# List building tactica



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

I had an idea.

Hydra armies:

Many armies have a key unit. Sometimes it’s a death star unit, other times it’s the single unit an army build revolves around. This can be a great bonus due to its increased threat level, but it can also be a detriment for the very same reason. Many other armies operate with Multiple Small Units. These are good at creating multiple threats but are often beaten by capitalizing upon the weakness of one unit and repeating it for the rest. Still other players have taken to using rainbow lists that spread out redundancy but do not repeat the weaknesses of MSU. Rainbow lists can still fall into the trap of having a few large and expensive units that tie up a lot of points.

I have noticed something different. What if someone were to create a list that spreads out battlefield redundancy but limits the size of the units so as to even out the respective threat levels? For example, I have noticed people who take smaller death star units tend to have them survive longer. They are not perceived by the opponent to be as large a threat as the fully fleshed out version of the squad. This change in perception often makes them target the unit less. A small Death co. unit survives much longer than its larger counterpart because there are only a few models in the squad instead of a fully sized squad.

We can apply this idea to an entire army build. Most units in an army can be made to present a (roughly) equal threat level so the opponent does not know which one to target first. For example, let’s say you have a tac squad with missile launcher and meltagun standing by a hill next to their razorback with twin linked lascannon. Let’s also say you have a 10 man devastator squad with 4 missile launchers sitting on the other side of that hill. Which is the bigger threat on turn 1? The devastators are the bigger threat; of course. However, let’s say you drop 2 of their missile launchers and now they only have 2. Which unit is now the bigger threat? That’s hard to say. Which would you target early in the game?

If many of your squads are even in points cost and threat levels your opponent will not be able to easily discern a "key" unit. In fact it may appear to them that you have no single key unit. This will make it harder for them to find the weakness to your army.


----------



## Archaon18 (Feb 17, 2012)

This is something I have never considered, as my army doesn't have a deathster unit, as my army has lots of small toih units ao againts elitist opposition I can act like a semi-horde, whereas against hordes I utilise my elitest nature


----------



## The Dog Boy (Oct 6, 2011)

The build you are describing is a well used and time honored list building tactic called Multiple Small Units, or MSU for short. It is very popular with all types of Space Marines, especially Space Wolves that can field many Razorback units comparatively cheap.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

The Dog Boy said:


> The build you are describing is a well used and time honored list building tactic called Multiple Small Units, or MSU for short. It is very popular with all types of Space Marines, especially Space Wolves that can field many Razorback units comparatively cheap.


Actually I am NOT talking about MSU. If you read my post again you'll see I address the inherrent weakness of MSU. I propose something different.

I propose taking units that are similar cost, similar size, present a similar threat level, and give battlefield redundancy without spamming so your oponent cannot easily decide what to do.

MSU fails in this because once you figure the weakness to one unit you can apply it to the rest of the spammed MSU army.


----------



## OrdoMalleus (Apr 24, 2009)

The Dog Boy said:


> The build you are describing is a well used and time honored list building tactic called Multiple Small Units, or MSU for short. It is very popular with all types of Space Marines, especially Space Wolves that can field many Razorback units comparatively cheap.


No, MSU is an example of this, not the other way round. For example, 75 Khorne , Berzekers running across the field is an example of a hydra army , but it certainly isnt MSU.

Edit: Ninaj`ed!

@ Pathfinder: Nice post: Inspired me to think about doing a "the forty" army: 5 squads of tooled up purifiers just running across the field, especially at low points cost, it would be hard to kill the quick enough!


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

OrdoMalleus said:


> No, MSU is an example of this, not the other way round. For example, 75 Khorne , Berzekers running across the field is an example of a hydra army , but it certainly isnt MSU.


Unfortunately MSU is NOT a good example. The identical nature of MSU is it's weakness. What deals with one unit deals with them all. Any gun line army would own the berserkers.

I'll give an example of what _I_ mean:

HQ: Reclusiarch with jump pack and infernus pistol
E: 3 Sang priests - 2 have jump packs, all 3 have power weapons
E: Sang guard with Chapter banner, 1 PF, and 2 infernus pistols
T: 10 man assault squad with 2 meltas and 1 PF (Combat squaded)
T: 10 man assault squad with 2 meltas and 1 PF
T: 10 man Tac squad with Melta, Missile launcher, PF, Infernus pistol, Razorback with twin linked lascannon
FA: Balls Pred with twin linked assault cannon and Heavy Bolter sponsons
HS: 10 Devastators with 4 missile launchers (combat squaded)
HS: Pred with lascannon turret, no sponsons

It's roughly 2000 points. It has lots of overlapping battlefield roles. It has plenty of tank punch. It has plenty of close combat. It has scoring troops. It has lots of boots on the ground. It has plenty of armor. 

