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.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Bike platforms should has a -1 BS modifier. I think that would balance them all out.

Nah, just drop Relentless from Bikes, that way if they move with a Heavy weapon, they snap-fire
If they shoot with Rapid-fire or Heavy weapons, their attention was devoted to firing said weapons and thus they are not prepared to launch an assault, since that action requires some mental prep time to properly steer the bike into combat.

Controlling a bike should occupy a large part of the rider's concentration, thereby making it difficult to shoot non-assault weapons AND prepare for a charge in the same sequence.
This change would also make pistols less redundant on bikes. I believe Marine biker come with pistol but Relentless makes that pointless (especially since they don't also have CC weapons). Dropping Relentless would solve multiple problems

-

And then the only troops people will take are Scouts and Gladius Tactical Marines. Nobody wants a non-Relentless bike.

Sorry if I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with a Marine army having Tac and Scout squads as its troops?

Arguably, there shouldn't be saves for dangerous terrain period. And since pretty much every non skimmer vehicle has access to dozer blades or equivalent , it seems dishonest to say that vehicles don't have a save.

I agree with Galef's idea to the problem (and I'm not just saying that because it would not effect my bikerboyz at all :V) , but that's the end of it. Any further change should be on a unit by unit change, and any suggestion for realism or immersion should just be thrown out. 40k is still an ABSTRACT wargame, so the imporant thing for rules writing should be whether an option is useful and competitive compared to other option. Not similarity to real life.

Keep in mind that I am saying this as an Eldar player who has played Eldar Jetbikes since when Dangerous tests didn't allow armour saves.

Also losing Relentless would not stop me from bringing Scatter bikes, despite them being Heavy weapons.
I would, however, also continue using Shuricannons, which are Assault. I like bikes and have played them YEARS before they were "OMG, you're TFG" good.
Losing Relentless would make me very happy as I could have my cake and eat it too.

But Marine Attack bike would need to have Relentless to remain functionally. Fluff-wise it would make since due to having 2 riders: 1 drives, the other shoots. Just give Bikes a side note that multiple riders grants Relentless. Easy-peasy Lemon Squeezy.

-

 Galef wrote:
Keep in mind that I am saying this as an Eldar player who has played Eldar Jetbikes since when Dangerous tests didn't allow armour saves.

Also losing Relentless would not stop me from bringing Scatter bikes, despite them being Heavy weapons.
I would, however, also continue using Shuricannons, which are Assault. I like bikes and have played them YEARS before they were "OMG, you're TFG" good.
Losing Relentless would make me very happy as I could have my cake and eat it too.

But Marine Attack bike would need to have Relentless to remain functionally. Fluff-wise it would make since due to having 2 riders: 1 drives, the other shoots. Just give Bikes a side note that multiple riders grants Relentless. Easy-peasy Lemon Squeezy.

-

So then Eldar just take Shuriken Cannons on everything instead, still vastly outperforming most units in the game?

You guys still aren't fixing anything and only creating worse situations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nazrak wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Bike platforms should has a -1 BS modifier. I think that would balance them all out.

Nah, just drop Relentless from Bikes, that way if they move with a Heavy weapon, they snap-fire
If they shoot with Rapid-fire or Heavy weapons, their attention was devoted to firing said weapons and thus they are not prepared to launch an assault, since that action requires some mental prep time to properly steer the bike into combat.

Controlling a bike should occupy a large part of the rider's concentration, thereby making it difficult to shoot non-assault weapons AND prepare for a charge in the same sequence.
This change would also make pistols less redundant on bikes. I believe Marine biker come with pistol but Relentless makes that pointless (especially since they don't also have CC weapons). Dropping Relentless would solve multiple problems

-

And then the only troops people will take are Scouts and Gladius Tactical Marines. Nobody wants a non-Relentless bike.

Sorry if I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with a Marine army having Tac and Scout squads as its troops?

Scouts are good. It is the CAD Tactical Marines that are bad.

I think if bikes lost relentless, it would fix a big giant fat issue in the game at the moment.....

