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 dont think i explained myself properly last post.

Tac sqauds Are fine, but IF you you want to bring them in line with the other marine codexii, then they need to radically change.

despite what everyone else thinks, i run 30 marines in a gunline list,
30 tacs
15 Devs with missiles, the rest i just chop and change
i only lost once to BA, and that is because i had never played them before, and every time i play SW, they lose

Btw this is a kantor list, so its a bit better than normal in CC

Well, not to crap all over your anecdotes of awesomeness, but if you played Blood Angels or Space Wolves instead of Vanilla Marines, that same exact army would end up about 200 points less, and all your normal guys would have jump packs or more attacks/better wargear. I'm trying to focus on the C:SM strategies that are actually consider more or less uniquely theirs, which typically involves some Assault Terminators, Vulcan, Bikes, a Librarian and/or Drop Pods. In none of those lists do tactical squads do more then provide a better drop pod assault (3 useful things in pods and 2 Tac Pods) or objective camping.

And @Melissa,
I am absolutely considering other armies troops, though I am not really considering non-5th edition troops, as they are typically in need of tweaking to bring them up close to the 5th edition codices (even Tactical Squads). I just believe they dropped the ball with them and that they could have easily been easier to synergize with the overall army. I don't feel any troops choice is defined by their basic weapon or armour save, but generally by their ability to do something essential for their army, whether support it where it lacks (such as GH, Assault Squads, or Wyches), contribute to its winning strategy (Vets, Blobs, Genestealers, Warriors, GH, Assault Squads) or be incredibly tough to take off objective (Blobs, Tervigons: honorable mention of Plague Marines, who are beefcakes; Wracks).
Tactical Squads are apparently supposed to provide the last part, and while they do it better then some, they aren't nearly as durable as Plague Marines or blobs; but still are priced like they are. Wracks have almost identical stats and are 2/3 the points. Even with a Haemonculous they are cheaper then a 10 man Tac squad, though they lack any long range firepower at all (making it an easier choice to go to ground! ). And that is the only thing they provide an army; they are below average in assault and can't provide fire support.

Magister187 wrote:Well, not to crap all over your anecdotes of awesomeness, but if you played Blood Angels or Space Wolves instead of Vanilla Marines, that same exact army would end up about 200 points less, and all your normal guys would have jump packs or more attacks/better wargear. I'm trying to focus on the C:SM strategies that are actually consider more or less uniquely theirs, which typically involves some Assault Terminators, Vulcan, Bikes, a Librarian and/or Drop Pods. In none of those lists do tactical squads do more then provide a better drop pod assault (3 useful things in pods and 2 Tac Pods) or objective camping.

And @Melissa,
I am absolutely considering other armies troops, though I am not really considering non-5th edition troops, as they are typically in need of tweaking to bring them up close to the 5th edition codices (even Tactical Squads). I just believe they dropped the ball with them and that they could have easily been easier to synergize with the overall army. I don't feel any troops choice is defined by their basic weapon or armour save, but generally by their ability to do something essential for their army, whether support it where it lacks (such as GH, Assault Squads, or Wyches), contribute to its winning strategy (Vets, Blobs, Genestealers, Warriors, GH, Assault Squads) or be incredibly tough to take off objective (Blobs, Tervigons: honorable mention of Plague Marines, who are beefcakes; Wracks).
Tactical Squads are apparently supposed to provide the last part, and while they do it better then some, they aren't nearly as durable as Plague Marines or blobs; but still are priced like they are. Wracks have almost identical stats and are 2/3 the points. Even with a Haemonculous they are cheaper then a 10 man Tac squad, though they lack any long range firepower at all (making it an easier choice to go to ground! ). And that is the only thing they provide an army; they are below average in assault and can't provide fire support.

well i never! lol
rude dude.

I are Teh awsomz, is not what i was saying. what i was trying to say was, if tac sqauds are so bad, how could i possibly win when taking 30?
and i am a good player, as several Dakkaites can attest to, good.. not amazing.

Tac sqauds do everything i want them to do, i dont expect them to shine, they are there to support the devs and termies, which they do bloody well sir! (posh english accent)

Melissia wrote:

NuggzTheNinja wrote:Putting carapace armor on Vets is basically throwing your points away. Power Armor is almost never worth it given the ubiquity of cover saves in 5th edition.

