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.

I say that one of the strengths of the SM dex is the array of SC's you can choose from. They all do something different and can add more character to your army.

I wish people would just stop comparing tacticals and grey hunters. They are different units that perform different roles. Tacticals camp objectives with support where as grey hunters are more of a participant in the active battle.

To the OP:

I have the SM dex and the BA dex. Guess which one I play more with? The SM dex. IMO it is a more balanced codex with a variety of builds. The trick to codex marines is synergy. It is as I like to say a support orgy! Everything in the army has to be supported and relies on its support more than the SW and BA dex's. If you take a good list and know the strengths, you will beat most of the SW and BA cookie cutter lists. Those lists can almost play themselves but many (not all) of the players who play them are just looking for an easy win and do not always understand how their army synergizes. I can personally attest to this statement as most (not all) SW players I play I beat.

I think it is the variety and the weapons we can use XD

Flexibility is one advantage, although Codex: Space Marines seem to do better in shooting rather than close combat. The trick to maximizing on flexibility, however, is using redundancy and synergy. Flexible units need to support each other and concentrate their strength. Conversely, having a range of flexible units means that you can spread that strength around more evenly without worrying about overkill and wasting a shot.

Take a platoon of three Tactical Squads, for example. You wouldn't be better off having one unit with three Melta Guns, one unit with three Missile Launchers, and one unit entirely armed with Bolters, because then you can only engage one unit a turn with Melta Guns, one unit with Missile Launchers, and the Bolters can only be used on AV10 and less. The Imperial Guard can do this because they can have several cheap squads per Troops choice. Cheap squads that Bolters mop up easily, but they have their own drawbacks.

Definitely the Flexibility. Just the whole Combat Squads is amazing when you don't know if your gonna play kill points of objectives.

You can take the 2 min Troop squads, and still have 4 scoring units. Meaning you have more versatility and points to spend on cool special stuff.

Most armies need to take atleast 3 - 4 solid(and usually expensive) troops considering the plethora of objective missions. But, you can specialize. Take your two 10 mans with a heavy wep and something special and keep them safe and cheap while your elites/heavy/fast loose wounds on the front line, making a game where you still have 4 scoring by the end and the enemy would have had to put his on the line and loose them.

Not to mention you can effectively double your FoC.

Yep Space Marines rule. FOR THE EMPEROR!

I have to agree with some of the points made so far. The Chapter Master and vanguard are not worth the points. Honor Guard are also IMO too expensive for what they do.

The Captain is a great investment if you want to take bikes as troops and that right there is something unique to the C:SM. If you are not taking the captain on a bike then you could probably get more use out of a Librarian, chaplain or one of the divergent chapter characters.
I'll chime in on tacticals and say that I don't think they are junk or bad but I do feel that they are expensive for what you get from them.

Cheers,
~Volkan

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:Tacticals aren't as great as Grey Hunters or BA Assault Squads, but I certainly wouldn't rate them as a bad/garbage troop unit.

grey hunters are junk too. people get all excited because they have an extra attack. whoopy. BA assault squads are what a good troop choice looks like.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

BA assault squads are nothing compared to Grey hunters.

We are 3 points cheaper per model
We have counterattack (I.E. we are not screwed if we get charged)
We have Wolf Standards, one of the best items for its points in the game.
We come with bolters, bolt pistols, and CCW base.
We dont lose close combat attacks when we take special weapons.
Our Sgts (Wold Guard) are cheaper than yours and our PF is 5 points cheaper as well.
We dont rely on a 50+ point 1 wound Free Killpoint giveaway to give us FNP and Furious Charge. Because we dont need it.

Plus the armies around them. Nothing you take is going to save you from 15 Missile Launchers firing at 6 seperate targets every turn. And I dare you to take a raider, because thats just another free Killpoint for me when I pop it with my 2 MM/HF speeders.

