| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
Posts: 303
Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
|
|
Let's stick with the fortress for example; Orks must love the idea; they're big and shooty and hard; but the reality of it is that - in the most part - they're not worth it! So what can be done to fix it? We've said that we don't want to go around dropping points costs left, right and centre (I agree; this would probably just lead to different sorts of units becoming 'the norm' and then it would turn into an arms race!) but what is it about a lot of these units that don't make them seem worth it in comparison to other things?
Example; Fortresses; poor armour for a war engine; how about making them 5+ reinforced?
Mauraders: weaponry not worth the points; up 2bp to 3bp
Vindicators: Would be worth it if the Demolisher was a MW (officially; seeing as we're talking tournament play as well here)
Now to quote myself for the answer.........
The point values only insure that if they are used properly they will not dominate the game. If they are used improperly then no point value reduction is going to make them any better.
The key phrase here is 'used properly'. Too many players feel that a unit/formation has to somehow be able to function out in the open or it becomes worthless.
Almost all Artillery Formations are 'brainless' formations, ie it doesn't take a massive amount of thought to figure out how to use them in a game, so they are popular. Shadow Swords are popular because they fall into the same category, park them somewhere with a good field of fire and just roll the dice. This isn't to imply I don't use them, I do, nor that only idiots use them, they form a vital link in an army's support formations. Baneblades require the player to figure out how to get the most out of them, often this requires that they operate in close proximity to other formations, and work closely with them.
I've seen games where IG players have fielded two, or more, Shadow Swords only to find out their opponent has no WEs in their army  They end up swatting flies with that mighty Volcano Cannon, get nowhere near their points worth out of that WE, and get stomped in the battle because they cannot adapt to the situation.
Time after time I've watched SM players shove their Tactical Formations out into the open into an area swept by heavy enemy fire. Their confidence in the Marine Tenacity is quicky shattered when the formation is cut to ribbons. Their first reaction is to moan that their is something wrong with the SM list. It never seems to occur to them that maybe their is something wrong with their tactical usage of said formation.
The SM army must use terrain to full effect, avoid useless 'gun fights', must use their formations in combination with each other, and above all never surrender the initiative to the enemy. Use the SM Army in any other way and you will always lose no matter what you field. (The SM Army rewards a player that uses combined arms and takes full advantage of their staying power.)
One of my favorite SM formations is 4xTerminators, 4xLand Raiders, and 2xVindicators (875pts). I use them to deliver the finishing blow in a battle, usually in turn two or three, never directly expose them to enemy fire before that time, and always have them working closely with a Tactical Formation.
A long time ago some players were moaning that something was wrong with the Ork Army because they couldn't get their Warbands into Close Combat. This implies that, to them, the only tactical use for an Ork Warband is to get into Close Combat, and if it doesn't then it is a waste of points to get them. Yea IF you just shove that Big or Uge Warband straight at the enemy, unsupported, it is going to die a horrible death and accomplish nothing of note. But back it up with a Big Gunz Formation with an Oddboy, have a KOS operating in the same area as that Warband,and actually use terrain to cut down on the enemies effective fires and the your view of the Warbands will quickly change. In an Ork Army they make an excellent base of maneuver for other Ork formations to work off of.
To add to Neal's comments on the Battle Forts: Move a Big Warband into the Woods and park a Warband in Forts behind the woods where the enemy cannot get at them. This puts the opponent in the position of having to prepare for an attack along three different lines of advance, thus spreading the defense out. Then the Ork player can launch an effective attack along the weakest line of resistance with the Forts while the Big Warband pins the remaining defenders in place. The opponent now cannot concentrate their forces on the Forts who will now shine because they are dead hard in support of the Boyz around them. Nothing cheezy here just good sound tactical usage of forces and combined arms.
The point of all of this is proper usage. Obviously I am a complete dullard when it comes to using my Tau Kroot, but I know there is nothing wrong with them because my friend performs miracles with his.
Use combined arms, use terrain to your advantage, attack along the line of least resistance with the best formation you've got, and most of all figure out the best way to use all the forces in your army to full effect. Often this means one must create the situations on the battlefield needed to make them more effective then the stat lines on the data sheet say they are.
It isn't up to the designers to 'create' victory for the players, it is up to the players to figure out how to achieve victory with their army.
Jaldon 
_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC
|
|
Players in smaller groups tend to 'follow the pack' when someone fields a deadly formation, while in larger groups this is less pronounced as there is always at least one or two nut cases (Like PG and Me) that will upset the apple cart an go against the trend, successfully.