Assault.

Huh, I guess you're wrong. It's almost ALWAYS worth it.

Not really, no. The big advantage to having Tactical Marines in hand to hand is Combat Tactics: the option to run away, leaving the rest of your army free to shoot the enemy unit in your turn. You don't need power armor to do this. You simply need to not be locked in combat with that unit.

Odds are, your tactical marines are going to get facebeaten by most things that would ever want to assault them (and since they only have 2A on the charge, they're worthless for assaulting nearly anything), so when you run away, you're freeing up the enemy unit to be shot. You aren't going to be saving the squad. A pre-requisite for using Combat Tactics is that the squad can optionally fail its morale check, so it's already involved in a losing proposition.

For that purpose, Vets with Flak Armor accomplish the same thing: if they get assaulted, they typically don't last one round of H2H. I don't WANT them to last one round of H2H because they certainly aren't going to last 2. Only they've got better access to special weapons and wargear and better transports. And they're cheaper.

Formosa wrote:

well i never! lol
rude dude.

I are Teh awsomz, is not what i was saying. what i was trying to say was, if tac sqauds are so bad, how could i possibly win when taking 30?
and i am a good player, as several Dakkaites can attest to, good.. not amazing.

Tac sqauds do everything i want them to do, i dont expect them to shine, they are there to support the devs and termies, which they do bloody well sir! (posh english accent)

I didn't say tac squads were so bad, stop misrepresenting my point. Yes, the vanilla codex can win with them. Yes, they server some purposes, but they are not on par with what I believe a troop choice should give, REAL support (which, despite what you have said, I can think of no way in which 30 tactical marines would support your army in the real sense of the word; they may provide some turns of bubble wrap and short range anti-infantry, but hardly help you win or cover the weaker part of your army, assault). I just believe that, as they laid them out, they are ineffective at significantly impacting the game in any sense but "Hey, at least they aren't shooting/assaulting my good units!", or killing weakened/bad units.

What do you mean SUPPORT your army?

Troops ARE your army. The rest is supporting THEM.

Quite frankly, instead of trying to make Tact squads just as outragous as their other counterparts, maybe nerf the other ones instead. CSM squads have free CCWs because they dont have ATSKNF nor have combat tactics. For their meager reroll they have to pay extra points for an icon and have an overcosted Aspiring champ. Wolves should be bumped up a few points due to having two extra special rules on top of ATSKNF and having 2 CCWs and BAs should have their Assault Marines decrease in cost on a by-marine-basis when taking Jump Packs off rather than a flat cost decrease on a transport.

Melissia wrote:What do you mean SUPPORT your army?

Troops ARE your army. The rest is supporting THEM.

I guess we can agree to disagree then. I think your ARMY is your ARMY and that everything in it should serve a purpose of either adding to your armies effectiveness or minimizing its weaknesses. And no amount of hollering about how good they are changes the fact that Tactical squads are filler in the majority of vanilla marine lists. I am 100% honest when I tell you I would take Veteran IG squads 100% of the time if given the choice between them and a tactical squad. If Mr. 30 tactical marines thinks otherwise, that's totally fine. This is just my opinion in the discussion.

Plus you add combi-flamer and voila

Marines are still great units... Too bad that they don't have ccw... It would make them pain in the ass... They can do anything, but will get locked in combat with even easiest foes...

People seem to be missing that standard marines are pretty much the "allcomers" of the 40K universe. They can do all jobs OK with a good chance of surviving and killing whatever it is they need to kill.

The whole point of tactical marines is you need to use them tactically. If you are getting wiped out by dedicated CC units, why are you putting marines in that position?

If you are getting shot to bits by dedicated shooting units, why are you putting marines in that position?

There is nothing tactical about buffing a generic allrounder unit like the tactical squad so that it can do everything excellently. Most other armies have to choose: Do I want a CC squad, or do I want a shooty squad? Because the army doesn't have an allrounder unit like the space marines do.

Probably the closest would be the CSM standard troop choice, but they pay more points for their options and get less rules for a slight increase in ability to do shooting and CC at the same time.

Right it's really only compared to Grey Hunters that tacticals suddenly look bad.

This is a fault of the Space Wolves codex, not the Space Marines codex.

