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.

Seaward wrote:

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.

That's an easy enough grain of salt. Look at a base marine vs grey hunter, without upgrades- because ultrastreamlined is how we run AF armies yeah?. 1 extra attack, acute senses (so rarely used) and counter-attack. So all he missed was the counter attack, which isn't that much of a game breaker, especially not in the ultra streamlined approach

Asherian Command wrote: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!

I think Vulcan Khan and Land speeder storms are the only "awesome" things on the list. The others either are in other marine codices, are "good" or "solid", or are awesome in a fun sense (MotF/TH/Conversion Beamer= ultimate apocalyptic future biker), not the tactical sense. But I'm totally agreeing on the "chapter traits without characters" bit.

Ok. But I love forgemasters thanks to venerable dreadnoughts. OH YEAH Iron Clads.

The lower Leadership is an interesting disadvantage when you consider that the utility of Leadership isn't linear.

A unit with Ld9, for example, passes Leadership tests ~83% of the time. A unit with Ld8 passes those same tests ~72% of the time. A unit with Ld7 passes those same tests ~58%

Why would I mention a unit with Ld7? Because that's what a unit of Grey Hunters is going to have after its been hit with a Whirlwind barrage (-1 for ordnance barrage).

If the Grey Hunters take a Wolf Guard to increase their leadership and add the combat that a Sergeant adds to a Tactical Squad, then they have the choice of either a second special weapon or riding in a Rhino or Drop Pod.

But suppose you decided to go with the Razorback for your Grey Hunters, since a minimum-sized squad and a Wolf Guard can fit in there with a special weapon. So you have the dude with the special weapon, the dude with the flesh-ch-I mean 'Mark of the Wulfen', the dude with the Icon of 1, the Wolf Guard, and the guy with the Power Fist. Why, that's a complex unit!

Except now it's even easier to kill and has even less firepower. Not such a bad thing if the enemy obliges you by closing. But not great if they decide to engage you at ranges greater than 12". Codex Space Marines can do both better thanks to Combat Squads.

And it's interesting that Grey Hunters don't have A2, they have A1 in combination with a pistol, a close combat weapon, and a rapid fire weapon. That means that they don't get A1+1 for having a Powerfist and a Bolt Pistol. And they only get A1+1 for having a Power Weapon. There's a reason special close combat weapons on Chaos Space Marine Chosen are bad, because unlike Space Marine Veterans and Wolf Guard, they only have A1.

Tactical Space Marines only have A1, but you know what's better than 2 attacks on the charge, or even 3 attacks on the charge? Bolter: S4 AP5, Rapid Fire. If you can take it on in close combat, you're better off rapiding firing and moving into template range. If you can't take it on in close combat, at least you can run away (Combat Tactics), and you're better off setting up shop and using the Heavy Weapon/Combi-Weapon to kill it.

AbaddonFidelis wrote: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.

What is it about tactical squads that make them "junk"?

Certainly their offensive output is minimal, but to say they are junk implies you should not take them at all. I think you fail to realize that tactical squads are primarily objective holders. In this role, they are actually pretty decent. Something that makes them better at this role is another so called "junk" item, the rhino.

Really, its your analysis that is junk. You are unable to see value in anything except offensive output.

Being an SW player myself, grey hunters are very good, but they are not the best. Why? Just look at other codices:

DE has Wyches, now those are awesome in CC.
Tyranids have Genestealers, again these guys are scarier.
BA has jumppack TROOPS? With force multiplier everywhere in the codex?
Chaos marines have T5 troops on PA. Now thats hard to move off an obs.

To anyone that says Grey hunters are "cheap" as a CC unit, not true. sure, their base cost is 15 points, and then you start adding toppings, like MotW, wolf standard, wolf guard and power weapons. And you'll see that their costs bump up high. Also, additional attacks ARENT that great, but hell, it beats having only 1. If you want them cheap just leave them as is. Keep them rapidfiring from with 2 special weapons and suck up assault with Counter attack. Now thats CHEAP.

And I agree with AF that BA ASM marines are better. ASMs are scoring, and they are either using their jumppack, or zooming 18 inch with their fast transport. They are either avoiding combat from a more powerful unit, or they will bully other poorer troop choices from other codices, which is how god intended troops to be.

If you look at them in a vacuum, BA ASMs aren't much of a big deal. And then you start putting in Sanguinary priests and librarians (shield and unleash rage) that are force multipliers other codices just dont have, esp SW.

