Talk:Shadow War: Armageddon

Shadow War Tactica?

• Should tactica for the various factions be put up on the main Shadow War page (perhaps in collapsed tables) or should each faction have a page of their own? Since the factions in Shadow War are so much more limited than in 40k or Kill Team it doesn't seem like it would be worth clogging the Tactics category even more than it already is.

-Rules Question: So I just played a game of Grey Knights vs Orks, 1st game of a campaign. At one point, I had one of my Grey Knights in combat with 4 Orks, and then I charged my 2nd Grey Knight against 2 of the Orks already in combat with the first Grey Knight. The rulebook only seems to specify how to fight in a group vs one model scenario, as stated in the multiple combat rules, but there is no mention of what happens when there is more than 1 model from each side locked in the same combat. Any clarifications or thoughts?

The way I did it, I had 1 Knight and 1 Ork fight. The Knight won, so a 2nd Ork fought the 1st Knight with a +1 attack and combat res. That Ork won, so I had the 2nd Knight fight the 2nd Ork, with both rolling +1 attack and combat res. The Knight won, so I had the 2nd Knight fight the 3rd Ork, the Knight with a +1 attack and combat res, and the Ork with a +2 attack and combat res. Essentially, I saw it as the same model fights until beaten, even if it survives combat.

-Answer: Necromunda is essentially a slightly more detailed version of 2nd edition 40k when it comes to the core rules. In 2nd edition, if my old brain remembers correctly, you would 'pair off' the combatants. So two orks would fight grey knight 1 and two would fight grey knight 2. This is provided the grey knight could REACH two. If there were three orks on one side of the 1st grey knight and one on the other side and the 2nd grey knight charged into combat from the side with just one ork and couldn't get into base-to-base combat with two orks due to movement range, then the 2nd knight would fight just one ork and the 1st would be stuck fighting 3. Close combat in 2nd edition was pretty messy when it wasn't mano-a-mano, but it works pretty well for necromunda.

-Answer 2: I asked about that to a GW employee and he told me the way it works is this: regardless of whose turn it is, the player with more engaged figures in a single combat decides the flow. He/she picks one of the outnumbered models to fight, then picks one of their own, and they go one on one. This process repeats itself for every model in base contact with the outnumbered figure, until either all outnumbering models in base contact with that single model have gone, or if that single model has been taken out. In the case of multiple outnumbered models, every outnumbered model MUST fight every enemy in base contact with them. So if Knight 1 is engaged with Orks 1,2,3 and Knight 2 is engaged with Orks 1 and 2, Knight 1 fights Orks 1-3, and then Knight 2 fights Orks 1 and 2. So Orks 1 and 2 get to fight twice each.

Unbalanced

• The "Cons" section has a little quip about how some of the kill teams are OP. Some insight on this would be nice!

-Could be considered from the advantage Ranged focused teams has over Melee teams. This can be offset by including more terrain and obstacles, but with Telescopic Sights making ranged weapons reach 1.5 times their normal range, Red-Dot Laser Sights giving a +1 to hit on shooting attacks (gives enemy 6+ invuln but it's not great), and Photo-visor reducing cover save modifiers by 1, shooters have a clear advantage when firing on melee enemies that can only run 8" every turn (4" is the average movement speed, though some armies, like Dark Eldar, can move 6" and run 12").

Ex: Space Marine Scout has a Sniper Rifle (18" short range, 36" long range). He adds a Telescopic Scope, increasing its range to 54" (adds short range to long range). Can be combined with a Red-dot laser sight, giving shooter +1 to hit with shooting while giving an enemy facing the shooter a 6+ invuln (rules make no mention of giving an enemy that already has an invuln save any bonuses, so assume red-dot doesn't affect them). Add a Photo-visor so shooter ignores a -1 due to cover saves (-2 from full cover goes down to -1). Add a +1 BS Advance to the scout, and he will always hit on a 2+. Playing in a Scout vs Ork campaign, as in the starter set, a 2+ pins an ork every turn, and with I of 2, it's hard for them to get back up at the beginning of the turn.

Ex2: Astra Militarum vs Tyranid Warrior teams, game 1. 10 guard vs 3 warriors (warriors cost A LOT, and with only 1000 pts to start, can only get the most basic equipment). 1 meltagun on a guard specialist (which they can get up to 3) can kill a Warrior with 3 wounds in 1 shot (possibly take him out of action with S8 and D6 wounds, -5 to Sv).

Ex3: Sustained Fire in general. Weapons like the Heavy Bolter, Big Shoota, Shuriken Catapult, etc can fire more than 1 shot in a single turn. The larger guns typically fire 2d3 worth of shots, while smaller weapons have 1d3 shots. Either way, they can be shot at multiple targets close to each other, or the same target over and over. with the only drawback being more possible Ammo rolls (whenever a 6 is rolled to hit, the gun may permanently jam or, in some cases, explode! Either way, a failed ammo roll means that gun can't be used for the rest of the match). However, many of these weapons actually have low Ammo rolls (4-5+, meaning on 2 dice, they have to roll less than the ammo roll to actually get jammed) and with a multitude of ways of getting rerolls (character skills, special operatives, certain upgrades, etc), so in essence, there are very few drawbacks compared to the power these weapons bring to a team.

