82685
Post by: Heirophant101
Now I know that the title is going to get some people going, but hear me out.
I have been reading some articles about (SM) Tactical Squads around the place, and the majority of them have split opinions: about half the posts say that Tactical Squads are excellent when used well, and the other half say that Tactical Squads are rubbish, and that they are too expensive for what they can do.
After some recent gaming experience, I have found myself taking 2x 5 man Tactical Squads with flamers (footslogging) to fulfil my troops requirements, and then use the saved 200 or so points to get some more toys to play with!
Obviously in 5th Edition, I took 3-4 full Tactical Squads (as everybody did) because only they could score. But now, with everybody scoring, I do not feel that it is necessary to take so many Troops choices again.
So, my question is: is it worth it to pay for upgrades on a squad that still won't do much damage? Is that one-shot combi-plasma worth it on Rhino squads? Is objective secured so amazing if you can just use Elites and Heavy Support units to kill everyone and have Fast Attack take the uncontested objectives?
Thanks in advance for any replies!
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Taking extra squads = no. Now that everything scores there's no need to take mediocre generalists in a game that rewards specialists. Objective secured is a nice bonus when you can get it on a relevant unit that you already want (for example, an IG meatshield platoon), but it's not enough to justify taking units that you wouldn't want if they didn't have it.
Taking upgrades = maybe. You have to pay the troops tax anyway, so you might as well try to make them at least semi-useful.
91639
Post by: HillyKarma
These are the questions that haunt my soul every waking moment of my existence.
As a SM player, I think you have to make the decision of how to approach tac squads.
I think a lot of people don't take advantage of the versatility of a tac squad, and instead focus on their HQs and throw tactical marines into the grinder.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
Well, two full Tacticals in Rhinos can be still worth it in objective based games.
I'm using them in my BA army where all units are fast.
60807
Post by: Walnuts
Yeah, I'm going to start re-introducing tacticals into my army, thanks to the new blood angel dex. I think a squad or two with 3 flamers each (hand, heavy, and regular), along with fast rhinos could do some serious damage to troops and be decent enough at screening my advancing jump infantry and furiosos, along with seizing points that they might justify their point cost.
In smaller games I think they could act as a decent enough bodyguard for meph or a regular librarian where you can't spare the points on things like a command squad to give meph a proper bodyguard.
8 tacticals, one with melta, serg w/ plasma or grav pistol, meph, inquisitor w/ demon hamer and liber heresius, rhino would I think make a pretty decent unit.
That's 381 pts, and even if the rhino gets blown up first turn, they'd still be halfway up the field thanks to scout. I think that could actually work decently well for 1k and under games.
We'll see, I'm hoping to get a game or two in this week, and I've got a highlander tournament next weekend so I HAVE to use a tactical squad.
11860
Post by: Martel732
 wuestenfux wrote:Well, two full Tacticals in Rhinos can be still worth it in objective based games.
I'm using them in my BA army where all units are fast.
5 man tacs in fast razors are much better.
91292
Post by: DarkLink
Believe it or not, the internet's polarizing rhetoric isn't absolute truth. Tactical squads aren't terrible, they're just mediocre. They're cheap durable scoring that has fairly weak shooting due to being forced to split between a heavy and special weapon and are mediocre in combat with only one attack. You'll still see Space Marine armies with lots of Tacticals do well in tournaments, but you're not likely to see a tac heavy army on the top tables. Don't feel bad about taking more than the minimum, but don't waste too many points over other, better choices. Like Sicarians, Fire Raptors, Centurions, etc.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
Martel732 wrote: wuestenfux wrote:Well, two full Tacticals in Rhinos can be still worth it in objective based games.
I'm using them in my BA army where all units are fast.
5 man tacs in fast razors are much better.
In objective based games I prefer more durable units.
11860
Post by: Martel732
wuestenfux wrote:Martel732 wrote: wuestenfux wrote:Well, two full Tacticals in Rhinos can be still worth it in objective based games.
I'm using them in my BA army where all units are fast.
5 man tacs in fast razors are much better.
In objective based games I prefer more durable units.
I find my list more durable when I can fight back and neutralize targets of interest.
18690
Post by: Jimsolo
I don't think I'd take more than two, but I'd definitely spend the points to upgrade them.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Definitely take the upgrades. 70pts for 5/10 bolter shots is pants. 95pts for 3/6 bolter shots and 2/4 plasma shots is okish.
83653
Post by: Mavnas
Yeah, a squad with no upgrades is a tax, with the right upgrades/rhino for your current game they're Ok...
That said, I'd rather take Scouts. Tacticals are just a worse, cheaper version of other squads. Scouts can genuinely do things the others can't. Now with BA you can get 3 attacks at I5 S5 on the charge out of scouts which makes them dangerous enough that they might be a distraction and draw some fire away from your other units. That tactical squad hanging around in your backfield? Yeah, he'll get around to it when he needs that objective.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
^ What Mavnas said. Scouts all the way!
83098
Post by: throwoff
There's a lot of tactical squad hate going on recently on here and on other boards.
Tactical squads in my opinion are great units. My 1500 pt lists always at their core have -
10 marines, melta, combi melta and rhino
10 marines, flamer and rhino
I play Imperial Fists tactics and bolter drill has saved my butt countless times.
They are not going to win you the game on their own but in the vanilla marines dex what else are you going to take? I use scouts almost every game but they die far too easily, granted there is more AP 3 and better now but there is bundles of AP4.
When I first started playing I hated Tacticals, felt like a waste of points as they died easy and never got much done. Once I learnt the arts of rhinos, synergising weapons and of course synergising lists they became great.
You can't just take a deathstar and dump two squads of Bolters in your list and expect them to do well, a smart opponent will see them and wipe them out removing your scoring units knowing your death star can't hold an objective.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
 throwoff wrote:There's a lot of tactical squad hate going on recently on here and on other boards.
Tactical squads in my opinion are great units. My 1500 pt lists always at their core have -
10 marines, melta, combi melta and rhino
10 marines, flamer and rhino
I play Imperial Fists tactics and bolter drill has saved my butt countless times.
They are not going to win you the game on their own but in the vanilla marines dex what else are you going to take? I use scouts almost every game but they die far too easily, granted there is more AP 3 and better now but there is bundles of AP4.
When I first started playing I hated Tacticals, felt like a waste of points as they died easy and never got much done. Once I learnt the arts of rhinos, synergising weapons and of course synergising lists they became great.
You can't just take a deathstar and dump two squads of Bolters in your list and expect them to do well, a smart opponent will see them and wipe them out removing your scoring units knowing your death star can't hold an objective.
Not quite as relevant now that your deathstars CAN hold objectives. They got proxy nerfed in their only real role, and if you want to take some special detachment or something, they're not even obsec, so they quite literally turn into "wish I could spend these points on something else" units.
59159
Post by: DW
They are mandatory for Ultramarines players who like to tip the scales heavily in their favor on an alpha strike, with the help of Tactical Doctrine. I usually run 30 of them at anything more than 1250 pts. 1 squad in a drop pod, then the other 2 in rhinos, or perhaps 1 more pod.
11860
Post by: Martel732
throwoff wrote:There's a lot of tactical squad hate going on recently on here and on other boards.
Tactical squads in my opinion are great units. My 1500 pt lists always at their core have -
10 marines, melta, combi melta and rhino
10 marines, flamer and rhino
I play Imperial Fists tactics and bolter drill has saved my butt countless times.
They are not going to win you the game on their own but in the vanilla marines dex what else are you going to take? I use scouts almost every game but they die far too easily, granted there is more AP 3 and better now but there is bundles of AP4.
When I first started playing I hated Tacticals, felt like a waste of points as they died easy and never got much done. Once I learnt the arts of rhinos, synergising weapons and of course synergising lists they became great.
You can't just take a deathstar and dump two squads of Bolters in your list and expect them to do well, a smart opponent will see them and wipe them out removing your scoring units knowing your death star can't hold an objective.
Marines have no synergistic abilities like Tau. How exactly do you propose to synergize them?
", a smart opponent will see them and wipe them out removing your scoring units knowing your death star can't hold an objective."
Actually, they'll ignore them because they can't hurt them, unless the death star is that hard to remove. I always leave tacticals because they are not causing any real damage.
90599
Post by: Reinokarite
They are pretty valid choise for Dark Angels though. DA have lots of "synergistic abilities" after all.
83098
Post by: throwoff
Martel732 wrote:
Marines have no synergistic abilities like Tau. How exactly do you propose to synergize them?
", a smart opponent will see them and wipe them out removing your scoring units knowing your death star can't hold an objective."
Actually, they'll ignore them because they can't hurt them, unless the death star is that hard to remove. I always leave tacticals because they are not causing any real damage.
You synergise them to work with your list properly and do a job. I still see plenty of players with 10 tacticals, no rhino, a missle launcher or lascannon, plasma gun, powerfist on the sgt and god knows what else bolted on, they then either sit out of range of the 8 bolters so the las can fire, or move and have to snap shoot it or never get into combat so the fist is pointless and so on.
Combat squadding, arguably the best cheap transports in the game (pods, rhinos and razorbacks) and the option to take decent specials and heavies makes them work. I have 5 or 6 regular lists all with slightly different set ups of tacticals to fit the opponent I come up against.
Basically I really like tacticals, they have won me games more often than any other unit.
Saying that of course I do play Imperial Fists tactics, and that again makes them even better!
35316
Post by: ansacs
This is one of those things where the mission set you play matters. When you play a score as you go style mission (most of the major GTs have a component and maelstorm) then flexible units with objective secured that can MSU the best in the game and always regroup are a great value.
In missions where you only score at the end of the game flexibility is worth much less and objective secured is also worth less. Thus TAC units are worth a lot less.
And in KPs all of the strengths of a TAC unit are weaknesses and they are a detriment.