Regarding to C:SM players saying how awesome tac squads are because you can split them, Im really having trouble seeing this as an advantage coz most of the time I see them played, they just get brutalized by 90% of the units in a competitive army list. 5 man Tacs just dont cut it, and that single heavy weapon isnt enough to justify splitting them into 2.

True, that tacs are kinda poorer compared to GH and ASMs, but hey you dont have any choice right?

Regarding Plasma Cannons. I dont wanna burst your bubble, bud, but if you are playing games where your plasma cannon dev squad is owning, you might have really poor competitiion there. Im just saying. Against competitive players, the best case scenario for your plasma cannon is killing a bunch of marines from a popped transport. Most of the time they'd be shooting just 1 marine behind cover. Not very impressive at all.

AbaddonFidelis wrote: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.

OMG, if GHs are junk, then hardly any other troops can be considered good

Dracos wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote: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.

What is it about tactical squads that make them "junk"?

Certainly their offensive output is minimal

hold on. stop right there. that's it. nothing else about them matters if they don't kill stuff.

dracos wrote:
I think you fail to realize that tactical squads are primarily objective holders.

just get something to kill the enemy and hold objectives. I mean really. is that too much to ask?

dracos wrote:
In this role, they are actually pretty decent. Something that makes them better at this role is another so called "junk" item, the rhino.

ok I'll give you that. if you don't expect them to do anything except sit on an objective they're fine. low expectations if you ask me (which you did.)

Really, its your analysis that is junk.

like so much rain going pitter patter on the roof.

You are unable to see value in anything except offensive output.

I could just hug you.
AF

Asherian Command wrote:Thunderfire cannons,
Chief Libarians,
Oribital Bombardment
Redeemers

TF are ok but way too fragile. If by chief you mean Tigirus, he's a bit vulnerable even with all his powers. Only OB worth using is probably the one with pedro. otherwise theres not much to it. Everyone else gets a redeemer after the 5th SM book

Asherian Command wrote: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!

Thanks for staying on topic I'd have to say I disagree with Khan and Orbital Bombardments being anything great but at least Khan has a place in certain lists. The other thing you mention that I love are Land Speeder Storms full of scouts. Take 5 scouts w/ bp/ccw and give the Sarge a PF/Combimelta or Combiflamer throw them into a Storm w/MM and watch all the turn 1 assault or outflanking shenanigans happen. This might be one of my new favorite units in C:SM I only started using them about 3 weeks ago but they have proven to be a great compliment to my Salamanders.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:
Also suggesting that Rhinos are terrible units is ridiculous. For 35pts they are an absolute steal and for a list which wants to push into the mid field they are much better than Razorbacks as you can fire out the top. If you want to do a Razor spam list then SW probably do that better anyway.

rhinos dont do their main job - providing mobility to the squad - very well because they constantly get zapped by autocannons meltaguns lascannons etc. you need a more reliable mobility option.

So, if a Rhino isn't a reliable mobility option, what is? Wave Serpent? Almost 3 times more expensive. Raider? Their armor is about as useful as a wet paper bag. No the Rhino isn't perfect. But it is still a pretty reliable transport, and does its job most of the time.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

The two most important abilities the nilla Codex has are actually missing from the list of stuff AF posted. Combat Squads and Combat/Chapter Tactics are imo what set the standard Marine codex apart from the others, they give you an unmatched flexibility with your list. The key thing to remember is that you are not BA or SW and there is no point playing or designing your list in the same way.

combat tactics is good on good units. splitting a bad unit in two just gives you two smaller bad units.
the ability to run away on command isnt the kind of go-for-the-throat aggression that I look for in a unit.
but thats just me.
AF

go-for-the-throat aggression? I'm surprised you ever win, with an attitude like that. Because any general worth their salt knows that a tactical retreat is often times more wise than sacrificing your men.

Hmmm can we drop the banter about the GH? Make your own topic about the worth of GH and take it from there

Other advantages of Codex Marines not mentioned earlier are the 12 model capacity on the Classic Land Raider and Drop pod. Both of these have 10-man capacity in the newer codex. Being able to attach an HQ to the 5 man termy squad in a lascannon LR is a big bonus.

Yuber wrote:
If you look at them in a vacuum, BA ASMs aren't much of a big deal. And then you start putting in Sanguinary priests and librarians (shield and unleash rage) that are force multipliers other codices just dont have, esp SW.

So you're suggesting that if we start looking at units outside of the vacuum of that unit's statline, Space Wolves actually get WORSE?

