General Stratigy Thought...

[ZenPaladin]

So I was thinking about stratigy today and came to a conclusion that many probibly have before. If you simplify things enough there are basicly to stratigies to building and playing an army. You either play to your strengths or you play to your oponents weakness.

For example. If you play the Tau you play to your strengths. You shoot the enemy, you don't assault them. If you play Blood Angels you assault them you don't shoot them. It's not that the Tau can't assault and its not that the Blood Angels cant shoot its that unless your are using their strengths you can be outmatched and defeated.

If your are playing to your foes weakness then you are looking for where he's weak. For example I take a balance Marine list. If I run up against Guard or Tau I try to assault. Even my most shooty units like Sternguard are going to do better in assualt against a firewarrior squad. If I come up against Space Wolves I'm going to try to shoot them because in Tactical on Tactical fighting i'm going to loose!

I run two armies. Tau and Necron's, with the Cron's i'm trying to play to my foes weakness. I'm adapting to them. With the Tau i'm trying to maximise my firepower and mobility it doesnt matter who i'm fighting.

So what sort of force do you run? Adaptive or Static. Which do you think is stronger? Easier? Obviously some combination of the two is allways in place.

[DarkLink]

As a Grey Knight player, I fully agree. In almost all of my games with my Knights, my strategy is "do what I have to do to live another turn".

If my opponent is trying to rush me, I shoot his transports out from under him. If he tries to out shoot me, I try to maneuver and return fire to protect myself and soften him up as much as possible, while getting in close to take him out.

It's all about playing reactive rather than offensive. Many will insist that you have to take the initiative, but some armies just can't do that well. In fact, some armies just perform better preventing the enemy from accomplishing their goals, rather than ignoring the enemies plan and following your own.

[david5th]

With my Ultramarines it's more adaptive. Take the initiative keep it that way but keep in mind this

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder - No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy's main strength (no plan survives contact with the enemy).

With mi Imperial Guard it's simply one word - SHOOT.

[fade_74]

I mostly play guard and I shoot....alot. There are differences in shooting though. I like to play armies with mobile volume of fire. I don't take huge heavy hitting weapons all the time (medusa, demolisher, lascannons, meltaspam etc). I like to be able to shift a huge enough amount of shots to one area to be able to kill almost anything. This is opposed to huge high strength bombs that will kill anything.

For example, Lets say i am shooting at a unit of terminators. I can bombard them with a couple medusa shots per turn and hope I hit which will most likely kill them off. Or, I can bring to bear a large number of lower power weapons and let my opponents saving throw dice do my job. A unit of 20 guardsmen, with a couple multilaser scout sentinels, and maybe a heavy weapons squad, supported by a chimera, will do the same job, but that mass of models is SO much harder to get away from.

I also find this way So much more fun to play. I almost never play the same list twice. I can use almost anything on my shelf, and it will fit right in. Don't want sentinels today? Ok, throw in some rough riders. Don't want to play a lascannon squad? Sure, penal legion would be fun! Don't want a chimera? How bout a vulture with 4 missile pods? Or no transports at all! yeah thats another squad i can buy for each chimera that I don't!

I'm rambling....I didn't get my regular 40k game this week lol.

[Lord Azaghul]

I
I'm rambling....I didn't get my regular 40k game this week lol.

Oiy I sypmathize! And I don't think I'll get one in this weeke either.


Tactics:
I play IG and I'm picking in SM.
IG are probably the strongest 'reactors' in the game. Taking first turn can be very devistating, but the ability to deal out both high S and high volumn fire power is awesome. I like to throw a squad of vets in reserve, and bring them up to plug holes in the line: Just as my opponent thinkgs he's cleared an area -BAM - have some melta and flamer and a tank! Or my sentinals, I love those little guys, a great early game distraction, or late game rear armour targetor. For me its an easy army to play to its strengths.

SM: clearly very different, and sort of an underdog these days. But I have no doubt I'll learn as soon as I get a dozen or so games under my belt!

[Uncle Nutsy]

I like to run a full adaptive list with my tau.

troop spam? lotsa bursties, PIGs and pulse subs. heavy armor? in come the deathrains, sunforges, railguns and heavy gundrones with markerlights.

[scadugenga]

It's not so much army comp or picking one particular style of play.

You need to outplay your enemy--seize the initiative (not rolling a "6" btw...) and make him react to your troops, rather than you reacting to his.

[DarkLink]

and make him react to your troops, rather than you reacting to his.

Well, here's the thing. This isn't necessary all the time. I find that I rarely make my opponent react to me. I instead react to him.

Now, if you're too slow to react then you can fall into a losing position and be defeated. But there are definately times when my opponent was too aggressive because he was trying to make me react to him. Well, I reacted, and his transports got shot out from under him and I picked him apart as a result. Or maybe his assault got too spread out when he should have advanced more slowly and carefully.

The point is, you have to look beyond the next turn or two. Sometimes that means not being aggressive, and letting your opponent come to you. "Making your opponent react to you" is a term that gets thrown around a lot, but... hmm, this would be a good time for a Sun Tzu quote, but I don't have an appropriate one off the top of my head.

The point is, don't get so caught up in trying to force your plan on your opponent that you defeat yourself.

[Uncle Nutsy]

It's not so much army comp or picking one particular style of play.

You need to outplay your enemy--seize the initiative (not rolling a "6" btw...) and make him react to your troops, rather than you reacting to his.

I've discovered that once you know an opponents' playstyle and you know for a fact that 'this is what they do in situation x' then there's no real need to 'outplay' them. When you know their patterns, you've already outplayed them before the game even starts.

I've done it a few times already. I sent a unit one way and they've followed it, just like I figured they would. By the time they've realized that they've taken the bait, i'm already in position to obliterate that unit.

Every time I've had a loss I take a moment to step back to ask "what unit did they use to gain that KP? how did he use it beforehand? How did they move it?". If the answer was "he used marines and got close enough to use powerfists to destroy the unit.", then the army list and tactics change to include a unit to stop said marine unit. Ever since I've started to do that, my army list has evolved to counter those units.


Such as the case of me vs a tzeench/nurgle army. I knew for a fact that Nurgle, while deadly in CC was also slow and purposeful and had no shooting. That lowered the threat level below Tzeench so I left them alone because I knew i could outmaneuver them. That let me concentrate on the Tzeench side, which I almost outright destroyed. If there was going to be any more turns, I then would have concentrated on Nurgle and wiped them out.

[Kahoolin]

Well, here's the thing. This isn't necessary all the time. I find that I rarely make my opponent react to me. I instead react to him.

Right. Playing aggressively may be enough to shock and overwhelm if you are playing someone who lacks confidence and/or experience. But if you're playing someone who knows their army inside out and can stay cool under fire, then daring behaviour is likely to lose you the game. I can attest this from experience, I am quite an aggressive and daring player and I usually have to reign myself in a bit, or I'm liable to overextend