Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Marines vs large formations
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=20824		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  CheesyRobMan [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Marines vs large formations
I'm a fairly new Epic player, and a mate and I had a couple of 1000pt games yesterday to get us into the swing of things - we'd already played through some of the training scenarios. He's using Chaos Marines (Alpha Legion) and I'm playing loyalist SMs (Crimson Fists). We enjoyed the games a lot although I did find that my small Marine formations were very quickly splatted in assaults against his much larger Retinues (8 stands of Marines, 4 of Havocs and 3 Dreadnoughts). Is the solution to sit back and shoot them from afar? Marines don't really have a lot of long range shooting. I imagine the result would have been much the same against any large formation such as an Ork Warband. How do Marines deal with hordes?
Author:  Mephiston [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
To be honest until you get to around 2700+ points a side the games won't be balanced. Lists should generally balance from 2700+ to 6000 (I normally get the upper limit wrong, E&C will be along to correct that shortly!).

However that chaos formation should limit the activations giving the marines an extra activation to either crossfire or assault with support.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Ya got both wrong; Nominal balance limits for playtesting have always been 2k to 5k AFAIK. :-)
Author:  Mephiston [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Really? I always feel that Steel Legion are a little too good at 2,000 when I've run intro games at that size.

The real answer is that you can't get sufficient number or activations or variety until you get to the 2,700 mark to appreciate the finer points of Epic (IMO)
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Mephiston wrote:
Really? I always feel that Steel Legion are a little too good at 2,000 when I've run intro games at that size.

I've never had a problem with IG armies at that size when using 1 commissar per 500pts as per the netEA balance update. YMMV.

2700 was the size of the first EA tourny and is still a popular size as it's the smallest size of game you can get an 850pt Titan in.
Author:  Dave [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
With their small numbers you definitely need support fire to help marines deal with bigger formations in assault. The double into support/retain and engage combo is effective in EA and really is ground-pounding SM's bread and butter. You have options to take many low-point cost units with good FF and fast movement. Coupled with your high SR and initiatve you can definitely set up 2-4 activations in a row at the end of a turn into the start of the next.

You can try bringing up some Land Speeders and ZoCing a big retinue, then retain and engage with some marines/tanks. Try minimizing the amount of shots fired back at you while maximizing your own. 6 Tacticals can account for 1.5 kills on average in FF, and your support from the Speeders can account for 1.67 more. Given that, if you can position your Speeders and Marines such that only 3-4 Chaos Marines can fire at you you're looking at an average of 3 kills to their 1, so you'd be up by 2-3 in the resolution depending on how much they outnumbered you by.
Author:  Kyrt [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Marines have great initiative, good mobility and more activations than horde opponents. This means you can:
a) move into support range and fire on the target, then retain and assault.
b) combined assault
c) drop pod/teleport/air assault

You can also try to fight on your own terms:
a) deny juicy targets
b) stall, in order to force large points-cost formations to waste their activation
c) use scouts (e.g. land speeders) to screen other formations
d) fight clipping assaults - it's difficult to get all stands in a large formation into CC/FF with a countercharge move

The latter is especially true if you include whirlwinds in your list, as it forces formations to spread out. This is something to bear in mind in general - sometimes the threat of a formation's power is as important (tactically) as its ability to put that power to good use. Artillery is a good example, for both this bunching reason and also for creating "exclusion zones" for vulnerable targets. Likewise, if you can shape your opponent's actions by deploying in a certain way, or abandon his plans by surprising him, these can give you an advantage.
Author:  CheesyRobMan [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Dave wrote:
You can try bringing up some Land Speeders and ZoCing a big retinue, then retain and engage with some marines/tanks. Try minimizing the amount of shots fired back at you while maximizing your own. 6 Tacticals can account for 1.5 kills on average in FF, and your support from the Speeders can account for 1.67 more. Given that, if you can position your Speeders and Marines such that only 3-4 Chaos Marines can fire at you you're looking at an average of 3 kills to their 1, so you'd be up by 2-3 in the resolution depending on how much they outnumbered you by.


