Mechanics of the Bahzhakhain: Dealing with Armour and Army Composition

Those who have seen my lists may have noticed that I take few or no dedicated anti-tank units, especially shooty ones. Part of the reason behind this is that I feel most dedicated anti-tank units are:

A-too easily destroyed, and tend to be a glowing beacon to your enemy (which you may or may not want.
B-too singular in purpose unless you know you can reuse them and face much armour.
C-may require expensive transports that you may need for a core assault unit's transport
D-often become the only target for enemy anti-personnel weaponry when the rest of your army is now in close combat, still in their vehicles, or your attempt to destroy a tank has failed/the tank has support of or is part of a tank formation.

The other part is that unless you use this dedicated anti-tank unit to force the enemies hand and manipulate his actions to incredible success, there is a better gain through another method.

Before going further lets slip in a definition for 'dedicated anti-armour'. It is not necessarily the unit, but the role you will use it for. Fire Dragons, if you are fighting against IG and you didn't take a dragons breath would be a dedicated anti-tank unit. If you took a dragons breath it would be an excellent anti-armour and anti-personnel unit and I would be all for it. Wraithguard, if taken just to take down tanks or an MC I would not take up a transport for them, but if I needed a high resiliency unit for holding objectives, or were facing alot of tough MC's/armour, or a mix of those and other elite units like tyranid warriors, SM terminators, immortals, etc. then I'd say go for it. Dedicated anti-tank units/options (like bright lances) are units, or weapons that have limited efficient applications beyond taking down tanks.

When I first started mechanized and semi-mechanized armies my main opponent was an IG player who fielded a disgusting amount of vehicles. A few days ago I played against him in a 2k battle and he fielded 8 vehicles, and used one bunker. So I became used to ensuring every unit in my army was capable of destroying a battle tank. With such vehicle saturation I could see which units succeeded and were best fitted to taking down tanks, especially as it fit into my CC intensive mechanized style. Warp Spiders have probably killed more Leman Russ's than anything else before I became fully mechanized. My mini-council never failed to destroy a tank it attacked in CC. My scorpions took many tanks of all kinds.

What was harder to implement with success were bright lances and dedicated anti-tank weapons. Fire dragons were harder to put in place and reuse than close combat or self-propelled units. Shortly after this I realized my opponent could not forsee where his biggest anti-tank threat was coming from. Everything was a threat to his vehicles; a major threat. The basis of Biel-Tan philosophy is to give the enemy more threats than they can deal with at once. This may mean more firepower than they match, more speed than they can catch, and therefore less time they have to destroy you, or merely too many squads attacking them at once, denying them a flank, or crushing one of theirs with combined force, denying support from their other units. In this instance you over-saturate their vehicles with threats they cannot overturn.

A mechanized army (especially CC intensive) gets up close and personal to the enemy DZ, and very quickly. 10 fusion gun shots is far more deadly for the approximate same cost of a fire prism (ignoring the requisite transport which has its own uses). The closer the Eldar get, the more deadly we are. The speed of our skimmers get us back shots with a high volume of strength 6 weaponry, as opposed to a single lance shot at range.

In light of all of this I do not take dedicated anti-tank units for THIS style of army. Some units are better at taking down armour than others, but knowing that all of them can allows me to squander every bit of size 3 terrain for my tanks because I don't have to deploy in response to my enemy (that and my mobility allows me to re-deploy from said cover). He put his Leman Russ in the back left corner, but I don't have to deploy a falcon of fire dragons in reply facing him. Perhaps I have my jetbikes+autarch behind a forest in front of it instead. This doesn't look like a powerful anti-tank unit to most commanders, and the Falcons and Waveserpents filled with goodies are usually more tempting (or at least scary).

So come turn two and I have rushed at the enemy and decide my jetbikes should go over enemy lines and strike at the HQ instead of the Leman Russ, with their bulk strength 4 catapults, 6 cannons, 8 fusion gun, and haywire grenade from the Autarch which would have done the job. Instead I have a Waveserpent with full shuriken cannons that has just dropped Scorpions who are now engaging into CC. It's just an empty transport without strong weapons right? That's what most of my opponents think at first, until it moves behind that Leman Russ and lights it up with 6 strength 6 shots. About 4 hit, half of them glance or better. The Leman Russ is now either unable to shoot or is now a pile of smoking slag.

In my last game I had a mini-council charging at two squads of opposing infantry, which had a Leman Russ behind them giving supporting fire against incoming skimmers. As I needed my tanks elsewhere the seer squad fired destructors at the Leman Russ, completely clearing all infantry between the seers and the tank, where upon they charged it and blew it open with 15 strength 9 auto-hits. My Scorpions then multi-charged the remaining infantry, allowing the seers to continue on next turn and breach the bunker. My opponent didn't think of this possibility at all, needless to say he expected my Falcon and Fireprism to be firing on that Leman Russ, not the infantry right in front of it.

