# Troops in 5th Edition



## Underground Heretic (Aug 9, 2008)

Examining the armies at my FLGS, I came to realize that most people only use about two to three troops choices. This brought on an odd thought: even though 5th edition only allows troops choices, with a few exceptions, to be scoring units, are they really as important as GW makes them out to be?

I know some people use two troops choices in power lists, more if their uber units are also troops, but these lists I would think rely on killing the enemy outright to win the game and generally can do it. Others rely on their non-troop units to contest or clear points while their few troops claim one or two points, but this generally relies on fast units or penetrating, accurate firepower.

But how does this influence army composition? Should armies with slow or fragile troops choices invest more points in troops so as to swamp the points with scoring units? Or should they concentrate points in transports to protect fewer units? Should armies that have more durable troops choices (i.e. MEQ or better) invest more or less points in their troops, relying on the resilience of their troops choices to carry the day?

What happens when these troops choices can fill various roles in the army? Generally speaking most troops choices serve to kill their counterparts in the enemy army; for example hormaguants and fire warriors are infantry killers extraordinaire, but are little use against vehicles. Imperial armies and some others have the option to integrate heavy weapons into their troops choices, allowing troops to serve as tank killers.

My admittedly small experience with 40k leads me to think that if your army can integrate some anti-tank (S 8 or better), especially at range, they can serve as a larger portion of your army than if you cannot. In 5th, the land of rhinos and devilfish, transports and vehicles seem to have proliferated and this necessitates some ability to bring them down. In some cases troops can easily do this, in others they cannot and that inability must be compensated for by other units.

The simple question, taking into account these and other factors, is: Using a balanced list, how much should one invest into troops choices as opposed to heavy support, fast attack or elites choices that cannot secure points, but should be able to kill more than and/or draw fire away from the requisite troops choices?


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

From an Ork perspective, if you don't bring at least three units of Boyz at a reasonable level of numbers, you're doing it wrong.... but our hidden Power Klaws let us build some anti-tank into every squad without even thinking about it overmuch... and the average Boy is damned tough in assault, and while their BS isn't even mediocre, they still hit a third of the time at range. They're also dirt-cheap.


And my experience with Orks informs my general philosophy- troops are worth it once you figure out how the ones in your armies work, you should bring quite a few.

Fire Warriors without Devilfish seem to do little but die in heaps.
Units of footslogging Ork Boyz below twenty in number don't even make good speed bumps.


And then you have armies like the Necrons, where their core troops are rock-solid, if pricey.....


----------



## Overfeind (Apr 4, 2009)

IG don't relay need more then 2 troops with that thay can have more than 10 scoring units for less than 600 pts more then enough for some heavy s and elites, in a 1500 or even 1000pt games.

it all depends on the army.


----------



## Unevenscore (Aug 7, 2009)

I've found combat squads a good way to up scoring units as I need. Sometimes 5 marines camped in cover on an objective can be annoyingly resilient. Other times I roll bad. It has only slightly changed the way I build my lists. I tend towards min number of troops choices but full squads always. Sometimes in 2000 I'll grab a third tac squad, though usually if its a campaign and scoring well is the primary goal.


----------



## Inquisitor Einar (Mar 6, 2009)

For Witchhunters, or to be more precise, SoBs, troops is the way to go. The lowly basic battlesister is one of the most economical and best troops you can get.
You have MEQ firing capability and armour, giving up only CC effectiveness and a lower toughness.
In return, you get faith, which adds extra kick and extra survivability to your troops where and when you need it, making even a basic troop squad a good tarpit against MCs and such.
In addition, because of their lower price than Marines, you can field a lot more of them, which increases their effectiveness even more due to increased faith.

While having a few specific units around to deal with certain other problems, the basis sister is a very solid troop choice, and very difficult to fully eradicate when they come in numbers.
I generally tend to field at least 3 squads of them in even smaller games, adding only the nastier tricks later.


----------



## Calamari (Feb 13, 2009)

I think it's important to remember that a unit doesn't need to be scoring in order for it to contest. Most of the time you'll be contesting anyway so muchos troops isn't realy required, correct use of other units _can_ preclude the use of scoring units (apart from the minimum for the FOC:blush


----------



## Concrete Hero (Jun 9, 2008)

Pretty much any army I play I never take fewer than three Troop choices.

