Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
There are people defending them as a choice in another thread, so I figured to make this thread as a dedicated discussion instead.
They have the same issue they basically have always had. They are not good at assault, except against squads that are terrible in the assault. They also are not really any good at shooting. 5th ed BA was probably their high water mark because having 2 melta guns in a squad that could deepstrike was good, and deepstriking flamers actually worked. They also got a "discount" on transport vehicles.
I find they try to fill the same niche as raptors. Their name is missleading. They aren't supposed to assault anything. They are a unit to load with special weapons and deliver them where you need them when you need them, but at a much cheaper costs than Sternguard or other options.
Vanguard Veterans/Warp Talons are the jumpack meele unit of both space marines and chaos space marines.
Of course I'm not saying they do this job right, but at least thats the tactical niche I believe they try to fill.
Galas wrote: I find they try to fill the same niche as raptors. Their name is missleading. They aren't supposed to assault anything. They are a unit to load with special weapons and deliver them where you need them when you need them, but at a much cheaper costs than Sternguard or other options.
Vanguard Veterans/Warp Talons are the jumpack meele unit of both space marines and chaos space marines.
Of course I'm not saying they do this job right, but at least thats the tactical niche I believe they try to fill.
Can they take full-size Plasma Guns? I think that's probably the best Special Weapon for deep-strikers - if they're stuck with Flamers and Meltas, that's bupkis.
I wouldn't be so quick to discount flamers, but assault marines are not an efficient delivery system for them anyway. It takes the same things to be successful at either shooting or assault; you either have to have a decent strength, high AP weapon, or a huge volume of attacks. Assault marines have neither, and they are also not durable. So they are not a very efficient unit to take. However, they have been and always will be one of the coolest units!
So, I'm not sure this is Assault Marines or Raptors, but the niche I'd envision (if I was building the rules) is:
A deep-striking unit, armed with 2 special weapons per 5, like scions, but with chainswords and bolt pistols instead of boltguns so that they can still "assault" things like Devastator Squads and IG Heavy Weapon squads, and then fall back to shoot (if the enemy doesn't) since they have the Fly keyword.
But if they don't get Plasma Guns or 2/5 special weapons then, again, bupkis.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
Hasty generalization to say they can't do anything well. They can beat up bubble screens very effectively. Also, I believe VV is 3 points per model more, not 2, which is pedantry, but that's what we're here for. At the end of the day, as an assault element, they can engage trash troops left on objectives and probably clear them out pretty effectively while not detracting significantly from the overall functionality of your army. Would I base an army around them? Not likely.
I can see situations where I'm trying to fit an assault element in and don't need to pay for the additional benefits provided by VV, it's an edge case, but it's a case.
VV is the Cadillac assault option, where you can hyper customize it for...reasons, Assault squads are the vanilla option. Honestly, yeah, there's a lot of possibly unnecessary overlap and redundancy, but that's been a SM thing for several editions now.
It could be worse, you could be Blood Angels, having Sanguinary Guard, Death Company, Vanguard Veterans, and Assault Marines when we all know that you're just going to take Death Company.
I have a hard time making an argument for Raptors and Warp Talons also, so there it is, jump assault troops are just too expensive for my tastes, they always seem to end up on the cutting room floor.
Jump "assault" troops are kind of mediocre as an idea, especially when there are much faster options available (e.g. bikes).
What I would see for jump troops are hybrid assault/shooty units, capable of punching fairly well (2 attacks per guy!) and shooting fairly well (2 special weapons per 5!) but most importantly filling the "skirmisher" niche of being fast and able to fall back while shooting, and also being able to deep strike.
Unit1126PLL wrote: So, I'm not sure this is Assault Marines or Raptors, but the niche I'd envision (if I was building the rules) is:
A deep-striking unit, armed with 2 special weapons per 5, like scions, but with chainswords and bolt pistols instead of boltguns so that they can still "assault" things like Devastator Squads and IG Heavy Weapon squads, and then fall back to shoot (if the enemy doesn't) since they have the Fly keyword.
But if they don't get Plasma Guns or 2/5 special weapons then, again, bupkis.
They get plasma pistols (or flamers) but it's 2/10 + the sarge.
Galas wrote: I find they try to fill the same niche as raptors. Their name is missleading. They aren't supposed to assault anything. They are a unit to load with special weapons and deliver them where you need them when you need them, but at a much cheaper costs than Sternguard or other options.
Vanguard Veterans/Warp Talons are the jumpack meele unit of both space marines and chaos space marines.
Of course I'm not saying they do this job right, but at least thats the tactical niche I believe they try to fill.
Blood Angels get Plasma Guns. The Vanilla ones only get Flamers, which are now lousy.
Can they take full-size Plasma Guns? I think that's probably the best Special Weapon for deep-strikers - if they're stuck with Flamers and Meltas, that's bupkis.
Breng77 wrote: They have the same issue they basically have always had. They are not good at assault, except against squads that are terrible in the assault. They also are not really any good at shooting. 5th ed BA was probably their high water mark because having 2 melta guns in a squad that could deepstrike was good, and deepstriking flamers actually worked. They also got a "discount" on transport vehicles.
Now they get none of those advantages.
Yep. The BA 5th ed assault squads were okay and all jump units were decent in 2nd where mobility was scarce and valuable.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
Hasty generalization to say they can't do anything well. They can beat up bubble screens very effectively. Also, I believe VV is 3 points per model more, not 2, which is pedantry, but that's what we're here for. At the end of the day, as an assault element, they can engage trash troops left on objectives and probably clear them out pretty effectively while not detracting significantly from the overall functionality of your army. Would I base an army around them? Not likely.
I can see situations where I'm trying to fit an assault element in and don't need to pay for the additional benefits provided by VV, it's an edge case, but it's a case.
VV is the Cadillac assault option, where you can hyper customize it for...reasons, Assault squads are the vanilla option. Honestly, yeah, there's a lot of possibly unnecessary overlap and redundancy, but that's been a SM thing for several editions now.
It could be worse, you could be Blood Angels, having Sanguinary Guard, Death Company, Vanguard Veterans, and Assault Marines when we all know that you're just going to take Death Company.
I have a hard time making an argument for Raptors and Warp Talons also, so there it is, jump assault troops are just too expensive for my tastes, they always seem to end up on the cutting room floor.
Vanguard are 18 with Jump Packs and Assault Marines are 16 with them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unit1126PLL wrote: So, I'm not sure this is Assault Marines or Raptors, but the niche I'd envision (if I was building the rules) is:
A deep-striking unit, armed with 2 special weapons per 5, like scions, but with chainswords and bolt pistols instead of boltguns so that they can still "assault" things like Devastator Squads and IG Heavy Weapon squads, and then fall back to shoot (if the enemy doesn't) since they have the Fly keyword.
But if they don't get Plasma Guns or 2/5 special weapons then, again, bupkis.
Raptors have that ability. Assault Marines can get Eviscerstors, but I'll let you tell me how handy that is.
Jump "assault" troops are kind of mediocre as an idea, especially when there are much faster options available (e.g. bikes).
What I would see for jump troops are hybrid assault/shooty units, capable of punching fairly well (2 attacks per guy!) and shooting fairly well (2 special weapons per 5!) but most importantly filling the "skirmisher" niche of being fast and able to fall back while shooting, and also being able to deep strike.
I think you're describing inceptors. Good at shooting, but with a decent charge, deep strike and the all important fly keyword.
So it seems that GW also realizes that assault marines don't really have a purpose, which may be why they didn't get a primaris version.
1. There IS no corner case. Vanguard have more LD and attacks for 2 points. Melta Bombs are worthless now and a Power Weapon on the Sergeant is not gonna propel them anywhere.
"5 ASM with a Power weapon on the sarge average 1.5 wounds against MEQ. If the ASM Sargent lives he can jump away and land a S 8 AP -4 D6 wound shot on something. I'd argue that could be more important than:
5 Vanguard with Chainswords average 1.77 against MEQ.
It's not a big gap. But to make a worthwhile difference you gotta start spending points on specials, which is fine, but then relative cost starts going up pretty quick."
Then I'll ask "What's the point of Vanguard Veterans?"
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Vanguard are 18 with Jump Packs and Assault Marines are 16 with them.
Ahh, thank you sir, I missed that, my foolish assumption to think that Jump Packs are Jump Packs.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Raptors have that ability. Assault Marines can get Eviscerstors, but I'll let you tell me how handy that is.
Every couple weeks I try to convince myself Raptors are worth taking and not fidgety units requiring a lot of setup to use. Then I go down the Night Lords rabbit hole, then I ask myself how they are better than Berzerkers in transports and discard the list in disgust.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Wait so if they have 1 special and 1 combi per 5, that's 2 per five...
there's your niche right there. The real question is why you'd ever take 10.
EDIT: Still unclear if they can or can not have plasma guns.
They can take plasma pistols. Raptors can take plasma guns (+ a combi on the champion). Not sure why they're different, but Raptors aren't exactly great either (they are firmly in the "ok" category).