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Theres plenty of purposes for bike units that could still function perfectly well without Relentless. Losing Relentless isnt going to kill Bike utility. Model for model and point for point theyll still shoot better than Tacs as their weapons are twin linked, they just dont get to shoot better and assault afterwards or fire a heavy weapon after jetting 12" around the table. Hardly a crippling loss for what the units cost relative to the capability of their alternatives.

Outside of losing the ability to charge after firing Grav or Plasma, or Attack Bikes losing every sense of purpose...

Except theyd still do everything a Tac does...but better. They still shoot better (TL guns), Hit harder on a charge, sport T5 over T4, have dramatically more mobility, and have on demand 4+ cover. They only lose the ability to shoot better and charge with an extra attack in the same turn. Some might call that a measure of balance...

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Theres plenty of purposes for bike units that could still function perfectly well without Relentless. Losing Relentless isnt going to kill Bike utility. Model for model and point for point theyll still shoot better than Tacs as their weapons are twin linked, they just dont get to shoot better and assault afterwards or fire a heavy weapon after jetting 12" around the table. Hardly a crippling loss for what the units cost relative to the capability of their alternatives.

Outside of losing the ability to charge after firing Grav or Plasma, or Attack Bikes losing every sense of purpose...

Except theyd still do everything a Tac does...but better. They still shoot better (TL guns), Hit harder on a charge, sport T5 over T4, have dramatically more mobility, and have on demand 4+ cover. They only lose the ability to shoot better and charge with an extra attack in the same turn. Some might call that a measure of balance...

Except they aren't doing everything better. The 4+ cover save destroys most of their firepower and doesn't help them survive an alpha strike. They'd be worse Tactical Marines when using Grav Guns. They're doing literally nothing special with Plasma Guns.

This is not differentiating them enough to the point that I would just go back to Scouts as my sole troops. I don't need SLIGHTLY better Tactical Marines. I want something besides them. Bikers and Scouts are that alternative. I'll just get my grav fix from Centurions and Plasma fix from Sternguard.

Next thing ya know, someone will suggest BS4/WS4 on scouts is broken.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


Except they aren't doing everything better. The 4+ cover save destroys most of their firepower

Its better than being dead, and with TL'd guns allows them to fire at what is effectively BS2, better than units that have to go to ground.

and doesn't help them survive an alpha strike.

...in what way? unless theyre being hit with Ignores Cover weapons of AP3 or better, but thats not the definition of an Alpha Strike, which is much broader.

They'd be worse Tactical Marines when using Grav Guns.

In what way?

They're doing literally nothing special with Plasma Guns.

for the most part sure, aside having greater mobility to engage them successfully. Is that a bad thing though?

This is not differentiating them enough to the point that I would just go back to Scouts as my sole troops. I don't need SLIGHTLY better Tactical Marines.

If we're going to insist that T5, TL'd guns, insane speed, an extra charge attack at I10, access to Jink, and not being slowed by terrain is only "slightly" better, I dont think we are playing the same game.

If thats not enough differentiation from Tacs, then youre looking for an assault unit fitting an entirely different role from Tacs that Bikes should not be filling in the first place. Bikes arent supposed to be a heavy cavalry unit, theyve just been given so many buffs they ended up in that role.

I want something besides them. Bikers and Scouts are that alternative.

it sounds like you want a unit that does everything with no appreciable downsides over alternatives except lack of access to Deep Strike, for no appreciable cost premium after kit is factored in.

I'll just get my grav fix from Centurions and Plasma fix from Sternguard.

You mean...the units that are actually designed and intended to be those special weapons specialists? The horror!

Next thing ya know, someone will suggest BS4/WS4 on scouts is broken.

WS4/BS4 on scouts is nothing near the realm of what we are talking about here.

 Galef wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Bike platforms should has a -1 BS modifier. I think that would balance them all out.

Nah, just drop Relentless from Bikes, that way if they move with a Heavy weapon, they snap-fire
If they shoot with Rapid-fire or Heavy weapons, their attention was devoted to firing said weapons and thus they are not prepared to launch an assault, since that action requires some mental prep time to properly steer the bike into combat.

