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.

Just wondering since I don't have a clue about anything 40k. Kill team is my jam, wanting dip my toes into 40k and I'm trying to make a 2k list but not sure if a heavy weapon and a special is more optimal than x2 squads of 5 with a special weapon. I would imagine a squad of 10 would be better for a morale test since you have more models, if you fail don't you run of the board or something similar? For some reason that's in my head, it could be from a previous edition not sure. Anyway I don't know what I'm talking about so I'll let someone set me straight.

Cheers.

You are almost always better with small squads.

You get the sarge for free, more flexible, generally more options for gear. etc. Less likely to die due to overkill, and also more resilient to morale. 8th works where you roll a die and add how many guys died that turn, if it’s over your leadership, you loose that many guys. With a small squad, they are all going to be dead due to fire before any run due to morale. Large squads not so much.

The reason to take large squads is for stratagems and other buffs. You can hit more guys with one use. Also, less drops for counting how many units you have, which can help get first turn in some formats. While these are nice perks, they do not outweigh the benifits of multiple small units in most cases.

Yep, it's one of the major issues with 8th's design. A bit they got wrong.

The way the rules are written, smaller squads become immune to morale (meaning they're dead before they'd actually fail the test) while also being a cheaper option to produce more CP. It also gives you more flexibility, and you reduce your "shoot at me" target indication.

The only major positive is auras/stratagems which impact a unit. Spending a "re-roll shooting" stratagem on a unit of 10 is obviously better than spending it on a unit of 5. This is the only consideration. However, if you make a large squad and your opponent is savvy enough to realize it's only large because it'll benefit from a stratagem - they're likely to target it.

There is virtually no benefits to taking 10 man squads, but tons of drawbacks.

 Nevelon wrote:
...The reason to take large squads is for stratagems and other buffs. You can hit more guys with one use. ...

And that is assuming you have a strat worth using, which Tacs generally don't.

so long you can not recycle the unit or have a massive stratagem, then big squads of marines don^'t work,
If you can recycle but are not morale immune, then intermediate squads can work.

If you have no access to both, go for the smallest possible squad.

The Newman wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
...The reason to take large squads is for stratagems and other buffs. You can hit more guys with one use. ...

And that is assuming you have a strat worth using, which Tacs generally don't.

As an Ultramarine, I do like the full re-rolls I can get for one CP with Scions of Guiliman on my tacs. Bolter Drill for ‘Fists also gets more milage from a lot of dice being tossed. While implied with the talk of special and heavy weapons, the 5/10 debate can also cover other squads. The +1 to wound strat on sternguard is pretty nice to have.

Yes, compared to other codexes our buffs and strats are a little lackluster, unfortunately it’s what we have. Don’t get me wrong, they are probably not worth running 10 man squads for, but they are a reason to run larger squads. Just not a very compelling one.

Ok then I didn't expect it but really interesting replys. Guess I'll be going 5 marine squads, sorted.

There are lots of units in 8th edition that benefit from going with max squad sizes. Tactical Marines are not generally thought to be one of them.

10 man marine squads have been a bad idea for three editions. Five man squads get you another Sgt and another special weapon.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
10 man marine squads have been a bad idea for three editions. Five man squads get you another Sgt and another special weapon.

At least in 5th edition you got a free rocket launcher at 10 marines in a squad. And combat squad rule made it usefull (when split fire did not exist yet).

Now both 10 man squads and combat squad rule are useless.

I know we dont want to go back to formations, but I honestly thought that was how armies would get CPs this edition. Space Marine Demi company with max sqds? Give them more CPs. Etc

Gitdakka wrote:

HoundsofDemos wrote:
10 man marine squads have been a bad idea for three editions. Five man squads get you another Sgt and another special weapon.

At least in 5th edition you got a free rocket launcher at 10 marines in a squad. And combat squad rule made it usefull (when split fire did not exist yet).

Now both 10 man squads and combat squad rule are useless.

If I recall correctly in 5th you couldn't take a special or a heavy unless you had ten, at least for anyone who wasn't SWs. The minute GW changed that removed any reason to ever take 10.

Since 6th I've ran my tacticals with a special, a matching combi and no other upgrades. Long way from the days of ten man squads and PFs every day all day.

