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've just started collecting SM, as addition to Custodes army (or vice-versa). What would be the positive aspect of building your army around tactical squads, instead of devastator squads? They cost the same points, and give you extra amount of heavy weapons - which are of course more expensive, but you would grab them on tactical anyway, as without them they seems to be a little bit soft. Are tacticals only the tax to get CP? Or is there any other good reason to have them? Yet, wherever I look I can see tons of TS, and almost none DS.

CP is the reason. CP's are very important in the 8th ed so taking spearheads rather than battallion is shooting pretty heavily yourself foot. And 3x5 tacticals in addition to devastators are pretty expensive since power armoured models aren't that good so generally are minimized.

You need some troops because you’re probably running a battalion or two, or a brigade.

Tacticals aren’t very special right now. Mostly they’re just an objective secured troops choice so they compete with Scouts and Intercessors and they frankly might be the worst of the three.

Probably just run them with a 5 man squad, plasma gun/lascannon/ML, and maybe a storm bolter on the sergeant (combi-plasma if you’re feeling frisky). The bolters aren’t very useful so the unit doesn’t really have enough firepower to accomplish a whole lot.

 Filq wrote:
I've just started collecting SM, as addition to Custodes army (or vice-versa). What would be the positive aspect of building your army around tactical squads, instead of devastator squads? They cost the same points, and give you extra amount of heavy weapons - which are of course more expensive, but you would grab them on tactical anyway, as without them they seems to be a little bit soft. Are tacticals only the tax to get CP? Or is there any other good reason to have them? Yet, wherever I look I can see tons of TS, and almost none DS.

Devastators are an excellent unit, however with the recent FAQ updates you can only take three units of them. Tacticals Squads pair well with Devastators because Tacticals are better at being mobile units. Because Devs are limited to only Heavy Weapon choices, they're usually looking to stay more stationary. Plus, they can do most of their damage from farther away, so you can keep them to the rear. Tacticals deal the most damage when they're within 12" Rapid Fire range, so they want to be constantly moving around to maximize that.

Of the three troop choices, Tac Squads are capable of doing the most damage. They have better weapon options when compared to Scouts and Intercessors. I usually run Plasma Gun, Combi-Plasma, and Grav Cannon in a 10 man squad. Sometimes Lascannon instead of Grav.

My armies are usually 4x10 Tacticals and 2x10(ish) Devastators (Because I don't have a 3rd. squad painted atm.), plus some other junk. The Devs tend to stay put, while the Tacs are pushing up and engaging. In the past I've run them with Drop Pods and mixed around which units go in them depending on my opponent, but since the FAQ change to 1st turn deep striking, I've been looking at Rhinos more.

Don’t have my books in front of me, but don’t you still need to take 10 tacs to get ONE heavy weapon?

 Stormonu wrote:
Don’t have my books in front of me, but don’t you still need to take 10 tacs to get ONE heavy weapon?

No, you can choose from either the special weapons list or heavy weapons list with a 5-man squad.

 Stormonu wrote:
Don’t have my books in front of me, but don’t you still need to take 10 tacs to get ONE heavy weapon?

No, you can get the Heavy in a 5-man, and this is what a lot of people do. I like the big squads, but I also use them more aggressively than most. This is partly because as Ultramarines, they can back out of assaults and still fire.

Thanks all for fast reply and joining the discussion.

Insectum7, are you using tactical squad as shooty units or are they assault orientated? Bolters, even with rapid fire, don't seems to be that dangerous. Where this damage is coming from? I guess it depends who are you playing against. If you put them against orcs the output will be completely different than putting them against tough 2+/3++ enemy.

How about the scouts? They are a little bit less expensive than tacticals and have nice wargear options - plus 'Concealed Positions' rule. But as well, almost everything is heavy, and they have one less point in save.

It really looks like best would be to mix them all.

I have toyed with using Devs as replacement Tacs in lists with scouts as troops. I ran them with Combi-plasma on the sarg and 1 grav cannon, with a cherub for 113 points, and hid them in razorbacks.

