# Do you need lots of troop choices to win games of 5th Ed???



## Skcuzzlebumm

*sigh*

Ok this has become my mantra since 5th Ed was released and the fact i keeping seeing so many posts on every forum talking about the same thing its actually made me break my lurking silence....

Q: Do you need lots of troop choices to win games of 5th Ed???

NO!

"There is not need to capture an objective if you have simply contested your opponents" (this is one of my mantra's along with "where's my beer?").

All my armies are designed to excel at Kill Points. This means i only really take 2 troops (maybe 3 if its Orks or Nids as they are a bit squishy) and then pump all my other points into really hard hitting and/or survivable units.

This obviously works well in Kill Points but then you apply this army to any other mission and it is just as good.

Capture the Flag (I can never remember the proper mission names btw) only requires you to hold your objective. So take something which loves sitting in cover (think scouts with cloaks here for marines for example). All you then have to do is be quick enough to get right in your opponents face and just jump all over his objective and contest the hell out of this.

Prime example was last night when i used a very sub par Marine army (just grabbed some stuff out my local GW's cabinet) vs a very tough Necron army (Nightbringer, 2 Liths and loads of warriors). Turn 1 i boshed a Pod down on a flank near his objective and steamed a Raider with regular terminators and a libby forward as well. This effectively pinned him in his deployment zone for 4 turns whilst he tripped over himself to deal with some tough, resilient units. In the end i was unlucky and only on turn 5 did he reclaim his objective.

Now the 3rd mission is multiple objectives. So whilst your opponent has brought 3/4 mediocre troops choices to the party you have the above units to smack him down and quickly contesting anything he claims and getting ALL the attention whilst your 2 troops choices do their thing take and objective and win the game.

This is the approach i have taken to 5th Ed and is pretty much why i continue to do so well. Hope it helps.


----------



## Darkseer

Hooray for killing! We shan't have any of this ridiculous 'mission' based malarky!


----------



## sooch

That's pretty much how I think 5th should be treated. Although usually I only bring 2 tac squads to a 1500 point game, usually there's a scout squad with cloaks in there as well to round it out. The rest is killy.


----------



## Stella Cadente

Darkseer said:


> Hooray for killing! We shan't have any of this ridiculous 'mission' based malarky!


indeed, why play a game with any meaning or focus to it, when you can just kill everything in sight like the 8yr old players do.............:alcoholic:


----------



## Djokovic

> indeed, why play a game with any meaning or focus to it, when you can just kill everything in sight like the 8yr old players do.............


Haha... a hint of sarcasm there.

IMO you need at least 4 troops choices to win a game in 5th ed.


----------



## sooch

Depends which army you're playing. If you're playing orks, hell yes you need at least 4 troops (unless nob bikers). If you're playing SM...well...you really don't want more of the rank and file blue boys than you need.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Djokovic said:


> Haha... a hint of sarcasm there.
> 
> IMO you need at least 4 troops choices to win a game in 5th ed.


Unless you are playing Guard, nids or Orks (who have very killable troop choices) you really don't.

Anyone putting 4 troop choices down in front of me is only going to make me smile as thats 300 odd points they haven't spent on something that is going to hurt me.

I would argue that it is the 8 year olds that spam troops in a vain hope to smother the board for a win rather than those who's armies are honed enough to at the least negate their opponents ability to claim objectives and/or clean them off the table.


----------



## World Eater

Stella Cadente said:


> indeed, why play a game with any meaning or focus to it, when you can just kill everything in sight like the 8yr old players do.............:alcoholic:


Hail,

Well said. And to further help 8 yr players (or those who play like 8 yr olds!) lets play with absolutely no terrain so that it all becomes a big old kill fest!
(cover saves just slow the game down way tooo much).

Missions and objectives help develop players as a whole, using an army of primarily Troop selections is not a sign of weakness, it should be the foundation/cornerstone of the whole army no matter who you play.

BFTBG!!

World Eater


----------



## Stella Cadente

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Anyone putting 4 troop choices down in front of me is only going to make me smile as thats 300 odd points they haven't spent on something that is going to hurt me.


if you really think 100-220 guard or 40 marines ain't gonna hurt you, then I'd like to know what land you live in


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Stella Cadente said:


> if you really think 100-220 guard or 40 marines ain't gonna hurt you, then I'd like to know what land you live in


When i'm not sitting on the top tables of tourneys i can be found in manchester.

No really all 3 of the 5th Ed armies i have been running would laugh thier way to the bank vs something like that.

In fact both my nids and orks have faced down Guard and Marine hordes lately and walked right through them.

Troops are there as a back up to tip the balance when needed but mostly to follow up behind the rest of your army and take objectives when needed.

Don't believe me look at all the top 10 armies in the UK and US GT's. Most of them only had 2 troops. That's a pretty fair indicator of how much you really don't need troop spam.

Plus if you did take one of these massive 100+ armies you soon realise that on a regular 6x4 it either trips over itself and never gets to bring everything to bare or it ends up so clumped together they are just waiting to get smothered in a couple of templates/blasts.


----------



## Stella Cadente

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> When i'm not sitting on the top tables of tourneys i can be found in Manchester.
> 
> No really all 3 of the 5th Ed armies i have been running would laugh their way to the bank vs something like that.


riiiight, if you say so


Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Don't believe me look at all the top 10 armies in the UK and US GT's. Most of them only had 2 troops. That's a pretty fair indicator of how much you really don't need troop spam.


GT's are an indicator of nothing in the real world to be honest.


----------



## darkreever

Stella Cadente said:


> GT's are an indicator of nothing in the real world to be honest.


Other than your likely very good at competitive play (I think.)

My current army doesn't use four troop choices to win the day, but neither do they use only two. (Nor do most of them back up the heavy hitters, they are usualyl amongst the heavy hitters.)


Anyway, Stella I remember a time ago elsewhere when you once mentioned a good record with an army; you were met with disbelief (amongst other things) and the results were far from nice. You both should just leave that bit be before it accidentally gets worse.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Stella Cadente said:


> GT's are an indicator of nothing in the real world to be honest.


No they are not an indicator of what most gamers play that much is true. 

What they are is an indicator of what the very sharpest end of gaming is and ultimately what works in that environment will work doubly well against joe blogs down the road.



darkreever said:


> Other than your likely very good at competitive play (I think.)


