|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:58 am
Tech Magos Sejanus Fellow Guard players. I find myself at yet another quandry. Basilisk or Destroyer Tank Hunter? I almost always take at least 1 basilisk but it depends on how my guard army is made up. If it's mostly foot sloggers then you need to take as much in direct fire as as possible to make up for your lack of mobility. On the flip side, if you have mostly tanks or mounted infantry in chimeras or even *gag* rough riders then I'd go with somthing more "direct" like a Lemun russ demolisher (with a russ or two to support it). If you want balance, then I would take one basilisk and a Lemun russ demolisher. You force the enemy to either go withen range of the demolisher or get pounded by the basilisk. A win-win situation Edit: I seem to have gone on rant, and completely forgot to mention the Destroyer Tank Hunter. I don't know much about it but I'll say this: if you have enough anti-tank firepower in your infanty then you could probally get more worth in somthing else. If your infantry are made to fight enemy infantry then yeah go with the tank hunter.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:00 am
Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for.
If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for.
Anyways, this tends to be true with IG armies: Tanks provide your Anti-Infantry, Infantry provides your Anti-Tank. Remember that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:06 am
Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. Anyways, this tends to be true with IG armies: Tanks provide your Anti-Infantry, Infantry provides your Anti-Tank. Remember that. Yeah, what he said.... ... emo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:46 pm
Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:21 pm
Nuclearwinter Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. Well up until World War 2, horse mounted hit and run tactics where still wildly used and effective for flanking opposition, and since most Imperial Guard Legions are based off of World War 1 and 2 armies, I can see why they implemented ''Rough Riders'' calvary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 8:45 pm
well, this is 40k, otherwise heavy bolters would be heavy 10, assault cannons heavy 100 and no one would get into hand-to hand (save Callidus Assasins and Wolf Scouts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:52 pm
You people have a shameful lack of imagination and tactics. talk2hand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 5:51 am
Jeraco Nuclearwinter Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. Well up until World War 2, horse mounted hit and run tactics where still wildly used and effective for flanking opposition, and since most Imperial Guard Legions are based off of World War 1 and 2 armies, I can see why they implemented ''Rough Riders'' calvary. show me an example of people who rode horses into battle in WWI or II the actual "Rough Riders" are not a valid example because even they were smart enough to dismount before advaning on the enemy in at least one battle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 5:56 am
Van Evok well, this is 40k, otherwise heavy bolters would be heavy 10, assault cannons heavy 100 and no one would get into hand-to hand (save Callidus Assasins and Wolf Scouts) Yes heavy bolters would be stronger in a realistic situation, but so would everything else. it's all scaled down and simplified. Dosn't change the fact that a man riding a horse into modern combat is just far too silly for me. (also keep in mind that a 6 turn 40k game, in actuallity, is only a 2 or 3 minute time span in real time.) hand to hand is rare, yes. but close combat is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:30 am
Nuclearwinter Jeraco Nuclearwinter Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. Well up until World War 2, horse mounted hit and run tactics where still wildly used and effective for flanking opposition, and since most Imperial Guard Legions are based off of World War 1 and 2 armies, I can see why they implemented ''Rough Riders'' calvary. show me an example of people who rode horses into battle in WWI or II the actual "Rough Riders" are not a valid example because even they were smart enough to dismount before advaning on the enemy in at least one battle. Cossacks and those Polish people that charged german tanks? I need a Mac here now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:58 am
Kaori Kapoigne Nuclearwinter Jeraco Nuclearwinter Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. Well up until World War 2, horse mounted hit and run tactics where still wildly used and effective for flanking opposition, and since most Imperial Guard Legions are based off of World War 1 and 2 armies, I can see why they implemented ''Rough Riders'' calvary. show me an example of people who rode horses into battle in WWI or II the actual "Rough Riders" are not a valid example because even they were smart enough to dismount before advaning on the enemy in at least one battle. Cossacks and those Polish people that charged german tanks? I need a Mac here now! According to Axis&Allies minis, thats a myth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:00 am
Kaori Kapoigne Nuclearwinter Jeraco Nuclearwinter Drachyench_The_Eternal Rough Riders have their roles. Mainly used for Anti-Marine / Necron / Chaos. Just hid 'em behind terrain (Not in, so the enemy cannot see them) until you are within around 19" of the enemy. Burst out, charge. Again, 9 rough riders tend to yield 6 dead on the charge, at 99pts. Sure, they suck after their first charge, though that's what they're made for. If you use them to attack something like, say, 'Nids or Orks, then yes, they are near-useless. Though that's not what they're bought for. But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. Well up until World War 2, horse mounted hit and run tactics where still wildly used and effective for flanking opposition, and since most Imperial Guard Legions are based off of World War 1 and 2 armies, I can see why they implemented ''Rough Riders'' calvary. show me an example of people who rode horses into battle in WWI or II the actual "Rough Riders" are not a valid example because even they were smart enough to dismount before advaning on the enemy in at least one battle. Cossacks and those Polish people that charged german tanks? I need a Mac here now! From what I recall, the russian cossacks used relatively inaccurate, single shot rifles. As did their enemies. As for poland, many more german tanks were taken out of commision by Polish Anti-tank gunners than a cavarly charge. Also, the polish cavalry usually just used their horses to get to the battle and would then dismount before fighting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:36 am
Oh for frags sake.. The day some s**t game teaches youngsters history is a bad day indeed! Plus those minis are some of the worst and inaccurate I've seen in ages.
The standard issue Russian rifle was the Mossin-Nagant, a five round bolt action rifle that partially won the war for the Russians the same way the Enfield did it for the British and the Garand did it for the Americans. If the Cossacks were traitors and fought for the Germans then they had K98 rifles.
If you don't like the man on the horse you model the man onto a motorcycle or give him a jump pack that looks clunky as to best represent the "Fleet" special rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 12:38 pm
Nuclearwinter But it's a man... on.... horseback. Fancy spear or not, I refuse to take such a perversion of common sense in my army. If I saw a man charging at me on horseback with a spear I would probally be more likely to die of laughter than him actually making it to me before I gunned him down. Yeah they're great on the tabletop game. But... come on: It's a man riding a horse in modern combat. In novel they're usually only used because of a lack of other troops, Terrain restrictions, or Recon (Or, more often, a mix of the three). Plus, and the fact that a Rough Rider sergeant can hold his own in combat with Dark Eldar Incubi in fluff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
