# Battlefield roles



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

One major issue we all have to deal with when we choose our forces is what role do we want our units to play. Some armies are "pigeon-holed" into certain roles. Tau and IG are almost always run as Gun lines. Tyranids and Orks are almost always close combat oriented. The rest of the armies out there have a more varied choice in their selection.

When you choose a force how do you choose your units? Do you give them one role and seek to increas their capability at fulfilling that role? What happens if they end up in a situation where that capacity has been compromised? What then?

It is a commonly held belief that every unit a commander takes must have the capability to deal with both infantry and armor. Now, the percentage of these two is varied. A space marine tactical squad is a perfect example of a good mix of both. A 10 man tactical squad armed with 7 bolters, 1 missile launcher, 1 melta gun, Sgt. with bolt pistol and power fist can open up armor or dispense with enemy troops.

The drawback to making units thet fulfill multiple battlefield roles is they rarely will perform either role very well. If they do, then you either require lots of them or they are expensive. 

Take the marine example above. Are they the consumate anti tank unit? No. Are they the absolute best anti infantry unit? No. However if you take multiples of that unit then you can overlap their lack of ability with numbers. 

Alternatively you can take a unit of 5 terminators. They are great at anti infantry and at destroying armor. Storm bolters and power fists are very effective at both issues. However, they are fairly expensive.

Instead of taking units that can perform multiple roles, what about different units dedicated to one role mixed in a single force such as the Eldar? Overall they can deal with armor and infantry very well. However if that unit of fire dragons gets assaulted, their capacity to fulfill their role has been removed. What if that unit of Banshees gets shot to peices? You have the same problem. How do we get around it?

In any force if you choose to take units that are specialized in a role, you need to ensure you have other units that can diversify their roles as a back up. I prefer to have several units (fortunately for marines the tac squad is perfect) that are multi-tasked with battlefield roles as my core and then I augment that with task specific units.

How do you view battlefield role allocation?


----------



## Crimzzen (Jul 9, 2008)

Maybe slightly off of what you are asking but I've found that a lot of the newer codex's are incorporating various ways of including all styles of play - even those not normally associated with said army type. For instance, have you ever been charged by a blob of 40+ guardsmen lead by straken? (furious charge and at least 5+ power weapons) It's brutal, not much can stand up to that. Or how about an Ork gunline (shoota boyz in battlewagons / lootas - able to put out well over 150 shots a turn!) 

I think this is why a lot of the newer codex's have been doing so well, a guard army can still shoot very well, but now it has the option of also being to pack a bit of a CC punch. Whereas an army like Tau nearly has zero CC ability (and look at what sort of tier army it is).

That being said, you still need to be careful on what units you take and how you gear them. 10 guys with a missile launcher and a melta isn't necessarily a good combo, just because it can tackle both armour and infantry.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

Theres a difference between giving a unit the ability to deal with something that isn't their specialisation and having them with split specialisations.

I uphold the at the army-wide level the army should be able to deal with everything and be flexibile. At the unit level, each unit should have a specialisation that they stick too, and if they can get something which gives them the ability to get out a situation they aren't made without breaking the bank, then they should do so. However, they shouldn't be mixing roles, unless they are meant to do it.

An example of this is my Warrior/Alpha Warrior Brood. They are primarily a shooting Brood, with a Barbed Strangler and Deathspiters all round. If I was to purchase Boneswords for the entire unit, I would be sinking points into their close combat ability, and if they are in combat, they aren't shooting which is a bad thing. 

However, if I give just the Alpha a Bonesword, I'm not throwing away points, but it gives them an edge in combat and makes the opponent think twice before charging them. That in turn means they can get themselves out of combat to shoot more or just not get into combat in the first place, without breaking the bank.


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

I am a tau player and you are slightly wrong the gun line tau is most unfortunately dead and now its a very mobile and unforgiving army. But beware our crisis suits can seriously surprise horde armies in CC strength 5 hitting you on 4's with your lack of save unless you have a power weapon or claw buried in your unit we can slash through hordes, not effectively or ideally but I will charge if I think it might hold say orks up for a turn and thus allow me to hold my objective or relocate my fire warriors (a better anti horde unit than crisis suits)

Yes I specialise units in my army in particular my crisis suits which i arm with twin linked plasmas and targetting arrays, sacrificing shot out put to allow me to take down marines and terminators with ease. Thus yes they suck against hordes but marine armies fear them alot especially with my ability to jump shoot and then jump away into cover

In general I would always have specialist units that are best at taking things down and then some units that can do both. For example i usually add plasma rifles to my broadsides spending the extra points to give them the ability to cut down mrines and tanks at short range. Only against horde armies is this worthless, yet it gives me a second weapon against fast assaulters,

I split my army into three sections, anti horde, anti tank(or MC as it is almost impossible to have a high tank and high MC list) and anti marine and i try and balance these sections out. Giving units there specific task is useful as you can almost immediately prioritise your targets and know the units that must be protected and those that can be sacrificed

Overall my whole tau army has to work as a unit each doing there particular job but comibining there fire with other units

Im not really sure what you asking but in summary, I allocate each of my units a role but I always try and ensure there is a back up, pinning all your hopes on one unit isn't wise


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

So I see most people favor specialized units in an overall balanced force. Hmm.... Personally Murphy's Law always plagues me so I have to give my units multiple capabilities.