Why is it so popular for guys riding on the newer codices' bandwagons to imply that their 'dex really isn't shiny and awesome compared to something written in, say, 3rd Edition, or even the beginning of 5th?

I know the answer, I just want to hear yours.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihallah wrote:

Seaward wrote:

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.

That's an easy enough grain of salt. Look at a base marine vs grey hunter, without upgrades- because ultrastreamlined is how we run AF armies yeah?. 1 extra attack, acute senses (so rarely used) and counter-attack. So all he missed was the counter attack, which isn't that much of a game breaker, especially not in the ultra streamlined approach

That's pretty disingenuous, though. The question wasn't, "What're the advantages of Codex Space Marines in an ultra-streamlined list?" so considering it solely from that perspective is...fatuous. If I ran nothing but DoA lists, I might not value Land Raiders much, but saying that they're "junk" wouldn't exactly be telling the whole story, would it?

PraetorDave wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
combat tactics is good on good units. splitting a bad unit in two just gives you two smaller bad units.
the ability to run away on command isnt the kind of go-for-the-throat aggression that I look for in a unit.
but thats just me.
AF

go-for-the-throat aggression? I'm surprised you ever win, with an attitude like that. Because any general worth their salt knows that a tactical retreat is often times more wise than sacrificing your men.

Well when I play against my Orky friend I have two basic strats- I can shoot him up as he comes and hold the line for a counter attack when he reaches me, or i can reach him midway and butt heads to take the initiative in the brawl ahead- but both strats know that there is no glory in pointless defeat. Aggressive play style doesn't mean red army human wave tactics.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

Powerguy wrote:
Also suggesting that Rhinos are terrible units is ridiculous. For 35pts they are an absolute steal and for a list which wants to push into the mid field they are much better than Razorbacks as you can fire out the top. If you want to do a Razor spam list then SW probably do that better anyway.

rhinos dont do their main job - providing mobility to the squad - very well because they constantly get zapped by autocannons meltaguns lascannons etc. you need a more reliable mobility option.

So, if a Rhino isn't a reliable mobility option, what is? Wave Serpent? Almost 3 times more expensive. Raider? Their armor is about as useful as a wet paper bag. No the Rhino isn't perfect. But it is still a pretty reliable transport, and does its job most of the time.

well the best thing is to not have a transport at all. take blood angels assault marines or space marine bikers. they're both more mobile than a tac squad + rhino, they give up only 1 kill point instead of 2, they dont force you to waste points on something with 0 offensive potential, and most importantly they don't make your squad's mobility dependent on the survival of a single av 11 tank in a melta rich environment.

if you have to have a dedicated transport out of codex: space marines I'd say drop pod. it's not as mobile as I'd like but there's nothing - nothing - your opponent can do to prevent them from getting in their face. they deliver the goods with regularity. rhinos have a disturbing habit of getting blown up mid field and stranding their occupants, dooming them to quasi-uselessness at best, and hot plasma death at worst.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

The two most important abilities the nilla Codex has are actually missing from the list of stuff AF posted. Combat Squads and Combat/Chapter Tactics are imo what set the standard Marine codex apart from the others, they give you an unmatched flexibility with your list. The key thing to remember is that you are not BA or SW and there is no point playing or designing your list in the same way.

combat tactics is good on good units. splitting a bad unit in two just gives you two smaller bad units.
the ability to run away on command isnt the kind of go-for-the-throat aggression that I look for in a unit.
but thats just me.
AF

go-for-the-throat aggression? I'm surprised you ever win, with an attitude like that. Because any general worth their salt knows that a tactical retreat is often times more wise than sacrificing your men.

yes. many of you would be surprised at how often I win.
AF


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihallah wrote:

Seaward wrote:

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.

That's an easy enough grain of salt. Look at a base marine vs grey hunter, without upgrades- because ultrastreamlined is how we run AF armies yeah?. 1 extra attack, acute senses (so rarely used) and counter-attack. So all he missed was the counter attack, which isn't that much of a game breaker, especially not in the ultra streamlined approach

That's pretty disingenuous, though. The question wasn't, "What're the advantages of Codex Space Marines in an ultra-streamlined list?" so considering it solely from that perspective is...fatuous. If I ran nothing but DoA lists, I might not value Land Raiders much, but saying that they're "junk" wouldn't exactly be telling the whole story, would it?

look this is a tactics thread. I just assume we're here to talk about the most competitive options we can think of. maybe dakka can make a "fun" forum so you guys who want to talk about something else won't feel so hot and bothered all the time.