What do you have?
A 1/6 chance to be fearless and have FC,
a 50+ point 1 wound Free Killpoint giveaway to give you FNP and Furious Charge
and a 200+ point Stormraven that will be shot out of the sky first turn.

ignore what Abbadonfidels says.

he just trolls threads to say that SM are bad and likes to argue the point. He also clearly doens't know what he is talking about as GH are among the top 5 best troops choices in the game(among Ork boyz, BA assault squads, Kabalite Warriors, and IG veteran squads)

I agree with Grey Templar: AbbadonFidelis is the sort of poster that's best seconded to one's Ignore list. That said, I'm pretty excited to read his witty retort to zeekill's manifesto.

KingCracker wrote:
And this folks, is what a BA fan boi sounds like.

sigh.... somehow I'm perceived as the instigator when I respond to this kind of stuff, so I guess I'll just let it go.

OP: if you just want to win, and dont care about having fun with your friends, then sure paint them red, and start playing BA. Or paint them greyish and play SW. Both those armies are REALLY good and are much easier to win with. That doesnt mean that the C: SM are junk. Really, you can ignore most of what AF is saying about them.

OP asked what was wrong with codex marines. I told him nothing. did you read my original response? I didn't say codex marines are junk at all. If you disagree with what I'm saying then let's have a discussion. But if you don't even know what I'm saying how is it possible?
AF

lets chill a bit guys this is borderline flaming...

brother thunderer wrote:
so...you are saying a 10 man, 155 point 2 meltagun squad with 30 attacks in almost every situation is junk...?

yes. that's what I'm saying. quantity of attack strategies dont work in a meta where every other model is high toughness, feel no pain, has a 2+ save, etc.

Also, Rhinoes are meant to get their cargo mid-field. Deploy 12 inches in, move 12, pop smoke. They just done their job.

once the transport gets blown away the guys are stranded. no mobility = no options. rhinos aren't hard to kill. you want mobility and options at all stages of the game not just on the 1st 2 turns.

more over, Have you not heard of the concept throw-away units? Like, an ork player bringing grots because they are cheap troop choices? for 75 points, scouts do their job of holding a point while being dirt cheap. Stop looking at things just for pure combat ability.

I have indeed. at 16 points a man tacticals dont qualify. dont recall the exact cost of grey hunters but they're comparable. if you're going to throw something away why throw away a tactical instead of a scout?

The advantage of combat tactics is denying assault armies the ability to charge a unit they need dead. I have screwed over so many other players with that trick.

sure. until they figure out that they can prevent you from doing this just by not shooting you. you save maybe 1 casualty vs. bolter pistols, maybe 1 or 2 more vs. plasma weapons. not good enough.

so, by your logic, raiders will suck, because they are base 25 points more and are AV 10 all around? The more and more I see what you have to say, the more I realize how little you know about the game.

sigh..... again I'm going to let the insult go and just address the issue. raiders are fast enough to reliably deliver the units they carry, which are close combat specialists. their destination is the enemy and once they get there they've done their job. since tacticals are supposed to be flexible rather than specialists they require options at all phases of the game. should have clarified earlier.
AF


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:Tacticals aren't as great as Grey Hunters or BA Assault Squads, but I certainly wouldn't rate them as a bad/garbage troop unit.

grey hunters are junk too. people get all excited because they have an extra attack. whoopy. BA assault squads are what a good troop choice looks like.

AF

LOLOLOL.

No. Just no. Grey Hunters are arguably the best troop choice in the game.

well... dont just assert it. argue it. what's so great about them?

I have written a series of articles about Codex: Space Marines on the Capture and Control website. The series is call "And They Shall Know No Fear." Here is the link, check it out you may find it helpful I talk about a lot of the units from the codex and their strengths and weaknesses.

Capture and Control: And They Shall Know No Fear

BTW I was under the influence this thread was about the advantages of C:SM So I will refrain from commenting on GH, BA AS, etc. Despite my fingers itching to weigh in.......

They have 2 base attacks, don't lose any when carrying a Special weapon, have counter attack so it really doesn't matter if they get charged, and have cheaper weapon options. all this for lower Ld.

all the advantages of CSM without any of the disadvantages.

