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 love the *idea* of combat squads, but in-game it's just such a lackluster, pointless ability. Tactical Marines are a low-tier troops choice to begin with, and ten-man Tactical squads are one of the worst options you can bring. I'd like to find a way to make it beneficial to bring them, but just... Eh...

As it currently stands, the first 5 Tacticals gets you a free Sergeant who can bring a Combi-weapon and/or a melee weapon, as well as access to a single Special or Heavy weapon.
The second 5 gets you... A single weapon of whatever you didn't pick before.

The second half isn't cheaper, it offers no benefits that a second five-marine squad wouldn't offer, and it's just generally inadvisable.

One possibility that comes to mind is to simply only grant a Sergeant if you take a full ten-man squad. This'd add an internally balanced reward for taking them, but makes the already-weak Tactical Marines even weaker, to the point of being one of the worst units in the game, period.

Another possibility that comes to mind is making the second five Marines cheaper - 13ppm for the first five, 12ppm for the second five. (Or, if you prefer, you spend 5 points for the mandatory Sergeant.) This is actually my favorite solution, but it runs contrary to the GW-preferred 8th edition style of 'Everything costs the same, regardless of context or how effective it actually is in a given situation.'

Possibly, there could be some kind of tactical benefit/special rule that you only get if you take a full-sized squad. The first thing that comes to mind is +1 Leadership if the squad starts at full size, which carries over even if you Combat Squad into two smaller squads. (Meaning that, instead of LD8 for the squad with the Sergeant and LD7 otherwise, you get LD9 and LD8.) This'd help with the fact that large squads are generally more vulnerable to Leadership-based attacks, but isn't really enough to justify the larger squad on its own, especially since Marines are already leadership-resistant. Most other buffs I could think of (Re-roll 1s to hit, give a single weapon from one Combat Squad 'Ignores Cover' if the other Combat Squad can see the target,) are already provided by either a Buff character or Chapter Tactics, making them redundant.

The last idea, which is one that probably won't really work out, is some kind of detachment bonus, a-la Decurion Detachments of yesteredition, that gives you a noteworthy bonus... But only if you take a 10-man Assault squad, Devestator squad, three 10-man Tactical squads, and a Captain or Chaplain. (It'd have to be a pretty potent bonus, but not something like 'Free upgrades/weapons', more in the lines of giving the Captain or Chaplain's buff to everyone in the detachment regardless of how far away they are.) GW has thus-far shied away from 'Formation' style detachments, but I really think that it could work here as a way to make full squads... If not 'Powerful', then at least 'Viable'.

So... Anyone have any ideas?

I think tacticals have two difficulties this edition: their stock gun doesn't allow their small numbers to effectively deal with hordes, and they have too few heavy weapons to effectively deal with vehicles/monsters. If they wish to do one or the other, they general need assistant from another specialized unit in the army. Generally, you end up being better off just bringing more of those specialized units.

Their position isn't helped by the existence of Devastator squads (which, in my opinion, shouldn't exist), but that Epic genie can't be put back in the bottle.

I think there should be two ways to build the squad - as a 5-man unit they should be objective hunters or equipped to deal to with vehicles. In the smaller configuration, you could load them up with more specialized gear - special weapons, heavy weapons, etc. They would be strong, but glass cannons (they only have 5 wounds).

In the larger group, they should somehow have a better defense and/or be better equipped to deal with hordes. Perhaps at 6-10 models they lose the option to take greater amounts of heavy weapons, but get access to the likes of breacher shields for better defense and/or storm bolters to up their firepower against horde units.

The thing about tacticals is that you don't take them for their damage output. But for the scoring and extra command points. So, their stat disadvantages are offset with other advantages. It's an interesting thing actually, but our local sm player had a similar mindset of "why should i ever bring tacticals when i can have devastators". Than he brought an army of devastators, killed 90% of the opponent's army but lost 5-15 due to maelstorm. As for scouts vs marines, +1 to armor is pretty nice - especially with new cover rules. 2+ armored 14 ppm tacticals are super frustrating to face.

I also remember a very potent army of tactical marines in 7-th - even before free vehicles. It featured 6*10 tacticals in droppods, some combi-melta sternguards in pods and Calgar. Back than he allowed marines to pass or fail ld whenever they wanted, so they became untarpittable. And re-rollable bolter shooting was actually decent vs troops. Marine statline is nice for surviving and scoring, so they dropped, killed troops, scored and remained untarpittable. Won a lot of games with this tactics.

So, all in all, tacticals still have a place even now. They're definitely not the allmighty super-killers or unkillable super-scorers but they give you a bunch of CP. They could use a killiness buff, probably. I'd suggest giving them an ability to shoot twice for 1 CP. This can encourage a use of 10-man squads. With captain re-rolls, they'll be putting out some really good shooting on the drop.

It would be extra cool if they could Combat squad afterwards. So, they drop, they do DAKKADAKKA and than split. Quite tactical.

@koooaei, you're rather missing the point. It's not that Tacticals are garbage. (They are, but that's not what I'm here to fix.) It's that taking ten-marine squads is garbage when you can just take two five-marine squads. In fact, as you helpfully pointed out, you take Tacticals to get Command Points.
Why spend the points for three Ten-man squads, when you could get SIX five-marine squads for the same cost.
(Your 7th edition example isn't really relevant, because in 7th you couldn't cram two squads into one Drop Pod.)

Even your strategem only works as a buff to Tactical Marines in general. It doesn't make me think 'Ooh, a reason to take large squads!', it makes me think 'Ooh, I can fire my Plasma and Combi-Plasma twice!'

Actually the stratagem does make larger squads more attractive, as you can only use it on one unit per turn, so a larger unit gains more benefit.

Tactical squads really need what they always have needed: The ability to take 2 special/heavy weapons. The mixed special and heavy (though better now than ever before) has always been sub-optimal. I don't think it is enough to offset the bonuses of smaller squads on its own though.

I think having more stratagems that benefit larger squads would be good, for instance a stratagem that made a squad have Bolters shoot at Rapid Fire 3, or something would make larger squads attractive. Also perhaps making "combat squads" function in a way where each 10 man squad counts as 2 troop choices for detachment purposes, and allow them to split at deployment.

I think if you did those 3 things
1.) Allow 2 specials/heavies
2.) Introduce more stratagems that benefit larger units.
3.) Allow 10 man squads to count as 2 choices for purposes of detachments.

IT would make larger marine squads more attractive.

Breng77 wrote:
Actually the stratagem does make larger squads more attractive, as you can only use it on one unit per turn, so a larger unit gains more benefit.

Well, yes and no. It gives more firepower, but that firepower is going to be 4-5 Boltguns and 0-1 Heavy Weapons with a to-hit penalty from moving. It's better, but not enough to motivate me to spend the extra points.

Tactical squads really need what they always have needed: The ability to take 2 special/heavy weapons. The mixed special and heavy (though better now than ever before) has always been sub-optimal. I don't think it is enough to offset the bonuses of smaller squads on its own though.

I think having more stratagems that benefit larger squads would be good, for instance a stratagem that made a squad have Bolters shoot at Rapid Fire 3, or something would make larger squads attractive. Also perhaps making "combat squads" function in a way where each 10 man squad counts as 2 troop choices for detachment purposes, and allow them to split at deployment.

I think if you did those 3 things
1.) Allow 2 specials/heavies
2.) Introduce more stratagems that benefit larger units.
3.) Allow 10 man squads to count as 2 choices for purposes of detachments.

IT would make larger marine squads more attractive.

Those altogether could work.

