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.

Bharring wrote:
There are a lot of MEQ that are lower than SM Tacs.

Plague Marines
Noise Marines
Rubrics
Berserkers
PAGK
CSM Tacs

Also, Marines do rather well at Maelstrom. Put a 5-man Tac squad on something with a Rhino or Pod, and the opponent needs to do more than sneeze. And any contesting unit that Flats Out to do so eats Krak up the tailpipe next turn.

Sorry, but there's NO way Plague Marines are worse than Tacticals. They're about even once you take into account free transports.

Yeah, I just let that one go. Plague marines are pretty stupid good, actually.

Martel732 wrote:
Yeah, I just let that one go. Plague marines are pretty stupid good, actually.

They're not stupid good. Just...good. REALLY expensive though, and the fact their Bolters don't have the Poisoned rule is pretty silly.

So I've added a bunch more, and my "Not sure where to place" list is growing.

Wyches are still winning, but its very close with those odd Gretchins I had never heard of.

So, if Plague Marines belong above Tacs, are they still below Crusader Squads? SM Bikes? FW? Dire Avengers?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Also, did I miss any troops that people already mentioned?)

I know I've talked up DA, but vs plague marines, it's really hard to choose. They are so DIFFERENT. Plague marines are true generalists with durability that tacs can't touch. They even have poison melee attacks for MCs. And T5 FNP keeps them alive vs MCs much longer than T4 alone. Their cost and lack of mobility are their ONLY two drawbacks.

Crispy78 wrote:
Wyches are pretty bad. Can't think of anything off the top of my head that I'd put below them.

You seem to have CSMs fairly high. Am not convinced on that - I'd probably directly swap them with Harlequins.

CSM Cultists are missing from your list. I'd put them around the mid-range somewhere. All I really use mine for is holding a back-field objective until someone looks at them a bit funny and they all die or run away, but at least they're dirt cheap...

I agree, you rank csm too high due to bias. CSM belong on the very bottom...Cultists are 5ppm not as cheap or as good as guardsmen.

Can someone please explain to me how Wyches are worse than Genestealers?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 dan2026 wrote:
The Genestealer Cult 'Favoured Disciples' seem pretty solid as assault troops.

WS/S/I 4, 3 attacks, Grenades, AP 5 rending, fearless.

Able to infiltrate and 1st turn charge in formation.

These guys are hot gak.

Wow that's nice.

Genestealers be crying right now...

You must not have children. No parent is upset when their children turn out better than they did, that's the goal of parenting after all.

I can just see a brood of Genestealers on the sidelines cheering on the cultists. With a broodlord acting like Randy Marsh in The Losing Edge episode (I'm not allowed to stand up for myself?! I thought this was Macragge! Huh?! Isn't this Macragge?! I'm sorry, I thought this was Macragge!)

Bharring wrote:Deschenus,
Do you still feel that FW should be below Tacs when not considering formations? If so, could you further elaborate as to why?

They absolutely belong WAY lower than Tacs. If they're not in a formation, then that means they're CAD, which is not really of much use to FWs but is immensely powerful on Tacticals. The reason for this is that FWs do not have the sturdiness of Tacticals nor ATSKNF or Fearless, which makes using them to hold/contest objectives with ObSec really sketchy. Add on top of that a lack of a quality deployment method (Devilfish being way overcosted for what it is at the end of the day) and there's no way FWs are above Tacticals out of Formations.

To nuance things, though, I think Breachers and Strikers need to be looked at separatedly.

Deschenus Maximus wrote:

Bharring wrote:Deschenus,
Do you still feel that FW should be below Tacs when not considering formations? If so, could you further elaborate as to why?

They absolutely belong WAY lower than Tacs. If they're not in a formation, then that means they're CAD, which is not really of much use to FWs but is immensely powerful on Tacticals. The reason for this is that FWs do not have the sturdiness of Tacticals nor ATSKNF or Fearless, which makes using them to hold/contest objectives with ObSec really sketchy. Add on top of that a lack of a quality deployment method (Devilfish being way overcosted for what it is at the end of the day) and there's no way FWs are above Tacticals out of Formations.