BTW this is also a lot of the "assault is dead" discussion. In score as you go assault is vital and happens turn 2-3. Units have to get in close to get to objectives. In score at the end assault often never happens unless one army is oriented completely around it.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
 ansacs wrote:This is one of those things where the mission set you play matters. When you play a score as you go style mission (most of the major GTs have a component and maelstorm) then flexible units with objective secured that can MSU the best in the game and always regroup are a great value.
But tactical squads suck in this kind of mission. Why would you take a slow infantry squad when you can take bikes as troops and have a much better unit for capturing random objectives every turn?
31784
Post by: Flood
I'm finding opponents neglect the low-threat rhino, only for it to snatch objectives from them via Obj Sec much to their frustration. For that alone I like a couple of Tact squads in a list.
35316
Post by: ansacs
Peregrine wrote:But tactical squads suck in this kind of mission. Why would you take a slow infantry squad when you can take bikes as troops and have a much better unit for capturing random objectives every turn?
Not if they take drop pods or rhinos + scout. This way you can get 60 bodies on the objectives turn 1-2. The extra wounds and the not white scars chapter tactics can make a big difference. Also the ability to take 3 ObjSec units per troops slot for less cost than 2 ObjSec unit of bikes helps the equation. Really there are a lot of little things that are not immediately obvious unless you play these armies that makes the differences. Such as krak grenades. When you fight MC or vehicles in CC with a unit of TAC marines they actually do considerably more damage per point than their biker cohorts. Or if you fight a list focused on killing power at the expense of ObjSec the 18 units swarming the board is very nearly impossible for most of the archetypal killing power lists to table while the bike list is actually pretty easy to table for a variety of armies. There is also LoS blocking for rhinos and second player turn "alpha" strike capability for a drop pod list (ie you try to alpha strike with a bike army and get seized on and you will fully understand an uphill battle).
There is additionally the sheer board control that so many units offer. You can literally make it impossible for the opponent to move forward in time to get to objectives.
Again this discussion is more nuanced as chapter tactics has a lot to offer in what works best. IWND makes rhinos a bit more annoying, Sentinels of Terra makes tac unit bolters much better, raptors rending bolters, raven guard free scouting for rhinos, utlramarines, etc. A lot of this is to leverage different abilities associated with chapter tactics.
I will end with the importance of assault in score as you go missions. If you are outclassed in assault with a biker army you will have to sacrifice ~140 pt units to slow the assault elements down so you can shoot them or get your own assault in place. With a tac marine spam army you can sacrifice an empty rhino or a 5 man tac unit instead which is a good deal cheaper. You can also use IG like tactics with speed bumps and bubble wrapping objectives.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Bare bones 5 mans with laz cannons camping an objective - will perform at the same rate as 10 man squad as it job is simple and in cover isn't worth shooting at with anything at it 48 inch range - it will likely perform better because it's avoiding getting shot at. You will shoot 8-10 shots at vehicles or MC and you might get lucky and blow something important up. If you prefer to waste points on a unit that does no damage outside of it's heavy weapon or expensive upgrades it will only ever get to use once. Unless you've got no where else to put the points bare bones will ALWAYS work better. 10 year marine veteran here.
11860
Post by: Martel732
ansacs wrote:Peregrine wrote:But tactical squads suck in this kind of mission. Why would you take a slow infantry squad when you can take bikes as troops and have a much better unit for capturing random objectives every turn?
Not if they take drop pods or rhinos + scout. This way you can get 60 bodies on the objectives turn 1-2. The extra wounds and the not white scars chapter tactics can make a big difference. Also the ability to take 3 ObjSec units per troops slot for less cost than 2 ObjSec unit of bikes helps the equation. Really there are a lot of little things that are not immediately obvious unless you play these armies that makes the differences. Such as krak grenades. When you fight MC or vehicles in CC with a unit of TAC marines they actually do considerably more damage per point than their biker cohorts. Or if you fight a list focused on killing power at the expense of ObjSec the 18 units swarming the board is very nearly impossible for most of the archetypal killing power lists to table while the bike list is actually pretty easy to table for a variety of armies. There is also LoS blocking for rhinos and second player turn "alpha" strike capability for a drop pod list (ie you try to alpha strike with a bike army and get seized on and you will fully understand an uphill battle).
There is additionally the sheer board control that so many units offer. You can literally make it impossible for the opponent to move forward in time to get to objectives.
Again this discussion is more nuanced as chapter tactics has a lot to offer in what works best. IWND makes rhinos a bit more annoying, Sentinels of Terra makes tac unit bolters much better, raptors rending bolters, raven guard free scouting for rhinos, utlramarines, etc. A lot of this is to leverage different abilities associated with chapter tactics.
I will end with the importance of assault in score as you go missions. If you are outclassed in assault with a biker army you will have to sacrifice ~140 pt units to slow the assault elements down so you can shoot them or get your own assault in place. With a tac marine spam army you can sacrifice an empty rhino or a 5 man tac unit instead which is a good deal cheaper. You can also use IG like tactics with speed bumps and bubble wrapping objectives.
14/model still seems like a lot for throw away models, which is what you seem to be advocating. Maybe there's still too much Eldar WS scorched earth in my meta to notice these things you are talking about. In my experience, tac squads do nothing, then die, both using them and fighting them.
61618
Post by: Desubot
I think obsec is nice when it comes to drop pods.
5man suicide squads with like meltas or something dropping on a back field objective or contesting one near a unit that cant really hurt it has come in handy in a surprising amount of games.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Maybe I'm spoiled a bit by BA in that I can fly around the board and mop up stray squads. But mobile shooting lists can do the same thing. I don't understand at all how these 5 man drop squad survive the withering firepower of 6/7 th ed.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:Maybe I'm spoiled a bit by BA in that I can fly around the board and mop up stray squads. But mobile shooting lists can do the same thing. I don't understand at all how these 5 man drop squad survive the withering firepower of 6/7 th ed.
Not everyone plays against wave spam... seriously Or heavy Tau.
11860
Post by: Martel732
 Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:Maybe I'm spoiled a bit by BA in that I can fly around the board and mop up stray squads. But mobile shooting lists can do the same thing. I don't understand at all how these 5 man drop squad survive the withering firepower of 6/7 th ed.
Not everyone plays against wave spam... seriously
Or heavy Tau.
Those are not the only mobile firepower lists. Tactical squads shoot back so poorly that tac heavy lists are absorbing insane amounts of fire over the course of the game. IG, GK, and even Orks have been known to shoot quite a bit as well.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:Maybe I'm spoiled a bit by BA in that I can fly around the board and mop up stray squads. But mobile shooting lists can do the same thing. I don't understand at all how these 5 man drop squad survive the withering firepower of 6/7 th ed.
Not everyone plays against wave spam... seriously
Or heavy Tau.
Those are not the only mobile firepower lists. Tactical squads shoot back so poorly that tac heavy lists are absorbing insane amounts of fire over the course of the game. IG, GK, and even Orks have been known to shoot quite a bit as well.
And how well do those lists tend to take fire back?
IG wont be in cover all the time.
GK loosing a few models to a melta or plasma here or there tend to be devastating considering there points costs.
Orks have gak armor.
Of which non of these have interceptor so its not like they are retaliating from the get go.
And of which if they are hugging cover they will ether GTG or get stuck with a 4+ which is hardly that powerful.
not to mention ALL of the follow up shooting from the rest of your army.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:Maybe I'm spoiled a bit by BA in that I can fly around the board and mop up stray squads. But mobile shooting lists can do the same thing. I don't understand at all how these 5 man drop squad survive the withering firepower of 6/7 th ed.
Not everyone plays against wave spam... seriously
Or heavy Tau.
Those are not the only mobile firepower lists. Tactical squads shoot back so poorly that tac heavy lists are absorbing insane amounts of fire over the course of the game. IG, GK, and even Orks have been known to shoot quite a bit as well.
And how well do those lists tend to take fire back?
IG wont be in cover all the time.
GK loosing a few models to a melta or plasma here or there tend to be devastating considering there points costs.
Orks have gak armor.
Of which non of these have interceptor so its not like they are retaliating from the get go.
And of which if they are hugging cover they will ether GTG or get stuck with a 4+ which is hardly that powerful.
not to mention ALL of the follow up shooting from the rest of your army.
Every tac squad you field cripples the fire coming back from your list, which was already crippled by having meqs instead of cheaper base units. A guardsmen with a plasma gun is so much more efficient than a marine because in both cases, they are just life support systems for a plasma gun. The guardsmen is actually a better shot, because he can be twinlinked by orders. Marines have so such synergy available. Marines' lack of initial body count caps the damage they can possibly cause in a single turn by itself. Now adding marines that essentially aren't doing anything just magnifies this problem of having a low dakka ceiling.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:
Every tac squad you field cripples the fire coming back from your list, which was already crippled by having meqs instead of cheaper base units. A guardsmen with a plasma gun is so much more efficient than a marine because in both cases, they are just life support systems for a plasma gun. The guardsmen is actually a better shot, because he can be twinlinked by orders. Marines have so such synergy available. Marines' lack of initial body count caps the damage they can possibly cause in a single turn by itself. Now adding marines that essentially aren't doing anything just magnifies this problem of having a low dakka ceiling.
a Guardsman cant be twinlinked by orders..... the feth book are you using?
second why on earth would you be droppoding next to a plasma gun....
71534
Post by: Bharring
If you're looking for something to hold its own against Serpent Spam, good luck. Its mostly agreed upon that its OP. So nothing measures up if that's your measuring stick.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:
Every tac squad you field cripples the fire coming back from your list, which was already crippled by having meqs instead of cheaper base units. A guardsmen with a plasma gun is so much more efficient than a marine because in both cases, they are just life support systems for a plasma gun. The guardsmen is actually a better shot, because he can be twinlinked by orders. Marines have so such synergy available. Marines' lack of initial body count caps the damage they can possibly cause in a single turn by itself. Now adding marines that essentially aren't doing anything just magnifies this problem of having a low dakka ceiling.
a Guardsman cant be twinlinked by orders..... the feth book are you using?
second why on earth would you be droppoding next to a plasma gun....