That i am, ask the Jez, Jigplums or Marz (who all know me).



> You both should just leave that bit be before it accidentally gets worse.


Don't worry i always play nice, hence why i used to be a mod here until i got too busy with other things.


----------



## Djokovic

Before I start, please do not post twice - just edit.

I agree that GTs are a pretty good indicator of what competitive lists are out there. 

If you are a good competitive player, I would love it if you would post some tyranid lists.


----------



## sooch

Skcuzzle has made very valid points, all of which I agree with. And like I said before, the amount of troops you should bring to the table depends greatly upon what army you play.


----------



## Djokovic

> depends greatly upon what army you play.
> Reply With Quote


IMO it depends more on playing style... even for orks, tyranids, and guard you can field some 'killy' armies with low model count (monster mash, deff dreads, leman russ spam).


----------



## killmaimburn

Troop spam is something that CAN be effective, it just varies with the codex. New marine codex tac squads are cheap enough that bringing four doesn't really impede your ability to pack in heavy hitters. Similarly, in the CSM codex, your troop choices basically play like elites, so they can be very effective as well. 
Before any of you respond I would like to make it clear that I in no way consider myself to have GT level skills and respect anyone who does.


----------



## Stella Cadente

darkreever said:


> Other than your likely very good at competitive play (I think.)


whos cares about competetive play, fun play comes first


darkreever said:


> Anyway, Stella I remember a time ago elsewhere when you once mentioned a good record with an army; you were met with disbelief (amongst other things) and the results were far from nice..


actually it was cases spread over several years of play with my guard, things like killing thirster's and Kharn and Harlequins and grey knights etc in close combat, but I never go round bragging about being top of tourney tables and and my armies laughing to the bank, I only spoke about odd occurrences that happen in none competitive fun games (what boardgames are designed to be)


----------



## sooch

Tac marine squads AREN'T cheap enough to bring 4 without having an impact on the rest of your list...adding rhinos makes each squad 205 apiece and that's way too much. You are right though, that troop spam is something that CAN be effective but it varies from codex to codex (a la orks).



Stella Cadente said:


> whos cares about competetive play, fun play comes first


Ah, the casual elitist. Please. If you want people to regard casual, fun play as casual and fun, don't go putting down competitive play and competitive attitudes and competitive builds as vehemently as you can.


----------



## Ragewind

> ack him down and quickly contesting anything he claims and getting ALL the attention whilst your 2 troops choices do their thing take and objective and win the game.


Thank God I am not alone! Filling more than 2 troop choices is agony for me (lol) This is the same approach I use and it has never backfired.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Djokovic said:


> Before I start, please do not post twice - just edit.


Don't worry that was just multiquote going a bit spare



> If you are a good competitive player, I would love it if you would post some tyranid lists.


I posted this a while back for Jigplums and Marz



ME:grin: said:


> mmmmm nids. I like nids don't you know
> 
> Ok my current thoughts on successful 5th Nid armies and how to further the hive mind's dinner menu.
> 
> TYRANTS
> 
> Flying tyrants are out. Without 4th Ed AT you can no longer hop from behind one wood the the back of another. Instead your pretty bat out of hell gets shot down the minute he hits the board. Not good. Instead for CCW power look to a basic cheap as chips double talon tyrant with I6, S6, Implant, WS6 (at 134pts thats a bargain).
> 
> The oh so great double devourer tyrant is still here. Lets face it all those Ork armies running around need some pain.
> 
> BROODLORDS.
> 
> Oh yes! Oh dear god how evil these guys have become. Always outflank them, always. This will cause your opponent to deploy in the middle of the board which is excellent for you as we all know nids like to hit on mass and do not like hitting long lines across a board. Next give mr Broodlord Feeder Tendrils and his stealer mates Acid Maw. Yep thats re-roll hits and to wounds for those stealers. OMG! Just think of all that rending.
> 
> WARRIORS
> 
> The old leaping warrior IMO is out. Rending just isn't what it used to be and at around 35-40pts each they just aint worth it anymore. Instead look at either a very cheap warrior with a 4+ save and Twin Devourers. Thats it! No need to splurge pts on BS as its twin-linked and again upping the Strength ends up costing an arm and a leg so just live with the S3 and re-roll wound. Or again 4+ save but with Deathspitters and rending claws for cheap massed S5 blast. These fellas are cheap as chips and great for helping to boost your crowd control.
> 
> LICTORS
> 
> mmmm a toughie. They obviously look like a liability in KP games but don't forget with the new cover rules and their +2 to all cover saves these little fellas are going to be very hard to shift. Combined with always hitting armour in the rear in CC and thier S6 will make short work of any tank. A godsend vs whirlwinds or the like.
> 
> STEALERS
> 
> I have never rated stealers as a troops choice for nids. Too many points and too squishy imo. Everyone knows what they can do in combat and therefore no-one will ever let them get past the 1st turn. Keep stealers with the Broodlord as above and thats all.
> 
> HORMAGUANTS
> 
> Probably the biggest losers in 5th Ed. These guys where awesome in 4th but with the new combat res rules and the inability to sweep into new units they just die like droves and cost twice as much as a regular gaunt. I am sorry to say these chaps are all getting spinefists in my army.
> 
> GAUNTS
> 
> the backbone of all nid armies. Don't be tempted by without number, it makes your average guant cost 80% more and is a killer in KP games (they will get shot again and again and again). Keep them cheap and take lots of them. The list i have run has 3 15 strong Termaguant broods at 90pts each.
> 
> RAVENERS
> 
> Oh dear again how the mighty have fallen. As single units they just give up KP's and with the downgrade of rending cannot even kill anything. In units the fail even more than CCW warriors as they cost as much, don't have synapse and have a lower save. Again a sad loss to the hive mind
> 
> GARGOYLES
> 
> These guys actually still have thier uses. Though they cost double that of a regular guant thier high mobility, high LD and combination of fleshborer and bio plasma make them a worth while unit to send alone down a flank against some lone units. Not sure if i would take them but they still have thier uses.
> 
> FAST ATTACK SPORE MINES
> 
> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Who are you kidding?!?! These are never going to be seen in a GT list as each one gives away an automatic kill point.
> 
> ZOANTHROPES
> 
> Oh yeah, 2+ save, synapse and lots of 4+ cover make these lads great for holding the horde of guants together whilst the big lads get stuck in at the front. I've actually had lots of success using these as a choir with scream on my tyrant. -4 LD and the new combat res rules means you can almost auto break units with ease.
> 
> BIOVORES.
> 
> Never really rated them much, they can be good but at the same time they fight for a hvy support slot against fex's and zoes which is why i doubt you will ever see them.
> 
> CARNIFEXS
> 
> Hello Ok we all know that Fex's are the soul of most nid armies. In 5th Ed this remains the same.
> 
> Current cheeky builds are:-
> 
> Good old Dakka Fex (BS3 or Spinebanks and 2 Devourers depending on your choice)
> Good old gun Fex (BS3, VC and Barbed Strangler).
> Screamer Killer (well my version)(2 talons, WS4 and mace tail is good enough for an elite slot)
> Strangler Fex (just a strangler and talons is only 113pts - ouch!)
> 
> Don't be tempted to go and pump tons of points into your fex's giving them all kinds of increases. They end up quickly costing way too many points and still tbh die just as easily to the usual high S and low AP weapons everyone has.
> 
> Weapons wise as you can see the usual suspects are still there. Worth noting that the VC is your friend still with the advent of such units as Nob Bikers (not even the warboss can risk playing Mr T5 alblative wound there) and Battlewagons (oh look you are open topped so i can pen and am S10).
> 
> IMO a fex should never cost more than 150pts. Anything more and you often start finding yourself struggling to make the points back. Remember 4 cheap fex's is better than 3 slightly better ones.
> 
> Hopes this helps you dude.


