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.

So I currently run 2 6 marine tactical squad w/a missile launcher and a 6 marine Intercessor but I'm wondering if it would be better to go with the full 10 Marines or 5 instead. Hoping to get some people insights please?

Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

What's the reasoning behind not taking them? Maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit but I figured to fill out my Battalion w/2 squads of Tac with a missile launcher in each would help to use the anti air stratagem and help get me the 5 CP.

Most use 5, I use 10-man and combat-squad them if I want to. Fewer drops if I want, or I can then concentrate weapon combinations into transports. Like deploy 2x2plasma squads in a Rhino/Pod, then keep the other guys back for supporting fire, or whatever. Flexibility is good, imo.

 Insectum7 wrote:
I use 10-man and combat-squad them if I want to.

Me too

dkoz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

What's the reasoning behind not taking them? Maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit but I figured to fill out my Battalion w/2 squads of Tac with a missile launcher in each would help to use the anti air stratagem and help get me the 5 CP.

Basically 13pts is too much to pay for a single model with T4 and 1 wound, given the mechanics of this edition.


Intercessors are a touch better given their durability and -1 AP, but really it's all about Scouts for SM Troops right now. Their special deployment rule is great, and one of the few viable ways to get models outside your deployment zone for Marines.

Stux wrote:

dkoz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

What's the reasoning behind not taking them? Maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit but I figured to fill out my Battalion w/2 squads of Tac with a missile launcher in each would help to use the anti air stratagem and help get me the 5 CP.

Basically 13pts is too much to pay for a single model with T4 and 1 wound, given the mechanics of this edition.


Intercessors are a touch better given their durability and -1 AP, but really it's all about Scouts for SM Troops right now. Their special deployment rule is great, and one of the few viable ways to get models outside your deployment zone for Marines.

Is it worth putting the camocloacks on the scouts to get that 2+ save in cover?

Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

dkoz wrote:

Stux wrote:

dkoz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

What's the reasoning behind not taking them? Maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit but I figured to fill out my Battalion w/2 squads of Tac with a missile launcher in each would help to use the anti air stratagem and help get me the 5 CP.

Basically 13pts is too much to pay for a single model with T4 and 1 wound, given the mechanics of this edition.


Intercessors are a touch better given their durability and -1 AP, but really it's all about Scouts for SM Troops right now. Their special deployment rule is great, and one of the few viable ways to get models outside your deployment zone for Marines.

Is it worth putting the camocloacks on the scouts to get that 2+ save in cover?

Tough to say. I really like it personally, a 2+ save is quite difficult to shift without the opponent dedicating a lot of firepower, and if they are doing that to a scout unit instead of something else then that is really good for you. It is a significant price bump though.

Zero. The correct answer is to never use them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

At the cost of incredible fragility.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scouts suck too, make no mistake. They just give up the fewest points before dying miserably.

Martel732 wrote:
Zero. The correct answer is to never use them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

At the cost of incredible fragility.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scouts suck too, make no mistake. They just give up the fewest points before dying miserably.

Scouts' threat to cost ratio is very poor for sure, but forward deployment is also a very strong ability. They're able to control objectives and deny deep strike. While other armies have much more efficient ways of doing this, Marines don't. So scouts fill a vital role.

Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

I'm guessing scouts inside a razorback don't get that scout move correct?

I run mine in a 5 man squad most the time with a plasma gun and storm bolter/combiplaz. If I have extra points and am not running devs for some reason I toss in a few extra tacs just to fill out my points.

dkoz wrote:
I'm guessing scouts inside a razorback don't get that scout move correct?

Haha. Correct.

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

You're right in that it's down to the meta.

It's also down to the rest of your list. In 'normal' games you can afford to take a bunch of suboptimal stuff if your list makes up for it elsewhere, and it probably won't make much difference.

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

Two players spam dissy cannons backed by doom. No mercy. They table marines as quickly as they can for sport.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stux wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Zero. The correct answer is to never use them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

At the cost of incredible fragility.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scouts suck too, make no mistake. They just give up the fewest points before dying miserably.

Scouts' threat to cost ratio is very poor for sure, but forward deployment is also a very strong ability. They're able to control objectives and deny deep strike. While other armies have much more efficient ways of doing this, Marines don't. So scouts fill a vital role.

Is deep strike worth denying anymore?

Martel732 wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

Two players spam dissy cannons backed by doom. No mercy. They table marines as quickly as they can for sport.

Got a list for that? I'm just curious.

Martel732 wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

Two players spam dissy cannons backed by doom. No mercy. They table marines as quickly as they can for sport.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stux wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Zero. The correct answer is to never use them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

At the cost of incredible fragility.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scouts suck too, make no mistake. They just give up the fewest points before dying miserably.