I trusted the IG guy because I didn't have time to read his entire codex. Drop pod lists have their own problems. One such problem is when you can't drop in anywhere safe. And the problem that you are footslogging once you do drop. But what I said about marines is not a specific thing, its a general thing. Marines have fewer bodies, which means their maximum firepower is more limited than lists with more bodies. And in tactical squads, and that max firepower drops a lot further.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:I trusted the IG guy because I didn't have time to read his entire codex. Drop pod lists have their own problems. One such problem is when you can't drop in anywhere safe. And the problem that you are footslogging once you do drop. But what I said about marines is not a specific thing, its a general thing. Marines have fewer bodies, which means their maximum firepower is more limited than lists with more bodies. And in tactical squads, and that max firepower drops a lot further.
well you trusted the wrong IG guy as there is no way to get Twinlinked in regular IG Unless the opponent literally list tailored against you. then sure but if some one spent points to literally put plasma guns on ALL of there units in every corner of the map then you are already winning as ethere they just spent at least 2 units worth of points to do it. You in reality should have zero issues putting a pod in the right spot to do the right job.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I trusted the IG guy because I didn't have time to read his entire codex. Drop pod lists have their own problems. One such problem is when you can't drop in anywhere safe. And the problem that you are footslogging once you do drop. But what I said about marines is not a specific thing, its a general thing. Marines have fewer bodies, which means their maximum firepower is more limited than lists with more bodies. And in tactical squads, and that max firepower drops a lot further.
well you trusted the wrong IG guy as there is no way to get Twinlinked in regular IG
Unless the opponent literally list tailored against you. then sure but if some one spent points to literally put plasma guns on ALL of there units in every corner of the map then you are already winning as ethere they just spent at least 2 units worth of points to do it.
You in reality should have zero issues putting a pod in the right spot to do the right job.
my
My issue is that there is no "right job" for tacticals. And you never addressed my point about marine firepower.
77159
Post by: Paradigm
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I trusted the IG guy because I didn't have time to read his entire codex. Drop pod lists have their own problems. One such problem is when you can't drop in anywhere safe. And the problem that you are footslogging once you do drop. But what I said about marines is not a specific thing, its a general thing. Marines have fewer bodies, which means their maximum firepower is more limited than lists with more bodies. And in tactical squads, and that max firepower drops a lot further.
well you trusted the wrong IG guy as there is no way to get Twinlinked in regular IG
Not specifically, but Primaris Psykers can use Prescience easily enough.
But back on topic, no I do not see Tacticals as a tax in anything other than the smallest games. As mentioned, they won't match up against WS spam well (hint: Nothing does, that's why it's considered OP and exploited) but against 90% of the other lists out there they are decent units. The real strength of them is that they can contribute something in every phase of the game, and while I appreciate that 40k often rewards specialists over generalists, one cannot do to underestimate the usefulness of this truly 'tactical' unit.
Movement Phase:
- Some of the best cost-to-utility transports in the game in Pods or Rhinos. 35 points for either getting anywhere I want on the board T1 (and having AV12 ObSec on that point) with minimal risk of scattering, or for a transport that can provide more ObSec, carry essentially two squads and doesn't lose all that much by flat-outting in the early game to get to any point you want within the first couple of turns is a steal. It can provide mobile LoS blocking, and even when Wrecked it'll still give you a 5+ cover save.
- Being able to split units at deployment is a great bonus, as you can potentially double your threat overload and ObSec ability, give the oppoent twice as many targets and not have to sacrifice your Heavy Weapon to remain mobile. Similarly, if you are that worried about being blown off the board, surely losing a maximum of 5 Marines is better than 10?
Shooting Phase:
- Tacticals may not boast a huge amount of firepower compared to Elite units, but ultimately they shouldn't; they are line troops, not uber-killing-machines. Taking a special and a Combi gives you a good output against your desired target, and at close range you're adding a few Bolter shots and a Krak Grenade which can't hurt. Add in the fact you have a BS4 5-wound Lascannon or Plasma Cannon hiding in the back if that's your style, which is free to support that Combat Squad or pick a different target entirely.
Assault Phase:
- Tactical Marines are not just shooters, as much as that may seem their role. They pay for S/T that is above most of the game, and against most shooty units you can easily win a fight with charging Tacticals. It's always better to charge than be charged (unless it's Space Wolves), so whipping out your bolt Pistols for a quick salvo and then getting stuck in should be something you proactively do. Obviously, you should avoid dedicated CC units, but that's what you bring High-power shooters or bricks like TH/ SS Termies to deal with.
- Similarly, Tacticals are far better equipped than most line troops to deal with vehicles. Half a dozen Krak Grenades and maybe Melta Bombs will put the hurt on most non- LR.
In summary, they are not point-and-click units, and naturally, if you're not getting the most from the stats you pay for then they're going to appear poor, but 10 Tacticals, with matched Special/Heavy/Combi in a Pod or Rhino is a great, versatile and worthwhile unit, and a staple of the codex. They're not winning you any games on their own, but they aren't meant to, and in theory, no unit ever should.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I trusted the IG guy because I didn't have time to read his entire codex. Drop pod lists have their own problems. One such problem is when you can't drop in anywhere safe. And the problem that you are footslogging once you do drop. But what I said about marines is not a specific thing, its a general thing. Marines have fewer bodies, which means their maximum firepower is more limited than lists with more bodies. And in tactical squads, and that max firepower drops a lot further.
well you trusted the wrong IG guy as there is no way to get Twinlinked in regular IG
Unless the opponent literally list tailored against you. then sure but if some one spent points to literally put plasma guns on ALL of there units in every corner of the map then you are already winning as ethere they just spent at least 2 units worth of points to do it.
You in reality should have zero issues putting a pod in the right spot to do the right job.
my
My issue is that there is no "right job" for tacticals. And you never addressed my point about marine firepower.
Its fine that there maximum firepower is limited
are you expecting them to remove enitre units in droves?
At best they should be killing a few like 3-4 guardsmen at best which is 1 going to cause moral and two should be enough to take out a misplaced heavy weapon or special.
at best you take them for a combi + 1 special weapon to take care of a VERY specific target like a vehicle or elite unit sitting out some where with plasmas
you could also go nuts and take some flamer ones to torch guardsman out of cover.
Bolt guns have issues but they where never supposed to be fantastic or wave serpent or tesla level BS.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I don't find them decent when I play against them. I find it incredibly unlikely that every marine foe I ever took on just didn't know how to use them. They are a mathematical non-sequitur.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:I don't find them decent when I play against them. I find it incredibly unlikely that every marine foe I ever took on just didn't know how to use them. They are a mathematical non-sequitur.
Well il match your anecdotal evidence with my anecdotal in which iv taken out plenty with pod drops. Naturally with actual support such as Ironclads and other units that actually move up instead of camping.
That and i dont play against nothing but spam lists. so there is that.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I don't expect them to remove units, but I do expect them to do *something*, which all too often they fail at.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:I don't expect them to remove units, but I do expect them to do *something*, which all too often they fail at.
Then you must have the most unlucky area for marines as they do plenty.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I don't find them decent when I play against them. I find it incredibly unlikely that every marine foe I ever took on just didn't know how to use them. They are a mathematical non-sequitur.
Well il match your anecdotal evidence with my anecdotal in which iv taken out plenty with pod drops. Naturally with actual support such as Ironclads and other units that actually move up instead of camping.
That and i dont play against nothing but spam lists. so there is that.
Forgive me if I don't respect your podding tacticals after going up against SW pod lists. Because I don't. Adding ironclads doesn't make tacs good. In fact you could have had more ironclads if you dump the tacs. Automatically Appended Next Post: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I don't expect them to remove units, but I do expect them to do *something*, which all too often they fail at.
Then you must have the most unlucky area for marines as they do plenty.
The 5th ed BA codex was by far the worst list in 6th and 7th ed and even with that dumpster fire of a codex tactical marines have never been a problem.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:Forgive me if I don't respect your podding tacticals after going up against SW pod lists. Because I don't. Adding ironclads doesn't make tacs good. In fact you could have had more ironclads if you dump the tacs. The 5th ed BA codex was by far the worst list in 6th and 7th ed and even with that dumpster fire of a codex tactical marines have never been a problem.
Quite frankly i wasnt expecting any less from ya. Im not sure what you are trying to say in the second quote. are you saying your dumpster fire BA Tac marines are able to deal with tac marines? or are you saying the dumpster fire BA tac marines are easy to be dealt with?
11860
Post by: Martel732
Lol. Do you think I used any tac marines with the 5th ed codex? I was winning because my opponents were using tac marines. They were crippling their own lists.
11860
Post by: Martel732
For troops? Meched up asm with an occasional jumper asm squad. Tacs couldn't bring enough heat before running them over with asm. Of course once they started using gravstar, bikers and smashbane I was hosed.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:For troops? Meched up asm with an occasional jumper asm squad. Tacs couldn't bring enough heat before running them over with asm. Of course once they started using gravstar, bikers and smashbane I was hosed.
Well the last point sounds about right.
Iv never had issues with mass rhino chassis though it was never the tactical jobs to deal with it 100% only the ones with melta guns.
anyway it seems we will fundamentally disagree so lets agree to disagree.
11860
Post by: Martel732
By the time you can fire melta, my ba are overrunning your tac marines. That's way way too late. If you pod up i can bubblewrap with jumpers.
You can play the agree to disagree card but you are essentially conceding that tac marines were helpless against the worst codex in the game.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Unless Blood Angels had their bolters replaced with Nerf Guns it's not like they can't win.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Worst codex at the time. BA might still be the worst for all i know, but its better than it was.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:By the time you can fire melta, my ba are overrunning your tac marines. That's way way too late. If you pod up i can bubblewrap with jumpers. You can play the agree to disagree card but you are essentially conceding that tac marines were helpless against the worst codex in the game.