WGBLs are an awsome force multiplier to add to the squads too.

i belive someone said these things a few posts ago too.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:Tacticals aren't as great as Grey Hunters or BA Assault Squads, but I certainly wouldn't rate them as a bad/garbage troop unit.

grey hunters are junk too. people get all excited because they have an extra attack. whoopy. BA assault squads are what a good troop choice looks like.

AF

LOLOLOL.

No. Just no. Grey Hunters are arguably the best troop choice in the game.

well... dont just assert it. argue it. what's so great about them?

I'm a little worried that I need to point it out when others already have in this thread, but very well.

They're cheap. They come with BP+CCW. They have Counter-Attack. Wolf Standard. Mark of the Wulfen. Two PWs per unit common when running them with a Wolf Guard sergeant stand-in.

So. What does that give us? A unit that can shoot far more effectively than a Blood Angel Assault Squad, a unit that can assault just as well as a Blood Angel Assault Squad, and a unit that can take a charge far better than a Blood Angel Assault Squad.

zeekill wrote:
BA assault squads are nothing compared to Grey hunters.

well at least you're making some points. as opposed to just flatly rejecting what I have to say. let's address the points you made.

zeekill wrote:
We are 3 points cheaper per model
We have counterattack (I.E. we are not screwed if we get charged)
We have Wolf Standards, one of the best items for its points in the game.
We come with bolters, bolt pistols, and CCW base.
We dont lose close combat attacks when we take special weapons.
Our Sgts (Wold Guard) are cheaper than yours and our PF is 5 points cheaper as well.
We dont rely on a 50+ point 1 wound Free Killpoint giveaway to give us FNP and Furious Charge. Because we dont need it.

1. yes but you dont get as much for them either. you dont get fast rhinos at a discount and you dont get jump packs, yes?
2. counter attack and wolf standards are nice. not great but nice.
3. BA assault marines get bolt pistols and close combat weapons. BA assault marines dont have bolters but so what? somebody earlier said that bolters were the best standard issue gun in the game. that is.... errrr... just not so. every once in a while a bolter kills something. not often. now somebody will say "ap 5 kills light infantry" yes thats true but has anyone else noticed that light infantry come in massive blobs that can absorb the casualties? and that 4+ cover is everywhere in 5th? why people persist in thinking that ap 5 matters I honestly don't know.
4. losing 1 or 2 attacks in a 10 man unit isnt that big of a deal. each attack from a marine has something like a 1/10 chance of killing a MEQ. the trade just isnt that big of a deal in a unit that is swinging 25 times or more on the charge anyway.
5. 5 points savings on a sergeant? really? this is one of your reasons why grey hunters are awesome? yeesh you all accuse me of min/maxing. anyway the powerfist being cheaper would matter if it was a good idea to take powerfists.... which it isnt.... so like losing bolters its a disadvantage that ends up not affecting much.
6. true you dont have a sanguinary priest around to give up a kill point. then again you dont have a sanguinary priest around to give you feel no pain and furious charge either. its a trade off. kill points dont even matter in 2/3 of the missions. in addition the priest can take wargear that strengthens the overall capabilities of the squad. he's expensive but completely worth it.
7. meanwhile your guys dont get jump packs or fast rhinos at a discount and cant have feel no pain or furious charge. blood angels assault marines ignore almost every shot from a weapon lighter than a plasmagun or in close combat from non-power weapons. they deny the opponent the use of an entire category of weapons, and because they have jump packs they usually get the charge and cannot be deprived of their mobility. all for a few extra points a guy.

Plus the armies around them. Nothing you take is going to save you from 15 Missile Launchers firing at 6 seperate targets every turn. And I dare you to take a raider, because thats just another free Killpoint for me when I pop it with my 2 MM/HF speeders.

where are all those missiles going to go? a BA player can bring a strong army without taking a single vehicle. he can use descent of angels to drop into cover near the long fangs. they'll live through long fangs shooting, but the long fangs won't live through the blood angels assault.

What do you have?

an infinite resevoir of patience.