Magister187 wrote:

Formosa wrote:

well i never! lol
rude dude.

I are Teh awsomz, is not what i was saying. what i was trying to say was, if tac sqauds are so bad, how could i possibly win when taking 30?
and i am a good player, as several Dakkaites can attest to, good.. not amazing.

Tac sqauds do everything i want them to do, i dont expect them to shine, they are there to support the devs and termies, which they do bloody well sir! (posh english accent)

I didn't say tac squads were so bad, stop misrepresenting my point. Yes, the vanilla codex can win with them. Yes, they server some purposes, but they are not on par with what I believe a troop choice should give, REAL support (which, despite what you have said, I can think of no way in which 30 tactical marines would support your army in the real sense of the word; they may provide some turns of bubble wrap and short range anti-infantry, but hardly help you win or cover the weaker part of your army, assault). I just believe that, as they laid them out, they are ineffective at significantly impacting the game in any sense but "Hey, at least they aren't shooting/assaulting my good units!", or killing weakened/bad units.

Humour:dude take a joke lol

to anyone who has played mass effect

Understanding response: I can see what you are getting at, I just dont expect alot from my tac sqauds.

polite Attempted explanation: I find that the 3 plasma cannons and 3 plasma guns help support my Dev sqauds by not tying up there HW slots.
secondly, like you said, they halp bubble wrap my immportant units, also when they get attacked in combat and "normally" hold due to stubborn, i get to counter attack with my 3 Attack
TH/SS unit (i keep kantor well out of combat), this is me is a good way of supporting the rest of my army

hey maybe we should all write like that, as writing normally does not convey intent

NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Not really, no. The big advantage to having Tactical Marines in hand to hand is Combat Tactics: the option to run away, leaving the rest of your army free to shoot the enemy unit in your turn. You don't need power armor to do this. You simply need to not be locked in combat with that unit.

Odds are, your tactical marines are going to get facebeaten by most things that would ever want to assault them (and since they only have 2A on the charge, they're worthless for assaulting nearly anything), so when you run away, you're freeing up the enemy unit to be shot. You aren't going to be saving the squad. A pre-requisite for using Combat Tactics is that the squad can optionally fail its morale check, so it's already involved in a losing proposition.

For that purpose, Vets with Flak Armor accomplish the same thing: if they get assaulted, they typically don't last one round of H2H. I don't WANT them to last one round of H2H because they certainly aren't going to last 2. Only they've got better access to special weapons and wargear and better transports. And they're cheaper.

Uh, as an Eldar player, I can attest to assaulting things with DIRE AVENGERS. you know t3, s3, 4+ save models with 2 attacks each on the charge and no grenades. There are plenty of reasons for doing this. Enemy squad on an objective that shooting didn't wipe out, or I want to try to push them off and take it for myself. This happens fairly often, really there are tactical opportunities where cc becomes preferable to staying in the open- even if you are not using specialized cc units or dedicated ranged units. And let me tell you, I'd rather assault onto an objective with Tactical Space Marines then with Dire Avengers or Storm Guardians!

That said, I do agree that the space wolf codex went OTT with its grey hunter squads- between Counter Attack, Mark of the Furry, ATSKNF, and pistols + ccw included on the profile, and the ability to take 2 special weapons... it really makes them like a sick hybrid cross between all the advantages of Tactical Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines... for a DISCOUNT... for what wolf players get they really should be paying around 18 ppm.

All told I do think its telling that most of the space marine army reviews I've seen note that you shouldn't take very many tactical squads. What with combat squading you can usually get by with 2 or 3 squads and still be fine on objective based games. Saving your points for smashy things like LRs and hammernators and Typhoons.

At any rate from what I've seen about space marines, I would think the best way to run them would be 10 man, ML + melta, and combi melta sarge (or flamers), with a razor dedicated transport. That way you still get 2 special weapons, and the heavy weapon can happily plunk away.

The reason people take those choices is because they're still used to lasplas, meh.

I love my plasma cannon and plasma gun, the sheer ammount of Meq at my FLGS is... well normal i guess.
i have noticed a distinct lack of any real AT (at my FLGS) though, even the guard player rarely runs alot of tanks. I seem to be the only one with any ammount of AT, and most of that goes to killing MeQ or 12 kraks a turn at transports (even land raiders are stopped by this) then i plasma the crap out of the occupents

Tacticals only pale in comparison to BA assault marines and SW grey hunters.

