Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I had a eureka moment in my last game. I realized that I've been deploying reactively, meaning that my deployment plan goes out the window as soon as I see what my enemy is doing, at which point I react to his deployment, ceding the initiative before the game begins. It occurred to me that firing lines are paramount for me, and placing warriors where they won't get to fire effectively against assault troops is deadly for me. In the last game, I based my deployment on covering open spaces he'd either have to use or go the long way around, both of which results benefit me.
Having said that, an interesting thread on split deployment has me thinking. Here are two deployment options:
1. Split. Put a unit of warriors on one flank (considering firing lines) and a unit on the other. Place the Veiling Immortals on one side to entice the opponent to load up there, then move them to the strong side. Place the destroyers where they can rapidly switch from one side to the other. Use the monolith to help move warriors from the sacrificial flank when they get assaulted, or to protect them on the now overloaded flank. Enforce strict fire discipline to eliminate one side of the enemies force, then focus on the approaching units from the sacrificial side. The hardest part about this approach has been the temptation to split my forces, then stay put to eliminate dangerous tanks. This usually results in BOTH sides getting assaulted -- a disaster.
2. Load up the flank with the best firing lines, perhaps deploying Immortals and Destroyers to force the enemy to split his own forces. Then unload on anything in range.
Of the two, I was considering the second, but have since changed to the first as 1) more flexible and 2) more likely to force a decent opponent to split his own forces evenly (any decent general will ignore Destroyers he knows he can't reach and Immortals who will simply disappear).
What do you think?
I never really thought about it. Because I field a WBF army I tend to deploy my warriors behind cover. I use 2 spiders as a protective wall in the middle, i field 2 individual so i get to deploy 3 heavy choices letting me see a bit more of their deployment before monolith goes down. I then deploy wraiths/lord behind spiders and NBringer.
From there my army adapts. My list relies more on my ensuring i get the right units in combat rather than making sure i keep firing lines open. If anything i want to close my opponents down.
Thank you for making me realise how odd my necron list is lol. I had never looked at how i deploy in much depth before now
I like loading up on one side, by the time my opponent realizes it, he often has a couple useless troops on the wrong end of the board, and then doesn't place anything else there. Then at the end, I place my Destroyers on that side, and kill whatever's over there while staying out of range of anything. Works like magic against Guard, they can easily mow through an entire platoon without even getting shot at. Once done, they have to move to go support everything else. Of course, I can't do that every time, as the player gets wise.
Another fun tactic to to start the a Veil Lord with Immortals near warriors, but advance the Immotals and Veil off with the warriors. This allows the Immortals to make use of their Assault weapons, and lets the warriors fire. Besides, it's unexpected.
Excellent point you make, even if both deployment strategies are valid.
Number 1 can be the way to go, to draw the opponent apart, and anything that makes WBB can re-join units on the other side of the table.. that being said, you can do a total feint by deploying on a specific side of the table (ala #2), then do your split to dramatically alter your entire face of attack.
Vice versa, you can do the split, and then turbo+tele to reposition and attack a single area- either way, not only are you stretching out the deployment phase with many placements (with important Fast Attacks going after the enemy puts down the majority of their army) and making the opponent deploy reactively, you then go ahead to further disrupt what he is doing with a huge re-positioning of your own stuff
Main thing is you must organise your firing priorities, and weight of fire against a limited amount of enemy units to utterly destroy them, before moving on. How you go about that is your choice, and can be affected by many things- how shooty/choppy the enemy is, how fast, amount of units in Reserves, amount of armour and Ordnance, terrain etc.