Unit1126PLL wrote: Wait so if they have 1 special and 1 combi per 5, that's 2 per five...
there's your niche right there. The real question is why you'd ever take 10.
EDIT: Still unclear if they can or can not have plasma guns.
They can take plasma pistols. Raptors can take plasma guns (+ a combi on the champion). Not sure why they're different, but Raptors aren't exactly great either (they are firmly in the "ok" category).
Right, okay, so Raptors have a point but ASM are still bupkis.
And yeah, putting them in the "ok" category is fine. I think that's a fairly balanced category, where taking a unit doesn't actively harm you but it'll function just fine in a fairly casual setting.
Raptors would probably be pretty good if the meta wasn't Screenhammer. Unlike plasma scions they're too expensive to just dump on whatever target happens to be available.
Unit1126PLL wrote: Wait so if they have 1 special and 1 combi per 5, that's 2 per five...
there's your niche right there. The real question is why you'd ever take 10.
EDIT: Still unclear if they can or can not have plasma guns.
They can take plasma pistols. Raptors can take plasma guns (+ a combi on the champion). Not sure why they're different, but Raptors aren't exactly great either (they are firmly in the "ok" category).
Raptors are mostly overshadowed by chaos terminators also being able to fill the same niche, with the added benefit of being able to fit more in each unit if you want to use the double tap stratagem which most people seem to be liking so far. They still have a niche though, given they are a much cheaper investment than terminators and less an issue if they fry themselves with overcharged plasma.
I'm not really sure what vanilla assault marines are for at this point. They don't have the number of attacks needed to threaten hordes, and they lack the specialized weapons you'd expect to see to deal with elites. They have the weapon restrictions of a troop choice yet sit in a fast attack slot. If they became a troop choice they'd have usage just in filling slots with melee guys and being able to deepstrike near objectives, and if they had the ability to specialize their loadout a bit more they might be able to fill a roll that isn't having the same basic damage output as a tactical squad except in melee rather than at range.
Arachnofiend wrote: Raptors would probably be pretty good if the meta wasn't Screenhammer. Unlike plasma scions they're too expensive to just dump on whatever target happens to be available.
I keep kicking around a Night Lords concept detachment using Raptors/Chaos Lord/Sorcerer deep strike because on paper it looks like it would really do a number on morale (I think you could end up swinging morale by 6 points or something pretty easily).
However, it fails against bugs since you have to assume fearless, it fails against Dark Angels because of chapter tactics, it could do a number on Conscript screens now, but that's a hell of a lot of points and setup to crush bubble screens.
It would probably do well against Eldar, since the morale swing would really limit the effectiveness of high Eldar LD.
The bottom line is that it's just hit and miss as to when it will be good. Then you have that nagging voice in the back of your head wondering how much of that morale manipulation was figured into their cost that's going to waste against a particular opponent.
TwinPoleTheory wrote: The bottom line is that it's just hit and miss as to when it will be good. Then you have that nagging voice in the back of your head wondering how much of that morale manipulation was figured into their cost that's going to waste against a particular opponent.
Well, if you compare raptors to assault marines they cost a point more, in return they get
1. The -LD ability
2. Better equipment options, both being able to take plasma/melta guns, as well as having access to the icon of khorne for refillable charges out of deepstrike. They do lose eviscerator (which isn't a loss) and the shield on the sarge (slightly less useless but not much). Overall a net gain.
3. They trade they shall know no fear, which isn't great unless you plan on avoiding msu for some reason, for the significantly more useful death to the emperor, excellent on a melee unit.
Raptors pay a a very marginal point increase (16 vs 17 ppm) but for the LD buff alone it wouldn't be worth it. The ability to make them more reliable deepstrikers, their situationally better melee, and the fact they can also double as deepstriking special weapons more than justifies that extremely minor point increase.
Well, if you compare raptors to assault marines they cost a point more, in return they get
1. The -LD ability
2. Better equipment options, both being able to take plasma/melta guns, as well as having access to the icon of khorne for refillable charges out of deepstrike. They do lose eviscerator (which isn't a loss) and the shield on the sarge (slightly less useless but not much). Overall a net gain.
3. They trade they shall know no fear, which isn't great unless you plan on avoiding msu for some reason, for the significantly more useful death to the emperor, excellent on a melee unit.
Raptors pay a a very marginal point increase (16 vs 17 ppm) but for the LD buff alone it wouldn't be worth it. The ability to make them more reliable deepstrikers, their situationally better melee, and the fact they can also double as deepstriking special weapons more than justifies that extremely minor point increase.
Please don't misunderstand, I am not complaining about their cost or even really asking for some sort of breakdown of Raptors vs Assault Marines (they probably are better, I haven't bothered to dig into it). I was simply bemoaning the fact that they are a niggling interest of mine that I continue to fruitlessly revisit in the hopes that I'll have an epiphany that doesn't leave them abandoned like an old couch on the curb.
I'm actually considering trying out a 5-man squad with 3 plasma pistols. I'm sure they won't be very good, but they could be interesting in a casual game.
TwinPoleTheory wrote: The bottom line is that it's just hit and miss as to when it will be good. Then you have that nagging voice in the back of your head wondering how much of that morale manipulation was figured into their cost that's going to waste against a particular opponent.
Well, if you compare raptors to assault marines they cost a point more, in return they get
1. The -LD ability
2. Better equipment options, both being able to take plasma/melta guns, as well as having access to the icon of khorne for refillable charges out of deepstrike. They do lose eviscerator (which isn't a loss) and the shield on the sarge (slightly less useless but not much). Overall a net gain.
3. They trade they shall know no fear, which isn't great unless you plan on avoiding msu for some reason, for the significantly more useful death to the emperor, excellent on a melee unit.
Raptors pay a a very marginal point increase (16 vs 17 ppm) but for the LD buff alone it wouldn't be worth it. The ability to make them more reliable deepstrikers, their situationally better melee, and the fact they can also double as deepstriking special weapons more than justifies that extremely minor point increase.
Don't forget they can take a Banner. Which basically means the Khorne mark and the reroll to charge banner. But still.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: I'll post my last post in the other thread first:
1. There IS no corner case. Vanguard have more LD and attacks for 2 points. Melta Bombs are worthless now and a Power Weapon on the Sergeant is not gonna propel them anywhere.
"5 ASM with a Power weapon on the sarge average 1.5 wounds against MEQ. If the ASM Sargent lives he can jump away and land a S 8 AP -4 D6 wound shot on something. I'd argue that could be more important than:
5 Vanguard with Chainswords average 1.77 against MEQ.
It's not a big gap. But to make a worthwhile difference you gotta start spending points on specials, which is fine, but then relative cost starts going up pretty quick."
Then I'll ask "What's the point of Vanguard Veterans?"
1. Melta Bombs are terrible. Nobody is paying for Melta Bombs anymore.
2. Not sure where you got that math. Vanguard with all Chainswords is 4 attacks each, with 5 on the Sergeant if you want 2 on him as well. That's 21 attacks total, and that's 2.3 dead total.
3. You also can double up on Bolt Pistols of course if you want a Cowboy thing going on.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Vanguard are 18 with Jump Packs and Assault Marines are 16 with them.
Ahh, thank you sir, I missed that, my foolish assumption to think that Jump Packs are Jump Packs.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Raptors have that ability. Assault Marines can get Eviscerstors, but I'll let you tell me how handy that is.
Every couple weeks I try to convince myself Raptors are worth taking and not fidgety units requiring a lot of setup to use. Then I go down the Night Lords rabbit hole, then I ask myself how they are better than Berzerkers in transports and discard the list in disgust.
Well if you WANT to go down that Rabbit hole, Mark them Khorne and buy a Banner. That's a ~50% chance to make the charge.
In standard 40k I'm not sure. I never did figure them out in 6/7 either. Even when I could get them where I wanted them, they didn't do much and almost without fail I always wished I had taken something else.
That said, in the heavily houseruled version of 40k I've been playing, they're pretty good. The trick seems to be terrain. When the terrain really matters, and ground based units face a slow slog through dense terrain or having the face the open ground for a turn or two, they're good at taking out the backfield shooting units. They can hop over the forests, the ruins, the garrisoned buildings, etc... and engage the dangerous but vulnerable units supporting the main line like heavy weapon teams.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well if you WANT to go down that Rabbit hole, Mark them Khorne and buy a Banner. That's a ~50% chance to make the charge.
I'm not sure WANT is the right word, I just have ~20 nicely painted raptors that have been gilding a carry case for about 15-20 years.
But honestly, I could say the same thing about the 40+ Terminators I have, the various Defilers, Predators, Autocannon Havocs (pour one out for my 4th ed tank hunting IW havocs), the list goes on, it's the island of misfit toys really.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well if you WANT to go down that Rabbit hole, Mark them Khorne and buy a Banner. That's a ~50% chance to make the charge.
I'm not sure WANT is the right word, I just have ~20 nicely painted raptors that have been gilding a carry case for about 15-20 years.