Yet it has no central "key" unit. It has no death star. It has no MSU weaknesses. And the threat levels it presents are pretty evened out. Your opponent will have a tough time cracking this nut as its balance presents no easily exploitable weakness. It is as I call it, a hydra list.



OrdoMalleus said:


> @ Pathfinder: Nice post: Inspired me to think about doing a "the forty" army: 5 squads of tooled up purifiers just running across the field, especially at low points cost, it would be hard to kill the quick enough!


Thanks.


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

pathwinder14 said:


> Actually I am NOT talking about MSU. If you read my post again you'll see I address the inherrent weakness of MSU. I propose something different.
> 
> I propose taking units that are similar cost, similar size, present a similar threat level, and give battlefield redundancy without spamming so your oponent cannot easily decide what to do.
> 
> MSU fails in this because once you figure the weakness to one unit you can apply it to the rest of the spammed MSU army.


I don't understand how you can claim "MSU" lists fail in this regard, and why you think that they always spam the same units. While I agree max razor armies are weak, that doesn't count for all MSU armies.
Actually, not having a key target is exactly what a good MSU army does. Good MSU armies don't have the same "weakness" repeated all over the army either.

Anyway, the list you just made have many flaws. Your idea of making an army with no "obvious threat" has merit, but this army you just made, gives me an easy time to identify my targets, which I think, is the opposite of it's purpose?

Kill jump infantry win game. Nothing else in the army is actually scary, and stopping 30 jumpers at 2000 games isn't exactly hard. Especially when they have so little ranged support.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

Tossidin said:


> I don't understand how you can claim "MSU" lists fail in this regard, and why you think that they always spam the same units. While I agree max razor armies are weak, that doesn't count for all MSU armies. Actually, not having a key target is exactly what a good MSU army does. Good MSU armies don't have the same "weakness" repeated all over the army either.


You're right. Somehow spam lists have become the poster-child for MSU.




Tossidin said:


> Anyway, the list you just made have many flaws. Your idea of making an army with no "obvious threat" has merit, but this army you just made, gives me an easy time to identify my targets, which I think, is the opposite of it's purpose?
> 
> Kill jump infantry win game. Nothing else in the army is actually scary, and stopping 30 jumpers at 2000 games isn't exactly hard. Especially when they have so little ranged support.


Oh I totally agree. I just threw it together as an expression of my idea. It is deffinitely not a prefect list.


----------



## Skari (Dec 20, 2011)

Very interesting idea. I do agree with this "hydra" list concept. For example someone who would run multiples of 2 TW cav rather than 6 of them in one unit. To increase number of targets and still have just as much killing potential... 

As for the distribution of points costs to a unit to unit ratio and leveling them across the board does indeed make it harder for an enemy to determine that key unit. Sadly tho in game the point value of a unit is not always proportional to its value in game or to the mission at hand. The correlation of this with the game can be upset if, say, you are playing something like kill points... you might have various threats and points value they are all the same but you would try and squeeze out the kill points from other sources not directly relevant to their points cost. 

Now, I think you would have to determine the basic layout and definition of multiple threats within a list. As with much else in this game it all becomes relative... opponent, army, table, terrain, deployment, all these will affect the true nature of "threat" within each particular list. This is what makes it harder to really develop. Anyway, rather than going into a philosophical discussion about the semantics of list building I shall leave it at that. 

Cheers!


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

I have another kind of list I thought could work rather well:

The Terror List

Essentially a list filled with things that you would say "ouch" if you saw them hit a unit on the battlefield. 

This may sound odd, as the aim for every army is to have strong units; but this is not necessarily so. Lots and lots of Imperial Guard mounted in Chimeras are not a Terror List. All tank-heavy Imperial Guard, using as many of the Plasma Leman Russ tanks with plasma sponsons as possible, is a terror list. Using lots and lots of Thousand Sons with their AP3 bolters in a CSM list is a terror list. Using trygons, tyrannofexes, carnifexes, and hive tyrants in a Nid list; another terror list.