The way GW writes rules the only way to make Combat Squads even remotely relevant would be to pull understrength squads entirely and make Combat Squads the way you get 5-man squads. Personally I'd rather either take the approach from Forge World's 30k rules and make a 10-man squad notably cheaper than two 5-man squads (in 30k the first ten Tactical Marines are 125pts but the next ten are 100pts, so you're paying 25pts for the privilege of having a second squad if you go that way), or take a look at how some historical wargames handle it where you've got to have some percentage of full-strength units, you can't just go all under-strength.

That said I do like Breng's first two suggestions (2 specials/heavies and stratagems that benefit larger units), and on the second point I've got a suggestion for a stratagem (again, shamelessly lifted from 30k, but it'd fit the bill):

Fury of the Chapter: 1CP. Choose a Tactical Squad to fire twice during the Shooting phase.

(Addendum: Combat Squads is feeling increasingly like an irrelevant artifact of older editions of the game kept around for flavour rather than gameplay effect (sort of like how Chimeras had Amphibious all the way through 5th-7th long after water terrain was relevant for any other reason).)

I'd agree that 'Combat Squads' was just meant to be a legacy addition...
If GW didn't give us a Strategem just for splitting up squads post-deployment, implying that they're still trying to make them somehow relevant.

Combat Squad is really just a garbage and overall useless rule. In the entirety of its existence I found exactly ONE use for it (using 6th edition Carcharodon rules) and that was it.

For making Tactical Marines more worth it:
1. Someone already mentioned two Specials at minimum, but I'm thinking a Crusader route where you get a Special and Heavy at 5 man squads, and then an extra of either at 10 men. This keeps them mildly unique.
2. Give them the same LD as Veterans. They are Veterans compared to Scouts, Devastators, Assault Marines, Centurions, Bikers...etc

Now once you've done that, you got an actual tough choice between Scouts, Devastators, and Tacticals
1. Scouts get deployment shenanigans, Sniper options, and melee options
2. Devastators do Heavy Weapon saturation and get bonuses for it (Signum and Cherub)
3. Tactical Marines are sorta in the middle after this as a nice balance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:
The thing about tacticals is that you don't take them for their damage output. But for the scoring and extra command points. So, their stat disadvantages are offset with other advantages. It's an interesting thing actually, but our local sm player had a similar mindset of "why should i ever bring tacticals when i can have devastators". Than he brought an army of devastators, killed 90% of the opponent's army but lost 5-15 due to maelstorm. As for scouts vs marines, +1 to armor is pretty nice - especially with new cover rules. 2+ armored 14 ppm tacticals are super frustrating to face.

I also remember a very potent army of tactical marines in 7-th - even before free vehicles. It featured 6*10 tacticals in droppods, some combi-melta sternguards in pods and Calgar. Back than he allowed marines to pass or fail ld whenever they wanted, so they became untarpittable. And re-rollable bolter shooting was actually decent vs troops. Marine statline is nice for surviving and scoring, so they dropped, killed troops, scored and remained untarpittable. Won a lot of games with this tactics.

So, all in all, tacticals still have a place even now. They're definitely not the allmighty super-killers or unkillable super-scorers but they give you a bunch of CP. They could use a killiness buff, probably. I'd suggest giving them an ability to shoot twice for 1 CP. This can encourage a use of 10-man squads. With captain re-rolls, they'll be putting out some really good shooting on the drop.

It would be extra cool if they could Combat squad afterwards. So, they drop, they do DAKKADAKKA and than split. Quite tactical.

Remember that there was also a list where someone brought a bunch of Rubrics and placed, only for it to never happen again. That's why when you look at tournament statistics you check for outliers like the Ultramarines list and that one I mentioned, instead of trying to do a bad justification of "It happened once!"

ONCE is the keyword here.

Yeah I agree, Tactics should get the Scion ability to take up to 4 special weapons (admitably one of the scion weapons is a heavy type, but it really probably shouldn't be).

I think then people would be using them just fine. Or Bolters need to get their AP-1 back.

 argonak wrote:
Yeah I agree, Tactics should get the Scion ability to take up to 4 special weapons (admitably one of the scion weapons is a heavy type, but it really probably shouldn't be).

