Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Are these two pretty much the same when it comes to point cost and stats? Do they come with the same customizations for the models?

Firstly, welcome to Dakka!

Stat-wise the two are nearly identical, with your Marine standard mostly-4s statline. Marines come with ASTKNF standard, CSM do not. The main differences come when adding options.
- CSM squads go from 5 to 20 men, SM from 5-10, so CSM squads can be twice the size.
- CSM can take additional CCW or swap out their bolters for them, while Tactical Squads cannot (unless you play the Charchadons Chapter Tactics)
- CSM squad can take two of the same Special weapon, such as 2 plasmaguns or meltaguns while SM can take a Special and a Heavy weapon, but not two of one.
- CSM can add Icons or Marks to the squad, which provide bonuses such as T boosts, Rage or FNP. Tactical Marines have no equivalent option.

So as you can see, CSM are far more customisable than Tactical Squads, but once you pile on the upgrades can come out far more expensive.

Chaos Space Marines can be customized a lot more than their loyalist counterparts.

However, it doesn't makeup for the special rules that the regular marines get for free.

ATSKNF and chapter tactics are nice, but so are marks.

The way to think about it is more that tac marines must take one of a certain range of mandatory upgrades, while CSM have the option to be taken without any for cheaper, or to pay to get upgrades instead. And, also, a few of their upgrades stack, like + CCW and marks, and marks and icons.

As others are saying, you just have more and more different ways to customize a CSM squad. My personal favorite is that they can take huge squads of them.

Chaos Marines have more room for customisation, where Tacticals get a lot more freebies bundled into the package.

As a baseline, they have the same equipment and stats. Chaos Marines are 1 point cheaper but are forced to pay for their unit leader. Therefore at small sizes the Chaos squad is more expensive, at 10-men they are the same, and above 10 the Chaos are cheaper.
The Chaos Marines have no special rules built into the basic cost. Their Champion has a rule that forces him to issue and accept challenges with the tradeoff that he can win stat increases if he survives.
Tacticals have ATSKNF and Combat Squads built in to their basic loadout. They also have Chapter Tactics, allowing the player to select 2 army-wide rules that apply to all models.

This is where most of the complaints come from; Tacticals receive 3 extremely good special rules where Chaos get a single dodgy one, and even then it's only on one model. For all this the Tacticals are also at a very similar price.

After upgrades, Tacticals have a wider range of weapons and transport options. You have a wider range of guns and much, much stronger delivery options. You can get Drop Pods and Razorbacks along with better access to out-of-slot transports like Land Raiders and Stormravens. You also have more melee options available for the Sergeant.
Chaos gets the 4 Marks of Chaos which fundamentally change the stats of the unit, along with matching Icons. They can purchase Veterans of the Long War and additional combat attacks. They have a much larger squad maximum of 20 men. Finally, you have the ability to double-up and repeat special weapons where the Tactical gets a wider range, but only one of each.

All in all I'd say Tacticals come across as the stronger option. Neither of them are great and so you really want small, cheap squads so that you can save points for the money units. In this respect a cheap Tactical squad simply has far more special rules than a cheap Chaos squad, and the cost of upgrading them is money wasted that could have gone to more Obliterators, Spawn and allies.

 Paradigm wrote:
Firstly, welcome to Dakka!

Stat-wise the two are nearly identical, with your Marine standard mostly-4s statline. Marines come with ASTKNF standard, CSM do not. The main differences come when adding options.
- CSM squads go from 5 to 20 men, SM from 5-10, so CSM squads can be twice the size.
- CSM can take additional CCW or swap out their bolters for them, while Tactical Squads cannot (unless you play the Charchadons Chapter Tactics)
- CSM squad can take two of the same Special weapon, such as 2 plasmaguns or meltaguns while SM can take a Special and a Heavy weapon, but not two of one.
- CSM can add Icons or Marks to the squad, which provide bonuses such as T boosts, Rage or FNP. Tactical Marines have no equivalent option.

So as you can see, CSM are far more customisable than Tactical Squads, but once you pile on the upgrades can come out far more expensive.

Thanks for the answer! Im not 100% caught up on the lingo, what is ASTKNF?

"And they shall know no fear."