Units that would all be, in a more balanced list, high-priority targets in your opponent's shooting and/or assault phases. I plan specifically to use a Terror Necron List, something like this:

Imotekh (Night fight and bloodswarm nano-scarabs...)

A unit of 15 Warriors joined by a Lord / Rezorb, a Cryptek with Veil, and Imotekh (for relentless)

A single unit of 5 Warriors for minimum troops

Either two units of five or one unit of ten Deathmarks. (If split into two units, they will get 2s to wound on BOTH marked units...)

A unit of 15 Flayed Ones to ruin the unit which Imotekh Bloodswarms.

A deep-striking monolith

Possibly an Annihilation barge and 3 Destroyers


So what's terrifying about that list?

1) There's a huge unit of warriors deep-striking around the table, which is fairly resilient, and has relentless so can shoot the full 24" even when using the veil (therefore being out of assault range for most enemy units...!)

2) 15 Flayed Ones... if I want to just take an enemy unit out of the game, I bloodswarm it with Imotekh and wait for the fireworks. Even if they kill over half of the blighters there will still be 21 attacks (28 if I charge) coming at them next turn. And if any more of them do survive, I could get up to a whopping 60 attacks...

3) Ten Deathmarks. Enemy monster, you say? Gone! Enemy deathstar, you say? Mark it, and gone! They've charged us, have they? Silly them; we still wound you on 2s even in combat if we've marked you!

4) A monolith... deep-striking. That's scary enough for anybody, and can help teleport things around.

5) The AP3 brigade; annihilation platform (with under-slung gauss cannon) backed up by 3 destroyers, providing 12 shots of S5 AP3 death, as WELL as the lovely tesla destructor...


I went in to that list a little too specifically, but can you see how everything is slightly unusual, but if you were hit by any one of my formations (bar the very cheap unit of 5 warriors) you'd think "ouch"? That is the Terror List, in essence; totally unbalanced, not particularly geared towards holding objectives or laying down supportive firepower; just simple combos to get your units where you need them, intact (in this case night fighting and deep-striking) where they can reap an horrific toll on the enemy.

What do you think of it?


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

So a terror-list is a horribly imbalanced list.

Am I supposed to be scared of 15 warriors? 15 Flayed ones? Monoliths? Dunno, I think they are some of the least scary units in that book.

And I think a ig list with 15 vehicles is more "terror" than a deathstar army


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Tossidin said:


> So a terror-list is a horribly imbalanced list.
> 
> Am I supposed to be scared of 15 warriors? 15 Flayed ones? Monoliths? Dunno, I think they are some of the least scary units in that book.
> 
> And I think a ig list with 15 vehicles is more "terror" than a deathstar army


Essentially, yes, terror lists are horribly imbalanced and therefore less easy to prepare for. As for being afraid of 15 warriors, when they have a Res Orb and Relentless, yes, you should be afraid. They have a 30" threat range (move and shoot full 24") and once you get within 18" they can unload their full 30 shots at you, which is nasty. This would be bad enough if they couldn't use the Veil of Darkness to Deep strike around the board every turn, essentially hitting you where you're weakest AND being a scoring unit.

As for 15 Flayed Ones... they have 3 attacks each, you should be terrified. :laugh: With Imotekh they can deep-strike without scattering if brought in within 6" of a unit he has marked, so the unit will essentially be dead next assault phase (unless the opponent tries to run off, in which case it'll be the assault phase after!).

Monolith... it's a 200pts vehicle with AV14 all round, can deep strike, has the power to grab any unit on the field and pull it through the portal, or can use the portal to insta-gib enemies close to it with no saves of any kind. It also has a low-AP high-strength large blast, and close-range anti-infantry weaponry. You should be afraid of this as well.

Whilst you may not fear my specific example, you seem to get the terror-list idea; I'd be horrified by a 15-tank IG army. :biggrin:


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

Haha ok 

15 warriors being within 18'' of me means my whole army can (will) kill that unit if I deem it necessary. 15 Flayed ones will die the second they deep strike near me.
Monoliths lost the immune to melta rule if I ain't wrong? Guess how many melta weapons/units I have at 1850? AV14 isn't scary when it has to get close. 