Controlling a bike should occupy a large part of the rider's concentration, thereby making it difficult to shoot non-assault weapons AND prepare for a charge in the same sequence.
This change would also make pistols less redundant on bikes. I believe Marine biker come with pistol but Relentless makes that pointless (especially since they don't also have CC weapons). Dropping Relentless would solve multiple problems

-

I've been thinking more that Bikes should be Relentless only if the weapon is mounted on the Bike. Twin-Linked Bolters and weapons on Attack Bikes would remain Relentless, but special weapons held by the riders, like Grav Guns, would not. This wouldn't cut into the purpose of Attack Bikes, and would still allow Assault weapons to be fired effectively on the move and before a charge. IMO, Bikes should be able to drive fast, use a flamethrower, and then lop off someones head with a sword, as per the rule of cool. But where bikes breaks for me is that a Bike is somehow a more stable platform to fire a Grav Gun from, in comparison to a guy on foot. If firing Plasma and Grav from riders meant that the unit couldn't charge (and that the Grav only got two, shorter ranged shots) that would work better for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nazrak wrote:

Sorry if I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with a Marine army having Tac and Scout squads as its troops?

Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Bike platforms should has a -1 BS modifier. I think that would balance them all out.

Nah, just drop Relentless from Bikes, that way if they move with a Heavy weapon, they snap-fire
If they shoot with Rapid-fire or Heavy weapons, their attention was devoted to firing said weapons and thus they are not prepared to launch an assault, since that action requires some mental prep time to properly steer the bike into combat.

Controlling a bike should occupy a large part of the rider's concentration, thereby making it difficult to shoot non-assault weapons AND prepare for a charge in the same sequence.
This change would also make pistols less redundant on bikes. I believe Marine biker come with pistol but Relentless makes that pointless (especially since they don't also have CC weapons). Dropping Relentless would solve multiple problems

-

I've been thinking more that Bikes should be Relentless only if the weapon is mounted on the Bike. Twin-Linked Bolters and weapons on Attack Bikes would remain Relentless, but special weapons held by the riders, like Grav Guns, would not. This wouldn't cut into the purpose of Attack Bikes, and would still allow Assault weapons to be fired effectively on the move and before a charge. IMO, Bikes should be able to drive fast, use a flamethrower, and then lop off someones head with a sword, as per the rule of cool. But where bikes breaks for me is that a Bike is somehow a more stable platform to fire a Grav Gun from, in comparison to a guy on foot. If firing Plasma and Grav from riders meant that the unit couldn't charge (and that the Grav only got two, shorter ranged shots) that would work better for me.

I am with you here in theory, but really this would only effect Grav & Plasma guns on marine bikes. All other weapons are either mounted on the bike or assault, so nothing would change for the most part. I am trying to make a blanket change that would tone down Scatterbikes

-

"Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad."

Or you don't grasp how terrible they are in 7th ed. And in 6th ed. And in 5th ed. Making bikes bad doesn't make them good, because even when bikes weren't this good, tacs were still bad.

Martel732 wrote:
"Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad."

Or you don't grasp how terrible they are in 7th ed. And in 6th ed. And in 5th ed. Making bikes bad doesn't make them good, because even when bikes weren't this good, tacs were still bad.

In what edition was the tactical marine terrible? Do you only play against necrons or something?

The tac marine is point for point one of the best obsec units in the game, in all ways except for maybe backline objectives, and even then having the ability to combat squad to 5 dudes with no special weapons and only filling up half a spot in an org chart is not terrible....

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Sorry if I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with a Marine army having Tac and Scout squads as its troops?

Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad.

Aw. I love a classic Tactical squad, me. Ten lads, flamer, missile launcher, cutting about in a Rhino.

 sfshilo wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad."

Or you don't grasp how terrible they are in 7th ed. And in 6th ed. And in 5th ed. Making bikes bad doesn't make them good, because even when bikes weren't this good, tacs were still bad.

In what edition was the tactical marine terrible? Do you only play against necrons or something?

The tac marine is point for point one of the best obsec units in the game, in all ways except for maybe backline objectives, and even then having the ability to combat squad to 5 dudes with no special weapons and only filling up half a spot in an org chart is not terrible....

