difficult to present target saturation because of having a mixed list presenting targets for all the opponents guns. Infanty are tough in numbers and in cover, but the thing is those guns shooting at the infantry would never have been used against a mech list. From the outset of the game the Mech army has inherent resilience by not presenting a dismounted infantryman. I've not been able to find such extreme target over load with anything other than a totally armoured force.
Oh, I have absolutely nothing against Vendettas, Valkyries or Chimeras. I'd be very very unhappy if they would take such toys away from us. As a matter of fact, I've been using two Valkyries and five Chimeras plus assorted stuff in my "fast/recon" list since May, and I've been predominantly playing with that list.
With regard to the question of how much firepower Chimeras bring to the table, the discussion became a little muddy I think because not everyone was talking about the same thing. Some people use mounted line squads, some use no skimmers, some use pre-dominantly mechanized but still hybrid lists, some go all out with melta Vets and so on. Accordingly, opinions must vary when it comes to the question of what one can reliably defeat at range. One of the more popular builds, or shall I say, one of the apparently fahsionable netlists is the Vet melta spam concept, and this I usually attribute with less long-range firepower.
Of course this does not mean that a mechanized list has no support units in whatever shape or form, and these can be quite formidable. Still I tend to not take them into account simply because a list that fouses on infantry can take them as well, and a hybrid (if the former isn't one already) will have supporting heavy armour or fast tanks per definitionem.
I think your example illustrates the pro's and con's well and without bias. You seem loathe to draw a definite conclusion though perhaps because you tried to avoid any semblance of bias. Is it not so clear-cut? I gather that you would prefer the mobility and protection offered by the IFV's?
Incidentally, my firebase platoon usually looks pretty much like the one in your example (although PCS's always get a Chimera as is only fitting for their rank, and a third or fourth flamer as well) ...
In the end, when something has to die, it is the Veterans we call upon without a doubt. What they can not do is to protect other assets, such as forming a screen around a tank, and if they ever have to act as a speedbump or sacrificial unit, something has gone awry.
Over opposing infantry formations or compared to infantry formations? I ask because at times it is actually beneficial to be shot atI'd even go so far and say I'd always rather get shot at than face the prospect of being destroyed utterly in close combat (even though there are ways to ameliorate this). For example, in one of my last games against footslogging Orks, I refused one flank and presented him with the wall of AV 12, with some squads embarked and others behind the tanks. Ergo, I didn't suffer any losses for two turns because his heaviest guns were big shootas - but my opponent never even had to chose between running and stopping to shoot, and was actually faster than usual. So, basic infantry IMO does have its uses beyond simply providing firepower and scoring units. A distraction or a sacrifice can be well worth it.
When it comes to fiercely competetive games, target overload is still important but it can and will be countered because at the end of the day, other factions can spam X or Y as well. I'd hate to face the 9 Obliterator army with a winged HQ and Plague Marines, or assault terminator spam, or multiple podding Ironclads, or heck, multiple strong artillery blasts raining down on my formation, and I'm sure some other notable culprits spring to mind. Just as every list of every codex that focusses on one aspect or one tool it will be strong as long as your opponent isn't fully prepared. I think.
The Germans are exceedingly fond of Rhine wines; they are put up in tall, slender bottles, and are considered a pleasant beverage. One tells them from vinegar by the label.
www.tablepott.de - Wir sind das Ruhrgebiet!
First, I'd like to thank the honourable members of the Warseer community who took time to write this comprehensive account of the pros and cons of mechanized IG armies.
Though, there is still a question left unanswered: how do you react whenever one of your Chimeras gets shaken, or even worse, destroyed? Space Marines are tough enough to endure retaliation fire once their transport is broken, but what should Guardsmen do?
Whereas an infantry platoon must be wiped out to the last man in order to stop being a threat, neutralizing a Chimera and its cargo is much easier to achieve, hence my reluctance to over depend on Chimeras.
Last edited by Badger[Fr]; 04-08-2009 at 13:15.
Well, you lost a Chimera. You could have lost an infantry squad for roughly the same points instead. Now you've got a squad on the ground, just act normally.
Some short comments/thoughts:
Target saturation. Yes, in a highly mechanized army with an infantry platoon it will probably draw a lot of fire. Therefore it must be fairly cheap and it's main role must be to hold an objective. I wouldn't put plasma guns in it. I feel AC/GL is more cost efficient.
PCS: I see no reasons why this squad on the other hand shouldn't be in a chimera at all times.
Chimera vets instead: I am by no means against this but think that under many circumstances an infantry platoon can perform well instead for holding objectives. The risk is paying for mobility/armor without using it.
Though, the loss of a Veteran squad is far more crippling than the death of a few Guardsmen, considering how most Mech Vets army lists lack the sheer number of bodies Infantry platoons can provide. In terms of KP, Veterans are a liability, and they can hardly hold objectives.Well, you lost a Chimera. You could have lost an infantry squad for roughly the same points instead.
I meant Infantry Squad, sorry.
Fair enough. Did you send your Chimera far out? If not you can punish assaulty attempts to wipe out your Veteran squad very harshly, and as usual firefights against the Guard don't go well.
Okay, for those torrent users out there I've put the tactica into a torrent. I don't know how long I can seed for (my computer eats bandwidth, so my roommates tend to deactivate my network connection when I'm gone) but you can go here to download the torrent.
Check out my trade/swap thread! =][= My Vostroyan Rough Riders Project Log!
The more I look at Harker, the more I start to think of him as a 55pt upgrade to a Chimera. I just wish he only had the Relentless USR though and was cheaper. Imagine a unit of Vets in a Chimera with Harker, 3x Grenade Launchers, Autocannon, Heavy Stubber, Multilaser, and Hull Heavy Bolter. That right there is a potential ******** of fire power.
Now Harker is VERY expensive costing the same as an entire Chimera. However, in bigger games when you already have a decent number of Chimeras I think he could become a valuable upgrade.
For us, there is no spring, just the wind that smells fresh before the storm.
He does.
It's only the cost which is preventing me from taking him in my army - well, that and the fact that all my Vet units are mounted in Valkyries and don't really need Infiltrate (I back a couple of Platoons and Leman Russes up with a Vet unit or two in Valks).
I think he can be worth it - even in a Mech squad - as he adds another mobile heavy weapon. He can make his squad Outflank (useful as it means you can take another Squad specialisation) which, with a Chimera, means a lot of firepower turning up in the enemy's back field.
An Inquisitor walks into a bar, =][= Post removed by the authority of the Inquisition =][=
The difference between a vet squad and an infantry squad in a chimera is that a vet squad actually kills stuff, the harker model alone makes me want to buy it.
I made a 1500 point list since I never play 1500 point games will you guys tell me if it is a good list.
Thanks
Last edited by CKO; 04-08-2009 at 19:44.
Phil Kelly is Tzeentch!
Keep in mind he grants the Stealth USR to his unit, so a Veteran squad led by Harker is only 25 points more expensive than the same unit with the Forward Sentries doctrine.It's only the cost which is preventing me from taking him in my army - well, that and the fact that all my Vet units are mounted in Valkyries and don't really need Infiltrate (I back a couple of Platoons and Leman Russes up with a Vet unit or two in Valks).
Already 16 pages?! Man alive!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote