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

So nobody likes taking Tactical Squads, what tweaks would you make to improve them?

My suggestions...

Bolter Drill - Steal Lysander's special rule and apply it to Tactical Squads. They're supposed to be the most highly trained Marines after all.

Priority Target - Let the Heavy Weapon fire at a different target to the other members of the squad. Short of leaving it behind in the 2nd combat squad, it's the only it will get to fire.

Tactical squads look very good on paper. Splitting them into combat squads means that the ML will always get to fire while the sarge and flamer dude gets in close and personal. It's everything else that took two steps in badass that makes them look bad in comparison.

Um who doesn't like tact squads?

They will obliterate any other troop choice while within double tap range and have the ability to combat squad themselves into specific roles.

Other than being limited to 10 models and being on the pricier side, whats wrong with em?

nothing, Tac sqauds are good, but not great.
Here is the kick in the teeth though, Grey hunters have CA, multiple special weapons acute senses and 2 cc weapons... all for LESS points than a normal marine, who has NONE of those skills, internet fanboy junk is the SW codex.

by GW reasoning my Tac marine should be 13pts

Flashman wrote:So nobody likes taking Tactical Squads, what tweaks would you make to improve them?

Tell people to stop being morons and realize how good tactical squads are?

Yes, certain Marine codices have arguably better variants, but frankly Tacticals themselves (when compared to all non-Marine troops choices) are pretty damned good and cheap.

Melissia wrote:

Flashman wrote:So nobody likes taking Tactical Squads, what tweaks would you make to improve them?

Tell people to stop being morons and realize how good tactical squads are?

Yes, certain Marine codices have arguably better variants, but frankly Tacticals themselves (when compared to all non-Marine troops choices) are pretty damned good and cheap.

there is no arguing, SW tac sqauds ARE better and BA ones are about the same unless the get furious charge, but that may or may not be a good thing depending on what you intended for them lol.

other than that i agree mell, Tac sqauds are good, I mean just for the sheers hell of it i like to run 60 marines in rhino's and a captain.... Tac sqaud SWARM??

Sure I can argue it. SW squads don't have heavy weapons options, don't have combat squads, and don't have combat tactics. They also don't have any heavy weapons choices. So while Grey Hunters are definitely better assault troops, they are not simply better.

Melissia wrote:Sure I can argue it. SW squads don't have heavy weapons options, don't have combat squads, and don't have combat tactics. They also don't have any heavy weapons choices. So while Grey Hunters are definitely better assault troops, they are not simply better.

They dont need heavy weapons, they dont need combat sqauds, no do they need combat tactics, they have all there neat
little skills for less points than a tac marine. that is what makes them better, they are identical stats wise, that means they should be 15pts each BASE, then add 3pts for all there abilities.

I think you would be very hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't think Grey hunters are better.
That being said tac marines are still good

Formosa wrote:They dont need heavy weapons, they dont need combat sqauds, no do they need combat tactics

That's arguable. Certainly I bet they're wanting combat tactics against genestealers, banshees, bloodletters, and so on.

Flashman wrote:So nobody likes taking Tactical Squads,

You should amend this to something like "So I don't like taking Tactical Squads despite how excellent they are."

Grey Hunters would be somewhere along the lines of 21 points or so a piece if done in the 4th edition (+3 points for the skills, +1 point for the Frag Grenade, +2 for the Krak Grenade). However Marines are still well priced if you get them at max squads (150 points for all 10 marines, 5 points for the flamer, 15 points for the Sarge's extra attack, and you get the ML for free).

Melissia wrote:

Formosa wrote:They dont need heavy weapons, they dont need combat sqauds, no do they need combat tactics

That's arguable. Certainly I bet they're wanting combat tactics against genestealers, banshees, bloodletters, and so on.

How does Combat Tactics help you there? You need somebody to shoot at the marines for them to be allowed to fail a morale check.

+1 attack base, Counter Attack, 2 Special Weapons, cheap CC wargear (Standard, Wulfen), cheaper. Grey Hunters are just so much better.

Heavy Weapons in a Tactical Squad is a waste. Am I really going to sit my 170 point unit on the back table edge so one guy can fire one puny little heavy weapon? That's totally point inefficient. Tactical Squads are garbage in assault. Since their role is close range shooting, they'll often get assaulted and 10 attacks won't even scare a guardsmen squad. Not to mention, the most common enemy in the game (other space marines) laugh at bolter fire. Combat Squads just gives you two smaller versions of the same crappy squad. What is 5 marines with a flamer going to accomplish? What about one missile launcher and four bullet catchers?

Tactical Squads are bad, real bad.

I would say, just give Tactical Squads a close combat weapon, so they're slightly better in assault, and the ability to take either two assault (melta, flamer, plasma) or two heavy weapons in a ten man squad.

Griever wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Formosa wrote:They dont need heavy weapons, they dont need combat sqauds, no do they need combat tactics

That's arguable. Certainly I bet they're wanting combat tactics against genestealers, banshees, bloodletters, and so on.

How does Combat Tactics help you there? You need somebody to shoot at the marines for them to be allowed to fail a morale check.

+1 attack base, Counter Attack, 2 Special Weapons, cheap CC wargear (Standard, Wulfen), cheaper. Grey Hunters are just so much better.