As for the list i have been running of late:

Tyrant with Lash Whip/Bone Sword, WS6, S6, Implant, Scream
+ 3 Guard
Broodlord with 3+ Sv, S6, Tendrils
+ 5 Stealers with Acid Maw
5 Warriors with 4+ Sv, Deathspitter, Rending Claws
Fex with 2 Devourers and Spine Banks
Fex with 2 Devourers and Spine Banks
15 Termaguants
15 Termaguants
15 Termaguants
Fex with Twin Strangler
Fex with Twin Strangler
2 Zoes with Synapse and Warp Blast

1500pts

Its got a fair amount of shooting that excels vs troops. The Stranglers as twin-linked for when i really need to hit those tanks/smaller units. Zoes at a pinch can chuck a S10 out for AT. Then you have the flanking Lord and CC Tyrant stomping forwards and keeping the enemy on their toes and not shooting at everything else. Finally enough guants to soak up some inevitable hits whilst moving up to take objectives when needed. In KP games these fellas steam forwards with the Tyrant and just generally make a mess whilst dying.

As for regards to comments about Fun -v- Competitive play. Don't kid yourself that even fun games between mates aint competitive, we all know they are often the most hard won as who wants to loose to their mates and hear about it down the pub? But that aside as a long standing tourney player i could go on for hours about how wrong ppl have gotten it about the attitudes displayed. i do go to a LOT of tourneys, i like them, i like winning. I also love the fact that in the UK for sure there is a small group of about 20 regular tourney players who you always end up playing on the high tables and they are all excellent games because though they are very closely played they are 99% done in a really friendly atmosphere. Hence why that group all get along so well despite the obvious rivalries such a situation is bound to cause.


----------



## killmaimburn

@ Sooch:

Naturally the tac squads have an impact but bringing 4 isn't TOO damaging to your list because they provide their own form of firepower (I mean having 40 marines in rhinos in close to half your list isn't bad given that they're packing a free ML and flamer, and that 40 is a high model count for marines. In CSM I usually bring between 40-60 marines, depending on the elite-ness (is that a word?) of my list, and with 820 down for troops you have a high number of marines, 4 armor targets for your opponents heavies, and room for some devs, a chapter master, and an assault squad or termies. I don't have as much experience with reg marines as CSM, but if I recall correctly their assault squads are now even cheaper than CSM raptors.

@ Skcuzzlebum:

Do you have any sample 5th edition nidzilla lists? Just curious, as I always wanted to build that army due to the low model count and high conversion possibilities.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

killmaimburn said:


> @ Sooch:
> 
> Naturally the tac squads have an impact but bringing 4 isn't TOO damaging to your list because they provide their own form of firepower (I mean having 40 marines in rhinos in close to half your list isn't bad given that they're packing a free ML and flamer, and that 40 is a high model count for marines. In CSM I usually bring between 40-60 marines, depending on the elite-ness (is that a word?) of my list, and with 820 down for troops you have a high number of marines, 4 armor targets for your opponents heavies, and room for some devs, a chapter master, and an assault squad or termies. I don't have as much experience with reg marines as CSM, but if I recall correctly their assault squads are now even cheaper than CSM raptors.


But the problem lies in that 10 Tactical marines don't dish out enough hard shooting or combat. Line them up vs a couple of MeQ killing tanks or CC units and its game over.



> @ Skcuzzlebum:
> 
> Do you have any sample 5th edition nidzilla lists? Just curious, as I always wanted to build that army due to the low model count and high conversion possibilities.


Friend of mine ran this against my Orks a while back (he still lost :biggrin:

Tyrant with 2 talons, WS6, I6, S6, Implant, Acid Maw, Scream
+ 3 Guard
Tyrant with Twin Dev, S6, BS4, Scream
+ 3 Guard
5 Warriors with Twin Dev, BS3, S5
2 Fex's with Twin Dev, BS3
3x8 Spine guants with without number
1 Fex's with Twin Dev, BS3
2 VC/Strangler Fex's

(can't remember the exacts but was pretty much the above)


----------



## killmaimburn

Thanks for the list!
Well I realize that tac squads aren't specialized or super capable but by putting them in the right place at the right time they are very effective. I'm sure you all know this and it's been said before, but if you get them stuck in with shooty enemies (ksons, tau, guard squads, etc.) they will be very useful and earn their points back, and they can shoot well enuff to put some hurt on stuff like a 32 man mob of ork boyz, or a 12 man (boy) mob that is rolling up in a trukk.


----------



## Brian007

Very nice post on the Nids!! It will help. I also play orks, I just started and I would love a run down like that on the orks and maybe a sample list like the nid one....Thanks!!