I play Thousand Sons, any game against marines (Codex, SW, BA or chaos) makes me smile. My bolters are ap3, you see. The games I lose against marines are rare. When I do lose to a meq army it's due to several factors. 1 My opponent has proper list synergy. 2 My opponent understands that mobility is key. 3 My opponent understands target priority, this goes both ways, forcing me to make tough choices on where to shoot and fight and choosing where to correctly fire his guns and assault me. A marine player who follows these 3 rules will give me a run for my money every time.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

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

Whats there to discuss? Im pretty sure the things almost everyone else has responded with covers anything worth debating. I dont play SM, but I have played against them many times, and I can tell that your earlier comments were just WAY off, specially for a new player to hear. The things you said are VERY disheartening for a new player to hear, because they dont have the experience yet to know for themselves that most of what you said was just crap. I dont know if you say the things you do, because you like to get a rise out of others or not, but thats just not how one goes about it.

annabelle wrote:I play Thousand Sons, any game against marines (Codex, SW, BA or chaos) makes me smile. My bolters are ap3, you see. The games I lose against marines are rare. When I do lose to a meq army it's due to several factors. 1 My opponent has proper list synergy. 2 My opponent understands that mobility is key. 3 My opponent understands target priority, this goes both ways, forcing me to make tough choices on where to shoot and fight and choosing where to correctly fire his guns and assault me. A marine player who follows these 3 rules will give me a run for my money every time.

This is completely true. I think a major advantage of C:SM is it's ability to do all those things. 1. You can build lists with good synergy using C:SM 2. Rhinos/Razorbacks/Drop Pods/Raiders/LS Storms can supply you with superb mobility 3. The variety/mobility in the codex can allow you to take units that will force your opponent to make tough (wrong) decisions. Great thoughts annabelle!

kenshin620 wrote:Hmmm can we drop the banter about the GH?

Unfortunately it would appear we can't. Perhaps we will luck out and a MOD will step in at some point and get the thread back on topic for those of us who care about the topic rather than our own personal agendas .

The Advantages of Space Marines:

1. Win every game except those against Necrons.
2. High Armor.
3. High Ballistics Skill
4. High Weapon Skill
5. High Leadership
6. Choose your own chapter
7. Other notable aspects that actual SM players know.

KingCracker wrote:
Whats there to discuss?

well... if there's nothing to discuss.... then stop discussing it. I'll help. <click ignore>

AbaddonFidelis wrote:If you have to have a dedicated transport out of codex: space marines I'd say drop pod. it's not as mobile as I'd like but there's nothing - nothing - your opponent can do to prevent them from getting in their face. they deliver the goods with regularity. rhinos have a disturbing habit of getting blown up mid field and stranding their occupants, dooming them to quasi-uselessness at best, and hot plasma death at worst.

Yet we know the weakness' of all derp pod armies... I see the point, but Rhino's have their places. Different types of squads, different tools etc.

annabelle wrote:I play Thousand Sons, any game against marines (Codex, SW, BA or chaos) makes me smile. My bolters are ap3, you see. The games I lose against marines are rare. When I do lose to a meq army it's due to several factors. 1 My opponent has proper list synergy. 2 My opponent understands that mobility is key. 3 My opponent understands target priority, this goes both ways, forcing me to make tough choices on where to shoot and fight and choosing where to correctly fire his guns and assault me. A marine player who follows these 3 rules will give me a run for my money every time.

Posting Tactical advice in the Tactics forum? Nigh on unheard of!

Shrubs wrote:C:SM is very playable and still one of the top codexes. What really separates them from BA and SW is:
- Librarian, null zone
- Biker troops
- Combat tactics

You got to kidding me, SM are not even in the top tier list anymore, more like tier 2. SW,IG, are the strongest codex in Tournament play or any play

AbaddonFidelis wrote:yes. many of you would be surprised at how often I win.
AF

Depends on how good your opponents are, not if they are 4 years old.
Well, what's your latest performance in any GT or the Ard Boyz?


Vulkan is still pretty awesome for the SMs.

To the OP if he is still listening.

The advantage of the SM codex is it's synergy and flexibility, as a player that went from playing strictly with the Orks codex to adding a SM army I was slightly disappointed with it as I was having a rough time getting used to the play style.

In time though I have learnt how to use synergy and support to it's greatest advantage which has influenced my ork list building and playing in good ways.

Unlike the Orks who can be fairly easy and straight forward to play ie. charge straight and fast and in turn can take the fun out of winning (like against armies that don't have enough weapons to take out my 120+ boys) You always come away with a good feeling when you win with sm because you would have had to have made some good decisions when building that army and playing that game.