Daemons I take three so I have the option of keeping one unit back in objective games.

Eldar I take three because the Wave Serpents are very much part f the fighting force.

Necrons I take 3 because lack of transports means I need the numbers

Chaos I tend to take three because the cult troops are fantastic anyway.

Three just seems a more reliable number, even if one totally gets eradicated then I still have two scoring units. Its a comfortable number of troops, probably stuck in it due more to preference than anything else


----------



## Sebi (Mar 3, 2009)

as Orks leaving home without at least 50% of the points spend in troops' choices is not good.... especially as a speed freak like me

I need the "mass" cause I cannot press 30 Orks into a pikkup ^^

So either I field 4 Pikkupz or at least 2 with two tanks


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

I take 6 in even 1250 >_> 
Of those, 3 are genestealer broods, which are more like elite choices anyway. The other 3 are two big gaunt broods for cover/objective taking and a unit of WoN Spinegaunts for objective babysitting. Make of that what you will


----------



## mrrshann618 (Jun 6, 2008)

I've always played troop heavy, they are usually the cheapest way to get bullets in the air. I currently run 4 troops in my 2000pt list, but that is becuase a unit of my troops cost roughly 300 pts (Thousand suns).

You also have to realize that any unit can contest, and 1/3 of all missions are simply to kill, not capture. So in the long run all you have to do is hold one and contest the rest. Easy to do when all you concentrate on is killing the other side. 5th hasn't really changed the face of the game, merely how people play the endgame. Nidzilla can still work, you just have to be more careful of your troops to get you the win.


----------



## ItsPug (Apr 5, 2009)

I use 2 mechanised melta vet squads and 2 45 man platoons with the PCS's in chimeras. 110 scoring troops and 4 Chimeras means I always have enough troops left :laugh:


----------



## hells_fury (Apr 17, 2008)

at 1500 is 2 squads of 20 sisters, am yet to see a squad wiped out, they eaily weather the small arms fire while the heavy weapons tend to ignore them in favour of taking out my exorcists, squad of seraphim for contesting an objective and a celastin retuine for counter assualt cause 2 eviscrators at S8 will make even MC shake.

at 2000 im hoping to get more sisters for a 3rd squad of 20 and then some more seraphim who can just contest some more hehe


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

I use 3 to 4 in 1000-1500 and past this it's usually 5 that being said my troops fill a very important role and can do multiple tasks in a DE army.

I don't think it has placed much more importance on them just players are more tactical about how they position and when they move and strike with them when they count for capturing an objective as when annihilation is in play it matters not.


----------



## Someguy (Nov 19, 2007)

I've recently been using quite a lot of troops in my marine army. 3 tactical squads and 5 scouts at 1500. A little over 800 points with rhinos and stuff.

I find that troops become better if you have lots of them, because you don't have to take such care of them. If you go for just a few sniper scouts or dire avengers in falcons then you don't spend many points but those points you have spent are almost completely wasted when it comes to killing the enemy. The unit is going to hide and avoid the enemy, which means everyone else has to do the work.

Fighting troops are a feature of most effective armies nowadays. There are quite a lot of armies around now where the main work is done by troops with other units taken just to do whatever the troops can't handle, or sometimes to provide a spearhead unit that the troops can follow in.


----------



## Inquisitor Einar (Mar 6, 2009)

That's pretty much what I do SomeGuy.
I use my Seraphim and cannoness as a spearhead, followed up by flamer and melta sisters, while my other flamer squad and retributors hang back. If something lands between my lines, they can take care of it easily.
Then later in the game, my IG platoon arrives from the flank with a PC, 3 combined squads into an unbreakable mob(30 guardsmen, commissar, 3 flamers, Vox, Priest ) and an SWP squad.
If my enemy is a fast opponent, I'll be using my sisters and seraphim and cannoness to bog down his units, so his underguarded rear units are exposed to my flanking troops, who then take any objectives over there and cause a little mayhem on his rear.
Then squeeze what is left in the middle between my retributors, my IG and my troop squads. ( seraphim and cannoness are generally dead around this time, which is what I planned, they will have done their job, and dieing gives me more faith )


----------

