Upgrades - how do you do them?

[Mr Mystery]

How do?

More of a general chit chat topic than a plea for tactical assistance.

I've been working on and tweaking my Skitarii army, and I've found myself breaking the habit of a lifetime and putting together specialist squads.

See ever since I got properly started back in 2nd Edition, I've been used to a more flexible approach to squad armament. Good example are Tactical Squads. If one had a Meltagun, their Heavy Weapon would be a Heavy Bolter. Flamer? Lascannon would be paired. Theory was my squads could then each deal with pretty much any threat, making it harder for my opponent to neutralise any one area of dakka.

Another part of that was one of necessity. I didn't have the disposable income I do today (of course I didn't. I was like, 15 at the time, tops) so instead had to make do with what I already had and what I could convert up (badly, as it often turned out).

But all of a sudden, I'm fixating on right tool for the right job. For instance, a squad of Skitarii Vanguard with three Arc Rifles can mess up nearly any tank in a single volley, spesh if it parks within rapid fire range. Not quite sure what's caused this change in philosophy though.

Anyways - scene is set, so do tell how you go about it?

[Drew da Destroya]

With Orks, I always used to bring Big Shootas on everything. They were cheap (rokkits cost double the points back then), fired 3 shots, had great range, and were relatively threatening to things. Then the new book dropped, and Rokkits cost the same... suddenly, I'm using Rokkits everywhere. They're now just as cheap, can actually threaten vehicles, and you can spam them like crazy to make up for the terrible BS of the shooters. Pretty much overnight they went from a waste of points to a must-have in my eyes.

Other upgrades remain obvious. Power Klaws on my nobz. Bosspoles where I can get them. Most other upgrades get ignored in favor of more bodies, or more specialized units (Lootas, Tankbustaz, the occasional Flash Git mob). Like, I don't think I've taken a single trukk upgrade (other than the free swap for a Rokkit) at all this edition. I just don't see the point.

Dark Eldar I play around with upgrades a bit more. Again, last edition, you generally put Lances on everything. It was the default, it cost no points, it was pretty much your primary anti-tank. You might sometimes play around with Disintegrators, but not often. Now, though, I have to think about it. I'll leave the Disintegrator on Raiders that are just rushing up to drop off assault-type troops (wyches, harlies, incubi, grotesques). I'll even sometimes leave them on Splinterboats (Raider with Splinter Racks, Warriors with Splinter Cannon inside). They generally end up being anti-infantry anyway (or just bullet magnets), and I'm getting some Anti-Tank from Scourge, Reavers, and the like, so why not? Also, Night Shields end up on lots of boats.

[Djbz]

I tend to arm everyone with a task in mind.
So my Wyches have Hydra gauntlets or Shardnet+impalers in their units
Kabalite Warriors/Trueborn all get Blasters
For Chaos each gets Meltas or plasmas in the units
Imperial Guard get armed for one task too (Veteran melta-squads/Infantry flamer squads)

But the intention with my Flesh Tearers is Heavy Flamer+Meltagun for Tacticals, while the Assault squad is Packing Inferno-pistols.

[Alaric]

Depending on the army I like to make squad specific roles. Anti tank squad, anti knight squad etc. Always the bear minimum as if you got more guys than they got bullets in their army you will usually have an easier time.

[YorkNecromancer]

I tend to upgrade according to a fairly simple philosophy: ain't nothin' in the middle of the road 'cept a dead skunk.

A take-all-comers squad is useless to me; an army works synergistically. Therefore, I tend to build squads with specific roles in mind, generally broken down into anti-infantry (lots of shots), anti-tank (high strength shots), anti-elite infantry (plasma equivelants), anti-flyer (Skyfire), take-and-hold (flamers) and the rarely seen Fire Magnet (any upgrades that make a cheap, disposable unit seem scary enough to waste shots on). I won't mix and match units to suit multiple roles.

I then tend to compare range to speed, and see what works. If it's got range, it doesn't need speed as much and vice versa. So I don't generally put Heavy weapons in something like a Tactical Squad that I'm using to seize objectives; their accuracy will be turd, they won't be much use, so what's the point? Sure, I might get lucky, but I could use those points on a more dedicated fire solution, so I'm more likely to do that.

I also try to run each unit as cheap as possible; if an upgrade brings nothing to the table, out it goes. So I very rarely take power fists(or any melee weapon costing over 15 point); for those kind of points, I'd rather take meltabombs and avoid assault wherever possible.

So with my Skitarri, say, the Rangers seem to have solid mobility + range; as a result, no point giving them the plasma caliver or haywire guns, because they're always going to need be keeping the enemy in that sweet 24"-36" spot (where they can shoot but most enemies will be unable to retaliate. Ordinarily, I would leave the Transuranic Arquebus at home, because it would compromise on that manuoverability... Only Skitarri have Relentless, so each squad of Rangers gets 3.