I think then people would be using them just fine. Or Bolters need to get their AP-1 back.

If you do this though, the only thing differing for Intercessors is the extra range. It becomes a slippery slope and I'd like something special for Bolt weapons, but I haven't a clue what. Maybe rolls of 6 to wound force the opponent to reroll a successful save?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 argonak wrote:
Yeah I agree, Tactics should get the Scion ability to take up to 4 special weapons (admitably one of the scion weapons is a heavy type, but it really probably shouldn't be).

I think then people would be using them just fine. Or Bolters need to get their AP-1 back.

If you do this though, the only thing differing for Intercessors is the extra range. It becomes a slippery slope and I'd like something special for Bolt weapons, but I haven't a clue what. Maybe rolls of 6 to wound force the opponent to reroll a successful save?

Then give intercessors ap-2 like rubrics.

I wonder if giving Tacticals 're-roll 1s to hit if they all target the same unit' would work, the same as Long Fangs get from the SW book.
It's make Captains a little less useful around them, but that isn't something I exactly see as a problem.

Or, instead: If one Combat Squad fires all of its weapons at a target, and then the second half of that Combat Squad also fires all of its weapons at the same target, the second Combat Squad may re-roll all failed to-hit rolls. (This way, it provides a powerful, tangible benefit for Tacticals who actually combat squad, though it still makes full ten-man squads less than stellar.)

Waaaghpower wrote:
I wonder if giving Tacticals 're-roll 1s to hit if they all target the same unit' would work, the same as Long Fangs get from the SW book.
It's make Captains a little less useful around them, but that isn't something I exactly see as a problem.

Or, instead: If one Combat Squad fires all of its weapons at a target, and then the second half of that Combat Squad also fires all of its weapons at the same target, the second Combat Squad may re-roll all failed to-hit rolls. (This way, it provides a powerful, tangible benefit for Tacticals who actually combat squad, though it still makes full ten-man squads less than stellar.)

I'd rather focus on a buff that doesn't make our auras redundant. I know that one of main buffs proposed in the past for Bolt weapons was a mild rerolling of 1 to wound, but we got Lieutenants now for that.

So my main focus is two fold for Tactical Marines:
1. Can we fill a niche that isn't being filled yet
2. What are other troops doing better, or other units for that matter

That's why I mainly propose my idea. Promoting 10 man squads is hard for most of the units of the game though. Not letting multiple units in the same transport like how it used to be would be a start though barring characters.

Tactical Flexibility:
(Replaces combat squad rule of the tactical squad)

If this unit consists of 10 models after determining the starting player but before the first battle round begins you may remove exactly 5 models of this unit without breaking unit coherency. Then set those 5 models up as a separate unit anywhere in your deployment zone and more than 9" away from any enemy models.

If both players have units with this rule take turns redeploying your units starting with the player who has the first turn.

I ran a 10man tac (8bolter, 1 flameer, +sgt) today in a couple of friendly games I played. I was pretty underwhelmed. I was also running a 10man scout (5 snipe, 1 missile, 4 shotgun) which felt far more effective, but that bolter fire started to add up for a couple turns with the rapid fire. 16 shots isn't too bad.

They DO feel like they need a slight tweak somehow. Perhaps one additional heavy/special? For the most part SM do have a ton of tac with bolters when you look at the lore, so I feel it's appropriate from that standpoint... but from a balance standpoint? I dunno.

I think if you run into a situation where you just need bodies it doesn't hurt to throw a lot of SM tac units out there, and your power rating will be 1 less with the 10 man as opposed to 2 units of 5.... but that won't add up to much unless you are running high point armies.

 combatcotton wrote:
Tactical Flexibility:
(Replaces combat squad rule of the tactical squad)

If this unit consists of 10 models after determining the starting player but before the first battle round begins you may remove exactly 5 models of this unit without breaking unit coherency. Then set those 5 models up as a separate unit anywhere in your deployment zone and more than 9" away from any enemy models.