The melta ones are in Drop pods The plasma ones are in Rhinos If you are sitting there bubblewraping your rhino/razors then thats fine. i can send in the ironclads or other units first to force them off it. or just shoot rear armor at st8. Ether way i aint conceding. They have there uses and they are actually able to kill things which you are completely denying left and right. And besides from anecdotal evidence there will be no way to prove ether of our points as there are far to many variables to consider such as actual lay out of table, how much terrain, are they LOS blocking terrain, was the lists tailored, points limited and the likes.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Killing a single ba here or there does not count as killing anything meaningful. Not when the tacs are being wiped out in mass in hth.
Once marines got the ability to kill my whole list with grav before i can close it all changed. Tacs are not part of that problem. Its all tiggy and grav cents.
I dont have to wait long for the pods to arrive. Once they do, all your melta is one shot and then dead. Not real scary. And I never list tailor.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:Killing a single ba here or there does not count as killing anything meaningful. Not when the tacs are being wiped out in mass in hth.
Once marines got the ability to kill my whole list with grav before i can close it all changed. Tacs are not part of that problem. Its all tiggy and grav cents.
Yeah i really dont see how these tacs are getting wiped out in mass besides from dedicated anti marine attacks. and at that if against BA they are going to lose because BA have better stats for CC but they are not going to be swepted off the boards unless you literally are the worse roller of 3+ saves.
So you are saying tacticals are not bad but big wombo combos are?
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:Killing a single ba here or there does not count as killing anything meaningful. Not when the tacs are being wiped out in mass in hth.
Once marines got the ability to kill my whole list with grav before i can close it all changed. Tacs are not part of that problem. Its all tiggy and grav cents.
Yeah i really dont see how these tacs are getting wiped out in mass besides from dedicated anti marine attacks. and at that if against BA they are going to lose because BA have better stats for CC but they are not going to be swepted off the boards unless you literally are the worse roller of 3+ saves.
So you are saying tacticals are not bad but big wombo combos are?
What im saying is that tacticals shoot and i pick up one model. Grav bikers or grav cents shoot and i pick up squads. I get tacs in hth and I kill them with ease. I get in hth with smashbane and lose entire squads.
Tactical squad get wiped out in HTH because they can't fight in HTH to save their lives. Literally.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:I don't expect them to remove units, but I do expect them to do *something*, which all too often they fail at.
Then you must have the most unlucky area for marines as they do plenty.
I must too then, because there are ZERO games that go by here where tacticals do something other than be a subpar choice for your army. And they're given plenty of opportunity. I usually let them live until I have no other targets to kill because they're literally lowest priority every time I face them.
10335
Post by: Razerous
Tactical Squads = Minimum Troops FOC requirement (in most cases)
Scouts = Troops
So, in context, as you HAVE to take one or the other, which is better. That should help answer the OP's question.
Personally I'm concerned that whilst scouts could provide a cheap I5 STR5 3A delivery system, I play too many armies that field AP4 weaponry, which is a straight hard counter.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Razerous wrote:Tactical Squads = Minimum Troops FOC requirement (in most cases)
Scouts = Troops
So, in context, as you HAVE to take one or the other, which is better. That should help answer the OP's question.
Personally I'm concerned that whilst scouts could provide a cheap I5 STR5 3A delivery system, I play too many armies that field AP4 weaponry, which is a straight hard counter.
They're both bad, just in different ways. With regular space marines, they at least have the storm as a transport options for the scouts.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Well its why i send my tactical in to deal with things they normal can deal with.
if its 1 model. lets make it a lemon or a paladin or that ravnger that is harassing my vindicator or triplas.
sure there will be situations where they literally cant deal with anything but that goes for any troops at that point.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Well its why i send my tactical in to deal with things they normal can deal with.
if its 1 model. lets make it a lemon or a paladin or that ravnger that is harassing my vindicator or triplas.
sure there will be situations where they literally cant deal with anything but that goes for any troops at that point.
They can't deal with anything on a point for point basis. That's the crux of our entire problem with them.
Other troops pay fewer points for the privilege of sucking. Also, many troops are cheap enough that they can mass up enough shots to accomplish something. See: IG troops.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Well its why i send my tactical in to deal with things they normal can deal with. if its 1 model. lets make it a lemon or a paladin or that ravnger that is harassing my vindicator or triplas. sure there will be situations where they literally cant deal with anything but that goes for any troops at that point.
They can't deal with anything on a point for point basis. That's the crux of our entire problem with them. Other troops pay fewer points for the privilege of sucking.
The problem is you are expecting a unit to perform the same task as a unit that costs 5x as much at least. a grav cent bomb is rediculus amounts of points. so are grav bikes. Besides Eldar and tau, other troops are relatively equal all around. DEs only shtick is that they have poison shots all of which have paper armor. IG come in 10s and they cost a little bit more then half the tac squad for a bunch of low St shots at low ld if you start spending for there transports and weapons there prices start skyrocketing. Nids need a leashing that requires them to have specific units near by that tend to add to there costs. so does unlocking sm bike troops. orks are a ton of bodies but with low bs and are generally best in cc but are prone to LD base things. Chaos requires unlocking for there better troops like noisemarines but they also cost a lot to get there long range killy. or are plauge marines and dont kill for gak. Daemons are mostly gimmicky at best, usually for summoning. Eldar are an issue with there presudo rending. Tau troops are way to cheap for what they do and crisis suits are also not balanced.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
LOL scouts are also really awful - just slightly less awful because they cost less points to do something useful. I should really just play IG because I think vets are the best troops out there...more specials...same BS...more versatility...Better transports...much cheaper suicides.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Or those units are balanced and tac marines suck. From where I'm standing, nearly all other troops are more useful than tac marines. So where does the problem truly lie?
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
In Games Workshop who makes a horribly unbalanced ruleset.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:Or those units are balanced and tac marines suck. From where I'm standing, nearly all other troops are more useful than tac marines. So where does the problem truly lie?
The point is they costs more to make them more killy compared to a tac squad. while there survivability generally never goes up. meaning most of them will die to any stiff breeze that would normally kill a tac as well.
There is no difference in usefulness at best. if you are building a specific troop unit to deal with a specific target, a tac can generally do exactly the same thing and will generally die just the same to retaliation fire.
The major difference is that tactical at least have access to drop pods to move the game up further on there side.
32940
Post by: Araenion
4 flamer BA tacticals in a pod for 170 points. How is that low firepower? Plus, who in their right mind would go around killing Tacs with so much more dangerous BA stuff on the table.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
 Araenion wrote:4 flamer BA tacticals in a pod for 170 points. How is that low firepower? Plus, who in their right mind would go around killing Tacs with so much more dangerous BA stuff on the table.
How can flamers in a pod be considered at all reliable. They have 8 inch range and can scatter 12?
61618
Post by: Desubot
 Xenomancers wrote: Araenion wrote:4 flamer BA tacticals in a pod for 170 points. How is that low firepower? Plus, who in their right mind would go around killing Tacs with so much more dangerous BA stuff on the table.
How can flamers in a pod be considered at all reliable. They have 8 inch range and can scatter 12?
because you can still move?
you scatter 2d6 of which yo uwill probably roll 7. of 7 you move 6" anyway. congrats you are back where you want to be. while you dont ever need to deal with misshapping unless you come in near a table edge.
and at that you have a straight 1/3 chance to not scattering at all.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:Or those units are balanced and tac marines suck. From where I'm standing, nearly all other troops are more useful than tac marines. So where does the problem truly lie?
The point is they costs more to make them more killy compared to a tac squad. while there survivability generally never goes up. meaning most of them will die to any stiff breeze that would normally kill a tac as well.
There is no difference in usefulness at best. if you are building a specific troop unit to deal with a specific target, a tac can generally do exactly the same thing and will generally die just the same to retaliation fire.
The major difference is that tactical at least have access to drop pods to move the game up further on there side.
And DA have WS. Your point? Automatically Appended Next Post: Araenion wrote:4 flamer BA tacticals in a pod for 170 points. How is that low firepower? Plus, who in their right mind would go around killing Tacs with so much more dangerous BA stuff on the table.
It's not 4 flamers. Hand flamers are notoriously poor.
61618
Post by: Desubot
My point is stop comparing things to WS and Eldars. EVERYTHING and i mean EVERYTHING looks bad compared to them. and that isnt an issue with all the other codexes. its an issue with the Eldar one specifically.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Araenion wrote:4 flamer BA tacticals in a pod for 170 points. How is that low firepower? Plus, who in their right mind would go around killing Tacs with so much more dangerous BA stuff on the table.
If they serve themselves up in a pod, sure I'll kill them with weapons that can't reach the rest of my opponent's army. Please piecemeal yourself for me. Please. Automatically Appended Next Post: Desubot wrote:
My point is stop comparing things to WS and Eldars. EVERYTHING and i mean EVERYTHING looks bad compared to them. and that isnt an issue with all the other codexes. its an issue with the Eldar one specifically.
Drop pods make everything better anyway. You can't use the drop pod as a reason why tacticals are good. Because a better unit put in the pod is just that much better. You are the one who brought transports into this, not me. I'm talking tac marines vs things like boyz, IG troops, and DA.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote:
Drop pods make everything better anyway. You can't use the drop pod as a reason why tacticals are good. Because a better unit put in the pod is just that much better. You are the one who brought transports into this, not me. I'm talking tac marines vs things like boyz, IG troops, and DA.
Its not just the WS the DA also has that BS presudo rend which is by far one of the worst decisions gw made.
being able to negate 2+ armor saves is BS.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Martel732 wrote:Or those units are balanced and tac marines suck. From where I'm standing, nearly all other troops are more useful than tac marines. So where does the problem truly lie?
This is my thoughts exactly. Insert any troops option from any other army and it is better than tacticals considering CSM squads are just tacticals themselves. This is pretty absurd considering marines are supposed to be elite infantry.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote:
Drop pods make everything better anyway. You can't use the drop pod as a reason why tacticals are good. Because a better unit put in the pod is just that much better. You are the one who brought transports into this, not me. I'm talking tac marines vs things like boyz, IG troops, and DA.
