greatbigtree wrote:No, you didn’t (successfully) prove your point. You made a claim. An inaccurate claim. Repeatedly.
I am making an accurate claim. That I can prove with this useful thing the kids are doing these days, “Math”. And in-game experience, but that’s harder to qualify.
Making
Tac Marines (and by extension, all 1 W marines) 2 points cheaper puts them right in the ballpark of cost to durability to offence that 5 point Guardsmen would have. With slightly more efficient access to Special weapons, while suffering inefficient losses against anti-elite weapons like Plasmaguns.
They’re efficient at clearing hordes while being vulnerable to massed Plasma. Exactly what they should be.
But by all means, continue your claims that there isn’t design space or whatever to fix them. I’ll just accurately point out that a 2 point drop, combined with raising Guardsmen to 5 points each (which they should be, relative to the rest of the game) would result in balanced troops for most armies.
Actually, math would show that 11ppm tacs are equal in performance to 4ppm guardsmen...
Referring back to the title of this post, even if Tacs were to be priced at 11ppm however, people will still take Scouts over them as Tacs really don't offer anything meaningful to a
SM army.
With smart placement of objectives within cover/ruins, Scouts are just as tough as Tacs barring ignore cover weapons.