| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 356
Location: Beavercreek, Ohio, USA
|
(Lion in the Stars @ Oct. 25 2006,16:46)
QUOTE OK, so here's a question for you: ?How do you play mud-marines without entering into battles of attrition?
Obviously, having enough terrain as well as using the terrain you do have properly is a factor here, as is maintaining multiple maneuver units above your opponent's numbers, and using said multiple units to gang up on one unit (or intermingled units) of your opponent.
Now, because the nature of a wargame means 'balanced' forces for a tournament scenario, how do you maintain an activation advantage with equal-points forces and keep your (by definition, individually smaller and less robust) units intact enough to attack the enemy, or to survive the inevitable counter-attack after your forces attack?
A Marine unit, even Scouts (who Aren't Real Marines Yet*), should have a life expectancy on the battlefield beyond one attack. ?Much of the time, current Marine units are very nearly one-shot disposable formations, incapable of doing much after taking even 2-3 kills, while even Tau and Eldar can handle the loss of 2-3 units without a terminal effect on the unit's effectiveness.
*My apologies to all members of the branch of service called the ARMY (whatever nation you serve), but sometimes the brainwashing from 4 months at USMC boot camp rears it's head. ?This time, I just couldn't resist.
The obvious answer to your question is: "Don't fight using Attrition Warfare tactics, use Maneuver Warfare tactics."
When you take a look at the various Space Marine formations with a Maneuver Warfare mindset, the first thing you look at is not the weapons, but the speed of the units. ?How fast can this formation go? ?The faster you can travel, the farther you can move and the more options you have for positioning your formations.
"Don't you mean 'the faster you can engage the enemy?"
No. ?Part of Maneuver Warfare is positioning your formations. ?An Attrition fighter is concerned with getting his formations into combat ASAP so he can deliver more firepower, quicker, over a longer period of time. ?A Maneuver fighter is concerned with postioning his formations so he can maximize his firepower and reduce his losses when the fighting does happen. ?An Attrition fighter tries to get units into a firing position while a Maneuver fighter positions himself for firing.
Now, going a little SunTzu on you here, another aspect of Maneuver Warfare is threat. ?Try to position your formations so that you convey a threat to your opponent. ?Try to position formations so that you trick your opponent into moving his stuff away from the threat that your formation poses, or towards it in an effort to eliminate the threat (and into a kill zone if you're lucky.) ?Position your formations so you trick him into doing something you want him to do, or so that you force him into doing something he doesn't want to do.
Continuing on with Sun Tzu, use your Infantry and armor as an anvil upon which the opponent will focus and use Bike, attack bikes, and land speeders as maneuvering forces like a hammer that go out and attack.
Since the Space Marines are all mechanized infantry (think of the jump packs on the Assault Marines as tiny Rhinos), and thinking of Dreadnoughts as infantry, if you take a look at all of non-leg infantry items that the Space Marines have, what do you see? ?Everything, except for the Land Raider and the Vindicator, are speed 30cm or greater. ?This is important, because it means that when you double or triple move you can pretty much go where ever you need to in one turn to position yourself. ?It means that until your infantry have dismounted almost everything is speed 30cm or greater. ?(This is why getting Dreadnoughts to be allowed to be tranported in Rhinos and/or Land Raiders is so important of a change for the Space Marines)
Drop Pods, Landing Craft, Thunderhawks, and teleporting Terminators are, aside from rules differences, effectively infinite speed transports that allow you to put formations wherever you want them. ?If you use them merely to put formations someplace in an effort to reinforce formations already there, you are wasting their potential. ?Use them to position formations for maximum affect.
If the Command & Commander Special Rules are adopted that I proposed over in the other thread then your job gets a whole lot easier. ?When you clump your formations together you not only become artillery bait, but you also transmit to your opponent what you are going to do next turn: assault him. ?With the wider spacing and higher prevelance of commanders you can more easily postion troops and hide your true intentions.
Now, after reading all of that above and looking over the Space Marine Reference Sheet again, has anyone noticed what the three biggest problem units are for the Space Marines? ?What are the three units that everyone complains are in the most need of "being fixed?" ?ANSWER: The armored vehicles that go less then speed 30cm: Dreadnoughts, Land Raiders, and Vindicators.
The Dreadnought's biggest problem is that, even though it is officially an armored vehicle, it is effectively an infantry unit that cannot be transported except by aircraft and drop-pod. ?One way to take care of the problem is to allow Dreadnought units to be taken in units of 4; it follows old background material and allows you to take the Missile Launcher & Twin Lascannon version as a slow fire support unit. ?If you increase its speed by making it more easily transported, like by Land Raider or by Rhino, then you will have "fixed" the Dreadnought.
The Land Raider's problem is that it is a little slow (25cm speed) and a jack of all trades, master of none. ?Since you don't have to use them to transport Terminators (or any infantry for that matter), and they aren't worth the points to use as a main battle tank, they don't have a real purpose beyond the trivial use of hauling Devastators in tournament games. (If you were playing a scenario where you have to assault an objective then the Land Raider shows its strength as a troop hauler.) ?It's not so much that they are too expensive, it's that the demand for their use and all of their abilities does not justify their points. ?Instead of lowering costs, why not increase the demand for them? ?Allow them to be used in Tactical and Dreadnought ?Detachments. If the FF = 4+ revision gets approved they might be worth taking for hauling Terminators.
The Vindicator's problem is that its speed makes it unfit to use integrated in other formations. ?That's it. ?I take back everything I have said about upgrading it in the past, because it is on par with the Predators, which are the same points. ?IMHO, If you want to make the Vindicator go faster you either have to downgrade the Demolisher to a less capable weapon or you have to up the points cost. ?Now, I wouldn't downgrade the Demolisher to a different weapon, because the Vindicator is the only unit the Space Marines have for flushing out enemy units in cover. ?I would either leave the Vindicator alone and use it as a special use formation, or increase the points cost if you increase the speed.
Wow, talk about tying together two different topics... ?I relinquish the soapbox.
_________________
I shot a Deathstrike Missile and destroyed an enemy titan in my pajamas last night. ?How it got into my pajamas I still don't know...
|
|
