I’ve
written before about one of the most important things you can do in 40k is
finishing off an opponent while you have momentum. Often you will have a great first two turns
where your shooting is red hot and you kill half the opponent’s army without
taking casualties in return, only to have the opponent hang around and
eventually the game ends up very close at the end. The goal in a competitive situation should be
to turn those strong starts into tablings, and not have them end in games that
are down to a single die roll on turn 7.
This
is common advice. I’ve written about,
and so has everyone else. But how do you actually make it happen? Not too many people discuss that part, which
is, incidentally, the hard part.
In
my experience, there are two methods you can utilize to finish off a cripple
opponent and maintain momentum: close combat and low AP and anti-cover
shooting. Let’s discuss each…
Close
Combat
Waaaaaaay
back in the day, I wrote about my rather average ‘Ard Boyz semi-finals results
which stemmed from using a list that was all shooting and no close combat. I remarked about how I would alpha strike,
kill ½ of my opponent’s list and then watch as his second half slowly grinded
back to even out the game. I decided
from that point forward, I wouldn’t play any lists that didn’t have at least
marginal CC ability. Even in my current
2k BT list I have two units of terminators, which are not good CC units in a
vacuum, but they aren’t bad at finishing off crippled combat squads.
In
any event, you can use close combat ability to finish off a crippled foe. Close combat is weaker than shooting in 5th
Edition 40k, we all know that. But it
has some things going for it that make it very good for our purposes
today. First, we can assume that if you
had a smashingly good first few turns your opponent is de-meched. An all foot opponent makes close combat units
far more effective. Second, close combat
ignores cover. This is huge.
Cover
is why shooty lists have difficulty beating crippled opponents. Turn one, demech unit, and then kill 40% of
them. Second turn, they go to ground in
cover and you only kill one of them, and realize it’s not profitable to
continue shooting them. Unfortunately,
that unit isn’t dead. That unit is
alive, in cover and probably near an objective or at least worth a kill
point. If you ignore then, you’re just
making the end game a lot more in doubt as the opponent still has a unit
hanging around to trouble you on objectives or not contribute a kill
point/VP. So ignoring them is
bad. However, also bad is realizing how
much firepower you have to pour into a unit of 5 IG vets with 3++ cover saves
to finish them. It’s an annoyingly high
amount of dakka. By using so much fire
on a crappy 5 guardsmen, you might be ignoring more valuable intact opposing
units.
A
close combat unit or two advancing into the opponent’s backfield can solve this
dilemma. They can charge in, wipe the
unit out, and move onto another one next turn.
Unlike shooting, they have a level of inevitability and reduce the
variance of cover saves. By having a few
close combat units doing your clean up, your shooty units (most of your army)
can continue to shoot at high priority, profitable targets. This is an often overlooked synergy. By not shooting at inefficient targets
(because your CC units are savaging them) your shooty units get to shoot more
optimally. The end result is your entire
army performs more optimally and you don’t lose the valuable momentum you’ve
gained in the early turns.
Low
AP/Anti-cover shooting
This
is a lesson that seasoned Tau players can teach everyone. Tau don’t have close combat units that can
finish off opponents’ crippled units. So
what do Tau generals do? Plasma, missile
pods, and Marker Lights (to reduce cover).
Most
non-Tau, non-IG players consider Plasma and Flamer units “bad.” Mostly because they don’t shoot down
vehicles. But what good is a lascannon
when you’re shooting at 5 Guardsmen in cover?
Not too much. It’s not even so hot
at shooting at 5 marines outside of cover.
I’m
not advocating anything approaching a 50/50 split between
anti-tank/anti-infantry firepower. In
fact, I’d argue that the role of anti-infantry firepower should be similar to
close combat units in shooty lists, one or two units that are either dedicated
to that task, or at least can be pressed into it when circumstances are
favorable. One or two dedicated
plasma/flamer units per army isn’t too terrible of a sacrifice of points, and
most importantly, anything you “lose” in points by buying them you could
potentially gain back by allowing your anti-tank units to fire optimally. If you have plasma units, you don’t have to
waste a lascannon shot on 5 marines, the lascannon can continue to shoot at
vehicles. Optimal shooting maintains
momentum. Sub-optimal shooting is how
you lose it.
If
there is a single lesson to take away from all this, it’s consider bringing one
or two ‘finisher’ units so that your mainline units can continue their tasks
optimally. The mainline units will give
you the momentum, and you don’t want to give your opponent a way back into the
game by playing loose and wasting your shots on sub-optimal plays in the
mid-game.