The cherub allows you to double the squads grav cannon shooting the first turn they jump out, and with the right re-roll auras (I used Roboute, who makes grav cannons actually pretty good against everything by rerolling all wounds) it was fairly effective. You don't mind moving the heavy weapon, either, since the sigum cancels out the -1.

After the first volley they are effectively the same as tac Marines with a sigum, which is pretty okay.

jcd386, as Insectum7 stated - with UM tactic you could pull them back from fight and shoot back. It comes with -1 Hit penalty, and next -1 from heavy weapons rule? Damn.. that's a lot.

It also depends on what kind of chapter you're running. From the CSM side I don't see a single reason to take Havocs. But, as a CSM we don't have cherubs or the Sergeant ability thing.

From a survival standpoint it's much easier to hide 3-4 lascannons/missile launchers in the Tactical Squads you'll need as Troops anyway --- vs. putting all of your eggs in one basket. If you have a Devastator squad, it's probably a priority to kill it. If you have three or four Tactical squads running around it's much harder to negate that anti-weapon fire. Likewise a single assaulting unit can tie up a Devastator squad where it'd be more difficult to tie up several tactical squads.

 Filq wrote:
jcd386, as Insectum7 stated - with UM tactic you could pull them back from fight and shoot back. It comes with -1 Hit penalty, and next -1 from heavy weapons rule? Damn.. that's a lot.

The "pro move" is this: When you engage in CC, keep your heavy at least 1" away form enemy models. That way the squad can fall back, but the heavy guy doesn't have to move. No additional -1 to hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
It also depends on what kind of chapter you're running. From the CSM side I don't see a single reason to take Havocs. But, as a CSM we don't have cherubs or the Sergeant ability thing.

You have the "shoot twice" Stratagem, and the "add-1-to-wound" Stratagem off the top of my head. If you didn't bring Obliterators (or they are dead or whatever), the Havocs offer up higher density Heavy/Special weapons to take advantage of them.

Sure, and the stratagem approach is one of the few reasons to run a unit like that (or indeed a "large" unit of any type --- most bang for you buck). I run the Renegade trait and my entire army is marked <Nurgle> so I do not make use of the Slaanesh double shoot stratagem.

It is indeed a consideration.

Devastator squads are generally better because they can take the cherub, and with Heavy bolters and missile launchers it synergizes nicely. Also, the signum gives them the ability to hit on 2s.

 Filq wrote:
jcd386, as Insectum7 stated - with UM tactic you could pull them back from fight and shoot back. It comes with -1 Hit penalty, and next -1 from heavy weapons rule? Damn.. that's a lot.

To be honest, I've never ever had them get into close combat.marines die to a still breeze so they just got shot to death. That being said, you still get to use the sigum every turn, so you can still shoot at BS4+ which is better than nothing.

I use Hellblasters and plasma Inceptors with Custodes and it has been working for me quite well.

The thing is that you're already running Scouts to use as screens or meat shields. Why spend more on what is the definition of a tax unit?

Meanwhile Devastators get a BS2+ heavy weapon and the Cherub to synergize with the Helfire or Flakk stratagem. People say you need to spend more on them but you REALLY don't need to. Keep it at two Heavy Weapons, and only three if you add an extra Marine. That's it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The thing is that you're already running Scouts to use as screens or meat shields. Why spend more on what is the definition of a tax unit?
.

No slayer, you're already running scouts. Imagine a world in which not everyone plays the same.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The thing is that you're already running Scouts to use as screens or meat shields. Why spend more on what is the definition of a tax unit?
.

No slayer, you're already running scouts. Imagine a world in which not everyone plays the same.

Seeing as everyone needs screens with viable deployment options...yes you're already running Scouts. Once you hit three squads you officially hit your minimum.

So there's no point to spend afterwards compared to Devastators. Objective Secured is useless so...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

Haha. No I think Im safe deploying devastators after you deploy your fire raptor, because I can just put them out of LOS of it, and in LOS of your other units, and they will be immune from the Fire Rapter because there's apparently "no value" in it having a high movement.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Filq wrote:
jcd386, as Insectum7 stated - with UM tactic you could pull them back from fight and shoot back. It comes with -1 Hit penalty, and next -1 from heavy weapons rule? Damn.. that's a lot.