But honestly, I could say the same thing about the 40+ Terminators I have, the various Defilers, Predators, Autocannon Havocs (pour one out for my 4th ed tank hunting IW havocs), the list goes on, it's the island of misfit toys really.
Well that's about the way to do it now. MoK doesn't change them rules wise, but rather how they interact with other models, so it breaks fluff slightly less.
1. Melta Bombs are terrible. Nobody is paying for Melta Bombs anymore.
2. Not sure where you got that math. Vanguard with all Chainswords is 4 attacks each, with 5 on the Sergeant if you want 2 on him as well. That's 21 attacks total, and that's 2.3 dead total.
3. You also can double up on Bolt Pistols of course if you want a Cowboy thing going on.
1. Terrible like the Tac Squads outperforming Sternguard in the other thread?
2. I assumed chainsword and Bolt Pistol, good call on double chainsword, although for at least the ASM turn the bolt Pistols make up the difference.
3. VV do have a ton of fun options, no doubt.
- My point here is that yes, VV are obviously better for assault, but they're only a tiny bit better at low point values. Imo you want to capitalize on the three attacks the sarge has, but it does drive the cost up. At 92 points compared to the VV 90 base, ASM can buy a pair of lightning claws and also achieve 2.3 wounds if you count their Bolt Pistols as well.
There might be an argument for buying Plasma Pistols and a Meltabomb to capitalize on Fly because they can leave combat and fire. The more I think about it the more I like the Meltabomb. S 8 D 6 wounds is awesome potential for 5 points. Buying pistols for the vets seems like a waste because I think upgrading their CC weapons is more ideal, since they can capitalize on their greater number of attacks.
1. Melta Bombs are terrible. Nobody is paying for Melta Bombs anymore.
2. Not sure where you got that math. Vanguard with all Chainswords is 4 attacks each, with 5 on the Sergeant if you want 2 on him as well. That's 21 attacks total, and that's 2.3 dead total.
3. You also can double up on Bolt Pistols of course if you want a Cowboy thing going on.
1. Terrible like the Tac Squads outperforming Sternguard in the other thread?
2. I assumed chainsword and Bolt Pistol, good call on double chainsword, although for at least the ASM turn the bolt Pistols make up the difference.
3. VV do have a ton of fun options, no doubt.
- My point here is that yes, VV are obviously better for assault, but they're only a tiny bit better at low point values. Imo you want to capitalize on the three attacks the sarge has, but it does drive the cost up. At 92 points compared to the VV 90 base, ASM can buy a pair of lightning claws and also achieve 2.3 wounds if you count their Bolt Pistols as well.
There might be an argument for buying Plasma Pistols and a Meltabomb to capitalize on Fly because they can leave combat and fire. The more I think about it the more I like the Meltabomb. S 8 D 6 wounds is awesome potential for 5 points. Buying pistols for the vets seems like a waste because I think upgrading their CC weapons is more ideal, since they can capitalize on their greater number of attacks.
1. I literally made a giant post with a better Sternguard loadout. The one I've been using and actually netting wins. I actually made those Sternguard too. Just need to make a stupid amount of other stuff. Not sure what my stand-in Reivers are gonna be yet.
I'm expecting my Scorpius soon.
2. However if you wanna include Bolt Pistols, I can run them with dual Pistols. Then charge a weakened squad that way.
Point is that Vanguard can actually specialize to hit a particular target. The blech performance of Assault Marines is literally gone when you throw an extra attack and LD on the squad for just 2 points. Just 2.
3. Melta Bombs are bad even on models able to actually throw them at that range. 66% to hit, 66% to wound the target, then the damage roll. And you only get to throw one a round. Massed Power Fists would be better, which you can get with the Eviscerstors on the Assault Marines, though it's bad on a 1 attack model. Thunder Hammers though on a 2 attack model...
1. I responded to your better Sternguard Squad post yesterday. Go check it out.
2. But at low point levels, the 10 points provided to the assault squad can get them a bit of gear which evens thungs out a bit.
3. Meltabombs are .83 to wound MEQ, do D6 wounds instead of a fists D3, and hit on a .666 rather than .5. And they're cheeaap.
VV are obviously a better assault unit. At low point levels I think ASM have merits.
There was more of a case for ASM back when flamers used a template and had AP 5. Esp as thats the piece of equipment Vanguard don't have access to. Sadly, no more.
assault marines might be better if you played in a meta like the in universe one where the bulk of your opponents are orks and IG and marines are rare eneugh that people don't kit to kill em
Insectum7 wrote: 1. I responded to your better Sternguard Squad post yesterday. Go check it out.
What thread is this? I've been thinking about a Lias and 3x Sternguard list.
Over in Proposed Rules "Proposed "fix" to Bolt Weapons", of all things. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/330/743674.page It went off topic over there. Slayer appears to run Sternguard/Lias as well, so you may as well ask him about his experience. He seems to like them.
The Grav Cannon and Plasma Guns kill 1.2 each, or 2.4. The short hand was very understandable.
It was not understandable because it is incorrect. Grav Cannons do D3 wounds against models with 3+ or better. Average Grav Cannon wounds are 2.4. Granted, there's no Guarantee of a non-1, requiring another shot. However they do average more wounds, comfortably beating out the Sternguard proposal.
As for Anti Rhino, 4 Lascannons with one at BS2 averages 6.6 Wounds without the Cherub, Grav Cannons average 7.4.. A Predator with quad Las averages 5.1. Get that, in rapid fire range, a Tac Squad averages more damage than the Quad Las Predator.
I forgot about the Grav, my bad.
However, that was a poorly equipped Sternguard squad in the first place. I'm doing 8 Sternguard with 2 Grav Cannons in my main list (so that is 6 Bolters). It clocks in at 190 something (around 10 points more), but once infiltrated or brought in via Lias they actually do work. How much more work? Let's find out.
Against GEQ, your squad in Rapid Fire does 4.1 dudes with the Bolters, 2.2 with the Plasma Guns, and 1.8 with the Grav Cannon for a grand total of 8.1 dead. Mine instead kills 5.3 with the Bolters and another 3.6 with the Grav Cannons for a total of 8.9. Without Rapid Fire, your Bolters kill 2 Guard, your Plasma 1.1, and the Grav Cannon still 1.8 for a total of 4.9 Guard dead. Mine instead kills 3.6 Guard again with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 6.2 dead.
Against MEQ, in Rapid Fire your Bolters kill 1.6, the Plasma 1.5, and the Grav Cannon kills the same amount for a total of 4.6 Marines dead. For my guys, I kill 3 total with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 5.6. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.8, the Plasma 0.7, and the Grav Cannon 1.5 still for a total of 3 Marines dead. My Sternguard kill 3 with the Grav Cannons and only 1.3 with the Bolters for a total of 4.3 dead.
Now I hadn't done REQ yet, so that'll be interesting. Against a Rhino in Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock off one wound, the Plasma non-OC 1.1, and the Grav Cannon 1.4 wounds for a total of 3.5 wounds inflicted. Two Grav Cannons from my squad knock off 2.8 wounds and the Bolters 1.7 wounds for a total of 4.5 wounds. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock out 0.5 wounds, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon has the consistent 1.4 for a total of 2.5. Two Grav Cannons from me do 2.8 again and the Bolters do a paltry 0.8 for a total of 3.6.
And of course who can forget about TEQ? In Rapid Fire range your Bolters inflict 0.8 wounds, the Plasma 1.2, and the Grav Cannon 2.2 for a total of 4.2 wounds inflicted, or basically two Terminators and a part dead. On my end I get 4.4 from the Grav Cannons wounding, and the Special Bolters do a spectacular 2 wounds for a total of 6.4 wounds, or 3 Terminators and a part dead. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.4, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon still 2.2 wounds for a total of one dead Terminator and one wound carried over. The Grav Cannons do 4.4 wounds again and the Bolters wound one, which is 5.4.
Now I'm sure you have complaints. The first one could be that I added 10 points to my squad to do this. That's fair. That's only 10 points for more effectiveness and a greater threat range though (don't forget Special Issue Bolters having that delicious 30" range), and I know people like you like adding Power Weapons and junk so that evens out.. You could say it's less guys, which is also true. However, at LD8/9 I don't have a high chance of running away, and to be honest it won't be hard to kill another 2 Marines to accomplish the job. You could argue for overcharging the Plasma, but there was a reason people took little Plasma last edition and therefore you would need rerolls. For the sake of fairness I'd have to add rerolls too.
Alright, that's a much better squad. My first table was with overcharged plasma for TEQ and REQ, so redoing your table representing overcharge. Rerolls to hit are applied equally, so the relationships don't change. We'd see the same results winners/losers, every number would just be improved by 20% or whatever. No, I don't take power weapons on my Tacs. As for Ld, I play UM, so I'm 8/9 on Tacs to begin with.
RFrange___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN--------8.9------------5.6-----------5.6-----------4.5
TAC------------8.1------------4.49----------6.1-----------5.4 With overcharge, the Tacticals are still ahead against TEQ and REQ close up. You're paying more for a squad that kills 4 point guys better, while I'm paying less for a squad that kills 30(or whatever) point guys better, longer. The Tacticals are better at making their points back.