----------



## sooch

My nidzilla list looks something like this:

Tyrant with VC/Devourers, +S, +BS, +Sv, Implant, Shadow
+3 guard (whips)

Tyrant with VC/Devourers, +S, +BS, +Sv, Implant, Shadow
+3 guard (whips)

Fex with scytal/barbed strangler

Fex with scytal/barbed strangler

Fex with scytal/barbed strangler

2x 8 gaunts WoN

2x 7 Stealers w/ FT

Fex with VC/strangler/+BS

Fex with VC/strangler/+BS

Fex with VC/strangler/+BS

It's very successful as far as nidzilla goes.

Anyways, back on topic: yes you get 40 bodies, but remember that 20 nob bikers can tear your 40 SM a new one before you can say "troops". You will be losing combat badly, and even with SM high leadership you will just get run off the board. Your opponent doesn't have to kill every space marine to win the game, remember?


----------



## killmaimburn

I concede your point, Sooch. There IS a reason I play my chaos army a lot more than my loyalist army...


----------



## englanda

I ran into this problem with SM. I, as a new player, listening to what I was being told, took 4 tac squads in 1500pts. I was DESTROYED by anything I went against - especially eldar and orks. I have since switched to orks and the problem is almost none existent. Boyz are just great. I don't think there's anything wrong with taking tons of ork troops, especially when the other half of your army is dead killy.


----------



## Darkseer

For many armies elite units have a specific purpose on the table, while troops are a jack of all trades and a master of none.

That is why an army which consists of various elite units all fulfilling their own specialist rules will generally be stronger and more versatile than horde of grunts.

Lots of grunts can hold lots of objectives...but not when they're dead.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Orks do probably have the best troop choices in the game and apart from Sisters are the only ones that really benefit from have more than 2 (but still don't go OTT else you end up with just lots of slightly better mediocrity).

You asked about my opinions on good ork lists, there are 4 IMO:

Build 1.

3/4 Battlewagons. One with Gazgull and some boyz, 1 with mega nobs, KFF in another and then lootas/burnas in another. Lots of AV14 rolling forwards causing a mess and then some of the most hard hitting units in ork bok dishing out pain (ever seen 10 burnas shoot a marine squad....).

Build 2.

2 Warbosses on bikes and 2 units of nob bikers where each model is armed differently. This makes maximum use of the new wound allocation rules and is generally a real bitch to deal with.

Build 3.

Horde: Big G + some lootas + KFF + as many boyz as possbile with as many rockets and klaws as possible. Does fall down on the fact it trips over itself all the time by having too many boyz.

Build 4.

Wrath of Kan. Couple of KFF totting Meks, 2 dreads and 3 units of kans (with grotzookas) backed up by lootas and some big units of boyz.

These 4 are all really harsh but are also a slightly too specialised in one area so can fall down when you pull than nemesis (i.e necrons/tau for the wrath of kan). Because of this i personally try to combine 2 of these 4 into a single list to help give some kind of flexibility and fall back.

i.e this years GT list for me was:

Warboss on bike with Klaw, cybork, squig, scorcha
5 nob bikes with 1 pole, 1 banner, 1 klaw, 1 painboy
12 lootas
30 boyz with 3 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
3 deffkoptas with rockets
1 looted wagon with boomgun, ard case and ram.


----------



## JokerGod

Just wait one second here! Do you honestly mean to tell me there are other missions other then "Annihilation" and "Kill shit"?

I have a very simple goal when I play, take one objective, just one. And kill everything that gets close to the other ones. it removes the need for mass squishy troops and alows me to take units that are more fun to play.


----------



## DarKKKKK

I guess im gonna have to try out just having 2 troop choices my next game. I just havent been having too much luck with the 4-5 (normally 4) I always use, but that normally in my 2000 pt games. Still my average in 1500 pt is mainly 3 which i still think is probably the best amount to have for 1500 pt without over doing it on the troops.


----------



## Crimzzen

Darkseer said:


> For many armies elite units have a specific purpose on the table, while troops are a jack of all trades and a master of none.
> 
> That is why an army which consists of various elite units all fulfilling their own specialist rules will generally be stronger and more versatile than horde of grunts.
> 
> Lots of grunts can hold lots of objectives...but not when they're dead.


Heh, I think it's nearly impossible to kill 130+ boyz holding objectives when they have 4+ cover saves (3+ if gone to ground). Granted the list has problems but you will hold most if not all of the objectives on the table :mrgreen:



Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Orks do probably have the best troop choices in the game and apart from Sisters are the only ones that really benefit from have more than 2 (but still don't go OTT else you end up with just lots of slightly better mediocrity).
> 
> You asked about my opinions on good ork lists, there are 4 IMO:
> 
> Build 1.
> 
> 3/4 Battlewagons. One with Gazgull and some boyz, 1 with mega nobs, KFF in another and then lootas/burnas in another. Lots of AV14 rolling forwards causing a mess and then some of the most hard hitting units in ork bok dishing out pain (ever seen 10 burnas shoot a marine squad....).
> 
> Build 2.
> 
> 2 Warbosses on bikes and 2 units of nob bikers where each model is armed differently. This makes maximum use of the new wound allocation rules and is generally a real bitch to deal with.
> 
> Build 3.
> 
> Horde: Big G + some lootas + KFF + as many boyz as possbile with as many rockets and klaws as possible. Does fall down on the fact it trips over itself all the time by having too many boyz.
> 
> Build 4.
> 
> Wrath of Kan. Couple of KFF totting Meks, 2 dreads and 3 units of kans (with grotzookas) backed up by lootas and some big units of boyz.
> 
> These 4 are all really harsh but are also a slightly too specialised in one area so can fall down when you pull than nemesis (i.e necrons/tau for the wrath of kan). Because of this i personally try to combine 2 of these 4 into a single list to help give some kind of flexibility and fall back.
> 
> i.e this years GT list for me was:
> 
> Warboss on bike with Klaw, cybork, squig, scorcha
> 5 nob bikes with 1 pole, 1 banner, 1 klaw, 1 painboy
> 12 lootas
> 30 boyz with 3 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 3 deffkoptas with rockets
> 1 looted wagon with boomgun, ard case and ram.


Nothing to really do with the post, but rokkits in groups of boyz are nearly useless. With the 7 rokkits listed above, 2 will hit, and being str 8, I'd rather just point my lootas at the same armour. (for the saved points, I'd jack up my lootas to 15 - capitalize on dead killy units. Instead of shooting rokkits, I'd rather just run, getting my klaws closer.