The "pro move" is this: When you engage in CC, keep your heavy at least 1" away form enemy models. That way the squad can fall back, but the heavy guy doesn't have to move. No additional -1 to hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
It also depends on what kind of chapter you're running. From the CSM side I don't see a single reason to take Havocs. But, as a CSM we don't have cherubs or the Sergeant ability thing.

You have the "shoot twice" Stratagem, and the "add-1-to-wound" Stratagem off the top of my head. If you didn't bring Obliterators (or they are dead or whatever), the Havocs offer up higher density Heavy/Special weapons to take advantage of them.

Also, if your TS is charged but your heavy weapon is out of combat because the enemy can not engage him, when in next turn your squad falls back.... He can shoot without minus? Have still a lot to learn yes.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

Haha. No I think Im safe deploying devastators after you deploy your fire raptor, because I can just put them out of LOS of it, and in LOS of your other units, and they will be immune from the Fire Rapter because there's apparently "no value" in it having a high movement.

They're moving maybe 2 times because of the range on their weapons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

Haha. No I think Im safe deploying devastators after you deploy your fire raptor, because I can just put them out of LOS of it, and in LOS of your other units, and they will be immune from the Fire Rapter because there's apparently "no value" in it having a high movement.

They're moving maybe 2 times because of the range on their weapons.

That might be true. But you know why you might only have to move once or twice? Because its fast!

A Dreadnought has a move of 6". Fire Raptor: 45". Theres value to that even if you don't want to admit it.

It just makes good sense to move the Raptor for a variety of reasons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The thing is that you're already running Scouts to use as screens or meat shields. Why spend more on what is the definition of a tax unit?
.

No slayer, you're already running scouts. Imagine a world in which not everyone plays the same.

Seeing as everyone needs screens with viable deployment options...yes you're already running Scouts. Once you hit three squads you officially hit your minimum.

So there's no point to spend afterwards compared to Devastators. Objective Secured is useless so...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

I don't run scouts. I use the bolter half of combat squads to do my screening. So, no. Not everyone is using scouts.

Primark G, plasma FTW - that is exactly what everybody is saying in 8th edition. I wonder, if you are paying Custodes, why would you invest in another multi wound unit? It would be easier for the enemy to build his troops to be against you as all units would be fragile against same type of weapon. Am I missing something?

 Filq wrote:
Primark G, plasma FTW - that is exactly what everybody is saying in 8th edition. I wonder, if you are paying Custodes, why would you invest in another multi wound unit? It would be easier for the enemy to build his troops to be against you as all units would be fragile against same type of weapon. Am I missing something?

It's a squew list of multiple wound infantry. It trys to saturate an opponents ability to deal with a single target type.
Most high rate of fire weapons are 1 damage some are D2
Custodes are 2+4++ 6mortal save. With 3 wounds avarage.
Primaris are 2 wound 3+ save. Similar targets.

A tack list will tend to have some anti tank some anti hoard and some utility weapons. The most efficient way to kill all of his models is utillity weapons. Ie predator autocannons HBC.

Most ranged weapons are single wound. 2 DMG kills 2W model same as 1 DMG but not vice versa... don’t go down that rabbit hole.

 Mmmpi wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The thing is that you're already running Scouts to use as screens or meat shields. Why spend more on what is the definition of a tax unit?
.

No slayer, you're already running scouts. Imagine a world in which not everyone plays the same.

Seeing as everyone needs screens with viable deployment options...yes you're already running Scouts. Once you hit three squads you officially hit your minimum.

So there's no point to spend afterwards compared to Devastators. Objective Secured is useless so...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Then again you think Fire Raptors are amazing for their movement so I don't expect you to actually know much about the codex ar this point. It's almost impressive how ignorant of the codex you are.

I don't run scouts. I use the bolter half of combat squads to do my screening. So, no. Not everyone is using scouts.

So let me get this straight. You:
1. Spend more than you have to on a unit with a bad profile
2. Use them to screen when:
3. They don't have the superior deployment option

Scouts are being used for a reason. Why are you spending on any troop outside them? If you want Bolter screens for some God forsaken reason you have Intercessors.

Did you know that 1st turn deep strike isn't a thing anymore?