24range___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN ------6.2------------4.3------------5.4----------3.6 Sternguard are ahead at range across the board.
TAC-----------4.9------------2.9------------4.2----------3.4
But here's the first aspect that I'm also interested in. Once squads takes a few casualties the tables turn, and the Tacticals begin to beat out the Sternguard against the lighter targets as well.
RFrange w/4 casualties.
STERN--------5.3------------3.8-----------5.3-----------3.5 Sternguard degrade faster, and the Tacticals last longer.
TAC------------5.7------------3.6*---------5.6-----------4.8
*Overcharge Plasma------3.97
And here's the other part I'm interested in, 10 Sternguard with just Special Issue Bolters. (180 points)
If we look at just their Bolters, they do good work against lighter targets. If you compare the last chart with the top Sternguard chart in Rapid Fire range, you see that the additional damage your squad is doing against MEQ and higher target categories is largely because of the Grav Cannons. If the Grav Cannons are doing the work, why take Sternguard over Devastators? Is the incentive behind Special Issue Bolters to bring GEQ killing power to the rest of the squad? The problem with that is:
Your squad costs 196. That's worth 15 normal Space Marines, which is 195. 15 x .666 x .666 x .666 x 2 (rapid fire) = 8.86 A tie with the Sternguard against GEQ. Just as effective against GEQ, but with almost twice the number of wounds. Point for point, basic Space Marines kill GEQ as good as the Sternguard do, and last longer. The basic marine increases the longevity of a Tactical Squad and does the same task as the specialization of the Sternguard. Fun fact: As three squads, if 3 of them throw Frag it's 10.5 kills, well ahead of the Sternguard. Sternguard don't really have this option because it's always better for them to shoot their bolter.
The proposed Sternguard squad does do better damage at range, but again, it's not veterans with bolters doing the work, its the Grav Cannons. If you're going to operate at longer ranges, why wouldn't you get Devastators instead? At range you're wasting the damage potential of the expensive models/bolters, imo.
So in conclusion, Sternguard are cool, but as a squad they're more specialized than they appear. They're good at killing light to medium infantry, but you're paying more for a squad that degrades faster, dies faster, and specializes in killing lower point models. The Tacs more effectively shield the specials and heavy weapons, and the bolter guys can passively achieve the thing that you pay 4 pts. for Sternguard to specialize in.
And this is all just the numbers, buying troops to get CPs is good, having ObSec (even if you don't value it like I do) is also still an advantage.
Feel free to take Sternguard. They concentrate anti infantry firepower a little better. Maybe Lias and the Raptors (?) Chapter Tactics improve them more somehow. But looking at the numbers, I favor Tacticals for my UM.
In summary he like his veterans, and I like my basic marines. He seems to hate that I like basic marines. This Assault Squad thread is spawned because of that. Admittedly, I can't defend the Assault Squad as well, as their gear options are significantly more limited. I don't think they're useless, but they are much more edge-case.
Well, how well does some Assault Marines fare against something like a Guard HQ? You would, assuming you use them at all, try and put them up against a high-value but low model count squad, right?
I dont know about regular SM, but BA assault squad can use plasmaguns, meltas and flamethrowers, 2 models in a 5 model unit. Doesnt change when there are 10 models. And of course BA specific inferno pistols and the regular pistols. They can use one eviscerator for every 5 models, so two for 10 models. The sarge may pick a combat shield and melta bombs.
Insectum7 wrote: 1. I responded to your better Sternguard Squad post yesterday. Go check it out.
2. But at low point levels, the 10 points provided to the assault squad can get them a bit of gear which evens thungs out a bit.
3. Meltabombs are .83 to wound MEQ, do D6 wounds instead of a fists D3, and hit on a .666 rather than .5. And they're cheeaap.
VV are obviously a better assault unit. At low point levels I think ASM have merits.
There was more of a case for ASM back when flamers used a template and had AP 5. Esp as thats the piece of equipment Vanguard don't have access to. Sadly, no more.
1. That thread has no response on my end. I'll look during my lunch.
2. It doesn't even things out. Nobody is buying Melta Bombs anymore for their Assault units, and the lone Power Weapon only gets you so far. It's like the people in a Tactical Marine thread that said the squad is okay at melee because of the Sergeant. And then I showed him and his squad losing to Conscripts (not that it matters now as Conscripts got a point bump for whatever forsaken reason).
The point being if the whole squad can't kill the opponent it's useless. Marines are not durable. You need to be able to kill the opponent before they kill you, and Assault Marines don't have weight of attacks or the ability to specialize to hurt a specific target.
Look at it this way: you're using those 10 points to not make the Assault Marines a liability. That's your upgrade. Whatever you wanna throw on them next is on you.
3. Once again, Melta Bombs are garbage, and you can buy them for Vanguard if you're that desperate. That's just another 5 points.
At low point levels, Vanguard are still better because they're only as expensive as you make them. You bought a Power Weapon that doesn't really even anything out and a Melta Bomb that will never get used for the same price. Does it really matter that you pay just an extra 5 points for a Melta Bomb for Vanguard? No.
I can't talk about Power Level though because I've never bothered to tackle that.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Well that's about the way to do it now. MoK doesn't change them rules wise, but rather how they interact with other models, so it breaks fluff slightly less.
For sure, the Icon is great, have that on one squad, drop in a Sorcerer with another squad for Warptime, maybe get a lucky charge with a Chaos Lord and possibly the Sorcerer.
Yeah, like I said, fidgety, maybe good, but fidgety.
Insectum7 wrote: 1. I responded to your better Sternguard Squad post yesterday. Go check it out.
What thread is this? I've been thinking about a Lias and 3x Sternguard list.
Over in Proposed Rules "Proposed "fix" to Bolt Weapons", of all things. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/330/743674.page It went off topic over there. Slayer appears to run Sternguard/Lias as well, so you may as well ask him about his experience. He seems to like them.
The Grav Cannon and Plasma Guns kill 1.2 each, or 2.4. The short hand was very understandable.
It was not understandable because it is incorrect. Grav Cannons do D3 wounds against models with 3+ or better. Average Grav Cannon wounds are 2.4. Granted, there's no Guarantee of a non-1, requiring another shot. However they do average more wounds, comfortably beating out the Sternguard proposal.
As for Anti Rhino, 4 Lascannons with one at BS2 averages 6.6 Wounds without the Cherub, Grav Cannons average 7.4.. A Predator with quad Las averages 5.1. Get that, in rapid fire range, a Tac Squad averages more damage than the Quad Las Predator.
I forgot about the Grav, my bad.
However, that was a poorly equipped Sternguard squad in the first place. I'm doing 8 Sternguard with 2 Grav Cannons in my main list (so that is 6 Bolters). It clocks in at 190 something (around 10 points more), but once infiltrated or brought in via Lias they actually do work. How much more work? Let's find out.
Against GEQ, your squad in Rapid Fire does 4.1 dudes with the Bolters, 2.2 with the Plasma Guns, and 1.8 with the Grav Cannon for a grand total of 8.1 dead. Mine instead kills 5.3 with the Bolters and another 3.6 with the Grav Cannons for a total of 8.9. Without Rapid Fire, your Bolters kill 2 Guard, your Plasma 1.1, and the Grav Cannon still 1.8 for a total of 4.9 Guard dead. Mine instead kills 3.6 Guard again with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 6.2 dead.
Against MEQ, in Rapid Fire your Bolters kill 1.6, the Plasma 1.5, and the Grav Cannon kills the same amount for a total of 4.6 Marines dead. For my guys, I kill 3 total with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 5.6. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.8, the Plasma 0.7, and the Grav Cannon 1.5 still for a total of 3 Marines dead. My Sternguard kill 3 with the Grav Cannons and only 1.3 with the Bolters for a total of 4.3 dead.
Now I hadn't done REQ yet, so that'll be interesting. Against a Rhino in Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock off one wound, the Plasma non-OC 1.1, and the Grav Cannon 1.4 wounds for a total of 3.5 wounds inflicted. Two Grav Cannons from my squad knock off 2.8 wounds and the Bolters 1.7 wounds for a total of 4.5 wounds. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock out 0.5 wounds, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon has the consistent 1.4 for a total of 2.5. Two Grav Cannons from me do 2.8 again and the Bolters do a paltry 0.8 for a total of 3.6.
And of course who can forget about TEQ? In Rapid Fire range your Bolters inflict 0.8 wounds, the Plasma 1.2, and the Grav Cannon 2.2 for a total of 4.2 wounds inflicted, or basically two Terminators and a part dead. On my end I get 4.4 from the Grav Cannons wounding, and the Special Bolters do a spectacular 2 wounds for a total of 6.4 wounds, or 3 Terminators and a part dead. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.4, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon still 2.2 wounds for a total of one dead Terminator and one wound carried over. The Grav Cannons do 4.4 wounds again and the Bolters wound one, which is 5.4.