I have many options, and with this kind of army almost every one of my units is up in and around the enemies DZ so every one is in striking distance of enemy vehicles. My Vypers often are used to finish off damaged enemy squads/combine fire with other Vypers and support fire to wipe large squads, or the focus on heavy weapons/HQ and other small valuable squads. Sometimes they hunt Chimeras, Sentinels and other light vehicles, but there is always the option at rushing the vehicle behind a heavy battle tank or artillery and unload 7 strength 6 shots (I use Vypers independantly when possible so they can do this easily and efficiently when the opportunity arises). When you have one Vyper, and it is next to a Falcon it is typically going to be ignored, especially if you're assaulting into your enemy with you're disembarked troops at the same time.

One of my favorites is my jetbike+Autarch squad. The Autarch with his BS5, a fusion gun and haywire grenades, will destroy most tanks on his own. With the mobility of a jetbike he can get where he needs to be. Back shots become readily available if you surive approach. When he's with 6 jetbikes or spears, he usually survives. Again with their mobility and massed strength 4/6 weaponry they can pose a serious threat to side /back armour. Last game my jetbike Autarch unit split at the beginning of the turn with the Autarch blowing a demolisher Leman Russ from the side, and the jetbikes blowing a Bassilisk from the side, then rejoining to shoot and assault infantry units in subsequent turns.

Harlequins and seers have a large chance at taking down any tank they face, and between the movement speed of the harlequins, and the singing spears of the seers, once in the DZ they tend to do pretty well.

The aforementioned Waveserpents are one of my best performers. Opponents underestimate the empty serpent. Once they drop their load they go tank hunting, always shuriken cannons or scatter lasers. Most infantry is in cover, starcannons are posh, and high yield weapons are more ideal for the position you can get in; the side and back armour. Bright lances are for ranged engagements against AV13-14 fronts and land raiders, which except for these exceptions of AV14 all around vehicles, there are fewer places for bright lances in this type of army where other weapons would not do better. The Falcon fills the same role as the serpent, if more aggressively.

My fire prism, I tend to use as anti-infantry truth be told. It works against bunkers and exposed light vehicles when I need it, but usually it is there to soak up ordinance shells that should be falling on my transports, jetbikes, and Falcon.

Bladestormed dire avengers cannot be underestimated against AV10. They have taken hive Tyrants, they have taken Leman Russ's. Enough said. In the third game of the `Ard Boyz tournement in the last game against an IG force (the same commander as from the above 2000pt game example) I had the last turn, which only last until turn three, so I used my Scorpions and Banshees to fire on light vehicles, destroying two sentinels. Anti-armour comes from all angles.

The Lanchester law brings us to the same conclusion with all battle-field goals in 40k; anti-armour, anti-personnel, a combination of firepower/CC/resilience values, scoring units, etc. One or two dedicated anti-armour units can match 1v1 against enemy tanks, but unless you are numerically superior these units tend to be relatively easy to destroy (before or after their implementation), and then you are reliant on the rest of your army which may or may not be adequate (mathematically or otherwise) to deal with remaining enemy armour, based on their firepower, ability to survive long enough to take down their targets, the mobility/range to achieve a targeting solution. If you have many units highly capable against armour values (many dedicated units, or just your whole army being able to oppose tanks) your opponent cannot effectively focus his fire on these units and eliminate this threat. You provide him with too many threats at once (numerical superiority) and you undo him before he can deal with you.

Not only does this superiority give you a higher killing power against each target type (be it tanks, infantry, or something else) and the utility I speak of above of your opponent not being able to focus efficiently on what is going to kill him (and indeed not even knowing how it will come!) you have options. In larger battles, especially tournement style, you will have a diverse set of anti-armour units, which are best against different armour values. A squad of blade-storming Avengers is definitely better used against light vehicles or rear AV10 armour than a squad of fusion gun toting Fire Dragons when there is a Leman Russ needing absolution in heretical fire. In the `Ard Boyz tournement in my third match I faced an IG army, and did not get first turn. On his first turn he drove forward with 4 Sentinels, 2 Chimerras, one Hellhound and a Leman Rus (and had another Leman Russ, several Chimeras, and a Basilisk at range). So I had several threats mid field I had to deal with, each at varying armour values. They were not all clumped together so I could not choose any unit to counter each, but with my mobility I still retained a high degree of freedom, especially with all of my units capable of destroying a vehicle. My vypers fired on the Chimera's, falcon on the hellhound, shinning spears on the rear armour of another chimera, Dark Reapers on the sentinels, and the harlequins went for the Leman Rus. Not only was I comparing relative strengths of each attack against each target armour value but where each opposing enemy was in relation to cover and the line of sight from the point of attack to my opponent's ranged Leman Rus, Bassilisk, and heavy weapon teams.

This summarizes, and details in places, my view of the methods and tactics of anti-tank which pertain best to the Bahzhakhain style. As with all parts of this article, while I may address alternative uses and methods, it is focused on one style of one craftworld, that being the ultra-fast close combat intensive mechanized Bahzhakhain transport rush (ufccimbtr-abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz for short).