Its not just the WS the DA also has that BS presudo rend which is by far one of the worst decisions gw made.
being able to negate 2+ armor saves is BS.
Okay let's talk guardsmen and boyz then. These units have way more dakka/pt and have many more wounds to give. Boyz and guardsmen also negate 2+ saves by throwing piles of dice. More importantly, a unit like tactical terminators can't cause significant damage in return to these units, either.
61618
Post by: Desubot
At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks.
and at that you still have armor saves.
while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks.
and at that you still have armor saves.
while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
They don't need saves. Marine armor saves have become, frankly a bit of a joke in practice. Either your opponent has AP 2/3 out the wazoo or they just spam you with so many wounds you can't save them all. The inability for marines to shoot back effectively is just crippling.
And your math is wrong about non-marine firepower. Shoota boyz generate more ounds per point, and they do it 6" further out. Guardsmen also generate more wounds per point and have access to synergistic orders that make it even worse.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks. and at that you still have armor saves. while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
They don't need saves. Marine armor saves have become, frankly a bit of a joke in practice. Either your opponent has AP 2/3 out the wazoo or they just spam you with so many wounds you can't save them all. The inability for marines to shoot back effectively is just crippling.
At what cost though? you say they spam it out but now that cheap unit is costing more and more then the tactical squad. Edit: and now you are adding orders in which would add further costs.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks.
and at that you still have armor saves.
while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
They don't need saves. Marine armor saves have become, frankly a bit of a joke in practice. Either your opponent has AP 2/3 out the wazoo or they just spam you with so many wounds you can't save them all. The inability for marines to shoot back effectively is just crippling.
At what cost though? you say they spam it out but now that cheap unit is costing more and more then the tactical squad.
No, it's not. That's the whole problem.
At least the IG has something somewhere to make their troops more effective. The marines don't even have that.
We don't even need to get into who loses the most points when struck by a riptide pie plate.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks. and at that you still have armor saves. while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
They don't need saves. Marine armor saves have become, frankly a bit of a joke in practice. Either your opponent has AP 2/3 out the wazoo or they just spam you with so many wounds you can't save them all. The inability for marines to shoot back effectively is just crippling.
At what cost though? you say they spam it out but now that cheap unit is costing more and more then the tactical squad.
No, it's not. That's the whole problem. At least the IG has something somewhere to make their troops more effective. The marines don't even have that. We don't even need to get into who loses the most points when struck by a riptide pie plate.
And im saying yes it is. you are saying that points for points other troops will gak on marines. at rapid fire range against stock guards and stock marines it is infact 19 shots from guards for 9.5 hits for 3.16 wounds of which 1.05 will fail at 50 points for the unit coming out to 47.368 points per kill Spacemarine would be 10 shots 6.66 hits 4.44 wounds with no saves. for 70 points for 15.75 points per kill for them. Id do other codexs if i owned them. let me try adding in a PCS since infantry squads have to come with them. the extra shots for FRFSRF adds another shot to those .5 more dead marines for 30 more points.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Ork Shootaboys are more durable per point, are unbreakable, and out shoot and out CC tacticals.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Xenomancers wrote:Ork Shootaboys are more durable per point, are unbreakable, and out shoot and out CC tacticals.
What are the points and stats so i can whip up the math.
91128
Post by: Xenomancers
Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:Martel732 wrote: Desubot wrote:At st3 and or low BS... any extra hits you get are offset immediately in the to wound step. and vice versa for orks.
and at that you still have armor saves.
while return fire the other way will generally hit and wound on 3s (4s for orks) and they will get no save.
They don't need saves. Marine armor saves have become, frankly a bit of a joke in practice. Either your opponent has AP 2/3 out the wazoo or they just spam you with so many wounds you can't save them all. The inability for marines to shoot back effectively is just crippling.
At what cost though? you say they spam it out but now that cheap unit is costing more and more then the tactical squad.
No, it's not. That's the whole problem.
At least the IG has something somewhere to make their troops more effective. The marines don't even have that.
We don't even need to get into who loses the most points when struck by a riptide pie plate.
And im saying yes it is.
you are saying that points for points other troops will gak on marines.
at rapid fire range
against stock guards and stock marines
it is infact 19 shots from guards for 9.5 hits for 3.16 wounds of which 1.05 will fail at 50 points for the unit coming out to 47.368 points per kill
Spacemarine would be 10 shots 6.66 hits 4.44 wounds with no saves. for 70 points for 15.75 points per kill for them.
Id do other codexs if i owned them.
let me try adding in a PCS since infantry squads have to come with them.
Your missing the point. A big part of why tacs suck is their lack of special weapons per points. Automatically Appended Next Post: Desubot wrote: Xenomancers wrote:Ork Shootaboys are more durable per point, are unbreakable, and out shoot and out CC tacticals.
What are the points and stats so i can whip up the math.
Not sure the exact points on the upgrades for the boys. a 30 man with 3 big shootas a nob with a bigshoota is only about 30 points more than a to a 10 man tac in a rhino with 2 specials and a vet with a combi.
Big shoota is str 5 ap 5 assualt 3 36" range. Shoota is str 4 ap 6 assualt 2 18" range. Orks have 2 attacks t4 ws4 bs2 and i2 and the nob has a powerclaw 2 wounds 3 attacks.
4 big shootas alone is going to moe the marines down. killing 1-2 marines a turn.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Xenomancers wrote: Your missing the point. A big part of why tacs suck is their lack of special weapons per points.
That certainly wasn't the point that was brought up. mostly that tacs suck and always will suck compared to any other troop choice. But this is exactly the same case for other troops as well anyway. and its harder for other troops too since its harder to get those tools where they needa go that fast. and the mobility generally comes from expensive transports which SM beats for points in general. (not Eldar) Generally special weapons cost a similar boat load through out most codexes. like 15 for plasmas seem to be consistant. and they will only take 1 per unit at best. Ig vets can get 3 but they are generally plasmas or meltas. which need to get close or get shot in the open so they almost always go in chimeras which add a whole lot of points to what would of been about 100-115 points. and if IG can do it then i dont see why marines cant take a rhino which will stem most of the plasma damage. and what specials can ork boys take? Edit: wait is this BA tacticals? as vanilla can only has 1 special or 1 heavy at 5 and at 10 can have both but not double specials. 4 big shootas woulnt even kill 1 marine. fyi 12 shots > 4 hits > 2.6 wounds > .8 saves failed. also assuming the price is correct. the orks will kill about 4.44 marines costing about 48 points per kill. the revise with tacticals alone would be 21 points per kill. 3.3 dead per 5 marine bolters at 12"
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
One issue. It's unrealistic to assume that the enemy general would leave things with bad armor outside cover. Something the tacticals get no use from in a troop v troop fight. These calcs are assuming typical 5+. God help the marines if the enemies are in 4+, or if it's night, or both.
140 points of guardsmen would kill 56 points of marines in one volley with no orders, and the same 140 points of marines would only kill 24 points of guard. If we assume that they get simultaneous shooting phases, the guard win that match easy.
140 points of shoots boys and 140 points of marines tie each other in damage, but the shoots boys do it from 6" further away. And if the marines are close enough to double tap, the orks are close enough to move, shoot, then charge with 'ere we go for a very easy charge, and at that point it's night-night marines.
And like I said, this gets much worse for the marines if better cover is available, or if it's night, while the other side experiences no negative effects whatsoever.
61618
Post by: Desubot
niv-mizzet wrote:One issue. It's unrealistic to assume that the enemy general would leave things with bad armor outside cover. Something the tacticals get no use from in a troop v troop fight. These calcs are assuming typical 5+. God help the marines if the enemies are in 4+, or if it's night, or both. 140 points of guardsmen would kill 56 points of marines in one volley with no orders, and the same 140 points of marines would only kill 24 points of guard. If we assume that they get simultaneous shooting phases, the guard win that match easy. 140 points of shoots boys and 140 points of marines tie each other in damage, but the shoots boys do it from 6" further away. And if the marines are close enough to double tap, the orks are close enough to move, shoot, then charge with 'ere we go for a very easy charge, and at that point it's night-night marines. And like I said, this gets much worse for the marines if better cover is available, or if it's night, while the other side experiences no negative effects whatsoever.
But not entirely fair either to always calculate against Tacticals. they will always look bad when facing nothing but 2-3-4+ cover saves which are not always possible. as well only a fool would be that close to an ork mob without any sort of support or atleast thinning them down. The calculations above is simply to prove that on an even playing field a tactical is infact NOT as bad per points as some people keep trying to say.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
The guardsmen also beat the Marines in melee, killing 28 points of marine and only losing 12. This is, of course, assuming that neither side charged. Also, the Marines will go first, but the loss of three guardsmen is hardly damaging to the statistic.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Desubot wrote:niv-mizzet wrote:One issue. It's unrealistic to assume that the enemy general would leave things with bad armor outside cover. Something the tacticals get no use from in a troop v troop fight. These calcs are assuming typical 5+. God help the marines if the enemies are in 4+, or if it's night, or both.
140 points of guardsmen would kill 56 points of marines in one volley with no orders, and the same 140 points of marines would only kill 24 points of guard. If we assume that they get simultaneous shooting phases, the guard win that match easy.
140 points of shoots boys and 140 points of marines tie each other in damage, but the shoots boys do it from 6" further away. And if the marines are close enough to double tap, the orks are close enough to move, shoot, then charge with 'ere we go for a very easy charge, and at that point it's night-night marines.
And like I said, this gets much worse for the marines if better cover is available, or if it's night, while the other side experiences no negative effects whatsoever.
But not entirely fair either to always calculate against Tacticals. they will always look bad when facing nothing but 2-3-4+ cover saves which are not always possible.
as well only a fool would be that close to an ork mob without any sort of support or atleast thinning them down.