2nd, 5th, 6th, 7th are all editions where the tac marine is arguably worse than useless.

2nd ed killed them because the boltgun was worthless and armor save modifiers.
5th ed killed them because of leafblower, grey hunters, and the boltgun was worthless.
6th/7th has the rise of mass xeno firepower and boltguns are still worthless. They are only saved by free transports, which BA can't even get.

Furthermore, tac marines have always been helpless in CC for their point cost. The unit you are really praising is the grey hunter, which does all the things tac marines can't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nazrak wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Sorry if I'm missing something, but what exactly is wrong with a Marine army having Tac and Scout squads as its troops?

Nothing. Slayer just doesn't grasp the beauty of the Tac Squad.

Aw. I love a classic Tactical squad, me. Ten lads, flamer, missile launcher, cutting about in a Rhino.

I hope you like being ineffective.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


Except they aren't doing everything better. The 4+ cover save destroys most of their firepower

Its better than being dead, and with TL'd guns allows them to fire at what is effectively BS2, better than units that have to go to ground.

and doesn't help them survive an alpha strike.

...in what way? unless theyre being hit with Ignores Cover weapons of AP3 or better, but thats not the definition of an Alpha Strike, which is much broader.

They'd be worse Tactical Marines when using Grav Guns.

In what way?

They're doing literally nothing special with Plasma Guns.

for the most part sure, aside having greater mobility to engage them successfully. Is that a bad thing though?

This is not differentiating them enough to the point that I would just go back to Scouts as my sole troops. I don't need SLIGHTLY better Tactical Marines.

If we're going to insist that T5, TL'd guns, insane speed, an extra charge attack at I10, access to Jink, and not being slowed by terrain is only "slightly" better, I dont think we are playing the same game.

If thats not enough differentiation from Tacs, then youre looking for an assault unit fitting an entirely different role from Tacs that Bikes should not be filling in the first place. Bikes arent supposed to be a heavy cavalry unit, theyve just been given so many buffs they ended up in that role.

I want something besides them. Bikers and Scouts are that alternative.

it sounds like you want a unit that does everything with no appreciable downsides over alternatives except lack of access to Deep Strike, for no appreciable cost premium after kit is factored in.

I'll just get my grav fix from Centurions and Plasma fix from Sternguard.

You mean...the units that are actually designed and intended to be those special weapons specialists? The horror!

Next thing ya know, someone will suggest BS4/WS4 on scouts is broken.

WS4/BS4 on scouts is nothing near the realm of what we are talking about here.

1.5 Bikers are a bit less than 10 Tactical Marines by maybe a Rhino. That 4+ is as good as another body. The durability difference isn't as grand as you claim for it to be. Rhinos also add a good amount of durability to Tactical Marines, but durability isn't their primary issue, is it?
2. I'm sure Martel could more easily explain to you why Rhinos are important against Alpha Strikes. For the definition of Alpha Strike, we got several choices: Skyhammer, Scatterbikes hitting you first, Skitarii Drop Pods (though we will see if this is a thing anymore once the FAQ is official), Raven Guard Vanguard charges, etc. I'm not sure if you're playing the game at all now, but that's important to counter against. Bikers don't live against these things because they're either weight of wounds or have enough AP2 for that 4+ cover save to crumble.
3. Because they wouldn't have a platform like a Rhino to keep them firing at max range. They could spam themail regular Grav gun more, but they'd be worse than the cannon option of the Tactical Marine rather than being on almost even footing.
4. Rhinos and Drop Pods already enabled that. The nice thing about Bikers was being able to do that and engage in melee, compared to the Tactical Marines being able to focus on shooting.
For the record it is also a bad move because you're hitting Chaos Bikers indirectly as well. Now they're forced into Melta Guns instead of having the option to do Plasma.
5. T5 is good and Jink is nice when it actually helps, but Tactical Marines get the option of creating two scoring units thanks to their transport.
6. No, the issue here is Tactical Marines don't have a niche for attacking. Hence why we have Bikers for real offense and Scouts for primarily scoring. The issue has always been Tactical Marines, not Bikers.
7. And then the Tactical Marines AND Bikers do nothing? I'm unsure if you actually care about Balance or just hate Bikers.
8. People complained when that happened because it made Tactical Marines worse off, but nobody was using them in the first place. I'm putting everything together to show Tactical Marines are the problem. Everyone is using them to balance against when they were always the worst off outside 4th when they could do two special weapons.