----------



## Mud213

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Orks do probably have the best troop choices in the game and apart from Sisters are the only ones that really benefit from have more than 2 (but still don't go OTT else you end up with just lots of slightly better mediocrity).


I need to preface this with the fact that I am by no means an expert. I have only played 2 games with my army (CSM).  After reading other codices (I've done far more reading than playing), I see that our troop choices are similar as other armies Elite choices.

Berzerkers are deadly in CC, Noise Marines can lay down a ton of bolter-equivalent fire and have a useful small blast (w/pinning), Thousand Sons have lots of AP3 shots w/ a Psychic, and Plague Marines are just plain tough.

Sure there are other things that will beat them at there own game, but they have the versatility of normal troops plus have a specialty. Having the ability to capture points is just a bonus. Taking more than 2 troop choices isn't the worst thing you could spend your points on in a CSM army.

For the most part I agree and love to hear that you don't _need_ to have a bunch of Troop choices to win. *I will most certainly reconsider taking so many in low point games* (in exchange for another Defiler :victory: ). I just wanted to say that we Traitors can benefit from more than 2 troop choices as well.


----------



## englanda

Thing with CSM, why take more than two troops when your two troops are unkillable and you have such tasty choices as demon princes and obliterators.


----------



## Fugital357

I've been playing a bit with the new Rules, and my new SM Codex. I've realized its not about having a lot of troops on the table, so much as it is about making certain your opponent doesn't.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Crimzzen said:


> Heh, I think it's nearly impossible to kill 130+ boyz holding objectives when they have 4+ cover saves (3+ if gone to ground). Granted the list has problems but you will hold most if not all of the objectives on the table :mrgreen:


Actually there is a lot out there that just sails straight through cover saves and couple in the fact 130 boyz is going to be a huge target means that blast weapons and pie plates are always going to be maximising the kills.

Also Ork boyz suffer very quickly when charged by proper CCW units (terminators, seer councils, FnP units etc). Thier low I , poor save and low return S means that they will loose a bucket load of boyz on the out. Thier return will do very little, odds on they are still fearless so loose loads more. Then they must consolidate in and so therefore quite easily surround the enemy making counter charges very hard or impossible. Your opponent just repeats this again and again.



> Nothing to really do with the post, but rokkits in groups of boyz are nearly useless. With the 7 rokkits listed above, 2 will hit, and being str 8, I'd rather just point my lootas at the same armour. (for the saved points, I'd jack up my lootas to 15 - capitalize on dead killy units. Instead of shooting rokkits, I'd rather just run, getting my klaws closer.


Yep BS2 is a bitch but there are lots of times when you will need some S8 or extra AT in your army. What would an Ork army without rockets do vs Landraiders or Monoliths? Also what do you do when facing dual lash or Nidzilla or Mech Sisters? It is often not such a viable option to rely on Klaws alone and even though BS2 sucks rockets are the best of a poor choice of options.



Mud213 said:


> I need to preface this with the fact that I am by no means an expert. I have only played 2 games with my army (CSM).  After reading other codices (I've done far more reading than playing), I see that our troop choices are similar as other armies Elite choices.
> 
> Berzerkers are deadly in CC, Noise Marines can lay down a ton of bolter-equivalent fire and have a useful small blast (w/pinning), Thousand Sons have lots of AP3 shots w/ a Psychic, and Plague Marines are just plain tough.
> 
> Sure there are other things that will beat them at there own game, but they have the versatility of normal troops plus have a specialty. Having the ability to capture points is just a bonus. Taking more than 2 troop choices isn't the worst thing you could spend your points on in a CSM army.


I would say you honestly don't need them.

Sure CSM have access to some nice troop choices but they cost a lot of points and overall don't pack as much punch as a lot of the other units in the CSM book.

Plus consider that a cult squad with chump, fist and special weapons is going to come in at around 300pts suddenly if you take more than 2 your are left with very little to spend on anything else and again your opponents more specialised non troop units will have a field day.

Remember that i play in the UK where 1500 is the norm. In the US its 1850/2k so maybe a 3 choice would work. As a rule of thumb (excluding Orks, and Sisters) you should try not to spend more than a 1/3 on troops.


----------



## Darkseer

Crimzzen said:


> Heh, I think it's nearly impossible to kill 130+ boyz holding objectives when they have 4+ cover saves (3+ if gone to ground). Granted the list has problems but you will hold most if not all of the objectives on the table.


Nothing a few markerlights, submunition rounds and Stealth Suits couldn't cure :mrgreen:
Then there's the Airbursting Fragmentation Projector!


----------



## englanda

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Warboss on bike with Klaw, cybork, squig, scorcha
> 5 nob bikes with 1 pole, 1 banner, 1 klaw, 1 painboy
> 12 lootas
> 30 boyz with 3 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 20 boyz with 2 rockets, nob with klaw, pole
> 3 deffkoptas with rockets
> 1 looted wagon with boomgun, ard case and ram.


I'm new to orks, but wouldn't some battlewagons fill several different rolls in a list like this? Deffrolas for anti-tank , protection from lash etc. My list would be somewhat like that.. Boss Biker, Nob Bikers, Lootas, 3 boyz squads mounted in battlewagons.. should come to 1500ish. Only thing it wouldn't do too well against is wave serpent spam (drop behind, S8 or S9 on rear armor.. ouch), but I'm not sure what in the ork codex does.


----------



## newsun

I have said this a few times to people about not needing a lot of troops.

And while I am currently playing sisters where it just makes sense for DG, you only need one unit to survive and claim an objective everything else should be focused on killing first contesting 2nd. Even those troops you do take ideally they should also be super killy if possible.


----------



## Mud213

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Remember that i play in the UK where 1500 is the norm. In the US its 1850/2k so maybe a 3 choice would work. As a rule of thumb (excluding Orks, and Sisters) you should try not to spend more than a 1/3 on troops.


I think _this_ is vital to the whole argument. We aren't really talking about the same game then. If we "Yankees" are thinking about 2K point games, it's not the same as a 1500 point game.

You're rule of thumb sounds good. Following that logic you can have 3 troop options at 2K.

One thing to keep in mind though is that most people I know will go after you troop choices primarily in order to insure that you can't capture points. If you only have 2, and they kill them, you could have all of your HS, Elites and HQ left, but you can't win the game anymore.