Those calculations are on 5+ cover, which should be readily available all over the table. Automatically Appended Next Post: I would like tacticals more if one of several things was done to them, but the specific one I want to mention now is the synergy element. Aka the lack of one.
If they had some kind of supporting fire or crossfire ability where they improved another unit's shooting or something by firing at the same target maybe?
Another would be if cover was a ballistic skill modifier rather than a save. That by itself could put power armor back on the map.
61618
Post by: Desubot
Wait how in the world are you getting your numbers? it honestly makes no sense that guardsmen are beating marines at all per point.
5 marines against 10 guardsman stock, should be assuming some how no one is charging.
Marines go first. 5 attacks 3.33 hits 2.22 wounds 1.48 of them failed saves
and for the ease of calculations assuming no challanges to take out the extra attacks and assuming no one died for whatever reason
guardsmen have 11 attacks 5.5 hits 1.8333 wounds and only .611 failed
That is 47 kill per points vs 81.81 for guardsmen. the marines are near twice as good at killing in CC.
i dont disagree though i REALLY wish cover was a BS mod rather than an or save. also wishing invul worked like a ward to bring back terminators but thats just me
10335
Post by: Razerous
Xenomancers wrote:LOL scouts are also really awful - just slightly less awful because they cost less points to do something useful. I should really just play IG because I think vets are the best troops out there...more specials...same BS...more versatility...Better transports...much cheaper suicides.
Have a look at the victory conditions of your games and play accordingly. If you need to score points, you may find Scouts (cheap, mobile, deployable) better. In regards to Orks or IG - Again context! I do like guardsman but currently I need to spend 130pts on the regular guardsmen to have 25 unequipped models or 60pts on unequipped veterans. Orks are similiar. You need to either mass up or equip all of them and all of those examples have serious problems with morale tests. Put it this way, an Eldar player does not have access to what a Marine Codex has to offer, but along the same theme is not required to pay the troop tax from the marine codex. Personally, whatever army you build, I was of the opinion that you should always design an army from the Troop Choices and up... Now that everything scores... less so.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
Desubot wrote:Wait how in the world are you getting your numbers? it honestly makes no sense that guardsmen are beating marines at all per point.
5 marines against 10 guardsman stock, should be assuming some how no one is charging.
Marines go first. 5 attacks 3.33 hits 2.22 wounds 1.48 of them failed saves
and for the ease of calculations assuming no challanges to take out the extra attacks and assuming no one died for whatever reason
guardsmen have 11 attacks 5.5 hits 1.8333 wounds and only .611 failed
That is 47 kill per points vs 81.81 for guardsmen. the marines are near twice as good at killing in CC.
i dont disagree though i REALLY wish cover was a BS mod rather than an or save. also wishing invul worked like a ward to bring back terminators but thats just me
. Your 5 v 10 matchup is weighted to the marines. 70 v 50 points.
Although, admittedly when I did the calculation, I assumed four point guardsmen, because if you call them 5 point men, then the sarge is getting an attack and LD point for free, and that would normally be a 10 point upgrade. You could replace the above with 4 point unmarked chaos cultists, since they are statistically identical.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Two full tac squads with reasonable upgrades and either rhinos or pods, comes to around 400pts.
Lets look at what marines can get for that:
- Typhon heavy seige tank. With ceremite. 14 all round. 6hp. 7" st10 ap1 ignores cover blast. 370pts.
- Sicaran battle tank with schism of mars and ceremite, 2 predators with lascannon side sponsoons. 410pts.
- 2 bikes squads, each with 5 bikes and an attack bike, 2 grav, 1 combi and a multimelta. 400pts.
- 9 rapier guns with 2 crew each, 3 with laser destroyers, 6 with quad bolters. 405pts
- Stormraven and 2 thunderfire cannons. 400pts
- 2 stormravens. 400pts
- 5 landspeeders with dual multimeltas. 400pts
- 3 grav centurions with tigurius. 425pts
- 2 squads of assault terminators, each with 3 LCs and 2 th/ss. 420pts
- Tooled up CM with SE etc, grav biker squad. 395pts
- 2 Thunderfire cannons, 3 multimelta attack bikes and 5 sniper scouts. 425pts.
Yes the tacticals fill up your compulsory troops slots, but isn't the whole point about whether they are taken partly as a tax? In other words, if you didn't have to fill up your troops slots, would you honestly take 2 full tactical squads with transport over all the options above? Can they cause as much damage or take as much damage as the above? There are so many better options in the dex if playing competitively. Granted, scouting transports and rending bolters for raptors, bp&ccw option plus rage for carcharodons, bolter spam with bolter banner with DA etc, change the game up a bit, but aside from that, would you really be more worried by your opponents 2 tactical squads then of their typhon or knight bearing down on you?
32940
Post by: Araenion
Martel732 wrote:If they serve themselves up in a pod, sure I'll kill them with weapons that can't reach the rest of my opponent's army. Please piecemeal yourself for me. Please.
Only because you asked so nicely. I play a full on aggression, board dominance list with pretty much anything. Even my Eldar lists' most common range is 12", basically melee.  So don't expect any piecemealing on my part. If you get hit by that squad, you can bet you'll get hit by other squads on the same turn and my entire army T2. Please waste your firepower to kill my Tacs (who are actually notoriously tough to kill once they drop to 1 model. Proven fact. 1 Tac killed my unwounded Avatar back in 5th), and not my TWC or SG or DC or TDAWGs or Fenrisian wolves. Please.
Essentially, you'll never get your money's worth by killing stuff with Tacs. They're there to take objectives from other troop choices (most equivalent troop choices will get mopped up by a Tac squad, especially with those flamers), plant their own annoying asses on one and stay there for the rest of the game (no one wants to shoot anything at 2 Tacs going to ground every round), or be a semi-dangerous distraction from your more valuable units. It's all about how it all fits together. People keep shouting about spam, psychic phase, bla bla bla, but I've yet to see a well-built, balanced list not give a fair fight to the likes of Serpent spam. Of course, YMMV.
11860
Post by: Martel732
"but I've yet to see a well-built, balanced list not give a fair fight to the likes of Serpent spam"
Except for the ones that get tabled, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Desubot wrote:Wait how in the world are you getting your numbers? it honestly makes no sense that guardsmen are beating marines at all per point.
5 marines against 10 guardsman stock, should be assuming some how no one is charging.
Marines go first. 5 attacks 3.33 hits 2.22 wounds 1.48 of them failed saves
and for the ease of calculations assuming no challanges to take out the extra attacks and assuming no one died for whatever reason
guardsmen have 11 attacks 5.5 hits 1.8333 wounds and only .611 failed
That is 47 kill per points vs 81.81 for guardsmen. the marines are near twice as good at killing in CC.
i dont disagree though i REALLY wish cover was a BS mod rather than an or save. also wishing invul worked like a ward to bring back terminators but thats just me
Cover giving out half the benefit of power armor for free is yet another problem that I wasn't even talking about. Tacs lack of offense is a bigger deal to me than them getting indirectly shafted on their defense. Actually , its more than half the benefit, because 5+ cover can't be negated by AP 2/3. Man they have ripped the gonads off meqs in general.
61618
Post by: Desubot
And the point is being missed still.
You are trying to claim point for point marines are the worst trash. and that anyone will kill marines more than they would kill in turn.
Iv pointed out that in the case. point for point for a straight up fight between two units the amount of unsupported (and even some supported) wounds caused per point give tac squads the win.
And this is done because for all intents there is really no way to account for ALL variables on table. it always comes into a what if this or what if that or well they should always come with a support or psyker or whatever.
Straight points for points marines are not the trash tier amongst troop choices you keep saying.
Poly: why in the world are you taking a full decked out unit. if it was takin as a tax at best they would be min squads with possibily a drop pod if the list is themed around it. probably with a special and a combi as that benifits the most in those ranges. at that you are at around 250 ish. Its a land raider. and those are noted to have far worse killing power than tacs.
81025
Post by: koooaei
Let's compare 5 tacticals with a plazmagun to 5 ASM in vacuum. Somewhat identical point cost.
Tacticals have a turn of 24' shooting and a turn of rapid fire shooting.
1-st turn. Bolters deal 0.44 casualtirs, PG deals 0.55 casualties - 1 dead ASM on average.
2-d turn. Bolters deal 0.88 casualtirs, PG deals 1.1 causalties - 2 dead ASM on average.
2 ASM shoot bolt pistol and throw a krak nade ~0.3 casualties. Tacticals shoot overwatch - 0.4-0.5 casualties on average, so we have 1-2 ASM charging 4-5 marines.
Let's say there are 2 asm and they're blood angels for the heck of it. 6 s5 attacks deal 0.66 casualties - let's say a dead marine paired with a few bolt shots.
4-5 tacticals strike back at ini 4 and deal 0.41 wounds for 5 and 0.33 for 4 - not much worse than 2 asm on the charge. Paired with overwatch it can round up to 1 dead ASM. And than you have a single asm with 2 s4 attacks vs 4 tacticals with 4 attacks.
Tacticals win a vacuum matchup against asm point to point hands down.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Desubot wrote:Poly: why in the world are you taking a full decked out unit. if it was takin as a tax at best they would be min squads with possibily a drop pod if the list is themed around it. probably with a special and a combi as that benifits the most in those ranges. at that you are at around 250 ish.
Because the point is that if you're treating your tactical squads as more than just a tax you're spending points on upgrades. And once you invest more than tax-level points in tactical squads they compare very poorly to the units you could have bought instead. Conclusion: pay the tactical tax, and no more.
Its a land raider. and those are noted to have far worse killing power than tacs.
Who cares if tactical squads are "better" than terrible units like a LR? Sucking slightly less than a bad unit doesn't make a unit worth taking.
Automatically Appended Next Post:  koooaei wrote:Tacticals win a vacuum matchup against asm point to point hands down.
Well yeah, if you assume that an assault unit just walks across the table through open terrain before charging. I don't think anyone is surprised by that result.
81025
Post by: koooaei
 Peregrine wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
koooaei wrote:Tacticals win a vacuum matchup against asm point to point hands down.
