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.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Essentially, on a case by case basis - which is all the discussion ever is on Dakka Dakka - it's impossible, because there's always at least one contrarian. Like Insectum7 saying that we can't assume standardized terrain for the purposes of balance discussions. Maybe that's true, but it makes discussion impossible if we don't have a baseline.

Is that observation really contrarian though? Tournament tables seem really different to the tables I often play on, and different than tables displayed in White Dwarf magazines. The density of terrain at tournaments is, I think, generally considered more sparse, and that will absolutely have an effect on unit performance.

Now if this thread was posted in the tournament subforum, or headed with a title that said "tournament" or the OP mentioned tournament play, then you'd have more of a claim. But it doesn't, and this is 40K General, which includes all sorts of players and metas.

Nor does this make discussion impossible, all it does is require a qualifier to statements made. "In context A, unit has more value than context B." instead of lazy statements like "Trash tier, unuseable." Which I'd argue are far worse for discussion than a simple acknowledgement of context dependency.

There isn't a context where Assault Marines have a use over Vanguard though. If you need to fill Fast Attack slots, you have better options. If you honestly NEED the supposed harassment unit, you'd fork up the extra 10 points or realize you didn't need that role in your army at all because, let's face it, Assault Marines don't harass anyone.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
There isn't a context where Assault Marines have a use over Vanguard though. If you need to fill Fast Attack slots, you have better options. If you honestly NEED the supposed harassment unit, you'd fork up the extra 10 points or realize you didn't need that role in your army at all because, let's face it, Assault Marines don't harass anyone.

Based on how you react to the idea of putting them on the table, they harrass you pretty well.

Jokes aside, the benefits of the Fly keyword on a unit are still good, and extra mobility makes them less pants than tacticals for board utility.

And this is just a though, based on a thing I remembered just recently (and I'm not laying out as a thing just yet as I'd have to dig into some math with codexes I don't have on me at the moment): has anyone looked at them as a means for dealing with flyers like the Hemlock?

Again Vangaurd do it better if they make it in as flailing chainswords against vehicals isn't great at producing results.
Also Vanguard can equip storm shields to hopefully weather the overwatch

Ice_can wrote:
Again Vangaurd do it better if they make it in as flailing chainswords against vehicals isn't great at producing results.
Also Vanguard can equip storm shields to hopefully weather the overwatch

So Vanguard do it better by being a heck more expensive to take Storm Shields?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And my question wasn't "who does it best" but rather a "can they be used for X?"

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
Again Vangaurd do it better if they make it in as flailing chainswords against vehicals isn't great at producing results.
Also Vanguard can equip storm shields to hopefully weather the overwatch

So Vanguard do it better by being a heck more expensive to take Storm Shields?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And my question wasn't "who does it best" but rather a "can they be used for X?"

Seeing as Hemlocks fly, no they don't do that.

Also the ability to take a single Storm Shield or two is pretty awesome for tanking. Not that expensive per model too.

Do storm shields actually have a cost? My codex is on iBooks and the storm shield states effects but no cost...

Storm shields are the princely sum of 5 points for a 3++

Also Vanguard can equip power weapons or thunder hammers so can be tailored to your intended target.

Ok so thinking about the VVs, if I gave them the jump packs and kept them close to a Chaplain with the jump pack, using Templar tactics, I could gain from:
-Litanies of Hate: re-roll failed fight phase hits,
-Righteous Zeal: re-roll failed charges,

If I had Chaplain Grimaldus, I could also gain from extra attack on 6+ hit rolls for units within 6”, however he can’t have a jump pack, can he? If not I couldn’t deep strike nor get around as fast.

He also can’t change his gear can he? The generic chaplain can have a power fist, bolt gun, pistol or combi.

So, which would be better? Generic chaplain or Grimaldus?

Also, best load outs for VVs with chaplain, and the chaplain himself?

Generic Chaplain can get access to the Crusaders Helm. It isn't as good as giving it to a generic Chapter Master, but it WOULD increase the LD buff as well if that was important to you.

Grimaldus just doesn't fulfill a need for the army I find.

What equipment should I give the generic chaplain then?

Also I was thinking of giving the crusader helm to another hq, possibly one running around with 2/3 crusader squads...

I don’t know I’m confused. I’m not sure what units to team up with what HQs. Could give crusader squads grimaldus because he can’t have jump packs anyway, then maybe team up a Captain with some termies or honour guard or idk

The issue as I see it is that assault Marines were left behind in the changes of the last few editions.

To start with, their weapon options no longer make much sense when you can't flame something after you deepstrike, and a single eviscerator or melta bomb can't kill a vehicle in one turn. In previous editions two mobile flamers were actually pretty scary to hordes, and a single melta bomb or round of combat with an eviscerator could kill a land raider. The core rules of the edition have moved on (and probably for the best) but the assault marine squad loadout never evolved along with it.

They also suffer from the nerfs in durability that came with the new AP system. This has been discussed elsewhere ad nauseum, but i think it's worth bringing up since assault Marines are typically not protected by transports and are expected to see some close combat, so they definitely feel the reduction in durability as much or more than any other Marine.

Additionally, there is another unit that does everything assault Marines do but better, the VV. In previous editions this was okay because the VV were elites and FoC slots had to be budgeted. It was entirely possible in other editions for one unit to be better than another, but used less frequently because it competed for a more valuable FoC slot with other units. Now that we have practically unlimited FoC slots, units are either the best unit that can do their job, or they aren't used. And with allies, this is exacerbated to the point where this is on a per faction basis rather than a per codex one. Why take assault Marines if you can take VV? And really, why take VV when you can take DC or Scions? You can do this with most units that don't see any play.

I think the only solution to these issues is either to give these lackluster or redundant units new abilities that let them fill useful roles in unique ways, and/or to return to more limitations in what is allowed for list building with things like a single FoC.

The easiest way to fix the VV issue would be to clarify their roles. For example, reduce VV to 5 man squads max and remove the double chainsword option, but let them drop in 4+D3" away instead of 9" (so they usually make the charge and sometimes even get into melta range). Then give assault Marines +1 attack on the turn they charge, and make the eviscerator do 2d3 damage against vehicles and monsters. This would clarify the role of VV to a precision deepstrike unit and assault Marines to large mobile assault units with lots of attacks. Then let BA take them as troops.

ShaunyP wrote:
What equipment should I give the generic chaplain then?

Also I was thinking of giving the crusader helm to another hq, possibly one running around with 2/3 crusader squads...

I don’t know I’m confused. I’m not sure what units to team up with what HQs. Could give crusader squads grimaldus because he can’t have jump packs anyway, then maybe team up a Captain with some termies or honour guard or idk

If you aren't gonna go for the Crusaders Helm for him, maybe go for the Armor Indomitus I guess. That's assuming you're going the Jump Pack route and you want to increase his durability.

Power Fist is generally an okay buy now thanks to the more consistent rerolls to hit and having more attacks base than last edition. They're a less dangerous weapon than before but honestly I don't think that matters too much now.