And as a closing note, when you say it is hard to prepare for an unbalanced army, what do you really mean? When I make a list, I make it so that I can beat any and all opposing armys, and I will use it no matter what army I am facing. Preparing for "deathstar" armies like this is cake.


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Well a terror list is certainly NOT, I think you will agree, "cookie-cutter"; it is horrifically imbalanced and not very common. When people create lists for all-comers, they create lists which will perform well against the majority "cookie-cutter" lists; how can they do anything else? They cannot know their opponent's list in advance so an all-comers list is the only thing they can do.

It is that moment of "oh, okay," that your opponent has when you whip out 15 tanks, or a fully-deep striking Necron force using Night Fight, or nidzilla, that your opponent realises they are NOT fighting cookie-cutter and their tactics have to adapt; already they are _reacting_ rather than being _proactive_, and you are already on the path to winning.


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

I don't understand, you say that when people makes all comers lists they make them only against "cookie-cutter" lists. Then, why on earth would we call them "all comers"? A well built can take on any of the armies you mentioned, som of them without the slightest problems.

I see your point of showing up with an unorthodox army that your opponent hasn't prepared for, but that is just it, they haven't prepared for it, which means if they are playing an "all comers" list then they have done something wrong.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

Skari said:


> Very interesting idea. I do agree with this "hydra" list concept. For example someone who would run multiples of 2 TW cav rather than 6 of them in one unit. To increase number of targets and still have just as much killing potential...
> 
> As for the distribution of points costs to a unit to unit ratio and leveling them across the board does indeed make it harder for an enemy to determine that key unit. Sadly tho in game the point value of a unit is not always proportional to its value in game or to the mission at hand. The correlation of this with the game can be upset if, say, you are playing something like kill points... you might have various threats and points value they are all the same but you would try and squeeze out the kill points from other sources not directly relevant to their points cost.
> 
> ...


Thanks. Yeah, points cost would be relative but It is possible to make units less of a precieved threat by evening them out with others (I.E. my example of a Dev squad with 2 ML next to a Tac Squad with ML and Melta in a Razorback).

The BOLS article today touches on the same subject.
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2012/03/40k-making-units-both-unique-and.html


----------



## Farseer Darvaleth (Nov 15, 2009)

Tossidin said:


> I don't understand, you say that when people makes all comers lists they make them only against "cookie-cutter" lists. Then, why on earth would we call them "all comers"? A well built can take on any of the armies you mentioned, som of them without the slightest problems.
> 
> I see your point of showing up with an unorthodox army that your opponent hasn't prepared for, but that is just it, they haven't prepared for it, which means if they are playing an "all comers" list then they have done something wrong.


Please cite a list which simultaeneously prepares fully for cookie-cutter lists as well as utterly mad random lists (such as terror lists) in every single 40k codex, and I will accept this argument. :laugh:

It's the unpredictability and sheer "huh?" factor of terror lists that make them work.

EDIT: And they *do* work. Personal success attests to the fact.


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

Your personal success? Do you really want to play that game?

No, I won't cite lists from every codex... lol.


----------



## thephish (Oct 27, 2011)

This is something I try to do with all of my lists that I make. I run MSU DE. MSU in general typically does this without trying simply b/c limiting the number of troops, special weapons etc. brings the points costs and threat levels closer to one another.

The concept of evening out the threat potential from one squad to the next could be applied to most 'styles' of lists. The Deathstar being the only one that can't be because of it's very nature. You could make it smaller to make it stick out less like you mentioned though.


----------



## pathwinder14 (Dec 27, 2006)

thephish said:


> This is something I try to do with all of my lists that I make. I run MSU DE. MSU in general typically does this without trying simply b/c limiting the number of troops, special weapons etc. brings the points costs and threat levels closer to one another.
> 
> The concept of evening out the threat potential from one squad to the next could be applied to most 'styles' of lists. The Deathstar being the only one that can't be because of it's very nature. You could make it smaller to make it stick out less like you mentioned though.


I have noticed more that MSU does in fact accomplish this. I was just stuck looking through the lens of MSU Spam. Once we get away from spam, MSU is ideal for this. The trick is getting people to power down their units to even thm out. But who would really run a 2 ML dev squad when they can get 4 ML in it? I know I wouldn't. I'll have to try it in a test game.


----------