Well yeah, if you assume that an assault unit just walks across the table through open terrain before charging. I don't think anyone is surprised by that result.
That's why i'm saying vacuum. We're also assuming Tacticals are not riding a rhino and are not supported by other ranged squads as it's way easier to support shooters than assaulters in this regard. Sure, ASM will do great if there's a solid blos they can fide behind - that's why they pay for jump packs, for the opportunity of doing this. But it's also limiting their movement. And so on, and so forth. My point is that stating that ASM kill Tacticals like no big deal is plain wrong when you compare them point to point.
61618
Post by: Desubot
But comparing it to maxed out rather than what you would normally just take?
Going max points up to 400 then yeah any of the crazy toys will completely eclipse marines hands down.
They can be taken and be useful and are not as bad as people claim.
53708
Post by: TedNugent
No one's really talking about the two biggest changes this edition.
Objective secured dedicated troop transports and 5 man Tacticool squads with a special weapon.
With one transport per 5 man troop squad, you could conceivably have a small army of 6 Razorbacks/Rhinos rolling around with objective secured.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Desubot wrote:But comparing it to maxed out rather than what you would normally just take?
That isn't maxed out, it's just two 10-man squads with heavy/special weapon and a transport. IOW, normal units that you'd take if you wanted to use your tactical squads as more than a troops tax.
81025
Post by: koooaei
Peregrine wrote: Desubot wrote:But comparing it to maxed out rather than what you would normally just take?
That isn't maxed out, it's just two 10-man squads with heavy/special weapon and a transport. IOW, normal units that you'd take if you wanted to use your tactical squads as more than a troops tax.
A single uber-unit, albeint killy, can't spread in 4 obsec squads with 2 obsec transports.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
koooaei wrote:A single uber-unit, albeint killy, can't spread in 4 obsec squads with 2 obsec transports.
Except if you look at that list of ~400 point units you'll notice that it includes several options for taking multiple units or units that can split fire with multiple guns.
32940
Post by: Araenion
You love to assume things. I see more Serpent spams tabled than them tabling anyone else. Granted, we play with a lot of terrain as a rule. You should try that.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Araenion wrote:
You love to assume things. I see more Serpent spams tabled than them tabling anyone else. Granted, we play with a lot of terrain as a rule. You should try that.
Terrain only helps against serpent spam for your vehicles (which the serps take even greater advantage of). The weapons traditionally firing from a serp are worse than ap3, so unless your marines are shrouded and behind 4+ cover, they are going to be using their armour saves anyway. The issue is not lack of an armour save but the sheer amount of high strength shots.
In response to the 400pts worth issue. 400pts is 2 squads with basic load out and cheapest transports. Not maxed out. If you are taking minimum to save points then you are treating them as a tax. You would not be getting them otherwise as there are better options for the points. 5 man with melta and combi melta in a drop pod are 15pts more expensive than 2 multimelta attack bikes. An objective sitting squad with a lascannon is only 20pts cheaper than 2 rapier laser destroyers which are FAR more effective and WAY more durable. There are so many better options in the dex that either max or min - they are a tax.
Ask yourself this, if you could take absolutely anything in the dex/in IAs/in supplements as troops, would you still take tactical squads? If the answer is yes then I salute your fluff driven narrative gamestyle, if the answer is no, then, quite simply, they are a tax. Automatically Appended Next Post: Peregrine has made the other points perfectly.
32940
Post by: Araenion
Poly Ranger wrote: Araenion wrote:Terrain only helps against serpent spam for your vehicles (which the serps take even greater advantage of). The weapons traditionally firing from a serp are worse than ap3, so unless your marines are shrouded and behind 4+ cover, they are going to be using their armour saves anyway. The issue is not lack of an armour save but the sheer amount of high strength shots.
I'm not talking about cover saves, I'm talking about BLOS terrain that forces the Serps to come close to you if they want to shoot you.
11860
Post by: Martel732
koooaei wrote:Let's compare 5 tacticals with a plazmagun to 5 ASM in vacuum. Somewhat identical point cost.
Tacticals have a turn of 24' shooting and a turn of rapid fire shooting.
1- st turn. Bolters deal 0.44 casualtirs, PG deals 0.55 casualties - 1 dead ASM on average.
2-d turn. Bolters deal 0.88 casualtirs, PG deals 1.1 causalties - 2 dead ASM on average.
2 ASM shoot bolt pistol and throw a krak nade ~0.3 casualties. Tacticals shoot overwatch - 0.4-0.5 casualties on average, so we have 1-2 ASM charging 4-5 marines.
Let's say there are 2 asm and they're blood angels for the heck of it. 6 s5 attacks deal 0.66 casualties - let's say a dead marine paired with a few bolt shots.
4-5 tacticals strike back at ini 4 and deal 0.41 wounds for 5 and 0.33 for 4 - not much worse than 2 asm on the charge. Paired with overwatch it can round up to 1 dead ASM. And than you have a single asm with 2 s4 attacks vs 4 tacticals with 4 attacks.
Tacticals win a vacuum matchup against asm point to point hands down.
ASM aren't really good anyway.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Araenion wrote:
You love to assume things. I see more Serpent spams tabled than them tabling anyone else. Granted, we play with a lot of terrain as a rule. You should try that.
Sounds like you were the one assuming lots of terrain when you made your initial statement. And terrain mainly grants cover, which doesn't help against WS at all. Or Tau. I was also tabling tac-heavy lists with 5th ed BA, so there's that, too. It really sucks for the tac user when they can't get by expensive and killy BA models off the table before its too late. Which they never can.
Final point: Eldar don't need WS spam to table marine lists that aren't using the holy trinity of smashbane, gravstar, and grav bikers. I can pull random units out of the Eldar book and put the wood to marines. Don't believe me? I've done it once.
32940
Post by: Araenion
Martel732 wrote: koooaei wrote:Sounds like you were the one assuming lots of terrain when you made your initial statement. And terrain mainly grants cover, which doesn't help against WS at all. Or Tau. I was also tabling tac-heavy lists with 5th ed BA, so there's that, too. It really sucks for the tac user when they can't get by expensive and killy BA models off the table before its too late. Which they never can.
Final point: Eldar don't need WS spam to table marine lists that aren't using the holy trinity of smashbane, gravstar, and grav bikers. I can pull random units out of the Eldar book and put the wood to marines. Don't believe me? I've done it once.
I've done it too. I never use Serpents and most marine armies don't stand a chance vs my list. But Eldar and Tau are relics of the old age. We'll get our turn with the nerf bat, don't you worry. And in the meantime, Serpent spam should be absolutely crushed by a decent BA or SW list with their sturdy and fast CC options. Ever tried killing 60 angry marines with 5-6 S5 I5 attacks each with 3+/5++ with AP6/- weapons? It's not pretty. Funny thing is, that's not a counter list, that's a TAC list. Just throw in a couple PFs and some trimelta ASM and you're done. And all I've seen so far suggests BA codex is on par with CoF SW supplement, probably better than the vanilla SW. Times they are a changing for marines and we'll see how xeno codices will age as the edition progresses.
11860
Post by: Martel732
I've seen the Eldar tear those 60 angry marines to shreds. Fast skimmers are hard to assault when taking all your losses from the front.
4139
Post by: wuestenfux
Martel732 wrote:I've seen the Eldar tear those 60 angry marines to shreds. Fast skimmers are hard to assault when taking all your losses from the front.
Eldar can do it.
And when SW or BA bring the fast moving assault units, the passengers disembark and destroy them with pseudo rending weapons.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
Yeah I've vassal'd eldar a few times with my "willing to play test anything" buddy. Any of the marine lists that were trying out some NOT top tier list were obliterated. I'm not sure what that guy was talking about when he said he didn't see serpents table other armies much. Maybe I'm just a godly eldar player without any prior practice?
81025
Post by: koooaei
Araenion wrote:Martel732 wrote: koooaei wrote:Sounds like you were the one assuming lots of terrain when you made your initial statement. And terrain mainly grants cover, which doesn't help against WS at all. Or Tau. I was also tabling tac-heavy lists with 5th ed BA, so there's that, too. It really sucks for the tac user when they can't get by expensive and killy BA models off the table before its too late. Which they never can.
Final point: Eldar don't need WS spam to table marine lists that aren't using the holy trinity of smashbane, gravstar, and grav bikers. I can pull random units out of the Eldar book and put the wood to marines. Don't believe me? I've done it once.
I've done it too. I never use Serpents and most marine armies don't stand a chance vs my list. But Eldar and Tau are relics of the old age. We'll get our turn with the nerf bat, don't you worry. And in the meantime, Serpent spam should be absolutely crushed by a decent BA or SW list with their sturdy and fast CC options. Ever tried killing 60 angry marines with 5-6 S5 I5 attacks each with 3+/5++ with AP6/- weapons? It's not pretty. Funny thing is, that's not a counter list, that's a TAC list. Just throw in a couple PFs and some trimelta ASM and you're done. And all I've seen so far suggests BA codex is on par with CoF SW supplement, probably better than the vanilla SW. Times they are a changing for marines and we'll see how xeno codices will age as the edition progresses.
you've messed up the quotes
Automatically Appended Next Post:
niv-mizzet wrote:Yeah I've vassal'd eldar a few times with my "willing to play test anything" buddy. Any of the marine lists that were trying out some NOT top tier list were obliterated. I'm not sure what that guy was talking about when he said he didn't see serpents table other armies much. Maybe I'm just a godly eldar player without any prior practice?
Yep, currently eldar power build with serpents and knights is super effective and easy to use. You don't need much gaming experience to win with it.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Araenion wrote:Terrain only helps against serpent spam for your vehicles (which the serps take even greater advantage of). The weapons traditionally firing from a serp are worse than ap3, so unless your marines are shrouded and behind 4+ cover, they are going to be using their armour saves anyway. The issue is not lack of an armour save but the sheer amount of high strength shots.