Rhinos, even ones that cost points, can ruin the most potent of alpha strikes. BA can hide jumpers/bikes behind them and then deploy in a manner to force the alpha strike to deep strike outside the rhino wall. In particular, grav can NEVER explode a vehicle, so rhinos are a pretty hard counter to that tactic. Skyhammer is there to punish greedy biker and Eldar lists.

Martel732 wrote:


I hope you like being ineffective.

Whatever mate. I like having fun with a game I enjoy rather than incessantly pissing and moaning about the same thing over and over again like a crybaby stuck record. Honestly I have no idea why you bother engaging with 40K given how irredeemably embittered you seem to be about it. Maybe try doing something you enjoy instead?

 Nazrak wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


I hope you like being ineffective.

Whatever mate. I like having fun with a game I enjoy rather than incessantly pissing and moaning about the same thing over and over again like a crybaby stuck record. Honestly I have no idea why you bother engaging with 40K given how irredeemably embittered you seem to be about it. Maybe try doing something you enjoy instead?

If I played in your group, I'd probably be fine with it. Since it has never been demonstrated to you )(in my case, again and again and again) how bad the flamer/missile launcher combo is. You can get away with it because you're not looking at having zero models by turn 4. I'm just guessing.

Maybe I'm burning out on playing for pure effectiveness, but that's what this thread is about. Effectiveness.

I'd be fine with losing relentless as a KDK player seeing as I only run melta bikes anyways, replacing the bolt gun not the pistol. It would make literally no difference to me.

Martel732 wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


I hope you like being ineffective.

Whatever mate. I like having fun with a game I enjoy rather than incessantly pissing and moaning about the same thing over and over again like a crybaby stuck record. Honestly I have no idea why you bother engaging with 40K given how irredeemably embittered you seem to be about it. Maybe try doing something you enjoy instead?

If I played in your group, I'd probably be fine with it. Since it has never been demonstrated to you )(in my case, again and again and again) how bad the flamer/missile launcher combo is. You can get away with it because you're not looking at having zero models by turn 4. I'm just guessing.

Maybe I'm burning out on playing for pure effectiveness, but that's what this thread is about. Effectiveness.

Yeah the Flamer/ML loadout is pretty bad but it is super nostalgic for those of us that started with Battle For Macragge.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yeah the Flamer/ML loadout is pretty bad but it is super nostalgic for those of us that started with Battle For Macragge.

ML/Flamer has been the stock tac load since the dawn of time, not just the Battle of Macragge. They were the weapons in the RTB01 box. They were the push-fits in the 2nd ed starter. 3rd edition and the return of multipose plastics? The only options in that box were ML/F. 4th starter, we can see the pattern...

I don’t know when the other specials were included in the tac box. I do remember buying a grey hunter box back in 3rd, just because the upgrade sprue had a meltagun! The first time a heavy weapon other then the ML was included in a multipart plastic tactical kit was the Mk. IV ones from BaC this year!

I may be a mediocre, jack of all trades loadout for tacticals, but it’s got a ton of history and momentum behind it. Which is why I generally try to include one in my lists. But I do it with my eyes open and low expectations of results.

Flamers are actually okay (automatically hitting and ignoring cover is money), but missile launchers are now a special kind of terrible. AP 3 is especially embarrassing in WarhammerAP2.

Another issue is that you want maximum Rhino/troop. So it's all 5-man all the time, so when a Rhino gets fragged (not if), your opponent strands 5 men, not 10. 140 points of tac marine on foot is 140 points you opponent can ignore.