Forgive my noobishness, but what do you mean by 'ZoCing'? I understand the reference to the zone of control, but not why this is useful.
Author:  captPiett [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
By using scout ZoC, you limit the formation that has been ZoC'd to a very few options, all of which have to get rid of the scout's ZoC in some fashion. For example, landspeeders that get a titan within 10cm then force the titan to either move out of their zone of control, or engage only the landspeeders. More than likely, a titan has bigger fish to fry than a low-point cost formation of scouts. It also cannot sustain. This can be extremely painful for the titan owner when he doesn't have another formation available to deal with the landspeeders/scouts.
Author:  Dave [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Units that start in the ZoC of a Scout also must counter charge towards the Scout even if another unit is closer. This can keep a few hits from being rolled on your assault formation as well if you can finagle it (perhaps a counter charge would have allowed the enemy to FF if it was between 15-20cm away from your engaging formation). Remember to stay more than 10cm away from units with a speed of 30cm or more though. They counter charge 10cm and can drag your Speeders into the assault, and thus give the rest of the enemy formation all of the attacks rolls you were trying to deny it.
Author:  dptdexys [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
Dave wrote:
Units that start in the ZoC of a Scout also must counter charge towards the Scout even if another unit is closer.


This isn't quite right, a counter charge has to go to the nearest enemy unit.
Only at the start of their activation does a formation have to assault or move out of the scouts ZofC, a counter charge is part of an enemy activation or part of a further round of combat in a tied engage.
Author:  Dave [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
This is what I'm going by:

Quote:
1.12.4 Counter Charges
...All the normal charge move rules apply...


Quote:
1.12.3 Making Charge Moves
...A charging unit that enters a zone of control must move into base contact with the nearest enemy whose zone of control has been entered...


My interpretation being that if a regular unit is 6cm away and a scout 7cm away you charge the scout, since it's the nearest enemy whose ZoC has been entered.
Author:  dptdexys [ Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
I'm going from this
Quote:
1.12.4 Counter Charges
A unit must use their counter charge move to move directly towards the closest enemy unit. It may move into base contact if close enough, and as long as the enemy is not already in contact with two defending units. Units can choose not to counter charge if they wish, but if they do counter charge they must head towards the nearest enemy.


And from this in the FAQ. Highlighted what I see as the relevant part, remembering that the said unit hasn't entered the ZofC but has started in it.
Quote:
1.12.3 Make Charge Move
Q: How should we interpret section 1.12.3 when it says "Remember that a charging unit that enters a zone of control must move into base contact with the nearest enemy whose zone of control has been entered"?
A: The intent of the rule is that if you enter a ZOC, then you must attempt to move into base contact with the nearest enemy unit whose ZOC you have entered. If you start a move in a ZOC, you can either move into contact with the closest enemy unit, or exit the ZOC by the shortest possible route.

If a unit does not have enough movement to make it into base contact it still moves as much as possible towards the closest unit. The intent of the rule is that you should not be able to charge through a ZOC to reach a unit further away but should alwayss move towards the closest enemy unit even if you cannot make it into base contact.
Author:  Dobbsy [ Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
dptdexys wrote:
I'm going from this
Quote:
1.12.4 Counter Charges
A unit must use their counter charge move to move directly towards the closest enemy unit. It may move into base contact if close enough, and as long as the enemy is not already in contact with two defending units. Units can choose not to counter charge if they wish, but if they do counter charge they must head towards the nearest enemy.

This is one of my least favourite RAW. It's ambiguous to me as it's not clearly worded that the "closest enemy unit" you have to "move directly towards" is part of the attacking enemy formation and means any enemy nearby - even if not part of the engagement - must be counter charged. It's badly worded IMO as I can (and have in the past)interpret it that the passage's intent describes the enemy that charged not some random enemy unit nearby. It just seems very gamey (not to mention tactically stupid) to me that you are forced to charge something not even involved in the immediate fight.

"oh, look we're being attacked commander!"

"Yes but there's an unarmed artillery tractor unit closer, kill that instead of supporting your fellow battle brothers!"

"Sterling Generalship, Sir! I'll get right on it!" :D

EDIT - Sorry for hijacking your thread Cheesy :(
Author:  frogbear [ Fri Jun 03, 2011 3:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Marines vs large formations
dptdexys is correct - or that is the way we play

Dobbsy wrote:
It just seems very gamey (not to mention tactically stupid) to me that you are forced to charge something not even involved in the immediate fight.


It is not "tactically stupid" or "gamey" as you are more likley to charge and engage the nearest enemy rather than risk your back in order to charge something that may be beyond the haze of smoke as an example.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/