Scouts' threat to cost ratio is very poor for sure, but forward deployment is also a very strong ability. They're able to control objectives and deny deep strike. While other armies have much more efficient ways of doing this, Marines don't. So scouts fill a vital role.

Is deep strike worth denying anymore?

Good question. It depends. If you're possibly facing Alpha Legion or Raven Guard then absolutely.

dkoz wrote:

Stux wrote:

dkoz wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Zero is the best number.

Or minimum size if you're insistent on using them. You shouldn't though.

What's the reasoning behind not taking them? Maybe I'm stuck in the past a bit but I figured to fill out my Battalion w/2 squads of Tac with a missile launcher in each would help to use the anti air stratagem and help get me the 5 CP.

Basically 13pts is too much to pay for a single model with T4 and 1 wound, given the mechanics of this edition.


Intercessors are a touch better given their durability and -1 AP, but really it's all about Scouts for SM Troops right now. Their special deployment rule is great, and one of the few viable ways to get models outside your deployment zone for Marines.

Is it worth putting the camocloacks on the scouts to get that 2+ save in cover?

No. Camo Cloaks are super bad right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

I personally take them in squads of 10 to unlock both a heavy & special weapon, that and the extra bodies are useful. Combat tactics to deploy them as two units if need be. I tend to run Salamanders, so the re-rolls are very handy.

Two players spam dissy cannons backed by doom. No mercy. They table marines as quickly as they can for sport.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stux wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Zero. The correct answer is to never use them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Don't be put off by the haters. Tacticals armed well deal more damage than the other two troop choices for marines. I like GravCannon (or Lascannon) plus CombiPlasma and Plsma in 10-man squads.

At the cost of incredible fragility.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Scouts suck too, make no mistake. They just give up the fewest points before dying miserably.

Scouts' threat to cost ratio is very poor for sure, but forward deployment is also a very strong ability. They're able to control objectives and deny deep strike. While other armies have much more efficient ways of doing this, Marines don't. So scouts fill a vital role.

Is deep strike worth denying anymore?

Deep Strike denying is still a vital role, AND you can't guarantee the reserves Beta rule will last.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 stonehorse wrote:
Wow, things must be harsh in people's meta if Tactial Marines are considered garbage.

They've basically always been garbage. Remember how last edition it took 35-55 free points from a Transport to make them worth considering?

I've got my souped in valhallans to suck up deep strikes. I can move move move two squads of them before the deep strikers can arrive. I really don't like paying 11 pts for a 4+ save. Not when 5+ saves cost 4.

Six is the best number. Everything should be taken in sixes.

Don't change anything.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Six is the best number. Everything should be taken in sixes.

Don't change anything.

Why is this your opinion?

Since I run CSM with a <Nurgle> flavor, all my squads are seven. It's a little nod to the fluff and is a decent size. Don't lose a ton to morale, a couple bodies to soak up fire before the heavy weapon or champion is hit - and leaves me room in the Rhino for a character or three.

Are they worth 13 points per model? Probably not, but they get the job done often enough (and Chaos champion weapon options are superior to most sergeant options from what I hear).

I was about to say I'm stuck in 2nd Ed with either 5 or 10 man squads, but then I remembered they used to sell a box set of marines that had 6 models.

I still like either 5 or 10. Mostly because 10 is a full unit, so split in half it becomes 2x 5 man squads.

dkoz wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Six is the best number. Everything should be taken in sixes.

Don't change anything.

Why is this your opinion?

It's a habit he picked up from Slaanesh I'm sure.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

They've basically always been garbage. Remember how last edition it took 35-55 free points from a Transport to make them worth considering?

While I have played 40k since 2md edition, I have only started playing Space Marines since 8th edition, so didn't have that luxury.

Played against Marines a fair bit and always found their Tactical Marines to be a solid troop choice. May be the meta I have encountered over the years aren't ultra competitive.

I assure you officer, I've only had a few ales it is mere coincidence that I have a Slaanesh Daemon force that has six Heralds, six Chariots, 3 six-strong seeker squads, sixty Daemonettes, six Daemonic Icons, six Instruments and a LoW that costs 666pts. Also, of my non-HQ models 66.6% have purple hair.

Coincidence.

Seriously, I did take six marines in all my squads when I was young, foolish and played Space Catholics. I found the extra body useful but not massively expensive; a boyz before toyz kind of thing.

If you play by points, I'd keep six. If you play by Power Level (people do that, right?), six costs the same as ten so you might as well take ten unless you're an oddball with some bloody-minded obsession with the number six.

I'd say go with 8... But that's heresy.

 darkcloak wrote:
I'd say go with 8... But that's heresy.

Imperial Calendar

January 1st
January 2nd
January 3rd
January 4th
January 5th
January 10th.