----------



## darkreever

Mud213 said:


> you could have all of your HS, Elites and HQ left, but you can't win the game anymore.


You could still win, but wiping out the entire opposing army is easier said than done.


----------



## MasterKnives

It does seem that troops are less useful this time around. However you cant completely skimp on them. Thin them out too much or allow them to be killed to easily due to lack of wargear/transports whatever and you are asking for trouble. However, using two fully fledged out units and having the rest of your army (at 1500-2k) do most of the heavy lifting should work out better than troop spam ever could.


----------



## Underground Heretic

I'll admit I'm still new and not tactically adept, but I've found that, at least for my tau, spamming fire warriors does work well. Generally, I just use them as a fire base that my opponent will willingly come at, but they can capture points and bring down anything up to T 8. I run pathfinders, and am required to take a devilfish with them which can be used to transport fire warriors. I'm not sure what unit would be described as tau's "uber killy" squad, but the pulse rifle is a darn good weapon that can be used to saturate death squads is used en masse. Just food for thought.

EDIT: Probably should have included how many I intend to run. At 1500 pts., 4 squads; at 2000 pts., 5 squads and above 6.


----------



## m3rr3k

My current CSM list played at 1700 (most points we can play at our GW store & actually "finish" a 5/6 turn game) breaks down like:

HQ: 20%
Elite / Fast: approx 22%
Troop: 33%
Heavy: 25%

troops consist of 2 NM squads & 1 Zerk squad.

at 2,000 (saturday games):

HQ: 15%
Elite / Fast: approx 20%
Troop: 39%
Heavy: 26%

troops consist of 2 NM squds & 2 Zerk squads.

I have a pretty decent list for any opponent - as long as I'm able to get close to those damned dark reapers every eldar player loves to use...


----------



## Johnny Genocide

I've always been using at least 4 troop squads in my Death Guard and Tyranids. The only army i use less than that are Necrons, where I use two squads of 10 warriors but they're fairly easy to protect. And in my Eldar where i use 2-3 usually fully fleshed out dire avenger squads with serpents.


----------



## World Eater

Hail,

Perhaps some of you are not aware, there is a version of 40k which DOESN'T use troops at all.

It's called Apocalypse. You want 8 Devastator squads. Go for it! An armoured spearhead of only Land Raiders, sure thing. You get the picture. 
Sure Apoc. is a bitch for newer players who don't have their 15th Hive tyrant
but what the hell, why go half-assed on those silly FOC's with those mandatory 2 Troops.
Apoc. was designed with the 'kill everything' without following the basic structure of regular 40k.
Troops are not the be all end all of your army, but it shows me who really has tactical ability to make the most of your core troops than just the killy stuff.

I would still shake your hand after the match win or lose, but I would be lying if I would truly enjoy playing more games in the future with people whose only concern is min/max 40k to win at all costs.

In a GW world of gaming compromise, some players don't!

BFTBG!!

World Eater


----------



## LimitingFactor

Originally Posted by Skcuzzlebumm View Post
"Anyone putting 4 troop choices down in front of me is only going to make me smile as thats 300 odd points they haven't spent on something that is going to hurt me."


Im still painting my world eaters force.

I plan to have two squads of bezerkers, one squad of tactical choas marines. All 3 squads to include champions or skull takers. (i will render these squads up to their full limits of 20 models, depending on the points allowed in a game.

1 Khorne lord , with or without a stead.

10 havocs with heavy guns (and close combat weapons hehe) .

Chosen marines , between 5 and ten of them all armed with melta guns , plus one melta combi.

no tanks , no big , easy to spot models, everything must be able to hide from tau as they advance towards them ready for the great big charge.
While the mauling is going on i hope my chosen marines will be in a good spot to capture objectives or kill HQ and Elite units by shooting them to bits.

i will use my havoks in a close support role, they may need to fight hand to hand more often then my old long fangs used to.


-----------
when i feel like fielding a more khorney force or i cant make up the points (my mates tau force is massive ) i will include more icons and 20 bloodletters. No plans for deamon princes or greater deamons, one day i may get some raptors.

i dont have weak troops in any area. All models may hide. Squads can be made into groups of 5/8/16/20 in most cases.

all models in the force may hold posistions and deny ground.

my armies average WS will be 5 and BS 4. 

------

I see no harm whatso-ever in using a troop heavy army , this is because my chaos troops are superb!


----------



## newsun

LimitingFactor said:


> I see no harm whatso-ever in using a troop heavy army , this is because my chaos troops are superb!


I think this is fine, just that you do not need lots of troops to win in 5th ed. 

You do need 1 of 2 things:
1. Wipe Out
2. 1 more claimed objective

This really only requires a single troops choice, with mandatory 2 you have one who is expendable and one which is not. Everything else can contest and if you take more troops you will be able to score too.


----------



## Crimzzen

I must say though, this thread delivers.

I think most people were getting stuck in the rut of filling up on troop choices - and while that's perfectly acceptable, I think it's good to remind ppl that armies in 5th can do extremely well with the minimum troop selection. It is completely up to the player and his/her playstyle - but I feel that many players are stocking up on troops because it seems like every other comment on army lists is, "you need more troops."

The OP brings up good points about how most (not all) troop choices just are not as killy as some of our elite/heavy/etc choices are, and then to win, you only need to control 1 objective and contest the rest. Using tough as nails units combined with killy units can achieve this just as heavy troop armies can spam objectives.

I guess what I am driving at is that its that its nice to see a fresh post not just agreeing with the norm. I know I was guilty of troop spam simply because I feel into the belief that I needed lots of troop choices. I think for my next couple of games, I may try the opposite and see how that runs. If nothing else, it will let me field some different lists.


----------



## LimitingFactor

"I see no harm whatso-ever in using a troop heavy army , this is because my chaos troops are superb! " me.


"I think it's good to remind ppl that armies in 5th can do extremely well with the minimum troop selection." Crimzzen.