If both players have units with this rule take turns redeploying your units starting with the player who has the first turn.

I like this, I think it's a good amount of power. You could have a bonus for combat squads and a bonus for full size, like this one from the OP.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Possibly, there could be some kind of tactical benefit/special rule that you only get if you take a full-sized squad. The first thing that comes to mind is +1 Leadership if the squad starts at full size, which carries over even if you Combat Squad into two smaller squads. (Meaning that, instead of LD8 for the squad with the Sergeant and LD7 otherwise, you get LD9 and LD8.) This'd help with the fact that large squads are generally more vulnerable to Leadership-based attacks, but isn't really enough to justify the larger squad on its own, especially since Marines are already leadership-resistant.

But really I think that the game should be designed around having infantry squads like this be able to function well, especially in a game with riptides, flyers, etc. There should be a rule for all small fire team units like combat squads where all the members protect and enhance the squads' primary gun, and a volley fire rule for units that have lots of rifles, like the 8 bolsters in a tactical squad or the massed fire from fire warriors, dire avengers, shoota boyz and guardians.

Guys this is how the great war started in the first place horrus wanted mega space marines the emperor did not.so deal with it or just be come CSM and get al the upgrades your want for your squads.
But seriously you don't see the point in combat squads? really? There is nothing wrong with tactical marines they are great. hard to kill have good range fire power and you can upgrade there weapons according to the task at hand.
Every army has the same deal standard troops and file . wish my csm or nids could go to an objective leave a few guys behind and move on. and if they die your opponent does not get points because the other halve are still alive . Or become a screen 1 squad in front of the second squad if they get charged they guys behind are unharmed and can return fire next turn or charge in.
sure you could take 2 squads of 5 tactical marines but that just means you have 5 small size units . in smaller games those could be victory points your giving away.

Redinc wrote:
Guys this is how the great war started in the first place horrus wanted mega space marines the emperor did not.so deal with it or just be come CSM and get al the upgrades your want for your squads.
But seriously you don't see the point in combat squads? really? There is nothing wrong with tactical marines they are great. hard to kill have good range fire power and you can upgrade there weapons according to the task at hand.
Every army has the same deal standard troops and file . wish my csm or nids could go to an objective leave a few guys behind and move on. and if they die your opponent does not get points because the other halve are still alive . Or become a screen 1 squad in front of the second squad if they get charged they guys behind are unharmed and can return fire next turn or charge in.
sure you could take 2 squads of 5 tactical marines but that just means you have 5 small size units . in smaller games those could be victory points your giving away.

Combat squads is useless because I can meet the minimum troop requirement and get more Combi-Weapons just by getting the 5 man squad. Also Chaos Marines are more able to upgrade to a task, and they are garbage as is. Better to just risk a KP game than have a useless rule and less weapons.

SM have always bin to cheap in my mind , great statlines great armor save , good ranged weapons. you should try playing troops from other armyś for a change then you would see SM are
under priced .
CSM can have marks and icons great magic buffs and if you go specialised army you get specialised units as troops . so go play CSM that is what you really want in your heart .

Redinc wrote:
SM have always bin to cheap in my mind , great statlines great armor save , good ranged weapons. you should try playing troops from other armyś for a change then you would see SM are
under priced .
CSM can have marks and icons great magic buffs and if you go specialised army you get specialised units as troops . so go play CSM that is what you really want in your heart .

No. Just... No.

Space Marines are around average at best.

Waaaghpower wrote:
I love the *idea* of combat squads, but in-game it's just such a lackluster, pointless ability. Tactical Marines are a low-tier troops choice to begin with, and ten-man Tactical squads are one of the worst options you can bring. I'd like to find a way to make it beneficial to bring them, but just... Eh...