Heavy Weapons in a Tactical Squad is a waste. Am I really going to sit my 170 point unit on the back table edge so one guy can fire one puny little heavy weapon? That's totally point inefficient. Tactical Squads are garbage in assault. Since their role is close range shooting, they'll often get assaulted and 10 attacks won't even scare a guardsmen squad. Not to mention, the most common enemy in the game (other space marines) laugh at bolter fire. Combat Squads just gives you two smaller versions of the same crappy squad. What is 5 marines with a flamer going to accomplish? What about one missile launcher and four bullet catchers?

Tactical Squads are bad, real bad.

I would say, just give Tactical Squads a close combat weapon, so they're slightly better in assault, and the ability to take either two assault (melta, flamer, plasma) or two heavy weapons in a ten man squad.

Marines can loose combat and take a morale test to break from combat, which they can elect to fail. Combat Tactics allows them to get away whereas Grey Hunters will likely stay in combat until they're wiped out. On the other end, Combat Squads means that you only sit half of your 170 unit to fire the ML, while the other half (with the flamer and the Sarge with 3 attacks mind you) go about in a razorback for some close-quarter goodness. A ML combat squad with 4 normal marines can sit on an objective for a rather cheap cost, as well as it lets you have 12 scoring units max. Devastators have higher cost MLs and cannot claim objectives.

If they decided to buff Tactical Squads, I'm not complaining. I think they are fine how they are though.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Flashman wrote:So nobody likes taking Tactical Squads,

You should amend this to something like "So I don't like taking Tactical Squads despite how excellent they are."

Actually, I do like Tactical Squads, but I never see people use more than a squad or two at most. But maybe it was an over generalisation.

The only amendment I would like to see for tactical squad is the following

wargear: Boltgun, boltpistol, CCW, Frag + Krak

No increase in points necessary I just think this would round them out a bit as one attack in cc or 2 on the charge is a bit pathetic.

For the record IMO Grey Hunters are better in every respect I don't like combat squads apart from in BA and a heavy weapon is not a great asset when it restricts half your squads firepower or more. However I respect Melissa's opinion that Tac squads can be better I suppose it is down to your style of play.

Tac squads are great but I believe my earlier amendment would allow them to fulfill a little bit more of their potential. There is a case however for allowing them to take two special weapons rather than 1+ a heavy weapon but that would make them too much like SW and BA. Although it works with the fluff.

Ed_Bodger wrote:wargear: Boltgun, boltpistol, CCW, Frag + Krak

Only true Marines who follow the ways of choas should have this option.

Loyalist Marines are arguably good enough already, certainly for the points, and certainly compared to most other armies troop choices.

If they got ccws, or split fire, the GreyHunters wouldn't be superior for cheaper, which is against the theme of their codex, so that will never fly.

I don't mind tac squads, I love them in fact, despite their cost showing the age of the codex a bit. They do alright, just not as exceptional as GH. They do expecially alright with razorbacks for the assault half of the squad, and they are pretty cool to spam in low point games. It was fun to throw 50 marines and a HQ against 1000 points and not be outnumbered for once.

I think marines should have ccw... I mean, gray hunters have everything smurf has + ccw and counterattack, and is still cheaper!!! So why wouldn't they have ccw? They would still be more expensive (especially with sarge)...

But nevertheless, I love tac squads... With proper support, they can do marvelous things... I never use them same way, and in every game they do something to return their points (if nothing less, they are scoring)...

me and Mellisia do agree that Tac sqauds are good.
we just diagree that GH are better, it really does bog down to this, Tac sqauds can do everything but nothing excels, this is why they are good.

If you give Tac sqauds a extra cc weapon, where does that leave Assault marines?

In the same boat as Chaos Raptors. One that's going downstream at mach 5.

simple way to make tac squads better, give them auto cannons

TyraelVladinhurst wrote:simple way to make tac squads better, give them auto cannons

I agree with this, if my Tactical Squads could take Autocannons, I would take them in every squad and use until my hearts content.

damn... such a simple idea but bloody brilliant.

hats of to ya TyraelVladinhurst

Flashman wrote:Actually, I do like Tactical Squads, but I never see people use more than a squad or two at most. But maybe it was an over generalisation.

You see people using scouts? In a competative context?

*bows* thank you, seemed like the easiest solution

You must be a tactical genius... *looks at "5000 Points of IG"* TYRAEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELL!!

Footsloggin wrote:You must be a tactical genius... *looks at "5000 Points of IG"* TYRAEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELL!!

lol, i make Horus blush when it comes to being a tactical genius

The problem isn't that tactical squads are bad, its that other armies are imbalanced comparatively, with more options, less rigid structure, and cheaper better variations and force structures. Fix tactical marines by fixing the broken divergent lists that make SM seem weak.

yeenoghu wrote:The problem isn't that tactical squads are bad, its that other armies are imbalanced comparatively, with more options, less rigid structure, and cheaper better variations and force structures. Fix tactical marines by fixing the broken divergent lists that make SM seem weak.

Amen. Beautifully written. Remember the new Tyranid codex? How nice and shiny and awesome it was?

Yeah. Tyranids are REAL good now.

It's the same thing - the new shiny stuff gets outclassed by newer, shinier stuff. I mean, the IoM.