Now I'm sure you have complaints. The first one could be that I added 10 points to my squad to do this. That's fair. That's only 10 points for more effectiveness and a greater threat range though (don't forget Special Issue Bolters having that delicious 30" range), and I know people like you like adding Power Weapons and junk so that evens out.. You could say it's less guys, which is also true. However, at LD8/9 I don't have a high chance of running away, and to be honest it won't be hard to kill another 2 Marines to accomplish the job. You could argue for overcharging the Plasma, but there was a reason people took little Plasma last edition and therefore you would need rerolls. For the sake of fairness I'd have to add rerolls too.
Alright, that's a much better squad. My first table was with overcharged plasma for TEQ and REQ, so redoing your table representing overcharge. Rerolls to hit are applied equally, so the relationships don't change. We'd see the same results winners/losers, every number would just be improved by 20% or whatever. No, I don't take power weapons on my Tacs. As for Ld, I play UM, so I'm 8/9 on Tacs to begin with.
RFrange___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN--------8.9------------5.6-----------5.6-----------4.5
TAC------------8.1------------4.49----------6.1-----------5.4 With overcharge, the Tacticals are still ahead against TEQ and REQ close up. You're paying more for a squad that kills 4 point guys better, while I'm paying less for a squad that kills 30(or whatever) point guys better, longer. The Tacticals are better at making their points back.
24range___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN ------6.2------------4.3------------5.4----------3.6 Sternguard are ahead at range across the board.
TAC-----------4.9------------2.9------------4.2----------3.4
But here's the first aspect that I'm also interested in. Once squads takes a few casualties the tables turn, and the Tacticals begin to beat out the Sternguard against the lighter targets as well.
RFrange w/4 casualties.
STERN--------5.3------------3.8-----------5.3-----------3.5 Sternguard degrade faster, and the Tacticals last longer.
TAC------------5.7------------3.6*---------5.6-----------4.8
*Overcharge Plasma------3.97
And here's the other part I'm interested in, 10 Sternguard with just Special Issue Bolters. (180 points)
If we look at just their Bolters, they do good work against lighter targets. If you compare the last chart with the top Sternguard chart in Rapid Fire range, you see that the additional damage your squad is doing against MEQ and higher target categories is largely because of the Grav Cannons. If the Grav Cannons are doing the work, why take Sternguard over Devastators? Is the incentive behind Special Issue Bolters to bring GEQ killing power to the rest of the squad? The problem with that is:
Your squad costs 196. That's worth 15 normal Space Marines, which is 195. 15 x .666 x .666 x .666 x 2 (rapid fire) = 8.86 A tie with the Sternguard against GEQ. Just as effective against GEQ, but with almost twice the number of wounds. Point for point, basic Space Marines kill GEQ as good as the Sternguard do, and last longer. The basic marine increases the longevity of a Tactical Squad and does the same task as the specialization of the Sternguard. Fun fact: As three squads, if 3 of them throw Frag it's 10.5 kills, well ahead of the Sternguard. Sternguard don't really have this option because it's always better for them to shoot their bolter.
The proposed Sternguard squad does do better damage at range, but again, it's not veterans with bolters doing the work, its the Grav Cannons. If you're going to operate at longer ranges, why wouldn't you get Devastators instead? At range you're wasting the damage potential of the expensive models/bolters, imo.
So in conclusion, Sternguard are cool, but as a squad they're more specialized than they appear. They're good at killing light to medium infantry, but you're paying more for a squad that degrades faster, dies faster, and specializes in killing lower point models. The Tacs more effectively shield the specials and heavy weapons, and the bolter guys can passively achieve the thing that you pay 4 pts. for Sternguard to specialize in.
And this is all just the numbers, buying troops to get CPs is good, having ObSec (even if you don't value it like I do) is also still an advantage.
Feel free to take Sternguard. They concentrate anti infantry firepower a little better. Maybe Lias and the Raptors (?) Chapter Tactics improve them more somehow. But looking at the numbers, I favor Tacticals for my UM.
In summary he like his veterans, and I like my basic marines. He seems to hate that I like basic marines. This Assault Squad thread is spawned because of that. Admittedly, I can't defend the Assault Squad as well, as their gear options are significantly more limited. I don't think they're useless, but they are much more edge-case.
To CREEEEEEED, I can give you tips about Sternguard + Lias via PM or you can just make a general post in the SM Tactica. I'm usually responsive in there.
I feel like if the Chainaxe were available to units other than Berzerkers this might be a slightly different conversation.
I have no numbers to back that up other than the vague assumption that giving most assault units +1 S and -1 AP would markedly improve their performance.
Why Berzerkers are the only ones to recognize the value of the Chainaxe is...unclear to me. Fluffy illogically fluffy fluffers is probably the reasons.
Actually this is all on GW. As someone completely into the fluff and narrative, I would be fine letting a Raptor unit have chainaxes. In fact, if we're playing Narrative or Open Play, this is just sort of the house-rule change that I think would improve, rather than harm, the fluff. Especially if they have Mark of Khorne!
Not sure how it would change things in matched play, but I'd personally be ok with it there too. I just can't speak for my group on that.
Insectum7 wrote: 1. I responded to your better Sternguard Squad post yesterday. Go check it out.
What thread is this? I've been thinking about a Lias and 3x Sternguard list.
Over in Proposed Rules "Proposed "fix" to Bolt Weapons", of all things. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/330/743674.page It went off topic over there. Slayer appears to run Sternguard/Lias as well, so you may as well ask him about his experience. He seems to like them.
The Grav Cannon and Plasma Guns kill 1.2 each, or 2.4. The short hand was very understandable.
It was not understandable because it is incorrect. Grav Cannons do D3 wounds against models with 3+ or better. Average Grav Cannon wounds are 2.4. Granted, there's no Guarantee of a non-1, requiring another shot. However they do average more wounds, comfortably beating out the Sternguard proposal.
As for Anti Rhino, 4 Lascannons with one at BS2 averages 6.6 Wounds without the Cherub, Grav Cannons average 7.4.. A Predator with quad Las averages 5.1. Get that, in rapid fire range, a Tac Squad averages more damage than the Quad Las Predator.
I forgot about the Grav, my bad.
However, that was a poorly equipped Sternguard squad in the first place. I'm doing 8 Sternguard with 2 Grav Cannons in my main list (so that is 6 Bolters). It clocks in at 190 something (around 10 points more), but once infiltrated or brought in via Lias they actually do work. How much more work? Let's find out.
Against GEQ, your squad in Rapid Fire does 4.1 dudes with the Bolters, 2.2 with the Plasma Guns, and 1.8 with the Grav Cannon for a grand total of 8.1 dead. Mine instead kills 5.3 with the Bolters and another 3.6 with the Grav Cannons for a total of 8.9. Without Rapid Fire, your Bolters kill 2 Guard, your Plasma 1.1, and the Grav Cannon still 1.8 for a total of 4.9 Guard dead. Mine instead kills 3.6 Guard again with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 6.2 dead.
Against MEQ, in Rapid Fire your Bolters kill 1.6, the Plasma 1.5, and the Grav Cannon kills the same amount for a total of 4.6 Marines dead. For my guys, I kill 3 total with the Grav Cannons and 2.6 with the Bolters for a total of 5.6. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.8, the Plasma 0.7, and the Grav Cannon 1.5 still for a total of 3 Marines dead. My Sternguard kill 3 with the Grav Cannons and only 1.3 with the Bolters for a total of 4.3 dead.
Now I hadn't done REQ yet, so that'll be interesting. Against a Rhino in Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock off one wound, the Plasma non-OC 1.1, and the Grav Cannon 1.4 wounds for a total of 3.5 wounds inflicted. Two Grav Cannons from my squad knock off 2.8 wounds and the Bolters 1.7 wounds for a total of 4.5 wounds. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters knock out 0.5 wounds, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon has the consistent 1.4 for a total of 2.5. Two Grav Cannons from me do 2.8 again and the Bolters do a paltry 0.8 for a total of 3.6.
And of course who can forget about TEQ? In Rapid Fire range your Bolters inflict 0.8 wounds, the Plasma 1.2, and the Grav Cannon 2.2 for a total of 4.2 wounds inflicted, or basically two Terminators and a part dead. On my end I get 4.4 from the Grav Cannons wounding, and the Special Bolters do a spectacular 2 wounds for a total of 6.4 wounds, or 3 Terminators and a part dead. Outside Rapid Fire range, your Bolters kill 0.4, the Plasma 0.6, and the Grav Cannon still 2.2 wounds for a total of one dead Terminator and one wound carried over. The Grav Cannons do 4.4 wounds again and the Bolters wound one, which is 5.4.
Now I'm sure you have complaints. The first one could be that I added 10 points to my squad to do this. That's fair. That's only 10 points for more effectiveness and a greater threat range though (don't forget Special Issue Bolters having that delicious 30" range), and I know people like you like adding Power Weapons and junk so that evens out.. You could say it's less guys, which is also true. However, at LD8/9 I don't have a high chance of running away, and to be honest it won't be hard to kill another 2 Marines to accomplish the job. You could argue for overcharging the Plasma, but there was a reason people took little Plasma last edition and therefore you would need rerolls. For the sake of fairness I'd have to add rerolls too.