It's a special rule that Marines have had for ages that allows them to ignore some of the more fundamental parts of the game. When they break from combat, the enemy can never rout them but instead they rally and go back to fighting (and presumably losing again). They also auto-pass their rally checks and so will never run off the board unless they are standing extremely close to the table edge when they break. Finally, upon rallying they get a little extra squeeze of movement and can end up moving faster than if they had never broken in the first place.

It's quite a powerful rule and many players hold it to be worth the 1pt difference between books even before looking at Chapter Tactics and Combat Squads.

Phoenix3270@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the answer! Im not 100% caught up on the lingo, what is ASTKNF?

It's a typo, it should be ATSKNF.

It stands for 'And They Shall Know No Fear'

Thanks for the clarification. So, if I were to get the Dark Vengeance box, and Marine Squad for Chaos and the Dark Angels, it would be even enough for play?

ATSKNF is a good rule. To CSM's credit, though, they can take fearless as an upgrade, and their HQs are fearless. As are most of their units in general.

ATSKNF is cheaper and more flexible, but CSM aren't exactly in the cold when it comes to morale.

 Ailaros wrote:
ATSKNF is a good rule. To CSM's credit, though, they can take fearless as an upgrade, and their HQs are fearless. As are most of their units in general.

ATSKNF is cheaper and more flexible, but CSM aren't exactly in the cold when it comes to morale.

Fearless that can be sniped out.

 Paradigm wrote:

- CSM can take additional CCW or swap out their bolters for them, while Tactical Squads cannot (unless you play the Charchadons Chapter Tactics)

...Or Black Templars.

 Paradigm wrote:
- CSM squad can take two of the same Special weapon, such as 2 plasmaguns or meltaguns while SM can take a Special and a Heavy weapon, but not two of one.

I'd love to have 2 special weapons for my tacs, please. I wonder why this isn't even possible. Too broken? Please.
Tacticals are meant to be the most flexible units of them all in the codex, and what can they actually do? Well... hold objectives... and that's just barely. They have little to none decent firepower against anything nor mass to counter the opponent's offensive.
Granted, they're one of the beefiest troops there are, compared to other codices (T4, 3+ armour save, and ATSKNF). But nowadays, it's not enough, when there's AP3/AP2, Ignores Cover USR, and other wicked stuff spread like candy... to everybody else than Vanilla Marines.

Forgive my rant, but it seriously makes my blood boil 'cause GW is so incompetent when it comes to writing codices.

 Tigramans wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:

- CSM can take additional CCW or swap out their bolters for them, while Tactical Squads cannot (unless you play the Charchadons Chapter Tactics)

...Or Black Templars.

Well, I was referring just to Tactical Squads rather than the Crusader Squad, but yes, BT can be super-choppy too, and have meat-shields on standby!

 Paradigm wrote:
- CSM squad can take two of the same Special weapon, such as 2 plasmaguns or meltaguns while SM can take a Special and a Heavy weapon, but not two of one.

I'd love to have 2 special weapons for my tacs, please. I wonder why this isn't even possible. Too broken? Please.
Tacticals are meant to be the most flexible units of them all in the codex, and what can they actually do? Well... hold objectives... and that's just barely. They have little to none decent firepower against anything nor mass to counter the opponent's offensive.
Granted, they're one of the beefiest troops there are, compared to other codices (T4, 3+ armour save, and ATSKNF). But nowadays, it's not enough, when there's AP3/AP2, Ignores Cover USR, and other wicked stuff spread like candy... to everybody else than Vanilla Marines.

Forgive my rant, but it seriously makes my blood boil 'cause GW is so incompetent when it comes to writing codices.

To be honest, I think it's more to do with the idea that, in-setting at least, a Tactical Squad should be able to do anything, anywhere, at any time. They should have the capacity to crack open a transport at half a mile or clear a room ten feet away with equal ease, while Assault and Devastator squads are more specialised.

It doesn't translate too well in game simply because, when allocating points to picking a unit, it's almost always better to tailor them for one role really well than to split them over two roles. Combat Squads does mitigate this.

2 Specials would be nice, but that's why I play Space Wolves, because the best type of attack is attack!

 Paradigm wrote:
BT can be super-choppy too, and have meat-shields on standby!

If they ever reached the close combat in 7th Edition first.

 Paradigm wrote:
Combat Squads does mitigate this.

But is irrelevant because it doesn't justify anything. They still have only one special and/or heavy weapon.