A 1/6 chance to be fearless and have FC,

forget red thirst. who cares about this?

a 50+ point 1 wound Free Killpoint giveaway to give you FNP and Furious Charge

which only matters in kill points missions. where I get the kill point back by *not* bringing a rhino.

and a 200+ point Stormraven that will be shot out of the sky first turn.

what does a storm raven have to do with anything? I would never take one of these things.
AF


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:They have 2 base attacks, don't lose any when carrying a Special weapon, have counter attack so it really doesn't matter if they get charged, and have cheaper weapon options. all this for lower Ld.

all the advantages of CSM without any of the disadvantages.

WGBLs are an awsome force multiplier to add to the squads too.

i belive someone said these things a few posts ago too.

yes. thankyou for reminding me. space wolf spuds are leadership 8 to boot.
someone may have said them, but that guy in particular did not. I'm directing my comments to individuals not the herd.
AF


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Seaward wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:Tacticals aren't as great as Grey Hunters or BA Assault Squads, but I certainly wouldn't rate them as a bad/garbage troop unit.

grey hunters are junk too. people get all excited because they have an extra attack. whoopy. BA assault squads are what a good troop choice looks like.

AF

LOLOLOL.

No. Just no. Grey Hunters are arguably the best troop choice in the game.

well... dont just assert it. argue it. what's so great about them?

I'm a little worried that I need to point it out when others already have in this thread, but very well.

They're cheap. They come with BP+CCW. They have Counter-Attack. Wolf Standard. Mark of the Wulfen. Two PWs per unit common when running them with a Wolf Guard sergeant stand-in.

So. What does that give us? A unit that can shoot far more effectively than a Blood Angel Assault Squad, a unit that can assault just as well as a Blood Angel Assault Squad, and a unit that can take a charge far better than a Blood Angel Assault Squad.

I know its fun and easy to let other people do your thinking for you, but I was hoping *you* would have something to contribute. I guess you don't so I'll just refer you to my responses to other people's points from here out, k?

whooooooo....

ok, lets all calm down.....


I will not take sides on the debate.
both choices are excellent.
but, for different reasons.
so lets move on, ok?

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
I know its fun and easy to let other people do your thinking for you, but I was hoping *you* would have something to contribute. I guess you don't so I'll just refer you to my responses to other people's points from here out, k?

Well, no. You stated they were crap, then asked me why they were good. It's not my fault that the reasons why they're exceptional troops don't change.

Hopefully having seen it three or four times in a row will start to allow some of it to penetrate, because it's hard to buy anybody's advice as credible when they suggest that Grey Hunters are trash.

@ OP:

GWvsJohn wrote a really good, spot on review of the SM Codex on 3++. You dont have to agree on everything he says, but its a nice short summary (of course repeating some of the true things allready sad in this thread, but I think its worth a look).

http://kirbysblog-ic.blogspot.com/2010/11/gwvsjohns-guide-to-space-marines.html

I'm moving on.
my comments were directed at OP anyway. if you want to convince him I'm wrong go for it.

stompydakka wrote:whooooooo....

ok, lets all calm down.....


I will not take sides on the debate.
both choices are excellent.
but, for different reasons.
so lets move on, ok?

I agree. I come on the tactics forums to discuss tactics and not see another witch hunt against AF. AF's ultra streamlined approach is how he rolls and tends to rub a considerable portion of the forum base the wrong way. If only people took something someone said with a grain of salt...

Nurglitch wrote:I agree with Grey Templar: AbbadonFidelis is the sort of poster that's best seconded to one's Ignore list.

well ignoring me is probably better than falling into fits of apoplectic rage when I express a contrary opinion......
honestly. I'm criticized for repeating the orthodox position one day.......
(there goes AF again, telling people to take vulkan and thunderwolves. he's a powergamer who gets all his ideas off the net. ignore him)
and then over here, when I'm not towing the party line on grey hunters, I get the exact opposite criticism
(no. just no. everyone KNOWS grey hunters are awesome. AF doesnt know anything about this game.)
I mean really. you all need to make up your minds.




and if you really need to ignore me in order to have a pleasant experience on dakka.... by all means. DO IT.