Alright, that's a much better squad. My first table was with overcharged plasma for TEQ and REQ, so redoing your table representing overcharge. Rerolls to hit are applied equally, so the relationships don't change. We'd see the same results winners/losers, every number would just be improved by 20% or whatever. No, I don't take power weapons on my Tacs. As for Ld, I play UM, so I'm 8/9 on Tacs to begin with.
RFrange___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN--------8.9------------5.6-----------5.6-----------4.5
TAC------------8.1------------4.49----------6.1-----------5.4 With overcharge, the Tacticals are still ahead against TEQ and REQ close up. You're paying more for a squad that kills 4 point guys better, while I'm paying less for a squad that kills 30(or whatever) point guys better, longer. The Tacticals are better at making their points back.
24range___GEQ______MEQ_____TEQ_____REQ
STERN ------6.2------------4.3------------5.4----------3.6 Sternguard are ahead at range across the board.
TAC-----------4.9------------2.9------------4.2----------3.4
But here's the first aspect that I'm also interested in. Once squads takes a few casualties the tables turn, and the Tacticals begin to beat out the Sternguard against the lighter targets as well.
RFrange w/4 casualties.
STERN--------5.3------------3.8-----------5.3-----------3.5 Sternguard degrade faster, and the Tacticals last longer.
TAC------------5.7------------3.6*---------5.6-----------4.8
*Overcharge Plasma------3.97
And here's the other part I'm interested in, 10 Sternguard with just Special Issue Bolters. (180 points)
If we look at just their Bolters, they do good work against lighter targets. If you compare the last chart with the top Sternguard chart in Rapid Fire range, you see that the additional damage your squad is doing against MEQ and higher target categories is largely because of the Grav Cannons. If the Grav Cannons are doing the work, why take Sternguard over Devastators? Is the incentive behind Special Issue Bolters to bring GEQ killing power to the rest of the squad? The problem with that is:
Your squad costs 196. That's worth 15 normal Space Marines, which is 195. 15 x .666 x .666 x .666 x 2 (rapid fire) = 8.86 A tie with the Sternguard against GEQ. Just as effective against GEQ, but with almost twice the number of wounds. Point for point, basic Space Marines kill GEQ as good as the Sternguard do, and last longer. The basic marine increases the longevity of a Tactical Squad and does the same task as the specialization of the Sternguard. Fun fact: As three squads, if 3 of them throw Frag it's 10.5 kills, well ahead of the Sternguard. Sternguard don't really have this option because it's always better for them to shoot their bolter.
The proposed Sternguard squad does do better damage at range, but again, it's not veterans with bolters doing the work, its the Grav Cannons. If you're going to operate at longer ranges, why wouldn't you get Devastators instead? At range you're wasting the damage potential of the expensive models/bolters, imo.
So in conclusion, Sternguard are cool, but as a squad they're more specialized than they appear. They're good at killing light to medium infantry, but you're paying more for a squad that degrades faster, dies faster, and specializes in killing lower point models. The Tacs more effectively shield the specials and heavy weapons, and the bolter guys can passively achieve the thing that you pay 4 pts. for Sternguard to specialize in.
And this is all just the numbers, buying troops to get CPs is good, having ObSec (even if you don't value it like I do) is also still an advantage.
Feel free to take Sternguard. They concentrate anti infantry firepower a little better. Maybe Lias and the Raptors (?) Chapter Tactics improve them more somehow. But looking at the numbers, I favor Tacticals for my UM.
In summary he like his veterans, and I like my basic marines. He seems to hate that I like basic marines. This Assault Squad thread is spawned because of that. Admittedly, I can't defend the Assault Squad as well, as their gear options are significantly more limited. I don't think they're useless, but they are much more edge-case.
To CREEEEEEED, I can give you tips about Sternguard + Lias via PM or you can just make a general post in the SM Tactica. I'm usually responsive in there.
The fact they're not in tournaments doesn't refute the math showing that they can outperform your Sternguard squad.
The most obvious thing about Assault Squads is the fact that their Jump Packs cost 3 points, while Jump Packs are only 2 for Vanguard. Imo if ASM with Jump Packs cost 15 instead, they'd be more on par. For example, that would be 5 ASM with 2 Plasma Pistols at 89, vs. a 90 point Vanguard with Chainswords.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: I'd like to see assault squads beable to take bolt guns. that could make em a very differant type of unit
Unit1126PLL wrote: Wait so if they have 1 special and 1 combi per 5, that's 2 per five...
there's your niche right there. The real question is why you'd ever take 10.
EDIT: Still unclear if they can or can not have plasma guns.
They can take plasma pistols. Raptors can take plasma guns (+ a combi on the champion). Not sure why they're different, but Raptors aren't exactly great either (they are firmly in the "ok" category).
A 5 man raptor drops with nurgle icons can put a nice LD debuff on a existing combat. Take nightlords and you are looking at -3 LD per raptor unit and up to -5 LD with two other nightlord squads in close proxy. Problem is you actually need to do wounds so they cant do much in melee on their own. But you can keep them cheapish and drop em with melta for multi task. Im not a NL player but -5 LD is not to be scoffed at. You can also combo with slanneshi heralds for some nice mortal wound generation. Forge world also has Malignatas cannons on several units that wound on leadership. How this all works on the table? who knows. And this thread is about assault marines but I had to say that you cannot compare AM's to Raptors,
ZergSmasher wrote: I'm actually considering trying out a 5-man squad with 3 plasma pistols. I'm sure they won't be very good, but they could be interesting in a casual game.
I use that loadout to mess with my friends broadside lol
p5freak wrote: I dont know about regular SM, but BA assault squad can use plasmaguns, meltas and flamethrowers, 2 models in a 5 model unit. Doesnt change when there are 10 models. And of course BA specific inferno pistols and the regular pistols. They can use one eviscerator for every 5 models, so two for 10 models. The sarge may pick a combat shield and melta bombs.
Sounds reasonable and is in line with former incarnation of the BA codex such as in 5th ed.
As a BA player, I'm interested in fielding Assault Marines and, of course, DC.
Will DC be the new black? I dont have the codex yet.
TwinPoleTheory wrote: I feel like if the Chainaxe were available to units other than Berzerkers this might be a slightly different conversation.
I have no numbers to back that up other than the vague assumption that giving most assault units +1 S and -1 AP would markedly improve their performance.
Why Berzerkers are the only ones to recognize the value of the Chainaxe is...unclear to me. Fluffy illogically fluffy fluffers is probably the reasons.
They generally wouldn't be useful on a raptor squad. With only 1 attack base, the chainsword's extra attack will outweighs almost any benefit an upgraded weapon could give them, particularly when cost is factored in. You need at least 2 attacks to make the chainaxe pull its weight. That or let it replace the bolt pistol, like bezerkers do. Which is a bit more of a tradeoff on a deepstriking jumpback squad.
This is the same problem assault squads run into with the eviscerator, or plasma pistols suffer. One attack isn't doing much on its own, no matter how nasty of an attack it is. Unless you are targeting tanks with a multidamage weapon which is also kinda situational with melee weapons.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
wuestenfux wrote: Sounds reasonable and is in line with former incarnation of the BA codex such as in 5th ed.
As a BA player, I'm interested in fielding Assault Marines and, of course, DC.
Will DC be the new black? I dont have the codex yet.
Haven't kept a close eye on it so far, but going by trends this edition your best units will likely remain your vehicles. Honestly the unique predator would be the best units in the codex if they hadn't apparently given it a bump over the other predators.
That being said, DC were fairly decent in the index, so depending on pricing they could be quiet decent. You'll just be tossing them in a transport as they still lack, to my knowledge, anything making them more likely to charge out of deepstrike successfully.
SilverAlien wrote: That being said, DC were fairly decent in the index, so depending on pricing they could be quiet decent. You'll just be tossing them in a transport as they still lack, to my knowledge, anything making them more likely to charge out of deepstrike successfully.
Death Company (and all jump pack units) can use Descent of Angels to charge on a 3d6 the turn that they deep strike. You can alternatively use Forlorn Assault to move+advance a Death Company unit up the table before the first turn (but after the seize roll so you know if you're going first), so with Forlorn Assault+your normal move+charge you have a total threat range of 24+3d6 inches.
I think Death Company will be fine without a transport.
to the OP in a tournament list assault marines are just outshined... but in open war and pick up games I have had luck throwing them in a storm raven, zipping them up turn 1 and dropping them out later in the game to harass or grab an objective to decent effect.
Descent of angels is good, but forlorn assault runs into the same problem that if you aren't going first, you will be a sitting duck even if you don't use the stratagem. Because you are still a fairly expensive squishy unit whose death will take a nice chunk of points from the army. It's the same issue with infiltrating AL bezerkers, it's often just more practical to use a vehicle.
But they do have the one stratagem so that's nice for a big unit.