 Paradigm wrote:
2 Specials would be nice, but that's why I play Space Wolves, because the best type of attack is attack!

...And once again, the "special-snowflake-mehreen" chapters have something better. The same goes with Dark Angels (Fearless and 4++ everywhere)
Seriously, I'd love to get my shooting terminators actually playable, for example.

BT can get into combat better than most MEQ thanks to a greater wound cap and their CT giving a re-roll on ones, and once they do reach it, they'll cause some hurt.

Combat Squads doesn't 'justify' the lack of 2xSpecial Weapon (the fluff does that, for better or worse), but it mitigates the squad's potentially split purpose by allowing them to act as 2 squads, so you won't need your flamer to go to waste while your Missile Launcher hits a transport.

And tangentially, Shooty Terminators are perfectly playable, but that's off-topic.

 Paradigm wrote:
BT can get into combat better than most MEQ thanks to a greater wound cap and their CT giving a re-roll on ones, and once they do reach it, they'll cause some hurt.

With what? Land Raiders? Sometimes yes, but I've yet to see a day when the BT have reached the close combat without getting their transports immobilised or popped open. Rhinos are out of the question because they're not Assault Vehicles, and Land Raiders are massive targets and lack dozer blades. Granted, they've got indisputably the best armour plating and the Machine Spirit to use to fire two targets at once, but it really falls flat, when it suffers the BMS (the Bullet Magnet Syndrome"), and is so big that it has difficulties to use cover efficiently. Same problem with the poor Vindicator, but at least the Vindicator can actually move around without a fear of terrain.

 Paradigm wrote:
And tangentially, Shooty Terminators are perfectly playable, but that's off-topic.

We can discuss about this off-topic elsewhere, should you have an interest to have a debate about it, for I must strictly disagree with that claim.

 Tigramans wrote:

Tacticals are meant to be the most flexible units of them all in the codex, and what can they actually do? Well... hold objectives... and that's just barely.

They can whine on forums, obviously.

But really, have you actually played maelstorm with your tactical marines?

 Tigramans wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
BT can get into combat better than most MEQ thanks to a greater wound cap and their CT giving a re-roll on ones, and once they do reach it, they'll cause some hurt.

With what? Land Raiders? Sometimes yes, but I've yet to see a day when the BT have reached the close combat without getting their transports immobilised or popped open. Rhinos are out of the question because they're not Assault Vehicles, and Land Raiders are massive targets and lack dozer blades. Granted, they've got indisputably the best armour plating and the Machine Spirit to use to fire two targets at once, but it really falls flat, when it suffers the BMS (the Bullet Magnet Syndrome"), and is so big that it has difficulties to use cover efficiently. Same problem with the poor Vindicator, but at least the Vindicator can actually move around without a fear of terrain.

 Paradigm wrote:
And tangentially, Shooty Terminators are perfectly playable, but that's off-topic.

We can discuss about this off-topic elsewhere, should you have an interest to have a debate about it, for I must strictly disagree with that claim.

There's nothing to discuss, Tactical Terminators are horrible, it really isn't open for debate. It's like saying dinosaurs only went extint 1000 years ago, it may be your opinion but you're provably wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:

 Tigramans wrote:

Tacticals are meant to be the most flexible units of them all in the codex, and what can they actually do? Well... hold objectives... and that's just barely.

They can whine on forums, obviously.

But really, have you actually played maelstorm with your tactical marines?

Yeah, their drop pods does a better job at holding objectives than the marines themselves.

 Zewrath wrote:


There's nothing to discuss, Tactical Terminators are horrible, it really isn't open for debate. It's like saying dinosaurs only went extint 1000 years ago, it may be your opinion but you're provably wrong.

They ARE horrible. If the sergeant actually got some wargear options, it would be a different thing.

 Zewrath wrote:


Yeah, their drop pods does a better job at holding objectives than the marines themselves.

My point exactly. The marines arrive and die, the pod survives and caps. *sarcastic woo-hoo*

 Tigramans wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
BT can get into combat better than most MEQ thanks to a greater wound cap and their CT giving a re-roll on ones, and once they do reach it, they'll cause some hurt.