The missile launcher was actually quite good in 2nd, it just cost a lot. Then 3rd came along and nerfed krak missiles into the ground.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

1.5 Bikers are a bit less than 10 Tactical Marines by maybe a Rhino. That 4+ is as good as another body.

If we're looking at them naked, maybe. Looking at them after full kit, the price differences manifest distinctly in the Bikers favor, especially if minmaxing. Going back to my earlier example, after kit for a ten man unit of each, the difference was what, 15pts? In a minmaxd unit, 5 bikers with 2 PG's and a powerfist is what, 155pts, while a 5man tac squad with a PG and combi+fist in a Rhino is 160?

Comparing the units on equal numbers with kit really shows how skewed stuff is. Part of that is because the Tacs basically require a transport, as they lack the mobility of the bikes and the T5 and 4+cover to mitigate damage.

The durability difference isn't as grand as you claim for it to be.

T5 with Jink and a far better ability to set the terms of engagement through mobility is huge, thats a pretty grand difference in functionality at the level of the units are are talking about.

Rhinos also add a good amount of durability to Tactical Marines, but durability isn't their primary issue, is it?

Not for the Tacs, but the T5 and Jink is a cornerstone of Biker bonuses that make Tacs seen as being pointless. Why take the Tacs when the same points will get you a more durable unit?

2. I'm sure Martel could more easily explain to you why Rhinos are important against Alpha Strikes. For the definition of Alpha Strike, we got several choices: Skyhammer, Scatterbikes hitting you first, Skitarii Drop Pods (though we will see if this is a thing anymore once the FAQ is official), Raven Guard Vanguard charges, etc. I'm not sure if you're playing the game at all now, but that's important to counter against. Bikers don't live against these things because they're either weight of wounds or have enough AP2 for that 4+ cover save to crumble.

In some circumstances, sure, I'd agree, but it all depends on what theyre being hit with. Being hit by scatterlasers or a full Centstar barrage, the 4+ wont matter, but theres a host of Alpha Strike stuff that will be dramatically mitigated by Jink, and against Scatterbikes the T5 will make a difference (not huge, but enough to be noticeable)

3. Because they wouldn't have a platform like a Rhino to keep them firing at max range.

How does a Rhino allow grav guns to always be fired at max range?

They could spam themail regular Grav gun more, but they'd be worse than the cannon option of the Tactical Marine rather than being on almost even footing.

and thats not a reasonable tradeoff for enhanced resiliency and mobility...?

4. Rhinos and Drop Pods already enabled that. The nice thing about Bikers was being able to do that and engage in melee, compared to the Tactical Marines being able to focus on shooting.

and being able to fire at full effectiveness, and charge, and get an extra CC attack at I10 to boot doesnt appear...excessive? Especially for a negligible points premium? Thats kinda what Im getting at, wanting to have a unit that does everything at full effectiveness with no meaningful tradeoff, at a negligible points increase, is a wee bit overboard.

For the record it is also a bad move because you're hitting Chaos Bikers indirectly as well. Now they're forced into Melta Guns instead of having the option to do Plasma.

I dont think CSM (or Eldar) bikers should be able to do all those things either. CSM bikers cant be made troops and form the core of an army the way SM bikes can, making the internal balance problem less pressing. Eldar Jetbikes also obviously need some significant toning down.

5. T5 is good and Jink is nice when it actually helps, but Tactical Marines get the option of creating two scoring units thanks to their transport.

You can combat squad bikes cant you? The option is there, you just need a full sized unit.

6. No, the issue here is Tactical Marines don't have a niche for attacking. Hence why we have Bikers for real offense and Scouts for primarily scoring. The issue has always been Tactical Marines, not Bikers.

Tacs have some functionality issues, but the answer to that shouldnt be a biker unit that just does more than what the tacs do and does them all better. Theres a lot of problems with 40k, and none of them exist in a vacuum, but while Tacs have their issues, Bikers (from all armies) are stupidly overcapable, especially for what they cost, and often in completely nonsensical ways.

7. And then the Tactical Marines AND Bikers do nothing? I'm unsure if you actually care about Balance or just hate Bikers.

I dont *hate* Bikers (though Im not a fan of their implementation as heavy cavalry), and Im not saying there shouldnt also be changes elsewhere, but the Bikers are really overcapable, and if the response to a potential nerfing is to use units that are actually supposed to fills the roles that Bikers overtook because they were overcapable, I dont see that as a bad thing.