I have to play against Tau though. I may have "superb troops ( my bezerkers are the equal of many elite squads) .
"It is completely up to the player and his/her playstyle" Crimzzen - but my mate has BIG guns that never seem to miss in the shooting phase. To realy rub it in , i charged a squad of bloodclaws into the tau only to see them ripped apart in close combat.
I have not seen the latest tau codex but i have seen ultra marines and i have my own codex chaos. Chaos seem to be much more handy in the troop department.
I have watched as a total novice defeated my space wolves over and over again using this blasted tau army of his. He would deploy as close to middle of table as he could and then simply fall back every turn while shooting. Any space wolf tanks, transport or large models do not survive, dont even try and deep strike because your dead as you hit the ground
Troops fair better because they are small enough to remain out of line of sight ,leaving them as targets for markerlights only.

maybe the latest rules change tau and limit them somehow...i asked this question elsewhere on forum and the answer to me was that tau are just as shooty as they allways were which leaves me with one option. Play a numbers game. If each chaos troop choice lost 60 percent of their troops on the advance , they will still rip the tau scum to pieces when they hit their lines. In the old days you could not hope to field such a massive looking force of chaos or marines, now that i am able to do so i relish the chance!

My gaming war is personal , i want the tau to die. i want my mate to wipe the smirk from his face and think....heck, i need a new plan/squad/model.

If khorne wills it , i will kill the two broadside squads using melta guns and krak grenades this time. 

i will take objective and crush the enemy because thats what chaos do.

It depends on why you are playing this game. Everyone has slightly different reasoning when putting an army list on paper. WHen picking an army you must of course consider the enemy forces and in that respect it is not completely up to me, the player. The Tau are partly, shaping my force.


----------



## Hellskullz

Lets not forgot armies that technically don't have any troops but are still FoC and not apoc. This can only be done by Orkz and SM i believe. Take a SM captain with a bike, now your SM bikers can capture objectives. Although they are now for all game purposes troops, they really still are the same fast attack unit but with the added ability of capturing. With orkz, I've seen some lists involve 2HQs and 6Troops. All the Troops were bikes, 1 being a nob biker unit, and the other 5 being reg bike squad. So how many 'troops' you have not only depends on race, but only your HQ. That's what I think anyways.


----------



## LimitingFactor

Thats a great post , regarding the bikes.

Totaly different from my method it would still cause the tau to dillute their firepower and objectives could still be captured .....faster than my foot slogging world eaters and their champions . All the troops in the biker force would have extra toughness.

yup , i hope i dont have to fight a biker force.

I was hoping to create a guard force , all on horse back. one day .... painting horses intimidates me.... so i wussed out and opted for a tank company instead.
There are some great troop choices in that force too.... i opted for 3 leman russ mbt


----------



## livingregret

--It is rather interesting reading through this thread. Different people(and different gaming area's) certainly play differently or place emphases on different things. I personally run a very balanced list at all times regardless of what I am going to be playing against. That means, normally, 3-4 Troops choices 1 HQ 1-2 Fast Attack and 1-2 Heavy. I find bringing that allows me to react to different armies in my own way. Sure there is the odd 1 Trick Pony that will put the hurt on me but I win over 80% of the time sooo I must be doing something alright.
-- It is something I have helped around my local gaming area and the players have gotten better at playing actual missions(I know weird right? Not just KP)and more and more of our players are placing at various Tourneys around the area. rather nice to see various players improve both as players and just enjoy the hobby more. 
-- This is just my personal rant. There is nothing wrong w/ someone who only takes 2 Troop choices and loads up on elites....lots of people do it. But let us not forget, as others have said, GT results mean little to nothing in the Grand Scale of gaming. Now I say that, and I myself am a "competitive" player, and it is rather hard to wrap my head around sometime. The fact that some people would rather take a "fun" list boggles my mind because I see that it is a game...but there is only 1 person who can win. Bring what you have to help w/ that.


----------



## darklove

In a serious game I usually take at least 3 units of Troops. That said, 2 can work just fine if you know you can both protect them AND move them to the key objectives when the time is right.
I mostly play Necrons, so mobility is not a problem, but the Troops are so costly that it is hard to take many units.


----------



## hells_fury

i think it depends on the army and the player. my sisters havent done well with only two troop choices, they die to fast somehow, so ive added another two more in. i still have lotsa nastys stuff running around, a celastin squad, seraphim squad with a living saint, 2 exorcists and my 40 sisters that can turn their bolters into AP1.

im getting eldar soon, havent read the codex but my plan is for two squads of rangers (im sure they are troops) with lotsa other cool stuff.

what im saying is its whatever the person likes or wants in their army, it makes no diffrence, sure you can go troop heavy for objectives or you can go elite and hs for just killing stuff but remember the games for fun so who cares whats in your list other then you and the guy versing you.


----------



## Chaosftw

Well.... I have been following this thread since it was first posted. I have watched people voice their opinions on the subject at hand. I don't think there is a 'right way' and a 'wrong way' to go about playing. Armies all you different Tactics and different weaponry in different ways so saying there is one general rule for all armies I do not fully agree with. I have been playing for some time now and have played on both end of the spectrum. I play Death Guard, Orks, and Necrons and have played them all in both ways Troop Heavy and i guess Everything else heavy..

I have found my DG work a little better with 3 mounted 10 man plague squads with 2 plasma and a Fist in each squad.

I have found that the Orks work the same wether it be Heavy Troop or Heavy everything else. I personally like playing HQ=Ghaz, 5x20-man Boyz Squads with 2 ML's and a Nob w/ PK in each squad, 1 squad of 5 Flash Gitz (still toying with them), and 2x6 Lootas.

I have found that playing minimal Troops for the Necrons works best. I find Necrons can bring some swift hurt when played properly and I find that they do so when you have a larger variety of units.

In any case I would not say one side is right and the other is not. Both can win and both can lose. It all depends on how they are executed at the end of the day.

Cheers,

Chaosftw


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

Well its good to see i go away for a few days (visting the better half) and the thread continues debate.

As some have gathered this thread is really a response to the ammount of times i have been asked in person or over forums about my opinions on paying 5th ed. Its also very much a reaction as someone also mentioned to how tired i have become seeing every single army list post having "get more troops in there" as a reply.

Also as ppl have no doubt gathered i am very competitive when in comes to gaming. I actually don't often take the really beardy armies but instead try something a bit different to force ppl outside ther comfort zone - some day i'll rant about that concept as well. So any and all "wisdom" (i use that in the loosest of terms as it is me and i am often far from wise) i try to force upon ppl is taken 100% from the view of playing and winning in tourneys.