With what? Land Raiders? Sometimes yes, but I've yet to see a day when the BT have reached the close combat without getting their transports immobilised or popped open. Rhinos are out of the question because they're not Assault Vehicles, and Land Raiders are massive targets and lack dozer blades. Granted, they've got indisputably the best armour plating and the Machine Spirit to use to fire two targets at once, but it really falls flat, when it suffers the BMS (the Bullet Magnet Syndrome"), and is so big that it has difficulties to use cover efficiently. Same problem with the poor Vindicator, but at least the Vindicator can actually move around without a fear of terrain.

Firstly, some parameters to what I am about to discuss:
- This assumes a decent terrain coverage, so at least 3-4 LOS blockers and ample scatter terrain.
- It assumes you are playing against something other than a Top-tier Serpent Spam/Screamerstar ect army, which according to the internet are everywhere but outside of top tournaments are rare in reality. So I'll assume we're talking about 1500 points of something non-spammy and not something that exploits imbalance/loopholes to a stupid extent.
- It assumes both players are competent,
I hope you'll agree that these things are fair assumptions to make as they mirror the way in which 40k is meant to be (and in most cases is) played.

To look at the options:

Rhino: The cheapest option available, it can deploy 12" in, move 18" the first turn with a flat out, meaning you are no further than 18" from the enemy even if they deploy against their board edge (in fact, they're likely to come to you, at least a little, shortening this distance). The next turn you disembark 6" towards the enemy, and move the Rhino 6" up beside them. You then fire with any weapons you can, before Flat-outing the Rhino to block LOS to the squad from as many angles as possible. At this point, the end of Turn 2 you have several squads of T4 3+ Marines, many of whom are obcured by the Rhino, and in all likelyhood in very feasible range to charge an enemy unit next turn. Considering you should have at least 4 squads as part of this manouvre, not to mention suporting tanks/units that will also be attracting fire, you are very likely to connect with several charges in the next turn, as I can't see any army crippling 40+ MEQ in a single shootin phase.

Drop Pod: Works in largely the same way as a Rhino, but gets you into position a turn earlier (at least with half your units) with the trade-off of not providing such good cover. Drop in as close as you like to the enemy, preferably focusing on one flank and using cover/LOS blockers to minimise incoming fire. From then on, same as above, go hell for leather at the nearest target and defy your opponent to kill enough marines to cripple the attack as well as dealing with other sections of your army.

Land Raider Crusader: Expensive, but very durable in multiples. Tactically, works the same as the Rhino Rush, but you can stay inside a turn longer thanks to it being an Assault Vehicle, all but guarunteeing you'll be hitting the battle line at full strength. It has the added bonus of putting out as much firepower as an up-gunned Tactical Squad all on its own, meaning a) you can weaken the enemy first and b) it continues to do its job after it has delivered its payload of Templars.

Foot-slogging: Contrary to what the internet would have you believe, Marines do not just evaporate walking across the board. With a full move+re-rollable run every turn you can hit combat by Turn 3 if the enemy has come towards you (most will) and especially if you use cover carefully, will still hit with a good number of men. All those points you save on Transports can go towards fire support to thin out the enemy, such as TFCs, Whirlwinds, Vindicators and Predators.

This does, of course, require the army to be built around etting into assault, but frankly, that's what a Templar army should be built around anyway, it's kind of their thing! Provide ample threat overload and stop assuming every army you face will be a GT-crushing netlist, and BT should see combat just fine.

 Paradigm wrote:
And tangentially, Shooty Terminators are perfectly playable, but that's off-topic.

We can discuss about this off-topic elsewhere, should you have an interest to have a debate about it, for I must strictly disagree with that claim.

For now, I'll just link a few fairly recent (late 6th/early 7th) threads where I have discussed it, but if that doesn't answer the question feel free to open a new thread in Tactics and I'll discuss it more.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/607115.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/603164.page

 Paradigm wrote:

- This assumes a decent terrain coverage, so at least 3-4 LOS blockers and ample scatter terrain.

There are no games I've ever played with scarce or no terrain. Actually, many have refused to play without a good number of 'em on the table.

 Paradigm wrote:
- It assumes you are playing against something other than a Top-tier Serpent Spam/Screamerstar ect army, which according to the internet are everywhere but outside of top tournaments are rare in reality. So I'll assume we're talking about 1500 points of something non-spammy and not something that exploits imbalance/loopholes to a stupid extent.