That said, I'm pretty excited to read his witty retort to zeekill's manifesto.

may have disappointed. not in the mood to flame people back tonight. but it's only 8pm eastern standard

Grey Templar wrote:ignore what Abbadonfidels says.

he just trolls threads to say that SM are bad and likes to argue the point. He also clearly doens't know what he is talking about as GH are among the top 5 best troops choices in the game(among Ork boyz, BA assault squads, Kabalite Warriors, and IG veteran squads)

And he's saying that BA assault squads are better than GH. Which are in the top 5 you just mentioned.


durrrrrrrrrrrp. Just because he has an unpopular opinion doesn't mean he's wrong. I would never run a AF style list- not my play style, I think it's a bit wankerish, and I think thats part of why I dislike the guy.

At the same time, I wouldn't want to have a smash against an AF style list, as it would be quite the fight (or maybe I would, since those games are the best...)

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

zeekill wrote:
What do you have?

an infinite resevoir of patience.

You ignored me, so i call BS there

Oh and

AbaddonFidelis wrote:somebody earlier said that bolters were the best standard issue gun in the game. that is.... errrr... just not so.

And then what is? I'd totally rather a boltgun standard issue than a grotblaster

jil wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

zeekill wrote:
What do you have?

an infinite resevoir of patience.

You ignored me, so i call BS there

errrr.... I guess you got me there.
developing a thicker skin as time goes on. I like to think....

jil wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:somebody earlier said that bolters were the best standard issue gun in the game. that is.... errrr... just not so.

And then what is? I'd totally rather a boltgun standard issue than a grotblaster

stern guard bolters with special ammo would be my nominee.

Yeah but I'm gonna argue that the bolter is more the "standard" weapon than sternguards special ammo, due to stormbolters being assault2 bolters, and everyone having a boltgun/stormbolter standard except assault troops (terms/jumppacks).

Now if the "standard" gun was special ammo sternguard bolters then we all know how much of a fan boi we would all be right?

And on the OP's subject, I nominate Sternguard as one of the pro's of the codex space marines. That ammo+combiround is no joke, especially since you can combat squad as you derp pod and hit two targets. Not cool!

yes sternguard are awesome shooters. if special ammo came standard codex sm would be ridiculous. hell if you could pay 5 points for the upgrade it would be ridiculous.

candy.man wrote:
I agree. I come on the tactics forums to discuss tactics and not see another witch hunt against AF. AF's ultra streamlined approach is how he rolls and tends to rub a considerable portion of the forum base the wrong way. If only people took something someone said with a grain of salt...

It's easy to take certain things with a grain of salt.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
grey hunters are junk too. people get all excited because they have an extra attack. whoopy.

That's not one of them. That's simply being wrong. Now, it's not his fault if he simply doesn't know the SW codex - or the way the game works - but it is if he refuses to listen to someone else explain it to him.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:yes sternguard are awesome shooters. if special ammo came standard codex sm would be ridiculous. hell if you could pay 5 points for the upgrade it would be ridiculous.

Isn't that why you can't ?

Ironclads are another thing that codex SM have that no one else has (BA dont have them do they (off the top of my head they dont...right?)). An AV13 walker that gets +1 on the damage chart, has a melta and a flamer and can derp pod in? My friend's codex marine army was lacking two things- he needed a little bit more close combat punch and a sprinkle more of AT. Totally killed two birds with one stone there. I've heard people complain they can't take a dread with 2 CCW's in codex marines- bugger that, gimme an Ironclad!

yeah I like ironclads. just to be clear I dont think c:sm are junk. thats what someone who cant read thought I said. I said tacticals are junk. the codex is good.

Thunderfire cannons,
Forge Masters
Chief Libarians,
Oribital Bombardment
Vulkan
Khan
Scarius
Redeemers
Land speeders that can drop infantry off
And the fact that we can have Conversion Beamers.
Yeah Space Marines Codex is awesome. I love it so much variety but if only you could have chapter traits without characters!