To nuance things, though, I think Breachers and Strikers need to be looked at separatedly.

In a game all about the shooting phase, I'd have to disagree.

Happyjew,
Feel free to convince me/us of the opposite.

Wyches I've always seen as something that might slow me down, but cost way too much. Genestealers are something I should be able to shoot off the board, but would tear me up if I don't.

I see Genestealers as better (5+ save, hit a lot harder), but I'm not sure.

neither are ever going to get a save on overwatch in most cases but wych's do get a decent one in combat but have nearly no offensive out put.

Stealers are more fragile but can kill things if they can get close enough to touch them. Shame that's a very unlikely.

I don't even know the stats or abilities of wyches.

Martel732 wrote:

In a game all about the shooting phase, I'd have to disagree.

Feel free, but know that I have both a SM army and a Tau army, and while I use Tacs regularly, I'd rather nail my nuts to a wooden plank than use FWs, so...

So what Tau troops do you use?

Kroot or Crisis teams (FSE)

Bharring wrote:
Happyjew,
Feel free to convince me/us of the opposite.

Wyches I've always seen as something that might slow me down, but cost way too much. Genestealers are something I should be able to shoot off the board, but would tear me up if I don't.

I see Genestealers as better (5+ save, hit a lot harder), but I'm not sure.

Genestealer pros: High WS - against almost everyone thy are hitting on 3+. Very few units have as high a WS as Genestealers. Most who are that high are single model units. Rending - Genestealers come with an AP5 rending weapon, and can buy an additional CCW for 4 ppm (apparently AP6 is worth 2 points). High Leadership - thanks to Leadership 10, they are very likely to pass morale tests.
Genestealer cons: No ranged weapon - well this is expected from a straight melee unit with a BS0. Of course this means no softening up an enemy before charging in, and no softening up an enemy about to charge in. No grenades - this is what kills genestealers. Due to poor armor (5+) and the fact that a majority of weapons are AP5 or better, Genestealers must rely on cover to get to where they need to be. And if the opponent has any template weapons, they are even more screwed. Since they have to rely on cover most of the time, any time they charge into melee, they are going at Init 1.

Let's assume a 140 point unit of both - 14 Wyches (no upgrades) vs 10 Genestealers (no upgrades). If the Wyches get a chance to shoot before the genestealers charge, that's 3 dead genestealers (assuming they have 5+ cover). If the Genestealers charge, they will lose another to Overwatch. Genestealers are at almost half strength, and the wyches haven't even done what they do best - melee. Wyches strike first in melee (no grenades remember), with 28 attacks. 14 hit, approximately 5 wound, 2 saved. Genestealers (who now finally get to attack) are down to 3 models. 9 attacks each, 6 will hit, 4 will wound, going right through the wyches armor. And then 2 will pass their invulnerable save. Assuming genestealers pass morale, the 3 remaining go first. and kill 1 Wych. The 11 remaining wyches finish off the squad.

If hte genestealers don't charge, the wyches are free to whittle them down with shooting a bit more before they charge in.

Skitarii troops of both flavors (Vanguard or Rangers) are no where near being the worst troops in the game. In fact points wise and effectiveness they're some of the best along with weapon choices, upgrades and relics.

Deschenus Maximus wrote:
Kroot or Crisis teams (FSE)

Interesting. I agree that crisis suits are way better troops than FW or tacs. What makes you like tacs more than FW?

Vanguard are a deadly unit particularly if you get them a vehicle from an ally force.

Happyjew,
Head to head, yeah, Wyches win. But against anything else, all they have is a decent amount of S3. And Genestealers have Rending. That threatens almost anything. Throw in T4, and it should make quite the difference.

I see your point, though. Genestealers probably need to drop a bit. Perhaps they are worse than Wyches.

Ogryns are very lacking.

Stats wise they're O.K. but they're point cost for said O.K. statsline is plain insult.

Martel732 wrote:
What makes you like tacs more than FW?