I always buy 10 man Tac squads because it allows me deployment flexibility. I can keep them together for aura, stratagem and number-of-drops benefits, or I can split them up into combat squads to send them into different missions. The Special-dense squads might band together in transports and head forward, while the heavy weapon units stay back.

Yeah as said, 5 man generally is better. It's kind of sad though that it is that way. I will say as well some food for thought, Dark Angels only ever lose 1 model to failed morale so they can more safely take large squads without fear.

As well Deathwatch squads of veterans can usually benefit from larger squads but they focus on firepower and have ways to mitigate damage with storm shields as well as morale tricks like terminators keeping you safe from morale checks, mostly.

Mostly though min squads for most things are better without the rare instance being an exception to the rule.

The way that fits with your style. You'll do better with a slightly less effective method that gels in your mind than you'll do with a slightly more effective method that isn't instinctual for you.

AngryAngel80 wrote:Yeah as said, 5 man generally is better. It's kind of sad though that it is that way. I will say as well some food for thought, Dark Angels only ever lose 1 model to failed morale so they can more safely take large squads without fear.

As well Deathwatch squads of veterans can usually benefit from larger squads but they focus on firepower and have ways to mitigate damage with storm shields as well as morale tricks like terminators keeping you safe from morale checks, mostly.

Mostly though min squads for most things are better without the rare instance being an exception to the rule.

Deathwatch also has better strats. Like being able to deep strike a squad straight into rapid fire vengence rounds range and/or to get frag cannons upfield.

Breton wrote:The way that fits with your style. You'll do better with a slightly less effective method that gels in your mind than you'll do with a slightly more effective method that isn't instinctual for you.

For all my bringing up the advantages of 5 man squads, when it comes time to put a list together, I field full 10 man squads. With a special and a heavy, and assorted toys on the sarge (normally a combi to match, sometimes a CC weapon) Why? I know it’s not optimal. But I’m an Ultramarine. If we don’t follow the codex, who will? It just doesn’t feel right to put a Space Marine army on the table without a full tac sqad or two rolling around. Unless you are playing top tables at a tournament, there is room for a little flex in your list, as long as you are playing with like minded people.

Everyone has units that are “meh” but they love. They might be the hot unit from editions past that have been hit a little to hard with the nerf bat (but you have fond memories of them leading you to victory). Decent units that are overshadowed by better options (take scouts). Just stuff you like the way it looks, or think you did an awesome paint job on. The competitive number crunchers will tell you to shelve those units, take the stuff that's FOTM you need to win. When you ask a question like “What is better” that’s the kind of answer you should get. But once you get the answer, feel free to ignore it. This is a game, it’s supposed to be fun. And it’s a game that’s part of a wider hobby, that includes fluff, modeling, and painting. So you need to weigh the mechanical benefits of what’s best on the table against the other aspects of the hobby. We want to have fun, and it’s not fun getting your teeth kicked in. But if you loose sight of what brought you to the hobby, if your army does’t resonate with you, is it worth it to win?

Obviously, you are not going to auto-loose for taking a 10 man squad. Heck, one of the things it does (lower your drops) helps with what is often the most important part of the game (going first). There is a LOT of randomness in 40k. Some of the subtleties in list building are going to wash out in the actions of out fickle little 6 sided friends. But just note that every time you make a fluff call, you do soften your list a little, and in the long run that adds up. If you are playing with like minded friends, it evens out. If you have a very competitive local meta, you might need to tighten up other parts of your list to compensate.

IMHO, YMMV, etc, etc...

Sometimes the rules for your chosen Chapter make the decision for you.

I play Crimson Fists. I gain such a massive benefit from MSU against most armies that it's a no brainer.

But here's the key - to have a truly TAC approach, I actually do usually bring a 10 man Intercessor unit in case I really want to use the Indomitus Crusaders detachment. Sure, I give up the extra Sarge if I don't need it and decide to run then separate with combat squads, but the flexibility of choice is worthwhile. Like when facing a horde style army where a 10 man Vet squad can get the best of both worlds.

Lemondish wrote:
Sometimes the rules for your chosen Chapter make the decision for you.