As it currently stands, the first 5 Tacticals gets you a free Sergeant who can bring a Combi-weapon and/or a melee weapon, as well as access to a single Special or Heavy weapon.
The second 5 gets you... A single weapon of whatever you didn't pick before.

The second half isn't cheaper, it offers no benefits that a second five-marine squad wouldn't offer, and it's just generally inadvisable.

One possibility that comes to mind is to simply only grant a Sergeant if you take a full ten-man squad. This'd add an internally balanced reward for taking them, but makes the already-weak Tactical Marines even weaker, to the point of being one of the worst units in the game, period.

Another possibility that comes to mind is making the second five Marines cheaper - 13ppm for the first five, 12ppm for the second five. (Or, if you prefer, you spend 5 points for the mandatory Sergeant.) This is actually my favorite solution, but it runs contrary to the GW-preferred 8th edition style of 'Everything costs the same, regardless of context or how effective it actually is in a given situation.'

Possibly, there could be some kind of tactical benefit/special rule that you only get if you take a full-sized squad. The first thing that comes to mind is +1 Leadership if the squad starts at full size, which carries over even if you Combat Squad into two smaller squads. (Meaning that, instead of LD8 for the squad with the Sergeant and LD7 otherwise, you get LD9 and LD8.) This'd help with the fact that large squads are generally more vulnerable to Leadership-based attacks, but isn't really enough to justify the larger squad on its own, especially since Marines are already leadership-resistant. Most other buffs I could think of (Re-roll 1s to hit, give a single weapon from one Combat Squad 'Ignores Cover' if the other Combat Squad can see the target,) are already provided by either a Buff character or Chapter Tactics, making them redundant.

The last idea, which is one that probably won't really work out, is some kind of detachment bonus, a-la Decurion Detachments of yesteredition, that gives you a noteworthy bonus... But only if you take a 10-man Assault squad, Devestator squad, three 10-man Tactical squads, and a Captain or Chaplain. (It'd have to be a pretty potent bonus, but not something like 'Free upgrades/weapons', more in the lines of giving the Captain or Chaplain's buff to everyone in the detachment regardless of how far away they are.) GW has thus-far shied away from 'Formation' style detachments, but I really think that it could work here as a way to make full squads... If not 'Powerful', then at least 'Viable'.

So... Anyone have any ideas?

Yes we have had the same problem at our local store...Tactical Squads are over prices when compared to other choices such as sternguard (3pts for 1 extra hand to hand, better bolter, and access to stratagem).

To me "Tactical Squads" make up the "backbone" of most "codex" marine armies. Yet they do not represent much on the table top. We have been testing some ways to bring BALANCE to a forgotten troop choice that is not cheese.

Choice 1: If you select a ten man squad all special weapons choices, and heavy weapon choices are 1/2 the points.
Rational: They are the most common type of squad in a SM army...
Balance: If you field all tactical squads it provide about enough points to generate one additional squad (2000pts).

Choice 2: Each FULL tactical squad provides +1 additional command point.
Rational: They are the "most flexible" (fluff) unit in a SM army...
Balance: Hard to break dumping 350+ points into a anemic squad that gets you +3 command points

Choice 3: <chapter> Tactical squads spread commander, chaplain, and lieutenant buffs to other <chapter> tactical squads within 4".
Rational: They are the "most flexible" (fluff) unit in SM army...if from the same chapter
Balance: Gives cool buffs, helps anemic ability to points, best results in mass, easy to counter.

Personally I like choice 3 the best. Makes army HQ diversity relevant, rewards having multiple tactical squads, and promotes a very "balanced" army.

 koooaei wrote:

So, all in all, tacticals still have a place even now. They're definitely not the allmighty super-killers or unkillable super-scorers but they give you a bunch of CP. They could use a killiness buff, probably. I'd suggest giving them an ability to shoot twice for 1 CP. This can encourage a use of 10-man squads. With captain re-rolls, they'll be putting out some really good shooting on the drop.