I prefer to go all out on a single area... but this also means a split deployment, Destroyers firing on the same targets as other elements in the army. If something heads for HTH with the Destroyers, Turbo away towards your main battleline. Something heads for the battleline, tele out and continue shooting and dropping Particle Whips :party2:
Either way, it's easier to demoralize the opponent with WBB if you can also keep them on the backfoot with their own units tasks- don't let their Assault units stay in assault (tele+Part Whip), catch out their shooting base (Field Scarabs simultaneously assaulting Devos and Vindi), rapidfire gauss at transports whilst Destroyers really let loose into the units (depending on the amount of shots each have and targets armour save). Keeping an opponent demoralized with Necrons means they start making mistakes you can exploit It's a great start to demolish their battleplan via deployment and turns 1/2 and then have WBB and turbo+teleport to help you outmanouver and outlive a firefight.
maybe... i should /rant here
LO RULESOriginally Posted by Jaffar_Hasad
I am not a Necron player, but my Space Marine army battles Necrons a lot (about 70%+ of my games...). Against many other opponents your strategies may seem opportune, but I want to carefully advise you to consider your opponent before employing them.
Space Marines (unless they field Scouts, what I consider to be utterly fatal against Necrons) do not care one bit about all that AP4 weaponry the Necrons field and use to cut through more weakly armoured armies like a hot knife through butter. Moreover, Space Marines do not care one bit about Gauss, because they are better off all-infantry anyway than when fielding vehicles, and they don't have any high-Toughness models that could suffer from your weapons' effect. Apart from that, Space Marines have very viable ways to field long-ranged weaponry (superior - by shooting further - to anything the Necrons have) and mobility.
This is not intended to become a puff piece on Space Marines, so let me go deeper into the problem: I used to deploy a relatively stationary army with a lot of heavy and special weaponry (Missile Launchers, Lasercannons, Plasma Guns) in a very shooty firebase and a small, swift and assaulty countercharge element (Power Fists to get rid of any Scarab Swarms charging forth to tie my units or deal death to other Necron units coming too close for their own good). Due to superior range and being able to blast anything apart from afar, the enemy was under pressure to come get me. Even with the Monolith deep-striking into the midst of my troops (thus destroying my formation) and firing the Particle Whip, the Immortals Veiling in with the Lord and the Destroyers speeding into range (though this will seldomly all go well at once - for example the Destroyers might be missing due to the Escalation special rule, the Lord and his Immortals may have difficulty finding a place to teleport near the Space Marine firebase without running a big risk of manifesting some place very solid or similarly unopportune, etc) it takes good dice (successful Leadership tests to target the key units, a lot of wounding hits and a good, little scattering shot from the Particle Whip) to take out the right Space Marines so they won't have all those Lasercannons to down the Monolith in their following turn and maybe shoot the whole unit of Destroyers or Immortals so none will be left to WBB to.
Nowadays I don't use these stationary, heavily-armed armies anymore, but instead play trait Marines with either all-Bikes and some Terminators to deep-strike near the Bikes' Teleport Homers, or an all-Drop Pod army.
That said, I'll try and get to the point. The point is that a stationary opponent, waiting for you to come at him, doesn't care about you splitting your force because he has all his troops sitting in one corner and will just blast away at you until you give him a good reason to stop. A highly mobile (Be Swift As The Wind Space Marine Bike armies, for example) force will even be grateful for your split deployment, because its speed and maneuverability will allow to cope with any mistakes in its own deployment and it can then concentrate its whole force on one part of your army and then on the other (units in or behind close combat won't be shot by the other part of your army either) - "divide et impera".
I won't be telling you Necron players how to play your armies: you are the experts and know them a whole lot better. But sometimes some useful insight can come from the enemy, and I just want to say that in my opinion, mobility is the Necron army's key to defeat its MEQ enemies. The ability to on the one hand engage the enemy very swiftly if necessary, and on the other hand flee the enemy (even out of the midst of an assault).
My advice is to field as many Jetbikes as possible, along with the Veil of Darkness on a Lord with a Necron unit, and make excessive use of the Monoliths teleporting ability. It also helps to use few unit types but mass models, so that my standard tactic of wiping out one entire unit type at a time can't be easily followed.