----------



## LimitingFactor

Did you start playing 40.000 when it was 2nd edition skuzz?

I ask because , i used to play it , using a troop heavy gaurd army . There was this guy who had a eldar army , heavy with aspects, farseer and allways an avatar plus a D cannon.

I used to loose most of those games,., my next army....still in 2nd edidtion was space wolves and i neglected normal troops and went for level 4 psykers, 20 wolf guard ....10 in terminator armour with assault cannons, heavy flamers.....ulrik , ragnar , njal and ranulf :mrgreen: ... i started to win many more games,beating eldar, nids, guard, blood angels and nurgle.

I took this method with me to 3rd and 4th edition and did ok until i faced Tau.

I have not played a single 5th edition game as of yet. I just hope changing to many troops with many medium threats to the enemy will work out better than it did in the 2nd edition - and better then the elite/hq heavy wolves faired in 3rd and 4th against tau.


----------



## Sieg

Strictly army dependent here.

In my eldar i often ran 5 troop (3 pathfinder squads and 2 DA in a WS). And this took me to the top 3 multiple times at near by tourneys.

Now that i am playing Red Scorpions using the new SM dex' i ounly use 3 squads. I find that 2 is just not that reliable and 4 is just plain dumb. 

Make sure your army is balanced and you will do fine. Dont worry as much about if they are troops or not. Instead focus on making your list work together as a whole and not just, "ok so i have my troops, now how many points do i have left to use to win a game"


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

LimitingFactor said:


> Did you start playing 40.000 when it was 2nd edition skuzz?


RT actually.

My 1st Army was SW which had 1 squad of each of the old metal box sets.

Next i did CSM's which had (iirc) 2 CSM squads, 1 terminator squad and buckets of Flamers of Tzeentch (used to have a thing for the flying mushrooms). That was all RT and 2nd Ed.

I took a break from gaming for a few years (discovered booze and boobies) and when i came back it was towards the end of 3rd Ed. Collected SM's using the old Salies rules (I3 ftw!). Since then have collected Deathwing/Terminator heavy Marines, lots and lots and lots of Nids (for which i am well known), Lost and the Damned (gave those to a friend though), Orks and now am back to collecting a new SM army.

That said have pretty much played with every army under the sun (with the exception of Dark Eldar and Daemons).

What was the question again?

Oh Tau. The key to killing Tau lies not in numbers, they love to "turkey shoot" hordes of troops running towards them. It is in having mobility to close with thier keys units before they have a chance to do anything whilst backed up by a reasonable firebase. Good example is Ravenwing/SM biker armies with a tank or 2 or some devastators. Any Tau player will tell you how much they hate bikes turboing forwards and then turn 2 unleashing tons of melta/plasma and CC goodness.


----------



## capnwoodrow

Skcuzzlebumm said:


> Prime example was last night when i used a very sub par Marine army (just grabbed some stuff out my local GW's cabinet) vs a very tough Necron army (Nightbringer, 2 Liths and loads of warriors). Turn 1 i boshed a Pod down on a flank near his objective and steamed a Raider with regular terminators and a libby forward as well. This effectively pinned him in his deployment zone for 4 turns whilst he tripped over himself to deal with some tough, resilient units. In the end i was unlucky and only on turn 5 did he reclaim his objective.


So in your examples of why your point is valid you included an example in which someone with more troops than you won a game? I think the problem is you can't make an argument and then defer to things like "luck" when they don't work. Then you could say, "Take 6 troops and be lucky. You'll win every time!"

Every army has different concepts that they are built on. Necrons and Orks can probably take 3-4 troop units and do well, while SMs probably won't in lieu of more powerful units.


----------



## Skcuzzlebumm

capnwoodrow said:


> So in your examples of why your point is valid you included an example in which someone with more troops than you won a game?


sorry my original post was not at all clear. He didn't win the game, it was a draw and he was lucky to keep hold of his objective (which he only brought back under control in the final turn with his last troops choice). He never came even close to contesting mine.

Used the same list again tonight (brought my dwarves in by accident) -v- marines with 4 troops choices; he just couldn't cope with my specialist units and I tabled the guy in KP's giving only one up myself (incidentally found out later he was massively over pts......)


----------



## the cabbage

CSM should in theory be strong? A couple of small squads of CSM to guard homebase. Then legion troops to go looking for a fight, the bonus over other armies is they play like elites but score like troops.


----------



## LordWaffles

the cabbage said:


> CSM should in theory be strong? A couple of small squads of CSM to guard homebase. Then legion troops to go looking for a fight, the bonus over other armies is they play like elites but score like troops.


But the small squads of CSM are each like 75 points minimum, add to the fact that anything with infiltrate WILL kill a five-man squad of fearful nillas.

The chaos player is much better off biting the point bullet and just getting decently equipped plague marines. They'll take on anything with infiltrate and hold objectives forever.

And the detriment is that only one of them is ever good at "looking for a fight". Tsons aren't good at melee, slaaneshi boyz are too expensive to do anything but shoot, and nurgle marines accept charges, not give them.


----------



## Blue Liger

Well whilst 2 is the minimum, but it depends on what army you play I mean using orks with 2 troops is just stupid as they are weak and become pointless unless they are huge squads, but then movement becomes annoying ans slow to some point , much like a DE player just going for 2 sniper squads whilst good in some games when it comes to seizing ground and taking multiple objectives absolutely pointless. I usually run 3 -4 troops with my DE as they are cheap but armies like CSM and SM won't usually have to do more than 2 plus Gw are bringing new codex's out with rules that when you take certain Special Characters certain other units becoming scoring ones eg the new SM codex or the Ork where taking a certain warboss makes a certain choice troop. So it comes down to what you play but for most I think 3 is a good number with 2 being decent size and a samll one to hold or be the one to shoot around at the last minute and snatch or contest.


----------



## Arnar

What 5th brought us is that troops are not cannon fodder any more. In 4th (and earlier) troops were the most expandable unit and the first to die since they did generally cost less then other units but took as much an effort to kill. The more elite units had to be conserved since losing them meant a huge dent in the VP difference. Nowadays the roles have been reversed so the units that take the heat are the elitists and the units that need to be preserved are the troops. This has made the troops more important to the flow of the game without the need to fill your slots with them. I am not sure this is what GW intended (guess they wanted more troops to be used) but it is a good result if you ask me.


----------