On the other hand, the Vanguard need to be within 18", so it makes sense to give them the calivers and haywire weapons. So, I have one squad with 3 calivers (designated an Elite-killer), and one with 3 haywires (as close range light-antitank/heavy in a pinch).

The final thing I always consider is: does this weapon make the unit as a whole better at killing at range? This is because killing at range is ALWAYS preferable to assault as far as I'm concerned, and not just because this is a 'shooting' edition. I had it explained to me thus by a number of medieval scholars (including a mate whose MA is in historical martial styles research): The reason a sword is better than a knife is because it gives you two additional feet of reach. The reason a pike is better than a sword is that it gives you four foot of additional reach. The reason a bow and arrow is better is because it gives you 30 to 100 foot of additional reach, and so on. A more skilled fighter can always beat a less skilled one, sure. But if two men are equal, the one with the range wins. If two men are equally good at range, the one with the most backup wins.

[CoffeeGrunt]

As a Guard player, upgrades are minimal. I never dole out Power Weapons as they pretty much never get to swing against anything they could hope to impact. Meltabombs are handed out on occasion, but normally they just rely on the support of their Long-Range Anti-Tank comrades, or the shorter ranged Melta squads. If I have spare points I'll hand out Bolters to Sergeants to mop up points, but not much more. I just don't see why I'm paying the same as a Space Marine Sergeant to give my Guardsman Sergeant a Power Weapon so he can be worse in every way with it.

Veteran squads always get Carapace Armour and a Chimera or Valkyrie, however, and get razor-honed to a task, with either Meltaguns or Plasma Guns. If I'm feeling particularly saucy I might give them the Demolitions Doctrine for the maximum amount of carnage a single squad can bring, but I rarely come across a target 3 Meltaguns will fail to hurt where 10 Meltabombs don't feel like overkill.

I also love Special Weapons Squads with 3 Demolitions Charges jumping out of my Vendetta. 90pts for a suicide squad that can pick off stragglers after they throw their payload and contest Objectives with OS is much fun.

[Sly]

I don't think it's really something that can be set as a rule for all armies.

Most Troop units have anti-infantry guns, but nobody has a problem with putting Meltaguns into a squad even if it splits their purpose. However, Imperial Guard, without massing 30+ bodies into a squad, really shoots too weakly to be considered anti-infantry with BS3 Lasguns. So that's one consideration.

Another is how well, if at all, you can match weapons together. Going with Lascannon/Flamer makes sense... if you're close enough to use the Flamer you will generally be moving, so putting in a Heavy Bolter to focus on anti-infantry doesn't really make much sense. But on Legion of the Damned, which are Relentless, I like matching Plasma Gun/MM since they have the same range and are reasonably close in choice of targets, whereas Flamer/Lascannon would really make no sense at all.

[YorkNecromancer]

Imperial Guard, without massing 30+ bodies into a squad, really shoots too weakly to be considered anti-infantry with BS3 Lasguns

If you're doing a standard, non-mechanised Infantry platoon with less than thirty men, you're pretty much doing it wrong.

10 men go in a Chimera. After that, you need thirty or so or what's the point of them? Guard survive by either being in tanks or simply having too many bodies to kill. As a result, a thirty man squad with lasguns and Orders is actually pretty good at killing infantry - even Terminators - through sheer force of rolling a literal bucket of dice.

Am I right in thinking 30 men with the 'fire one more time' order put out 90 shots within 12"? Stick them behind Bullgryns who are behind an Aegis line, and I challenge anything to attack without being a little bit afraid.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/Johnnyboy1988/A_Message_from_the_Inquisition_by_T.jpg

[CoffeeGrunt]

Platoons should be at least 30, I like 40 as a comfortable number. Give them Flamers for receiving charges and a couple of Heavy Weapons, add Commissar to taste. Cheap Objective-camping unit that takes an eon to chew through if you're supporting them properly.

That said, the Lasgun is weak, even en masse you'll find it really peters out as you go through the rolls. I consider Anti-Infantry to be weapons aiming to kill anything from Cultists to Fire Warriors, Marines are another tier up. With First Rank, Fire! Second Rank, Fire! you put out a lot of dice which can induce a lot of pain if your opponent fluffs their rolls, even on Terminators.

However, anything tougher is why you have Tanks and everything else in the Guard Codex.

[Sonikgav]

I tend to take units to deal with multiple threats but almost never try and do everything.

My troops will be equipped for anti infantry almost always. Depending on the race it may have combat weapons.

I won't try to equip them with Anti - tank as well because I'll likely take a different unit who's primary function is that, and usually 2 of them so there's redundancy against my opponent wiping them out in 1 turn and im not relying solely on one unit.