I'm quite enjoying the difficulties of that codex myself...

striderx wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:yes. many of you would be surprised at how often I win.
AF

Depends on how good your opponents are, not if they are 4 years old.
Well, what's your latest performance in any GT or the Ard Boyz?

So basically, everything out of AbaddonFidelis' metaphorical mouth is that if you want to win, play Blood Angels. Every other MEQ army isn't worth playing. Well, as someone who enjoys a battle, win or lose, I will agree to disagree. Now off to things that actually matter...

havent said that at all.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
to recapitulate, because alot of our posters seem to have some problems with basic reading comprehension....

a. codex marines are not as strong as blood angels or space wolves but they're a good army and for someone like OP who is just beginning they're a fine army to start with.
b. rhinos and tacticals are the weak points of the SM codex.

AF


Automatically Appended Next Post:
in fact nevermind. I've said what I have to say on this thread. I'm done here.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:

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?

10 grey hunters put out as much dakka as a 10 man tactical squad at the same BS and strength, while putting out twice as many special weapons fire at all phases of the game. They get more attacks at decent S in melee, have a 3+ save, and wolf-standard means they reroll ALL ones for a turn. Consider they can get dirt cheap transports and are hard as hell to crack once they get in cover. That is a troops choice I would take with glee.


Also consider that Tactical Marines are objective holders. They are not meant to take the fight to the enemy fast, but get to the objective and hold it with their lives. They do not need that rhino after turn 2, they are where they need to be as is. Marines are though as nails, they do not need to be really fast as a result.

A 5 man tactical squad is 90 points. for 15 points more, one gets a 3+ armor, and +1 to their WS and BS. Sounds good to me.

annabelle wrote:I play Thousand Sons, any game against marines (Codex, SW, BA or chaos) makes me smile. My bolters are ap3, you see. The games I lose against marines are rare. When I do lose to a meq army it's due to several factors. 1 My opponent has proper list synergy. 2 My opponent understands that mobility is key. 3 My opponent understands target priority, this goes both ways, forcing me to make tough choices on where to shoot and fight and choosing where to correctly fire his guns and assault me. A marine player who follows these 3 rules will give me a run for my money every time.

I like to think of it as having the proper combination of synergy, redundancy, and flexibility.

Mobility affects who you can see, what your range is, and how you can shoot. It also affects who you can charge. Mobility is therefore key to Shooting and Assault. Within Shooting there's a strict target priority at work in order to both minimize the retaliation next turn in turns 1-6, and to maximize winning the game in turns 5-7. Shooting also affects assaults. If a transport isn't destroyed with shooting, an assault squad may not have a target, casualty selection can be used to edge units out of an opposing unit's assault range, and you have to assault whatever you shot at. Shooting is also less risky than close combat, since self-inflicted wounds are limited to Perils of the Warp and Gets Hot. A weak round of shooting isn't going to see a shooting unit's target chew it to pieces with return fire, at least not until the next turn (again, affecting mobility and position).

The number of targets that a unit can address is important. At one target per unit, the army with two more units gets two units ignored on the first turn of shooting, and gets to concentrate the fire of up to three units without also engaging every unit in the opposing army. Most of the time fire will be concentrated on many fewer units because the power, range, and number of weapons is insufficient to complete the target priority checklist. Call this number the target priority shortlist: Without killing these units, the next turn is going to be very very bad for you. But also being able to engage MSU or multiple small unit armies is also important. Flexibility meshes really well with redundancy since a flexible unit can be spammed up to the number of Force Organization slots, whereas specialist units need to complement each other as well as have their own doubles or triples.

Synergy can be across phases or in the same phase, like a unit of Tactical Marines being delivered for optimal template range by a Rhino, a Librarian casting a Null Zone, or Vanguard Veterans using Scout Bikers to drop into close combat with enemy tanks on T2. Sicarius is the ideal Space Marine Captain because of the synergy he has with his army. Likewise the Librarian psychic powers are some of the best in the game because of their synergies.

You can really pile on the bonuses, but the trick is remaining flexible. That's why Combat Squad are good, because they allow your army to more finely distribute its firepower, and to waste enemy firepower on over-killing small squads.

After what all's said and debated. It all boils down to this:

There are 4 prevalent MEQ armies:

Blood Angels
Space Wolves
Chaos SM
Vanilla

Which one has the best troop? Which one has the worst?

I'm not sure who is the best, but I'm sure Vanilla is the worst.