I play Crimson Fists. I gain such a massive benefit from MSU against most armies that it's a no brainer.

But here's the key - to have a truly TAC approach, I actually do usually bring a 10 man Intercessor unit in case I really want to use the Indomitus Crusaders detachment. Sure, I give up the extra Sarge if I don't need it and decide to run then separate with combat squads, but the flexibility of choice is worthwhile. Like when facing a horde style army where a 10 man Vet squad can get the best of both worlds.

It also depends on the unit you're talking about. Taking 10 Tacs makes a lot more sense than taking 10 Dev's, but I've also taken the 10 Dev's, Combat Squad'ed them and stuck the other half in a razorback. I would not do so this edition I'd rather have the objective Secured.. Taking a 5 man Terminator, Van/Stern -Guard Veteran squad etc isn't the end of the world from either a fluff or competitive standpoint.

Likewise, I normally don't like Min size units, but 6 Aggressors won't fit in a Repulsor of any type yet. Let alone adding Calgar, a LT, and an apothecary, so I run 3 and they all JUST fit inside the Repulsor.

As stated, always take min squads, unless the unit has a way of just ignoring moral.

I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

If you are just thinking of getting into 40k I wouldn't invest any $$ into tacs. As much as some people want to rail against it, the writing is on the wall for the little bois. I'd start with intercessors (primaris) if I were going out spending new hobby money on marines...

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

I don't go to tournaments. My matches are mostly semi-competitive so no soups or a lot of min maxing.
Sometimes I do face Death Guard led by Mortarion or a pure Knight army and I'm about 50/50 win ratio against them.

My Space Marine army hails back from the days of 3rd edition and could've easly walked out of the pages of the White Dwarf at the time.
I don't follow the latest trends in army building: I don't think it's worth the money and effort even if it handicaps me somewhat.

I just take what I have and try to be the better general on the battlefield: There's a hell of a lot more to 40k than math hammer and net lists.

PS: I have no idea who the "loyal 32" are.

Ok, so you are playing in a much more casual setting, i asked because in anything other then a casual, space marines especially 10 man tac squads are very bad.

Loyal 32 are 30 guards men, 2 commanders for the easy 5 CP for sub 200 points.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

I'll respond to this as I almost always take 3-4 full Tac Squads, and definitely had the loyal 32 and Castellan in my meta. The loyal 32 is no problem. The Castellan WAS a problem, but not anymore.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

I'll respond to this as I almost always take 3-4 full Tac Squads, and definitely had the loyal 32 and Castellan in my meta. The loyal 32 is no problem. The Castellan WAS a problem, but not anymore.

Oh yeah now the castellen is a much rarer sight, but my point still is, seeing 10man tac squads in a competative settings is a rare sight as they kinda just suck.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

I'll respond to this as I almost always take 3-4 full Tac Squads, and definitely had the loyal 32 and Castellan in my meta. The loyal 32 is no problem. The Castellan WAS a problem, but not anymore.

Oh yeah now the castellen is a much rarer sight, but my point still is, seeing 10man tac squads in a competative settings is a rare sight as they kinda just suck.

I get that it's a common sentiment, I just don't agree. They're units without a pre-ordained purpose, but that doesn't make them suck. You just have to define their role yourself, and they can shift that role from game to game, which I like, personally.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Eligius wrote:
I always take 3 full Tactical squads in my 2000pts Salamander army.and they haven't let me down yet.

Curious if you play competativly or just casually, were castellens popular in your area or are the loyal 32 big in your area?

I'll respond to this as I almost always take 3-4 full Tac Squads, and definitely had the loyal 32 and Castellan in my meta. The loyal 32 is no problem. The Castellan WAS a problem, but not anymore.

Oh yeah now the castellen is a much rarer sight, but my point still is, seeing 10man tac squads in a competative settings is a rare sight as they kinda just suck.

I get that it's a common sentiment, I just don't agree. They're units without a pre-ordained purpose, but that doesn't make them suck. You just have to define their role yourself, and they can shift that role from game to game, which I like, personally.

Which can be said about aanay unit, but the problem with tac marines is that what ever role they fill, other units can do it better and usually for cheaper.

The best squad of tacticals is a 0 man. Ultra garbage unit.