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.

You can also use a cleaver for cracking nuts.

I'd hate to see the state of the tools in your Garages.

How I read this thread's title.

Sounds like it became actually useful in this edition... Can't remember what it did in 3rd/4th, but it was negligible. Maybe that lack of consideration stems from there.

Never thought of that Hyd, good point.

Jihallah wrote:A bunch of stuff

This. Exactly this. The HW gives you a slew of options, even if you don't use them most of the time, for the trivial cost of one boltgun. There are situations where a full Tac squad jumping out and rapid firing is not a good idea, and this is where the heavy weapon is useful. Making the argument that a single boltgun shot is important is silly, particularly if you're simultaneously arguing that a single heavy weapon shot made in the first or second turn of the game is meaningless.

As far as the "right tool for the job" analogy, if I need to chop meat, I'll bring a cleaver. If I need to chop meat and there's no cleaver handy, I'm sure as heck gonna use a scalpel, because I'm not going to get very far trying to karate chop meat with my hands.

Unless, of course, I'm a ninja, in which case I can do everything. But we're not talking about Grey Knights here.

As i've stated before, i've often take a HW because, well everyone does. But have you ever taken the time to think it through? How often does it get to fire? What does it contribute? Then play test with 9 Boltgun Marines and a Special Weapon and see what you think.

They are worth taking if you are running Razorbacks, as you have to combat squad them so therefore the other combat squad may as well become a backfield HW totting unit.

I like rhino's and I like moving and rapid firing, it's what Marines are good at.

mwnciboo wrote:As i've stated before, i've often take a HW because, well everyone does. But have you ever taken the time to think it through? How often does it get to fire? What does it contribute? Then play test with 9 Boltgun Marines and a Special Weapon and see what you think.

Did you miss the part where Jihallah thought it through? Where he stated, in explicit detail, how often it realistically gets to fire and what it contributes? It's great that we've had this thought-provoking exercise, but in this case, the answer really is as obvious as it seems. If a HW is free, even one or two shots a game will more than make up for a single lost bolter round (it's a net loss of one because the HW carrier gets a pistol). If you're putting that much weight on a single boltgun shot, which is what you're doing when you're advocating 9 botlers + SW, I have to question whether you're basing your position on real math or anecdotal probabilities, because that one boltgun round will make such a negligible impact on their performance that it's barely worth mentioning.

I've been using a little 5-man dev squad with 4 MLs in my vanilla marine army for a while now. I love them. Useful but not priority #1 for my opponent, so they usually perform very well. I do actively try to use the signum but I have to really work on remembering it. I've decided I need to really go out of my way to model it on the sergeant in some rather obvious of not obnoxious form so that when I look at the models on the table I remember to use it.

Roboute wrote:

mwnciboo wrote:As i've stated before, i've often take a HW because, well everyone does. But have you ever taken the time to think it through? How often does it get to fire? What does it contribute? Then play test with 9 Boltgun Marines and a Special Weapon and see what you think.

Did you miss the part where Jihallah thought it through? Where he stated, in explicit detail, how often it realistically gets to fire and what it contributes?

I'm pretty darn sure this thread is very good evidence mwnciboo can read english. Did you miss the part where he responded to peoples posts...and responded to mine?
He read it. He disagrees. I still think I'm right (it hard for me not to be, har har ), but he doesn't. We can agree to disagree, or we can seriously hash out the same argument except letting it get angrier and angrier. So If you want to take up the banner of tac HW's all yours.

mwnciboo wrote: I'd hate to see the state of the tools in your Garages.

pretty shmick, but the old tools still look old. Work good 'n' proper though
Some people think it's a little orky to use tools from 40 or more years ago, but god damn we have gone through so many terrible quality Chinese manufactured electric drills, but the German manufactured one my old man bought in the '70's still outperforms them in battery life and durability. I might take a pic of two of our claw hammers and upload it- one was bought around 1995-2000, and the other is dirty old one from about '78.
The newer one's head is bent back, the one from the 70's don't look pretty but certainly was more durable
Kept well and looked after, my allen key set is getting on in the years. I remember last year when my brother bent a couple of his because a teammate tightened up some screws on his equipment too tight and he got impatient
So, yes my electric drill is from the 70's and looks crap. But it's battery lasts longer than a damnable Ryobi, and if I pegged it at the wall it wouldn't break

Hyd wrote:Sounds like it became actually useful in this edition... Can't remember what it did in 3rd/4th, but it was negligible. Maybe that lack of consideration stems from there.

The old signum allowed the unit to reroll 1 missed to-hit, but few units got them (techmarines and...that's really it really). Some books did have them in the armory, so you could give them to certain characters and such.

Hyd wrote:

Victory goes to Hyd.

Jihallah wrote:I'm pretty darn sure this thread is very good evidence mwnciboo can read english. Did you miss the part where he responded to peoples posts...and responded to mine?
He read it. He disagrees. I still think I'm right (it hard for me not to be, har har ), but he doesn't. We can agree to disagree, or we can seriously hash out the same argument except letting it get angrier and angrier. So If you want to take up the banner of tac HW's all yours.

Not angry (internet arguments just aren't worth it) ... those just seemed like odd questions to ask at this point in the discussion. Why ask "What do they really contribute?" when what they contribute has already been hashed out? The logical response in my view would have been to say "I disagree that they contribute what you say they contribute" or "I don't think the benefits of a HW outweigh the costs." Instead, his questions made me question if he had really engaged with the points you made..

On the subject of tools and using the right tool for the job, I've always liked this one.



My point on Contribution to the Battlefield is valid, one shot with Missile launcher at 36" with 9 marines standing still saying " Wtf's going on cannot see anything, give me some targets". It's a question of Mechanization, Marines are mobile, they are a strike force not a garrison force like Guardsman. I'm not saying HW's are bad, but my perception of utility within the game has changed over the years has changed as I have played more and more games against increasingly skilled and canny opponents. The critical feature is that Tac Marines score (as do scouts but they don't survive nearly as well), 2/3 of the time you need to move to the Objectives to capture them. So you are going to have to move and fire almost all the time, as well as to get into the critical 12" range to use the main marines skill, which is Close Quarters Battle (Not Hand to Hand their is a difference). Rapid firing where you hit 2/3 of the time is not to be underestimated.

HW's and Rhino bunkers are great. But again restrictions on movement kick in. I have run all kinds of squads over the years and I find for my playing style (Mech, Melta, Mobility 3M strategy). My HW's in TAC's rarely contribute. If I ran Gunline then great more HW's and cheap LC.

http://captureandcontrol.blogspot.com/2010/09/40k-strategy-3ms-explained.html

On the original point of SIGNUM however, I think it's interesting that some of the old hand Dakka hands like Gitsplitta are agreeing that many people often forget about it. It's a bit like the Ironclad move through Cover.

Jihallah wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Not sure if it counts, but I use my Techmarine's signum to make his squad's meltagun BS5 all the time.
Of course, seeing as it's a single melta shot, they miss anyway, but still...

o_O Techmarines come with signums o_O?

Once you go Black (Templars), you never go back!

This thread was like a trip down memory lane, it reminded me how hilariously cheap BA devs and SW longfangs are, and it reminded me how people fall in love with their own mediocre listbuilding choices.

MikeMcSomething wrote:it reminded me how people fall in love with their own mediocre listbuilding choices.

Must be pretty cold up there in that Ivory Tower Mike.

Until Devastators get their price reduced, I think I'm going to skip them and stick with Vindicators.

Though, if you use them, you should definitely being using that BS5 every time.