8. People complained when that happened because it made Tactical Marines worse off, but nobody was using them in the first place. I'm putting everything together to show Tactical Marines are the problem. Everyone is using them to balance against when they were always the worst off outside 4th when they could do two special weapons.

Again, the two special weapons thing isnt that huge an issue. CSMs can take two specials, and most competitive CSM armies avoid taking any actual CSMs at all if they can. Im not opposed to SMs getting that option but I dont think thats really the core of the issue. The scale of the game gas bloated to the point where basic infantry is left behind, and units like Bikers and Scatterbikes just do everything better, while mechanics changes have hosed their versatility at the smaller levels. Allowing units to charge out of transports in the 5E style would make units like Tacs a whole lot more viable in general, and I think a lot more than just an extea special weapon.

I maintain that bikes without

a) massed heavy weapons
b) rerollable jink saves
c) invincible tanking ICs
d) invis

are not that big a deal. Even relentless grav guns only reach 18", allowing for all kinds of ugly return fire. Two grav guns aren't tabling anyone anytime soon either. Standard jink saves of 4+ are easily overcome as well.

Guys, guys. . . Tactical vs. Bikes, here it is:

Tacticals are better at taking a position, and holding it.

Bikes are better on the move, duh.

Both have a place.

But are Bikes weirdly a little too good at shooting on the move? Sure. Somehow driving a motorcycle makes it easier to fire a two handed weapon that requires stability to get maximum effect. I suppose this could represent them darting forward on the vehicle, then stopping, putting their feet on the ground and firing, but I'm not sure I go along with that idea, especially when they can assault right afterwards.

This is 7th ed. The best way to take a position for non-gladius lists is to kill the unit trying to take it from you. The bikes are 100% better at this task, which is people's problem.

Martel732 wrote:
This is 7th ed. The best way to take a position for non-gladius lists is to kill the unit trying to take it from you. The bikes are 100% better at this task, which is people's problem.

This is 7th Ed. If you're deciding not to use formations then you are playing a different game.

Ultramarine Gladius Tactical Squad, full Grav Loadout in a Rhino will be pumping out Grav with re-rolls to hit for three turns, and be three Ob-sec units. In a good position, once per game they will be firing 11 AP 2 shots, re-rolling to hit, and five of those re-rolling to wound. If you can't figure out how to make that work I've got nothing for you.

Bikes don't Doctrine as well as the Tacs, and their two Grav Guns is equivalent to the single Grav Cannon (since they don't re-roll to wound).

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
This is 7th ed. The best way to take a position for non-gladius lists is to kill the unit trying to take it from you. The bikes are 100% better at this task, which is people's problem.

This is 7th Ed. If you're deciding not to use formations then you are playing a different game.

Ultramarine Gladius Tactical Squad, full Grav Loadout in a Rhino will be pumping out Grav with re-rolls to hit for three turns, and be three Ob-sec units. In a good position, once per game they will be firing 11 AP 2 shots, re-rolling to hit, and five of those re-rolling to wound. If you can't figure out how to make that work I've got nothing for you.

Bikes don't Doctrine as well as the Tacs, and their two Grav Guns is equivalent to the single Grav Cannon (since they don't re-roll to wound).

BA don't get grav cannons on tacs. Neither do SW on their tac-equivalents.

Gladius makes tacs good by giving them free stuff. That, in effect, is the same thing as giving a discount on the tac marines themselves. So at the gladius price point, yeah, they're fine. For BA and SW, they're trash.

Martel732 wrote:


BA don't get grav cannons on tacs. Neither do SW on their tac-equivalents.

Gladius makes tacs good by giving them free stuff. That, in effect, is the same thing as giving a discount on the tac marines themselves. So at the gladius price point, yeah, they're fine. For BA and SW, they're trash.

Then when you say "tacs suck", say "your tacs suck". Because I like mine. I build my armies to get the most out of them, and I can win battles against Bike armies.

Can you do it without the gladius? If not, that means the gladius is good, not the tacs.