Descent of angels is good, but forlorn assault runs into the same problem that if you aren't going first, you will be a sitting duck even if you don't use the stratagem. Because you are still a fairly expensive squishy unit whose death will take a nice chunk of points from the army. It's the same issue with infiltrating AL bezerkers, it's often just more practical to use a vehicle.
But they do have the one stratagem so that's nice for a big unit.
Well, if people are using LOS blocking terrain to their advantage (why wouldn't you?) than it becomes less of an issue. The tables I play on aren't so barren you can't hide a 10 man (or more) unit begind something. That also allows you to use the 1 CP strategem to teleport a Jump Pack unit so they are just out of 9" from an enemy unit. Not great odds of making the charge, but they shouldn't be the first units charging in at that point.
An Angel's Wing Librarian should be leading the charge to stop Overwatch, followed by a 3D6 charge from your other DC unit, followed by the unit that teleported. So no, a vehicle isn't more practical when you can teleport essentially anywhere with your Jump Pack DC. Nothing else has that kind of mobility.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And even than, Assault Marines become fairly decent with Unleash Rage and as the first wave (well second after the Librarian), to eat up Overwatch shots against anything the Librarian couldn't hit with his charge. I would rather my Assault Marines take the Overwatch from anything that auto hits over my Vanguard or Death Company.
Assault Marines do ONE thing better than Vanguard Veterans; fill up the 3 mandatory fast attack slots in a Brigade.
But I would only consider doing this in my BA army, where:
1.) the stratagems are so good (and necessary) that it may well be worth it to build for a brigade simply to have those 3 extra CP's, AND...
2.) the red thirst compliments beautifully the (limited but cheap) volume attacks that Assault Marines have, AND...
3.) you can put plasma guns on 2 dudes, essentially running them as a mobile midfield firing platform with ablative wounds.
In short, I think I would ONLY consider Assault Marines in a BA army; and even there they are not particularly good.
The way I'm trying to think of assault marines in this edition are as Tactical marines (ie, I'm not sure I'm putting jump packs on them, but instead packing them into Rhinos)
Tac squads will be passed over in favor of scouts (for deepstrike blocking or snagging objectives) or intercessors (for midfield fire support)
Back in the day assault marines were normal marines that had an additional close combat attack and we're faster moving. Now unfortunately they have been outshined by veterans with backs. But that's because it seemed back then veterans were a waste, much like choosen for chaos are now.
For assault marines to really get some strength back something has to give. If vanguard vets are going to have all the access to the special cc weapons and sternguard get the special range then assault marines should get basic options. Like "replace your chainsword and bolt pistol with a bolter for free" or replace your bolt pistol for another chainsword for free or replace your chainsword for another pistol. That kind of stuff. Let them become masters of basic weapons. I could find a use for assault marines with bolters.
If things couldn't easily fall out of combat, they'd be super useful.
Exactly this. If GW fixes CQC and requires an actual check to fall out of combat they become amazing.
I honestly do not even bother with 8th at this point. Thank god for 30k.
They're also, you know, terrible melee units on their own. If you're taking them for "assault" they are outclassed by more specialized melee units that CAN deal massive damage on the charge. Just like regular Marines, these guys don't seem to have a place in the current meta without either a price decrease or attack increase or something to make them more focused or desirable.
The fact enemies can back out of combat does make matters worse for the unit, however it in and of itself is not a problem. 8th rewards you for taking specialized units and punishes you for taking toolbox units. It's the reason Chaos Terminators aren't as desirable as Obliterators, or Chaos Marines aren't as desirable as Havocs.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
There are people defending them as a choice in another thread, so I figured to make this thread as a dedicated discussion instead.
By adding jump packs and flamers they become solid units to hold up charing enemy infanty. They assault the bad guys, do their round, on their next round they fall back, shoot again, wait for the charge, overwatch flamer them again. Being able to fall back and shoot, and move fast is their thing. I'm with you on the Vanguard thing tho, except Vanguard squads can't equip flamers.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
There are people defending them as a choice in another thread, so I figured to make this thread as a dedicated discussion instead.
By adding jump packs and flamers they become solid units to hold up charing enemy infanty. They assault the bad guys, do their round, on their next round they fall back, shoot again, wait for the charge, overwatch flamer them again. Being able to fall back and shoot, and move fast is their thing. I'm with you on the Vanguard thing tho, except Vanguard squads can't equip flamers.
If things couldn't easily fall out of combat, they'd be super useful.
Welllll id put the caveat that it would be more useful if things couldn't get out of combat so easily AND got to still shoot or charge or do things (aka fly orders chapter tactics and the like)
that and a hand full of armies that have really good screen units.
you should be able to deep strike, tie some long range unit for a turn, they can leave and your unit is dead but they are also not shooting las cannons at your tanks or what not.
With jumppacks they are semi-useful due to deepstrike, fly and 12' move, but they die easily and are overcosted. Charging flyers can be fun if you have eviscerators (you shoudn't).
I play Raven Guard and have 30 but I completly shelved them for Vanguard vets. They need to be troops.
I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
Azuza001 wrote: Back in the day assault marines were normal marines that had an additional close combat attack and we're faster moving. Now unfortunately they have been outshined by veterans with backs. But that's because it seemed back then veterans were a waste, much like choosen for chaos are now.
For assault marines to really get some strength back something has to give. If vanguard vets are going to have all the access to the special cc weapons and sternguard get the special range then assault marines should get basic options. Like "replace your chainsword and bolt pistol with a bolter for free" or replace your bolt pistol for another chainsword for free or replace your chainsword for another pistol. That kind of stuff. Let them become masters of basic weapons. I could find a use for assault marines with bolters.
Wouldn't that just be lesser version of those flying Primaris Marines in Gravis armour?
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
Yes, that is actually what you use them for. That and jumping tanks. If you just connect with most units they can't shoot next turn. The jump pack gives them a good move and imo, more importantly, "deep strike."
Bought bare bones, neither Vanguard or Assault Squads do much damage, so if you're just looking to run interference, the cheaper option has its place.
giving assault marines more attacks or cutting their price seems the best way to do it. if each one had 3 attacks (including chainsword bonus) they'd be a bit better
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
That's pretty much exclusively what I use jump troops for, and what I've been saying you should use assault troops for.
Just because it can't kill it doesn't make it bad. Locking a 200 point tank in combat with 80 points of Assault Troops for a turn or two, even if they do absolutely nothing to it before falling back and letting your Lascannons deal with it, is well worth their cost.
I'd rather them be cheap than them be killy, really. A cheap fast unit with FLY opens up tactical possibilities and is a significant threat, an expensive-but-killy unit offers nothing new and just competes with other options that do the same thing.
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
That's pretty much exclusively what I use jump troops for, and what I've been saying you should use assault troops for.
Just because it can't kill it doesn't make it bad. Locking a 200 point tank in combat with 80 points of Assault Troops for a turn or two, even if they do absolutely nothing to it before falling back and letting your Lascannons deal with it, is well worth their cost.
I'd rather them be cheap than them be killy, really. A cheap fast unit with FLY opens up tactical possibilities and is a significant threat, an expensive-but-killy unit offers nothing new and just competes with other options that do the same thing.
This is highly meta dependent because most xenos armies have flying vehicles that can't be tied up, and if you're facing Guard or CSM there's going to be a big screen of cheap models that have to be killed off before you can touch the vehicles. This is where the lethality of Khorne Berzerkers and Death Company is valuable, you reaaally need to clear out that screen if your plan is to tie up the enemy's shooting.
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
That's pretty much exclusively what I use jump troops for, and what I've been saying you should use assault troops for.
Just because it can't kill it doesn't make it bad. Locking a 200 point tank in combat with 80 points of Assault Troops for a turn or two, even if they do absolutely nothing to it before falling back and letting your Lascannons deal with it, is well worth their cost.
I'd rather them be cheap than them be killy, really. A cheap fast unit with FLY opens up tactical possibilities and is a significant threat, an expensive-but-killy unit offers nothing new and just competes with other options that do the same thing.
This is highly meta dependent because most xenos armies have flying vehicles that can't be tied up, and if you're facing Guard or CSM there's going to be a big screen of cheap models that have to be killed off before you can touch the vehicles. This is where the lethality of Khorne Berzerkers and Death Company is valuable, you reaaally need to clear out that screen if your plan is to tie up the enemy's shooting.
Hence Fly.
Anyway, it takes around 3x the cost of something to kill it off, as a general rule of thumb, so it's pretty efficient to tie things up with cheap, fast troops. They don't even have to have melee weapons.
It is most definitely meta-dependent. My local store's meta is super saturated with Space Marines and their treasonous brethren, and those who aren't Space Marines are Imperial Guard, Tyranids, or Orks. Though even going in against the Orks can be pretty valuable, since you just have to kill off 10 of the boyz for that 80-point squad to have been totally worth it.
Of course, fast cheap assault units can still be leveraged against armies that can Fly, but they do lose a lot of their strength, and it's not terrible to have them in your list if you're not list tailoring.