Well, it goes back to ObSec at the end of the day. FWs are just not good at taking or holding objectives from other things that have ObSec (or anything, really). While bolters are lackluster weapons compared to pulse rilfes/carbines/blasters, Tacs are MUCH better at leveraging ObSec thanks to 1) far better resilience (T4, 3+ save) 2) ATSKNF (making them immune to be swept in combat) 3) far better mobility/deployment options (drop pods, Khan scouted rhinos/razors, Raptor natural scouting). Tacs are unlikely to ever win you a game thanks to their overwhelming firepower (though now that Gravcannons are available to them, they are MUCH more deadly than they've ever been) BUT if you play them smart, their ObSec-ness can often mean the difference between a loss and a tie and between a tie and a win.

If Firewarriors had Fearless and a transport option that wasn't hilariously overcosted, we'd be having a different discussion, probably.

Bharring wrote:
I see your point, though. Genestealers probably need to drop a bit. Perhaps they are worse than Wyches.

It's the lack of grenades that's the real big problem. If they could strike at I6, they would be doing a lot more good, but with just a T4 5+ save, they can't take hits.

SM scouts, Skitrai, SoB squads, horrors, necron immortals and plaguebearers should be above fire warriors, in this order.

Fire warriors are good, but most non tau players see the gun and overrate them as they miss just how destructivly poor the statline is. The ones I listed however, seriously underrated, and at the very least above tac marines. Especially scouts.

Breachers are probably just under noise marines.

Corsaiers and kataphons are somewhere high. Not sure where, but probably both above horrors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SM scouts, Skitrai, SoB squads, horrors, necron immortals and plaguebearers should be above fire warriors, in this order.

Fire warriors are good, but most non tau players see the gun and overrate them as they miss just how destructivly poor the statline is. The ones I listed however, seriously underrated, and at the very least above tac marines. Especially scouts.

Breachers are probably just under noise marines.

Corsaiers and kataphons are somewhere high. Not sure where, but probably both above horrors.

Yeah, no grenades does suck for a squshy CC unit. But Wyches feel their pain. If either had Grenades, they would make quite a jump.

The reason I'm hesitent to move Genestealers below Wyches is what they threaten. If there is a squad of Genestealers, unless I'm playing blobs/hordes, I need to deal with them. Otherwise they'll eat almost anything. Wyches, on the other hand, don't threaten a lot. And even then, their threat is typically to tie something up, not kill it. So I need to kill those Genestealers. Not so much the Wyches.

It is far too easy to kill either. That is true. I beleivd its typically a bit harder to kill the Wyches. However, those Venoms shouldn't be discounted.

Head to head, incidental firepower beats no firepower. If you start facing other things, though, it gets a lot more even. Picture Genestealers fighting Tac Marines, or other MEQ/TEQ, and you might know what I'm thinking.

From personal experience, a Wych squad that gets into CC slows me down or I need to relieve the unit. A Genestealer squad generally kills whatever.

I still think its Wyches, but enough of a point has been made to move them. We can always revisit it.

In defense of the wyches, who mind you are still underwhelming especially if you consider their fluff, they gain their main offensive capacity when they reach turn 4 (or 3 under certain circomstances). The combat drug bonus for either an extra attack, strength or WS also help improve significantly their damage output. A charge from a wych squad with furious charge and one of those bonuses can hurt rather seriously (especially with a Succubus leading them). Wyches are terrible unit choice, but a single squad of them with a Succubus in a raider lurking around waiting for furious charge to kick in isn't a bad investement since they are a very low target priority and can quicly get in position for their charge in the late stage of the game, sweep a squad of an objective and be a little bit scary to the unsuspecting foe. Its the best use I found for them.

Tacs better than scouts?

Epr,
You make good points.

I'd argue that, in a more relaxed meta, even Genestealers and Wyches (and everything else there) have a place. Beer and pretzels (figuratively) and a fun meta can make almost anything work.

Is it the consensus that Scouts are better than Tacs? For some roles, certainly, but with everything Tacs can do, and with all their options, what do people think?