Ex4: Harlies. Move 6", if running they gain -2 to hit from opponents shooting attacks vs -1, combined with harlies kiss you have an attack with high weapon skill that will kill most things on one charge.

That said, despite the frustrations suffered by the melee player, permanently killing a model is actually quite difficult. First, a model has to be taken out-of-action (either by hitting it, wounding it, going through any of its saves, and then rolling a 6 to injure; or rolling a 2-5 on injury to 'down' it, keeping the figure down until the end of the match, then rolling a 1-3 during Recover Fighters step of aftermatch resolution). Then, it must roll a 1 on the Serious Injury chart, and then again roll 1-3 to actually be permanently dead.

On top of that, the winner gets 1d3 promethium caches while the loser gets 1, so potentially, the winner might also get 1 cache as well. In a single game, yes some kill teams may be more unbalanced than others, but considering the game is meant to be played in series of matches, the unbalance starts to even out, as the winner is the first player to gain 15 caches, rather than the one who wins the most games.

---

Well I think it is still a bit early to tell how well the game is balanced. I just played a few games with Nurgle CSM team, and to my surprise, many assumptions I made before games was proven not true. The most surprising example to this would be Autocannon. 150 point, high impact, D3 damage, sustain 1, long range, reliable ammo roll, I thought anyone who do not take it over plasma gun would be nuts, but with the dense terrain and hiding action, I find that for the first few games when the general gear level is low, it would be much better to go with 2 specialists with 2 plasma gun than 1 specialist with one powerful heavy weapon (autocannon, ML, and never thought I would say this, heavy bolter). Also I find that pining against csm is not as much of a problem as I thought it would be, as long as you always stay in cover and hide before getting into your effective range, and once in your range stay in combat groups that can recover pinning early (so gunner + bolter troop next to each other, plenty of yoof and a nob staying within 6'). Against other elite low model count force (grey knight, tyranid, murder clown), you have the number (I had 5 power armor bodies from the start of the campaign, while grey knight/tyranid can usually afford 3), and you have durability advantage against others (ork, IG, tau). My team leader actually lost close combat to an IG leader with chainsword for a round, but with 3+ armor and nurgle toughness, he failed to wound me and was put down by a simple hit from a bolter butt next round.

All I am saying is that we need to forgo some of the normal 40k or killteam thinking and adapt to SW. There are enough differences to make this game one of its own (pinning, hiding, shooting in to combat, scatter weapon much more reliable). I had my team leader throw a blight grenade into a losing close combat where my plasma gunner are struggling against 2 guards men, and killed both of them and pinned another nearby, with my gunner only suffering a flash wound. This type of tactics is outside 40k norm but sure interesting and effective in SW.

As for the tactics page, I think it is important for us to consider 3 stages of the campaign (early, mid, late) when talking about team building as this is one of the main differences between SW and normal 40k. In other word, in 40k we mainly talk about combat "tactics", things you do to win you a game, while in SW we need to also consider "strategy" which win you the entire campaign. It is important to have a vision of how you would like your entire kill team looks like in late game when you start build your starting list, so you do not waste war gears. For example, if you really want that autocannon, but also want to have 2 bolter marines on the ground for 1st game, then consider having a specialist with bolter, and a csm leader with bolt pistol, so after the first game in your rearm phase you can give the bolter to your csm leader, and crack open your first cache to buy your autocannon on the csm gunner. This way you can get a Autocannon gunner almost certainly after this first game, without wasting a single point. Similarly, when to recruit newbies are an interesting topic, with conventional thinking leaning towards getting them from the start to quickly raise their ranks, while in practice, I find most recruits have hard time avoiding getting downed in games, which is required for their promotion. Now I am leaning towards hiring your recruits mid campaign (so for a 15 cache campaign, about 2~3 missions in) when the backbone of your team is already solid with mid level gears and some skills/characteristics improvement. The exception for this rule would be ork yoof. They get the most out of the promotion to boyz, with +1 A and WS, and they start with BS 2 just like boyz. Basically they shoot just a well as boyz (or as bad as boyz I guess), for half price. And with shoota being sustain 1, statistically speaking each yoof with shoota actually is just as good at shooting as IG vets, if you dont mind shootas explode a little bit here and there, which you should not, as you are playing ork. MOOORE　DAKKA! Anyway get your recruit mid campaign for safer promotion and bulking up your manpower, unless you are ork, then get as many yoof as you can and give them a shoota each and let them stay within your nob and fire away.