You can't equip every unit to do everything but you can try to cover multiple scenarios across you're army.

[Lord Manton]

When I started playing, I played Ultramarines. Being 12 I had no idea what I was doing so I just built the squads with what they had. The old tactical squads in those days only had flamers and missile launchers, so that's what they got.
Then I moved on to space wolves. Their upgrade spree came with a melta gun and power fist and power sword and an axe, so naturally my squads found themselves armed to the hilt with as many legal upgrades as I could fit into a unit. A couple of additions ago, I figured out that this made my standard Grey Hunter squad cost over 200pts and that this was a stupid way to go about it.
These days I have a purpose in mind for each squad. I'll tend to kit a squad with melta x2 and a combi-melta and ditto with the plasma squad. The beauty with these units is that plas can take out light vehicles and rear-armour almost as well as melta will and melta is pretty handy at taking out heavily armoured troops if there aren't any vehicles nearby. Then there's usually an assault unit in there with a couple of power weapons and CCW.
I think, Mr Mystery, you e just grown up and become a sharper player, cutting out wasted points and maximising the utility of your units. As Yorkie points out, a squad that's equipped for close range anti infantry and long range anti tank isn't any good at either and is ultimately a liability.

[Chris*ta]

One thing I have been pondering is whether it's worthwhile to include an Anti-Tank weapon (melta gun) in a squad that's not otherwise intended for AT.

While in practice one melta gun doesn't have much chance of destroying something or even disabling it, the threat that it could should change the way the opponent plays with his expensive toys.

I'm not heavily into the serious play, but this makes sense in my head. What does anyone else think?

[Alaric]

One thing I have been pondering is whether it's worthwhile to include an Anti-Tank weapon (melta gun) in a squad that's not otherwise intended for AT.

AP 1 is good for killing more than just tanks. Ive killed many a characters with the instant death fun that is STR 8.

[Mr Mystery]

One thing I have been pondering is whether it's worthwhile to include an Anti-Tank weapon (melta gun) in a squad that's not otherwise intended for AT.

While in practice one melta gun doesn't have much chance of destroying something or even disabling it, the threat that it could should change the way the opponent plays with his expensive toys.

I'm not heavily into the serious play, but this makes sense in my head. What does anyone else think?

That's part of my thinking too, at least in some armies.

Spreading out the ming can reduce 'safe' areas for certain units.

I reckon I'd still spread with armies such as Marines, as being numerically small (not to mention Combat Squadable) it makes sense. Other armies will of course vary.

[Haighus]

Yeah, Marines can get away with it, because they can just combat squad the 2 weapons into different units. But by that point, it functionally makes no difference to have the combined squads specialised or not, except you can't choose to have specialised squads when you don't want to combat squad. Personally I would go with specialising.

[Charon]

When I started playing, I played Ultramarines. Being 12 I had no idea what I was doing so I just built the squads with what they had. The old tactical squads in those days only had flamers and missile launchers, so that's what they got.

These came from 2nd edition where units could split fire between other units and tanks.
Having Lascannon and Flamer for example was not a drawback as the Lascannon fired at the tanks (or Big Ones in case of Tyranids) while all the Bolters and the Flamer shoot another unit.
That also explains some of the more... questionable tank designs. They worked well under these conditions but fail to work in the current version of the game.

[Haighus]

It would be cool if they brought that back- give split fire to all units, and make units that have split fire already... better at splitting fire?

[CoffeeGrunt]

I've always said that tanks should split fire with their weapons like Superheavies, because the Tau slave their secondary weapons to Drones, and the Guard have one or two men for every gun on the Leman Russ, (judging by the viewport and gun beside it.) Space Marines have Machine Spirit to do this to a decent degree already, but it feels like something that should be the rule, not the exception. After all, most tanks would be equipped with anti-armour main cannons and anti-infantry support weapons, but in 40K such a setup is never optimal.

Still, the game is what it is.

[Haighus]

Yeah, if the weapons on an Imperial Bastion can be slaved to shoot at multiple targets, and can be found on damn near every Imperial world with a classification of civilised or more advanced, and they are meant to be basic and fairly stupid, then why can't Guardsmen manning a sponson, or the supposedly far superior machine spirits found in all Space Marine vehicles capable of doing such a thing? (never mind the fact that the sponsons on a Predator can be remote controlled and Marines are supposed to be able to multitask incredibly effectively).

[Houghten]

Brief plug for Dropzone Commander, in which every tank (and, indeed, infantry squad) can fire each weapon at a different target if it wants to.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Bolt Action too.

I'd like to see Co-Axial weapons get picked up by GW in the same way Forge World use them.

[Haighus]

They used to, until Apocalypse 2.simplified came along and they removed all nuance to Superheavies, including the co-axial weapon rules, which are identical to the current FW ones.