Tanking and Threat in 40k (tactica)

[Guest]

Comes up a fair amount though I'm not sure if all players are aware of it when designing lists.

 

So, first, is concepts.

 

Tanking is about having a unit (or several) that is able to become the focus of the enemy, so the rest of the army can be more effective with less durability. If the tanking unit is the entire army, that is called a deathstar and really isn't the same thing as tanking - Tanking focuses on drawing fire away from your other units so they can fire unfettered.

 

Threat is about have units that intimidate the opponent into focusing on them, instead of the easier targets. This could be threat generated due to actions in this particular game, potential actions, or for a psychological reason.

 

A classic example of tanking would be a land raider filled with terminators that advances towards melee (500+pts). The other 1000-1500pts of the army focuses on damage output. The opponent must decide if the destruction of the tanking unit is of greater priority than elimination of the rest of your forces. If the answer is that the tanking unit more valuable to the opponent (like a deathstar), then you've failed at tanking. Tanking is about making the opponent ignore the more valuable portions of your army in favor of attempting to destroy your tanking unit. If you can trick the opponent to attacking the less valuable tanking unit, then destroy the opponent with your non-tanking elements, then you succeed at tanking. If they destroy your tanking unit too quickly, it will also cause this approach to fail.

 

To succeed in tanking, a player needs 3 things:

1) a unit able to tank your opponent,

2) a unit able to threaten the opponent,

3)and the unit must generate more threat than other friendly threatening units meeting the above requirements.

 

In examples:

 

1) High AV can tank opponents that rely on weapons which can only glance their AV, especially if they have poor odds. High toughness tanks low strength weapons. Cover tanks work against weapons that don't deny cover, likewise good armor save units. Invulnerable save tanks are great, but often come at large cost which often makes them ineffective tanks (but very effective deathstars). Buildings and large units can tank too. There are also many other types of tanking units, with combining of types being ideal.

 

2) Being able to threaten means the opponent is threatened by the unit and, more specifically, is able to direct their attacks at them. In example, a tanking unit outside of LOS does not meet this requirement. A vindicator that is so far out of range that it won't be able to shoot anything for a few turns is also not able to threaten. Models placed in a location where the opponent forgets that they are there are also examples of units that don't threaten.

 

3) Generation of threat is one thing, but being able to generate more threat is what makes the opponent decide to attack the tanking unit instead of attacking the better target.

 

Threatening units can simply be units with a threatening reputation (vindicare assassin), or with the best paint job on table, or just a favorite of the opponent. Victory point awards also dramatically affect the threat of a unit (like a unit guarding/contesting an objective will generate more threat than unit normally would).

 

Unlike MMORPGs, 40k doesn't have a threat meter or calculator, with our use of tanking units/threat being very contextual. Look for it. It's there. With enough experience and experimentation, you can start to control the opponent's turn...Yeah, it's pretty fun.

 

Anyway, hope this helped some people. Its sort of a loose concept with mostly psychological applications, but it does dramatically affect the game and the viability of certain units.

[fluger]

A similar if different tactic in the same vein is threat overload/target saturation.  Essentially instead of having one unit that presents all the threat and is hard to kill, one has lots of repeated or tactically repeated units all threatening at once.  None of them in particular are that hard to kill, but present a problem of diffusing firepower to mitigate.  This is classic MSU (multiple small unit) strategy.  

 

As an example, instead of 500 pts in a Land Raider with terminators in it, there could be 500 pts of hormagaunts with adrenal glands.  

[Guest]

A similar if different tactic in the same vein is threat overload/target saturation.  Essentially instead of having one unit that presents all the threat and is hard to kill, one has lots of repeated or tactically repeated units all threatening at once.  None of them in particular are that hard to kill, but present a problem of diffusing firepower to mitigate.  This is classic MSU (multiple small unit) strategy.  

 

As an example, instead of 500 pts in a Land Raider with terminators in it, there could be 500 pts of hormagaunts with adrenal glands.  

Very much agree.

 

Also considering the idea of "disposible tanks" via the daemonology summoning powers, seems like some potential there. You'd only need the tank to last long enough to get summoned again...

 

My latest tanking unit acquisition is a vengeance weapon battery with a battle cannon. 85pts that must shoot the nearest target at BS2, but I expect amazing things from this guy.

[pretre]

My battle cannon batteries were crazy good at the Open last year.

[spacewolved]

I've been using a 3 man unit of grav-centurians with tiggy in a sw droppod. Cast invisibility on them and let them do work. 

[pretre]

I've been using a 3 man unit of grav-centurians with tiggy in a sw droppod. Cast invisibility on them and let them do work.

I just got 3 cents for this reason. :)