Rare in reality? Welcome to mine; there's always at least one or two of those guys who bring in the interesting mathhammered combinations, when we play at our tabletop dungeon.
ONCE, I had a chance to play a nice, fluff-full game without special hijinks, and was actually a really nice experience. The rest have been more or less tournament-like play, or outright roflstomp.

 Paradigm wrote:
- It assumes both players are competent,
I hope you'll agree that these things are fair assumptions to make as they mirror the way in which 40k is meant to be (and in most cases is) played.

I don't know what to say about the "true" way of playing 40K, since there appears to be none. A game, which is getting played in tournaments, despite being imbalanced beyond comprehension. While trying to play a fluffy game, it fails to reach the actual level of fluffy gameplay via rules.

What comes to competence of players - it varies.

 Paradigm wrote:

To look at the options:

Rhino: The cheapest option available, it can deploy 12" in, move 18" the first turn with a flat out, meaning you are no further than 18" from the enemy even if they deploy against their board edge (in fact, they're likely to come to you, at least a little, shortening this distance). The next turn you disembark 6" towards the enemy, and move the Rhino 6" up beside them. You then fire with any weapons you can, before Flat-outing the Rhino to block LOS to the squad from as many angles as possible. At this point, the end of Turn 2 you have several squads of T4 3+ Marines, many of whom are obscured by the Rhino, and in all likelyhood in very feasible range to charge an enemy unit next turn. Considering you should have at least 4 squads as part of this manoeuvre, not to mention supporting tanks/units that will also be attracting fire, you are very likely to connect with several charges in the next turn, as I can't see any army crippling 40+ MEQ in a single shootin phase.

STOP!

FOUR SQUADS? In 1500 points games, that means at least 700-800 points away - and that's just into troops!
Troops which can't even take and hold objectives well aren't worth spending just because you want to get close, not even the T4 & 3+ can justify that.
Also; considering the Rhino's armour, which is basically paper, wrapped with a little sturdier cardboard paper, is going to get wrecked quickly, if you turn it into a LOS blocker. Also: 'grats on GIVING the First Blood for the opponent.

 Paradigm wrote:
Drop Pod: Works in largely the same way as a Rhino, but gets you into position a turn earlier (at least with half your units) with the trade-off of not providing such good cover. Drop in as close as you like to the enemy, preferably focusing on one flank and using cover/LOS blockers to minimise incoming fire. From then on, same as above, go hell for leather at the nearest target and defy your opponent to kill enough marines to cripple the attack as well as dealing with other sections of your army.

My favourite of the transports, and the ultimate trick in the hand of the Marines 'dex, because it gives almost absolute control where to bring your men to fire and wrestle (counting out the scatter). I already use two of these for suicidal missions to take down the critical targets as quickly as possible. The bad thing is, that the only crew which is reliable in this matter, is the Sternguard Veteran squad, which means a massive investment.

 Paradigm wrote:
Land Raider Crusader: Expensive, but very durable in multiples. Tactically, works the same as the Rhino Rush, but you can stay inside a turn longer thanks to it being an Assault Vehicle, all but guarunteeing you'll be hitting the battle line at full strength. It has the added bonus of putting out as much firepower as an up-gunned Tactical Squad all on its own, meaning a) you can weaken the enemy first and b) it continues to do its job after it has delivered its payload of Templars.

No dispute here, the Land Raider is the master of transport vehicles, and the sturdiest ones around. However, in ruins-bloated terrains, it becomes an asinine investment, since it is terrible to assault over the obstacles. If it had a chance to purchase a dozer blade or ignored the terrain altogether, I'd buy another one, and use TWO. I love Land Raiders, but I DETEST its inability to actually move in terrain (and rolls of ones seem to just love me, since I roll 'em a lot).

 Paradigm wrote:
Foot-slogging: Contrary to what the internet would have you believe, Marines do not just evaporate walking across the board. With a full move+re-rollable run every turn you can hit combat by Turn 3 if the enemy has come towards you (most will) and especially if you use cover carefully, will still hit with a good number of men. All those points you save on Transports can go towards fire support to thin out the enemy, such as TFCs, Whirlwinds, Vindicators and Predators.