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

I base mine around my devastators and build the rest of the army around them. Dev's are good anti-anything depending on how you equip them. Devs with 4 heavy bolters can mow down infantry while 4 lascannons shred armor. After decided how the devs will be equipped I prep the rest of my army to take care of the other issues. If my devs are anti-armor I take flamethrowers with my tac squads and an assault squad, if they're designed for anti-infantry I make sure my tac squads have heavy weapons and possibly meltaguns along with twin-linked lascannon dreadnaughts and razorbacks. 

Generally I prefer a mixed dev squad. Not the greatest against against a single target but a lascannon, krak, and plasma cannon are good against vehicles and MEQ's while the Heavy bolter, plasma, and Frag missiles can deal a lot of damage to closely packed infantry units. Not really bad against anything. 3 decent weapons to take on whatever they feel like. Arming the other squads to fit certain roles and compliment each other alongside a firebase seems to be working well atm.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

pathwinder14 said:


> So I see most people favor specialized units in an overall balanced force. Hmm.... Personally Murphy's Law always plagues me so I have to give my units multiple capabilities.


Thats why you have redundancy. You shouldn't rely on one unit to take care of Anti-tank.

It all comes down to balancing specialisation and flexibility. If you have an army of specialists, you can alwasy put in one or two 'jack-of-all-trades' units to fill any gaps you need too, either to boost one aspect against an extreme army set-up or to replace a unit that you lost in battle.

If you have an entire army of 'jack-of-all-trades' then you won't be able to effectively deal with enemy armies that have a heavy bias. An army of specialists can be extremely dangerous in the right hands, as every unit in its right place can do massive damage compared to a more well-rounded unit, but the army itself will be very unforgiving.

The more specialised each unit is, the more Tactical thought needs to go into using it to its peak effectiveness.


----------



## bakoren (Nov 16, 2009)

Almost half of my army is the ultimate in tyranid specialization: Genestealers!

The way they munch and crunch on almost any armor (and their poison) makes them a force to recken with.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

Wolf_Lord_Skoll said:


> Thats why you have redundancy. You shouldn't rely on one unit to take care of Anti-tank.
> 
> It all comes down to balancing specialisation and flexibility. If you have an army of specialists, you can alwasy put in one or two 'jack-of-all-trades' units to fill any gaps you need too, either to boost one aspect against an extreme army set-up or to replace a unit that you lost in battle.
> 
> ...


What I meant was that I give everry squad something that can work against both armor and against troops. For example, I always put 2 plasma pistols and a power fist in my assault squads. The idea being that they blow up transport vehicles then deal with the troops inside. However those same plasma pistols and power fists allow them to deal with other armor. I gice melta guns, missile launchers, and power fists to my tac squads. I combat squad them and have a missile launcher and 4 marines sitting on the back field while the meltagun, powerfist, and 3 marines (in a rhino or razorback) run around taking down armor or troops. 

Each has multi-role capability.


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

With that you'll need to have each unit fulfill multiple roles though. I scaled back my generalities and I found I can field more units that fit specific niches. Prior to scaling back I could have either a pair of dreadnaughts or a basic terminator squad and one hq, after I have both the termies (with assault cannon and chainfists) and the dreads and two HQ's. So my overall army is more effective if I use them properly so instead of pulling double duty and I'm more likely to get their points back. Also do you know how intimidated an ork/guard player gets when he realizes marines outnumber him? Quite fun.


----------



## qotsa4life (Dec 31, 2009)

About a month ago I read Brokensword's tactica on CSM and discovered the idea of defense in depth. I started using the following army list.

Daemon Prince MoS Lash 135

8 Zerks SC + PF 208

7 PM 2 x PG, PC + PF 231
Rhino Twin bolter DP 60

10 CSM LC, IoCG 180

10 CSM ML, IoCG 170

2 Oblit 150

Defiler LC 170

5 Chosen 2 x MG, 3 x Flamer, IoCG, 135
Rhino Twin Bolter, DP, 60

Total 1499

I always deploy in a spearhead formation no matter the opponent/mission.

Against CC armies I deploy a gunline approach. I put the heavy weapons up front and the turn before I think I'll be assaulted I unload the PM squad and run in with the KB squad and DP to meet the attackers. The chosen outflank to deliver flamer madness.

Against Gunline armies I move the PM squad in their rhino with the defiler, DP and KB squad as fast as possible towards the enemy line. The 2 CSM squads sit tight and shoot armour. They can sit on objectives too. I can deepstrike the Oblits and chosen if I go second, they get deployed straight up if I go first.

If the army is fairly balanced I use the gunline approach.

In this example some roles are specialist; CSM squads are anti vehicle/mc.(LC + ML,
KB are CC, (32 S5, I5 attacks on the charge + PF!). 

While some are 'jack of all trades'; DP (Lash, S6, 5attacks), Chosen (2Meltas + 3 Flamers), PM (PF + 2 x PG), Oblit and Defiler can fulfil either role depending on the army or mission.


----------

