RE: [Epic] 2000pt 'ideal' IG Army

From: Sean Smith <seans_at_...>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 12:38:40 +1300 (BST)

On Fri 13 Mar, Miller, Chris wrote:
> > >
> > > I got burned once, because you can't support unless some of your
> > units
> > > are touched, I had a bunch of HH just sitting there, watching their
> > > buddies die. A clever (or cheesy) opponent can screw you by charging
> > > your flanks. Besides, I saved 25 points buy joining them anyway.
> >
> > The thing is if the Ork player decides to not engage the
> > hellhounds in his assault, they'll be within FF range after the
> > guardsmen are driven off (a FF that the orks will almost definitely
> > lose). This could be very bad for the orks if you have a mobile
> > reserve nearby that can either surround or simply beat on the
> > broken greenskins (broken units are at 1/2 assault factor & FP for
> > CCs and FFs, IIRC).
> >
> > Also note that with the above setup, the orks HAVE to
> > engage at least 1 Hellhound in order to get into base contact
> > with non-Comissar (non-Save) units. Assuming the orks charge
> > from the front; if they hit your flanks then that's no longer the
> > case. Perhaps a T formation for the hellhounds would be better:
> >
> > C C H C C
> > H H H H H
> >
> > etc, you get the idea.
> >
> -------> I wasn't going to jump in on this one, but I guess I will now:
> I'm really really skeptical of any formation( both of the ones displayed
> so far) requiring such precise placement of units - there are so many
> ways this thing can be messed up it's not even funny. As mentioned
> above, if someone manages to travel an extra few cm's and hits you in
> the side, it's broken. More importantly, a single AT shot (or death ray
> if it's especially important) picking off the front hellhound breaks
> it. A megacannon will wreak havoc with it also.

However if the enemy has mega cannons or anti-tank weapons in range
then I wouldn't be adopting this formation anyway! Please credit
me with some fore sight. Also remember if the enemy gets in
range of the hell hounds (assuming lack of foresight by me) he
has risk the anti-tank fire from my support weapons. You also
have take into account the losses he will suffer from my firepower
and anti-tank weapons.

> Anytime you depend on 1 unit being in a certain position in relation
> to a bunch of other units to do something, you're taking a very large
> risk, and these guys seem to be assuming they will survive the shooty
> phase with no losses, when the front guy is the first thing which will
> be hit if shot at with FP. I don't really see what the advantage is over
> just taking them as part of the whole detachment. That way you don't
> have to worry about getting a particular unit into HTH, you just need to
> get close, which is far easier. Also the comissar saves can cushion the
> HH's from FP attacks (if they're armor is the same - I can't remember),
> and picking off the "keystone" HH becomes less of an issue.
> Not saying placement isn't important, just that this seems to require
> a rather precise formation which looks fairly brittle to me. Also, the
> intermingling of at least 2 detachments really needs to be mentioned to
> your opponent when he shoots at them, and by drawing attention to it in
> this way, he's probably going to think a little more about it, and may
> well realize what you're trying to pull devoting a few extra shots to it
> to make sure things don't happen the way you want.
> Chris Miller

Sean Smith
Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:28 UTC