It's meta dependent, but so is almost everything. I'd probably build my TAC list very differently if my meta was entirely flavors of Eldar and Tau.
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
That's pretty much exclusively what I use jump troops for, and what I've been saying you should use assault troops for.
Just because it can't kill it doesn't make it bad. Locking a 200 point tank in combat with 80 points of Assault Troops for a turn or two, even if they do absolutely nothing to it before falling back and letting your Lascannons deal with it, is well worth their cost.
I'd rather them be cheap than them be killy, really. A cheap fast unit with FLY opens up tactical possibilities and is a significant threat, an expensive-but-killy unit offers nothing new and just competes with other options that do the same thing.
Nobody is arguing Assault Marines should be as killy as Vanguard. The point is that the Vanguard are only 10 points more to do that and inflict more wounds. THEN they can be equipped silly.
Azuza001 wrote: Back in the day assault marines were normal marines that had an additional close combat attack and we're faster moving. Now unfortunately they have been outshined by veterans with backs. But that's because it seemed back then veterans were a waste, much like choosen for chaos are now.
For assault marines to really get some strength back something has to give. If vanguard vets are going to have all the access to the special cc weapons and sternguard get the special range then assault marines should get basic options. Like "replace your chainsword and bolt pistol with a bolter for free" or replace your bolt pistol for another chainsword for free or replace your chainsword for another pistol. That kind of stuff. Let them become masters of basic weapons. I could find a use for assault marines with bolters.
Wouldn't that just be lesser version of those flying Primaris Marines in Gravis armour?
I am not sure, I don't have any primaris marines myself so I haven't really looked at them.
I guess the other side of the problem is assault marines are more mobile and better at close combat but that's not saying much now days. Would simply making them a troop choice help any? Then your options are 1 shot at 24/2 at 12 with tacticals or 1 shot at 12, but 12" movement. Still don't know if that fixes the problem but at least they have a different roll now as fast objective holders.
Azuza001 wrote: Back in the day assault marines were normal marines that had an additional close combat attack and we're faster moving. Now unfortunately they have been outshined by veterans with backs. But that's because it seemed back then veterans were a waste, much like choosen for chaos are now.
For assault marines to really get some strength back something has to give. If vanguard vets are going to have all the access to the special cc weapons and sternguard get the special range then assault marines should get basic options. Like "replace your chainsword and bolt pistol with a bolter for free" or replace your bolt pistol for another chainsword for free or replace your chainsword for another pistol. That kind of stuff. Let them become masters of basic weapons. I could find a use for assault marines with bolters.
Wouldn't that just be lesser version of those flying Primaris Marines in Gravis armour?
I am not sure, I don't have any primaris marines myself so I haven't really looked at them.
I guess the other side of the problem is assault marines are more mobile and better at close combat but that's not saying much now days. Would simply making them a troop choice help any? Then your options are 1 shot at 24/2 at 12 with tacticals or 1 shot at 12, but 12" movement. Still don't know if that fixes the problem but at least they have a different roll now as fast objective holders.
A lot of people dont consider troops to be too valuable but it would be nice. i feel it would simply be easier to lower their costs.
Arcanis161 wrote: I was thinking of using them just to tie up some dangerous enemy unit for a turn or two. Are Assault Marines too expensive for that? What would be better/cheaper then? Scouts maybe, but you would have to make sure you deploy after your opponent.
That's pretty much exclusively what I use jump troops for, and what I've been saying you should use assault troops for.
Just because it can't kill it doesn't make it bad. Locking a 200 point tank in combat with 80 points of Assault Troops for a turn or two, even if they do absolutely nothing to it before falling back and letting your Lascannons deal with it, is well worth their cost.
I'd rather them be cheap than them be killy, really. A cheap fast unit with FLY opens up tactical possibilities and is a significant threat, an expensive-but-killy unit offers nothing new and just competes with other options that do the same thing.
Nobody is arguing Assault Marines should be as killy as Vanguard. The point is that the Vanguard are only 10 points more to do that and inflict more wounds. THEN they can be equipped silly.
I don't think I ever said that.
I don't consider Vanguard killy either. I was commenting on the whole "ASM are bad because enemies can leave melee" thing, and "bad because doesn't kill things" thing.
I suppose if your playing power level they work ok. It's 10 pl for 10 assault marines vs 15 for 10 vanguard. Depending on their role if you want the assault marines for their mobility and flamers then maybe there is a use? Vanguard can definitely hit harder but if your swarm hunting plasma pistols don't matter as much. Idk
... keep hoping we figure something out.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Because there really isn't one. Flamers aren't good so being able to spam them doesn't work (though bikers would do that better anyway) and for TWO more points per model you can get Vanguard instead. They're not so cheap that you can argue to fill the Fast Attack slot for a Brigade. They simply can't do anything well.
There are people defending them as a choice in another thread, so I figured to make this thread as a dedicated discussion instead.
In the 4th edition of 40k you could take the doctrin 'blessed be the warrior' which allowed you to take Assult marines as elite and or troops, resultnatly at 3point a modal the elite troops could have either or the furious assult rule or the tank hunter abillity.
that and a hand full of armies that have really good screen units.
Curious- what armies do and don't, in your opinion?
Tau, Guard, and Nids obviously do. Orks are an army of screen units.
Cultists and Scouts are...okay. Sisters don't have much of one at 9 points a model I think. Grey Knights get nothing. Scarabs for Necrons are alright, and Wraiths are good. Genestealer Cults operate like Guard. Vanguard/Rangers are...there.
Realistically most armies can screen well enough to screw up most attempts to tie up their expensive units.
The only real exception is normal SM, who only have scouts which are expensive and fragile for cost. Tau (and maybe sisters) are also under the curve atm but only by a little, should be fixed by the eventual codices like what happened for admech.
SilverAlien wrote: Realistically most armies can screen well enough to screw up most attempts to tie up their expensive units.
The only real exception is normal SM, who only have scouts which are expensive and fragile for cost. Tau (and maybe sisters) are also under the curve atm but only by a little, should be fixed by the eventual codices like what happened for admech.
Well the space marines have to have some kind of weakness, they cant be super human at everything.
What is their point? To die in service to the Emperor, duh.
Assault Marines are basically Tactical Marines with fewer options and can move faster. They suffer from all the drawbacks of a Tactical Squad- OK at everything, master of nothing. They use to be a good close combat unit, but then all Space Marines got Bolt Pistols and an option for a close combat weapon.
So now their big advantage is fast movement and ignoring terrain in an edition where everyone got faster and terrain is marginalized. If they got some kind of rule like "When this unit uses it's Jump Pack, (moves more then 6") all enemy models suffer -1 to hit when shooting at them" would help them out tremendously. The loss of Hammer of Wrath really hurt these guys. The old tactic of "Suicide with Melta Guns and Melta Bombs" is gone in this edition. Shooting is much more important in this edition then previously, and if you make it into close combat, it's brutal. Getting there is the problem, and moving a bit faster helps Assault Marines to get into close combat maybe a turn early. Once in close combat, you basically have a Tactical Squad fighting.
Basically, there is no point to the Assault Squad unless you have some kind of chapter trait or formation that makes them better. Otherwise, you would be better off taking Inceptors who out shoot, out fight, and out last Assault Marines in every category.
Blackdheild_Barbarian wrote: Well the space marines have to have some kind of weakness, they cant be super human at everything.
Vanilla Marines aren't actually that great at most things at the moment, besides having some excellent named characters. Also some of the best transports currently, unless that changed in CA or one of the other codices leapfrogged them. Flyers and tanks are good but not amazing atm, basically on curve sitting in the middle. Everything else is, to me knowledge, either bad or at least below average.
Which is a secondary problem with assault marines: they are hampered by being tied to the same pricing as tactical marines, who are also fairly trash.
I'm beginning to think their best use might be as an inverse distraction carnfex. Instead of being an obvious threat, they are an obvious non threat. Forget giving them jump packs and weapons. Just run them up the battlefield on foot as cheap distractions (with better armour than scouts). Your opponent can ignore them, in which case they get to tie up any non fly units in combat. Or he can shoot them, in which case something more important gets ignored.
At most, give one 5 point upgrade, either meltabombs or power axe.
The point of assault marines becomes apparent on appropriately modeled hive city boards.
When enemy barrage weapon teams ares on an overpass three foot above the level your tactical squads are on and you cannot get line of sight through the maze of pipework and cooling towers, you'll be glad you have jump infantry to ignore intervening terrain.
=Angel= wrote: The point of assault marines becomes apparent on appropriately modeled hive city boards.
When enemy barrage weapon teams ares on an overpass three foot above the level your tactical squads are on and you cannot get line of sight through the maze of pipework and cooling towers, you'll be glad you have jump infantry to ignore intervening terrain.
This goes back to the "selling models" over game design issue. Vanguard didn't ever need to really exist (hell, half of the Space Marine models don't need to exist - the game was fine before them). And even when you get a unit like Vanguard it should be limited to say, one unit per army, etc. But since it's not - it simply negates most other units in the same area as them. You see this repeated in tons of armies with tons of units.