TFC:s are brilliant; cost-effective and boosts the ruins of your choice.
Meanwhile, Whirlwinds? Ahahahah, no. It doesn't have the firepower to kill anything else than boyz and gants. Cheap, yes, but still useless... UNLESS you use the FW's Relic Whirlwind Scorpius, which is an exact opposite with the reaction. When it's stationary, it hits hard - even MEQ units.
Vindicators? Bloody yes, but in order to give 'em a chance to actually shoot once or twice a game, you need at least two of them. Otherwise you'll be spending 135 points just for a bullet magnet, which stood around and got glanced to death. The big scary cannon frightens many, and not without a reason; S10 AP2 hurts. Whatever it hits, quite possibly turns into a crater. Too bad its range is unsatisfying, and attention it gets is immense.
Predators are a mixed bag. While they can be tailored for flesh-ripping or tank killing, I think they're still slightly too expensive for their purpose. It suffers a similar fate like the Vindicator; it's a bullet magnet, and you need to field them more than one to be effective.

 Paradigm wrote:
This does, of course, require the army to be built around getting into assault, but frankly, that's what a Templar army should be built around anyway, it's kind of their thing! Provide ample threat overload and stop assuming every army you face will be a GT-crushing netlist, and BT should see combat just fine.

GW needs to give me a REALLY good reason to build an assault-heavy army lists, because since 6th edition, the assault has been kicked in the corner.

***

Most of the time, I build lists with a balance; there's everything to counter anything. I take some tanks, I take tacticals/scouts for defensive purposes, I take Devastators to break opponents' heavy units. I don't believe in "mono-build" lists, which are exclusively tailored to a single role. Leaves too much weaknesses for the opponent to abuse.

Tactical sqauds have one advantage. For same number 2 tacticals, and then break into two combat sqauds and cover 4 separate locations at same time or break off melta gunner etc into a flanking sqaud to best bust a tank etc.

Gives you lots of flexibility and extra options.

Zewrath wrote:There's nothing to discuss, Tactical Terminators are horrible, it really isn't open for debate.

Lol. Well, if YOU say so, it must be true. Not a single debate can be made. Nope. Not one.

Paradigm wrote:To be honest, I think it's more to do with the idea that, in-setting at least, a Tactical Squad should be able to do anything, anywhere, at any time. They should have the capacity to crack open a transport at half a mile or clear a room ten feet away with equal ease, while Assault and Devastator squads are more specialised.

It doesn't translate too well in game simply because, when allocating points to picking a unit, it's almost always better to tailor them for one role really well than to split them over two roles. Combat Squads does mitigate this.

Well, it used to make more sense, as well. Back before everybody had a monstrous creature and there were superheavies in the game, and people started playing at huge points values.

Tac marines actually do their job of flexibility very well still in smaller points games where you don't have apocalypse board-clearing uberweapons on invincible space robots.

 Ailaros wrote:

Zewrath wrote:There's nothing to discuss, Tactical Terminators are horrible, it really isn't open for debate.

Lol. Well, if YOU say so, it must be true. Not a single debate can be made. Nope. Not one.

Go ahead and start the thread, but prepared to be disappointed and be proven wrong. Tactical Terminators have been horribad since 5th, and Mathhammer + Common Sense will show you how.

The only singular advantage that CSM Vanillas have is the ability to get 2 Special Weapons in the 10 man squad. That's REALLY good; add on a Combi-Weapon and you can do lots. HOWEVER, they have competition with Plague Marines, who do the same thing but better, and Noise Marines, who can take that really good ML equivalent they got and camp objectives.

For 1 more point per model (and the squads end up costing the same because mandatory Champion), Tactical Space Marines out of the Loyalist codex get ATSKNF, Combat Squad (which is neat, even when it doesn't do too much), and THEN Chapter Tactics. Factor in that this is considered inferior to Bikers and it's pretty amazing. That's more due to handing out AP2 to everyone and their mothers, but that's a whole different topic.

 Tigramans wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
2 Specials would be nice, but that's why I play Space Wolves, because the best type of attack is attack!

...And once again, the "special-snowflake-mehreen" chapters have something better. The same goes with Dark Angels (Fearless and 4++ everywhere)

That's funny, because I know a lot of SW players here say that Tacticals are better than our Grey Hunters... Not saying that I agree, but Vanilla has its own unique flavour. Hit & Run on all Tacs if you're running White Scars is epic.