Negative examples: in a game yesterday my Necron friend fielded only 20 Warriors at 1,500 points; I basically deep-striked four squads right around them and killed 16. If I had succeeded in one more Reserves roll or if he didn't have his cover saves against the Assault Cannons' Rending hits and the Plasma Guns for the Warriors set up between barrels and crates, then probably that would have meant no more Warriors for the rest of the game. And then all it would have taken was to down one more Destroyer for "welcome, Phase Out"... My Necron friend was quite lucky that 10 of the fallen got back up and he could teleport the one remaining (and now quite big) squad out of range. Or a single unit of Destroyers, even if maxed out to five, is downed quite easily by two squads - and be it 2 cheap Devastators with 4 Krak Missile Launchers each, shooting further than the Destroyers themselves. Even if the enemy has to ignore more acute threats in order to wipe them out: it always pays off to concentrate fire, but agsinst Necrons it does to thrice. I have also seen single Heavy Destroyers being fielded. One lucky Bolter shot and it's gone forever...
Long story and seemingly off-topic. I wrote all that as an (certainly confusing, sorry) answer to the question on deployment, whether to load a flank or split your forces. To put it clearly: what I meant to say is that either way you do it, the key element is mobility. Deployment is not that important if you are able to change your troops' formations very quickly. And this ability is also superior to any possible way of deployment.
Just be sure that your less mobile troops have a good stand (cover, good lanes of fire and all - we know the drill) and that they can quickly and easily be supported by your mobile units. Make sure you have the option of somehow moving away even your slower squads (teleport the Warriors with the Monolith, for example).
Concentrating your troops in one place is usually easier to play for the less tactically adept, while splitting your force allows for much more flexibility and some definitely nice maneuvers and tactics. But if you split your forces be sure to have all the ones that lack maneuverability in one place, thus conserving the option of concentrating your troops nonetheless, if necessary. Irrevocably bonding to several places on the battle-field simultaneously is presenting the enemy victory on a silver plate...
Good post. A couple of points I'd make:
1) The only two armies I've played against are Chaos and WH (the Chaos player also has Dark Eldar and Tau, both of which he hasn't wanted to play against me yet), both of which need to close with me in order to succeed. The old Chaos army tended to use three units of marines with a missle launcher in each. Despite their size (often only 6 models), they were very hard to kill without massive firepower that I really couldn't divert from Khorne Berzerkers and tanks. They also, as you suggest, tended to deploy in places that made Veiling a bit of a risk. The new Chaos army has so few troops that he can't do this anymore, especially since he now needs to field units of 10 to get the heavy weapons. The WH army has Exorcists, Seraphim, and mechanized Sisters, but their low toughness means that they take so many wounds that they melt away, and all those tanks go down to Gauss. I've never faced a static army, so I suppose my deployment question was based on armies that have to come to me. I'll probably lose the first time I face an army that doesn't, simply because I'll lack the range, AP, and high strength weapons such an army will field.
2) Again, I have never played a bike army, or a drop pod/deepstrike army, but obviously that would negate whatever mobility advantage I can muster. I'd still argue that a split formation could force you to pick a side. I'd probably have to balance the sides in that case, sacraficing one in order to win on the other. The question would be whether or not I have ENOUGH mobility to concentrate fire effectively. I doubt I do, which would necessitate a different list. You seem to have a handle on how to beat the Flying Circus, which is really the only way a split deployment could work. Without the veiling immortals and the destroyers, splitting warrior units would be suicidal, especially since warriors probably won't get a chance to rapid fire against your bikes.
3) I guess my point was limited to two different types of deployment that my army could make in order to force my opponent to react to me, instead of simply dropping units in response to him. You've pointed out the flaw in my army against fast moving MEQ, but those armies present problems WAY beyond deployment for me. The good news is that I'll have to find new opponents before I have to swallow that bitter pill.
I'd suggest you talk your Chaos friend into finally battling you with his (hopefully static) Tau. I'd love to see the turn your Monolith deep-strikes, releasing its Flux Arc while simultaneously teleporting some close combat squad that rushes forward to pick apart the remaining enemy units together with the Immortals teleporting in with the Lord and the Destroyers rushing up dealing death...
4+ armour and low Leadership is exactly what Necrons work best against...
Back to topic. As I've said before: splitting your deployment allows for some nasty tactics. But no matter the opponent, I would always be sure that my troops can rally if need be; i.e. I would put all the slow ones on one side and only quick ones on the other.