Ooo what I'm thinking is that for a stratagem 1 point. Say you have 1 half at point A then the other half at point B they both get to fire simultaneously even though they are on the opposite sides of the board. Boom a reason to combat squad and take 10 guys. Then give them -1 ap and I'll be happy

Well, there's 2 issues with marine infantry squads right now:

1. They're very frontloaded. You start off with a free upgrade to veteran sergeant, and thanks to combi-weapons being useful again, 2 weapon slots. You could go some way to mitigate that by restricting the veteran sergeant (either a cheap upgrade in points or maybe coming free if you take a full 10 man squad) and making additional marines cheaper to incentivize taking a full squad over starting a new one. I don't think that'll work as marines aren't really so good for their points, but it's a step in the right direction.

2. The elephant in the room - marines can take 1/2 size squads as default. Back when the combat squad rule came out, the minimum size was 10 marines which made the rule more relevant. Given that marines are basically expensive wound counters for the weapon slots, no-one in their right mind is going to go for the full 10 as they get 2/3 slots to start with. Taking another squad gives them an additional 2 potential slots instead of 1 for maxing out on size.

Imagine if IG infantry squads could take 5 men with free veteran sergeant and a weapon slot? They'd be doing the exact same thing

 Torga_DW wrote:


2. The elephant in the room - marines can take 1/2 size squads as default. Back when the combat squad rule came out, the minimum size was 10 marines which made the rule more relevant. Given that marines are basically expensive wound counters for the weapon slots, no-one in their right mind is going to go for the full 10 as they get 2/3 slots to start with. Taking another squad gives them an additional 2 potential slots instead of 1 for maxing out on size.

Imagine if IG infantry squads could take 5 men with free veteran sergeant and a weapon slot? They'd be doing the exact same thing

Actually, this is a decent point. Why should Marines be able to take 5-man squads in the first place? Pretty much solves the issue.

Why does the Combat Squad rule even exist in the first place? It's clunky, and takes up unnecessary space on the datasheet. No one else has it, and the ability to take two 5-man squads can basically represent the same thing lorewise.

Wanting to Combat Squad sounds like a nostalgia thing.

 Cream Tea wrote:
Why does the Combat Squad rule even exist in the first place? It's clunky, and takes up unnecessary space on the datasheet. No one else has it, and the ability to take two 5-man squads can basically represent the same thing lorewise.

Wanting to Combat Squad sounds like a nostalgia thing.

This is exactly it; it's a legacy thing from 1st (and I think 2nd) edition when Marines always came in squads of ten. Since they started letting you take squads of 5+, there's no good reason, crunch-wise, to not take 2 separate five-man squads, but it doesn't fit with the fluff to have one sergeant every five guys. Not really sure why they changed it from 10 guys to 5-10 guys, tbh.

Yes it was like that in 2nd as well.

And I think that's the answer really, treat combat squads like transports and artillery. One purchase, one drop, but can be placed on separate locations of you choose.

That alone should be a sitting incentive under the current rules. Maybe less important once chapter approved comes out.

Zustiur wrote:
Yes it was like that in 2nd as well.

And I think that's the answer really, treat combat squads like transports and artillery. One purchase, one drop, but can be placed on separate locations of you choose.

That alone should be a sitting incentive under the current rules. Maybe less important once chapter approved comes out.

People have enough trouble making use of tacticals as it is, I don't think making you buy them in groups of ten to meet the troops requirement will make them any better.

If it was up to me I'd say Tacticals, Devestators, and Assault Marines should all be merged into one unit type. The new Tactical Squad would come in units of ten, and allow up to 4 marines to take either special, heavy, or power weapons, with the sarge still getting his sarge list. Any marine would be allowed to trade his boltgun for a chainsword. They'd also get the option to upgrade to jump packs, or have a drop pod, or rhino. I really wish this is what intercessors were.

No, there isn't, because you need to take them in 5 man teams with a single lascannon and then cower in cover. Every other use them is likely to end poorly.