"I'm not talking about cover saves, I'm talking about BLOS terrain that forces the Serps to come close to you if they want to shoot you. "
Sorry, no one where I play will play on a pac-man board. There are going to be plenty of 36" firing lanes. I suspect if you had to play under those circumstances, you might change your tune.
77846
Post by: Poly Ranger
Eh? What's going on with the quotes?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
^that wasn't me btw. I said the bit about cover not helping against serp spam.
77159
Post by: Paradigm
Martel732 wrote: Araenion wrote:Terrain only helps against serpent spam for your vehicles (which the serps take even greater advantage of). The weapons traditionally firing from a serp are worse than ap3, so unless your marines are shrouded and behind 4+ cover, they are going to be using their armour saves anyway. The issue is not lack of an armour save but the sheer amount of high strength shots.
"I'm not talking about cover saves, I'm talking about BLOS terrain that forces the Serps to come close to you if they want to shoot you. "
Sorry, no one where I play will play on a pac-man board. There are going to be plenty of 36" firing lanes. I suspect if you had to play under those circumstances, you might change your tune.
This could well be a huge part of your percieced issue. Throw in some terrain that forces actually decisions and movement and you may find shooty armies are far less dominant. I suggest at least 3-4 if not more 6" square BLOS Buildngs/hills if not more, it should liven things up a lot.
And if those players refuse to play such a setup as it would be ceding the advantages they are exploiting, then I'd say that tells you all you need to know about their attitude to the game.
11860
Post by: Martel732
 Paradigm wrote:Martel732 wrote: Araenion wrote:Terrain only helps against serpent spam for your vehicles (which the serps take even greater advantage of). The weapons traditionally firing from a serp are worse than ap3, so unless your marines are shrouded and behind 4+ cover, they are going to be using their armour saves anyway. The issue is not lack of an armour save but the sheer amount of high strength shots.
"I'm not talking about cover saves, I'm talking about BLOS terrain that forces the Serps to come close to you if they want to shoot you. "
Sorry, no one where I play will play on a pac-man board. There are going to be plenty of 36" firing lanes. I suspect if you had to play under those circumstances, you might change your tune.
This could well be a huge part of your percieced issue. Throw in some terrain that forces actually decisions and movement and you may find shooty armies are far less dominant. I suggest at least 3-4 if not more 6" square BLOS Buildngs/hills if not more, it should liven things up a lot.
And if those players refuse to play such a setup as it would be ceding the advantages they are exploiting, then I'd say that tells you all you need to know about their attitude to the game.
Even with what you suggest, there will be tons of 36" firing lanes. Any setup that doesn't allow for this is not going to fly, because it will be seen as slowing the game down too much. Also, my issues with proliferation of marine-neutering firepower is not just perceived.
77159
Post by: Paradigm
Which is why what I suggested was at minimum. Some 36" firing lanes is fine, but more than 3-4 is probably too many. And if by 'slowing the game' down they mean 'making it harder to just wipe non-spam armies off the board', then yes of course it does, but that shouldn't be anything to complain about unless your only interest is how fast you can table your opponent. Terrain is the great leveller in many cases, especially in bringing shooting and assault armies closer in power.
And I call it percieved as myself and several others in this thread have seen no evidence of Marines being frail or weak against most lists (and no, I'm not counting Serpent Spam as, as has been mentioned, use that as a measuring stick and everything looks poor).
11860
Post by: Martel732
I think marines are still lacking pretty badly when not using Smashbane, grav cents, grav biker troops, and thunderfires. Of which BA get zero of those things. Not encouraging when I think of it like that.
32940
Post by: Araenion
Quotes are getting messed up left and right, lol.
Wave Serpent has on average 11 shots at 24", 8 at >24". Assuming all 11 hit, that's 9 wounds, or 2 DC dead. Per Serpent. 6 Serpents statistically kill 12 DC per turn. Even if every Serpent survived till the end game (highly unlikely) they'd just barely manage to kill all the DC in 5 turns, while all it takes is 3 DC to wreck a Serpent.
I've played Eldar for a decade now. When I tell you that if I played 4-6 Serpents, I'd be terrified facing that tide, you better believe me. Like I'd be terrified facing White Scars bike armies or SW TWC spam.
Don't misunderstand me, I was never one of those that claimed Serps weren't overpowered. They were and still are. Any army currently out there will have a chance at being overwhelmed by that much firepower. But they were and still are a gimmick. All it takes is a SINGLE squad to multicharge 2-3 Serpents and it's over. Completely. This is why I never play more than 2 Serpents and usually none.
I'd really like to show you what I mean. I'd take a Serpent/WK army vs an army of your choosing, then I'd take my usual Eldar list and see which one did better.
Martel732 seems fixed in his belief that he'll never beat Eldar with his BA. But from reading the codex and seeing it in action a few times, I just can't see that that's true. Feel free to disagree.
Niv-mizzet, regarding what you said. You don't need any experience with a Serpent spam to win, but since we're so fond of anecdotes, the lot of us, I once brought a tournament army to a practice game, but my opponent was a no-show, so I offered to play a CSM player who brought a fluffy foot CSM list, I think it was Nurgle. Neither of us saw a point in playing, so I offered to switch armies. I've never played with CSM before, he never used Eldar before. I've tabled my own tournament list with his own list. If what you all say is true, that should never, ever happen. Skill matters and Eldar aren't unbeatable, we just like you to think we are. One trick is to never let the Eldar player dictate the flow of turns. If you force him to shoot what you want, force enough turbo-boost or jinks and keep shoving your units down his throat, there's very little he can do except roll dice and hope for the best. When playing vs Eldar, you don't need to go for the kill, you just need to delay their firepower.
Oh and also, if you expect you'll beat a Serpent spam with an army of tacs, that won't ever happen. It's a top tier build that people shouldn't play casually, but do anyway because mechdar was the only way to play the army in 5th, so if those are the only models you have, you're stuck with them.
I'm going off-topic, I apologize. It just pushes my buttons when someone is claiming Eldar are unbeatable because Serpents! And Wraightknights! Eldar best units aren't those two. They're just ridiculously simple to play. And because of that, their tactics don't change much from game to game. If you've played vs one Serpent spam, you've played vs them all and you know precisely what they'll do. As much as people like to believe 40k is all about dice and luck of the draw, my experience has shown a vastly different picture. Like I said, YMMV. With that, I won't derail this thread any longer, I'm out.
11860
Post by: Martel732
Most Eldar players have stopped using true WS spam. It's not just WS; it's pretty much everything in codex. And, as I pointed out, BA are still missing all the best marine units. BA can do fine against Orks and DA probably, but against the good lists? I don't see anything in the BA codex that Eldar would fear at all. Eldar could down an entire BA list where every meq had FNP. Now BA can't field that. So they'll get gunned down even faster.
32940
Post by: Araenion
Martel, no one around here likes to play on plants-vs-zombies board, so I do have that going for me, true. But I'm sorry if your group is stuck in their gunline playstyle and they won't even give a chance to non shooty armies by exploiting an environment built precisely to suit their armies. But that's a problem with your meta, not the game, nor any particular codex.
What you say about Eldar units is true. Even stuff like humble Swooping Hawks can be deadly. But the Eldar aren't beasts that they were, back when Seer/Baron Council and Beaststar were in play. They have enough weaknesses that you can exploit and as was always the case with them, they're a snowball army. Foil their plans once early, and they won't be able to make a comeback.
Oh and hopefully, no hard feelings. It's just the discussion that gets my knickers in a twist, not you or any other poster. Mid-terms are coming up, so blood is boiling.
My proposed DC army does have FNP across the board. And there are a lot of combos in that book. It just might be that it'll take time to discover how best to utilize BA units. BA are the first and so far the only marine army that hands out special rules like they were IG orders (I don't know much about the new GK, but I wouldn't exactly call them your usual marine army either). Once people learn what units interact with those rules the best, it may be that you'll finally see the light at the end of a long tunnel that was 2 past editions.
11860
Post by: Martel732
It's not just the tables. It's the edition, and the codicies. Marines are supposed to be able to function with minimal cover, and they just can't.
Also, we have a ton of terrain, just not much blocks LOS. If there has to be a bunch of walls on the table to make things work out, I don't think that's a good sign. Do you? Armies that actually benefit from cover sure love it.
32940
Post by: Araenion
I think GW is trying to force players into some kind of mandatory houseruling to fit amy particular game. Forge the narrative and what not. You can play with no terrain or with mountains everywhere, they don't care. Given that terrain is such an integral part of any military strategy, this is, I think, the biggest flaw in the BRB.
My group realized back in 6th that we'd have to do something about shooty spam builds, but nobody likes houserules for every game, so adding LOS blocking terrain was a good decision, imo. It'll still leave a few lanes open, but you can play the movement game much better with 2 or 3 lanes, than with an open board, like Paradigm said.
LOS blocks are much more important than forests, small ruins or barricades. In fact, those only benefit shooty armies even more, because your assault will be slowed down by too much terrain. As an assault army, I'd in fact rather play with a completely empty board, than with lots of terrain, but no LOS blockers.
83978
Post by: Melevolence
I have a few people in my local meta that love to gun line, or play mobile shooting armies but they don't want blocking terrain. As an Ork player, I insist there be at least 2 or 3 blocking pieces that get placed in strategic places so both armies can take advantage of it.
It makes no sense from a 'narrative' or even a 'competitive' standpoint deny blocking terrain. I love to play assaulty Orks. You shouldn't deny one play style simply because it would put your play style at a slight disadvantage (While the other army is put at a HUGE disadvantage, with shooting being the least disadvantaged). I've played enough games with only cover providing terrain to know that getting just cover saves is not enough to get an assault army up the board with enough numbers to matter. Even for Orks.
I feel bad for any player who is forced to deal with people not willing to compromise. It makes a game that can be very enjoyable despite its flaws to becoming an infuriating few hours that one wished they had spent elsewhere.
83653
Post by: Mavnas
I likes the explicit terrain rules in 6th
|
|