This way of setting up will really harm anyone but a completely stationary opponent (who most probably just won't care; but you won't have any disadvantages there either). Let's discuss some scenarios.
Scenario 1: the opponent plans to advance his whole army upon you. You have Destroyers, Scarabs and the Immortals with Veil on one side, the Warriors and whatever is left on the other.
Plan A: the opponent chooses to split his troops. You keep baiting that part of his army going after your mobile force until the very last instant; this is when you charge back to support your stationary force and pick apart the much smaller enemy force before taking on the other half of his troops.
Plan B: the opponent concentrates his troops on your stationary force. Your mobile force outflanks the enemy; he is then torn apart by your suppressive crossfire.
Plan C: the opponent concentrates his troops on your mobile force. You keep fleeing and dealing death nonetheless (moving 12" ingoring terrain yet shooting 36" with high-strength, multiple-output weaponry rocks so very much - that's why Destroyers are my favorite 40k unit; well, not really, because I don't get to have them...) and wait until your weakened opponent switches to plan A or B.
Scenario 2: the opponent advances only a part of his units towards you and keeps a firebase back.
Plan A: the opponent advances towards your mobile force. Keep shooting and fleeing while you hide your stationary force from the enemy firebase.
Plan B: the opponent is after your stationary force. So your mobile force goes after his firebase. In the resulting mobile force versus mobile force battle you will win, because of the possibility of putting out so much firepower "on the fly" - literally.
Scenario 2, plan B actually even occured to me once. My Space Marine Bikers and Assault Marines took out the Necron firebase while Destroyers and Immortals took out mine. Unfortunately, even though my Bikes can fire a single (twin-linked) Bolter shot 24" while moving, and even though I add Attack Bikes to my squads with 3 Heavy Bolter shots up to 36", I just did not have a chance of catching the mobile Necron force in CC or even rapid-firing range.
If there hadn't been some Terminators ready to deep-strike near the Destroyers and rend through them with their Assault Cannons I would definitely have lost the game...
But still: remember that scenario 1 will probably not work if the enemy force doesn't foot-slog. Fast units won't be outflanked very easily, and they react quickly to anything you do. Drop Pods are sitting ducks once they've landed (because the squads in there necessarily are foot-sloggers), but they are very, very unpredictable (as to where they will strike for the first time) and can mass surprising quantities of firepower to small areas on the battle-field.
If you aren't able to flee those Drop Pod squads after their initial landing, or if you lose tactical initiative to the superior maneuverability of Bike armies, then you will most probably fail badly against those types of enemies.
Against the opponents you listed it's probably fine to split your force. Though I still advise you never to split the slow troops (at the beginning of the game, that is; later on it may become essential). Keeping that in mind I think that scenarios like the ones described above will work very well. Still: more mobility never hurts a Necron army!
That's a lot to try to respond to, so I won't. The advice is great, though, especially in detailing the tactical options in such depth. I could see setting up warriors, a lord with res orb and any available tomb spyders on one flank, making a really tough, long lasting base, then setting up all the mobile units (although a scarab unit to slow down the advance towards the base might help, too), including DLords, Veiling Immortals, Scarabs and Destroyers on the other flank (not that I could fit all of that in a 1500 point game, but you get the idea). The opponent can't simply ignore the fast units, as you suggest, because his flank would be wide open, but chasing them around with faster units wouldn't gain much, either. Hmmm... I'll take your suggestion to avoid splitting Warriors, too. That works for IG because of their high numbers and firepower, but sacrificing a unit of Warriors makes Phase Out awfully likely.
Now I just need to set up game and give it a shot. How much you want to bet I roll like crap and blow the whole idea up? The best laid plans of machines and men (or something like that)...
Way to go, Red Archer, that's awesome. The only potential problem I see is with 2B, the firebase shoots at your mobile units when they come to play. Anything with range on the Destroyers can potentially hurt them. That rules out rapid fire, but not many rapid-fire units will be sitting in the back where they can't accomplish anything. At least, that's how I see it. Everything else looks sound, in my experience, Necrons are very adept at dealing with your first scenario.