They do offer the advantage of a discounted heavy weapon and reasonable ability to stand and take anything.

Definitely preferable to having devastators or sterngard getting shot up. They even offer an ability to stand up and take a round of CC due to having 3+ armor and T4.
Sure they will get owned by bloodcrushers or termies or some hoard of power weapons but even a mass of high strength non-power weapon attacks will not guarantee that tacs will run. Now they may inevitably lose the combat but this also puts a risk on an opponent. It also gives you an opportunity to field a counterattack unit that can come in and save the day.

Alternatively you have the combat tactics and the ability to auto run and avoid combats. So much so that orcs don't necessarily want to shoot+ charge you because you have the potential to take 3 casualties in the shooting phase and run.

CSM have dedicated troops and they certainly are better but also are paying a 50% penalty for all that awesomeness. Wounds do count. So while a bunch of berzerkers will be more awesome in CC or plague marines will stand up better, they will be fielding 7 to your squad of 10 WITH heavy weapon.

So we are left with grey hunters and BA assault marines.
The grey hunters while better than SM in CC, are inferior to the tacs in reach - due to HW and to a degree cost.
While an army of 6 tacs versus 6 greyhunters will invariably lead to the SW win. Remember he does have to pay for all of that, so hopefully - rather than sinking pointing into a PW for your sgt, you will take the points savings and increase your firepower advantage by taking a unit of devastators or two dakka preds or you will take a unit of something that will own him in CC like 5 TH/SS termies or the like.

It seems a lot of peoples' problems with tacs are to do with either weapons choices or 'lack of flexibility,' which generally translates to 'only have one attack.'

You're getting a ML, MM, flamer etc. for FREE. That's more or less like having your cake and eating it.

Plus, I once saw a ten man tac squad take an assault from 20 stealers and win. Granted, only the sarge and two others were left, but they still won.

Sixalicious wrote:
Plus, I once saw a ten man tac squad take an assault from 20 stealers and win. Granted, only the sarge and two others were left, but they still won.

And I had Guardians beat a Carnifex in a assault, doesn't make them good at all.

Anecdotal evidence from a statistical outlier is only going to feed the idiots who don't think Tac Squads are good. It'd be more useful to point out something they're likely to do that was useful, like having 5 of a 10 man combat squad get wrecked by genestealers only to have the other 5 chop them into haggis after they were out of assault.

like i said i love my tac sqauds, as a DA player it cost me 15 points for just a plasma gun and a further 15 for the cannon, now i get all the plasma goodness for HALF the price.

I hate to say this, but.. if you think Tac sqauds are not a good support unit, then your not useing them properly

Best way to improve Tac Squads?

Nerf hammer some of the cheese out of newer space marine codex's.

jp400 wrote:Best way to improve Tac Squads?

Nerf hammer some of the cheese out of newer space marine codex's.

lolzzzzzzzzzz

you would have to nerf hammer alot more than that if you ask some of the people who have posted lol

new tac sqaud cost... 13 pts per model lol


scouts become 8... hmm actually that dont sound bad.. make em pay 5pts for sniper rifle though

I'd allow them a single special or hevy weapon per 5 and the other at 10 man. Maybe even allow them to pick up to 2 heavies or specials or a mix, so they can be kitted out as needed.

Also the best suggestion i've seen for Tact marines was someone saying give them true grit or whatever it is that lets them use bolters as CC weapons, means constant 2 attacks and no bonus for charging, so they can still shoot as well and won't become 3 attacks on the charge grey hunters thus keeping things sweet.

Formosa wrote:you would have to nerf hammer alot more than that if you ask some of the people who have posted lol

That's because a lot of these people aren't playing an army that suits their playstyle.

DakkaDakka wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Formosa wrote:you would have to nerf hammer alot more than that if you ask some of the people who have posted lol

That's because a lot of these people aren't playing an army that suits their playstyle.

Fully agree.

People need to stop trying to change an army to fit their style, and instead change their style to fit their army or change armies.

I mean hell, if you play Space Marines, all you have to do is change their color from Blue, to red, gray, green, black ect ect and you get an entirely "different" army. How hard is that?!?

tac squads are awesome! split em into combat squads sgt goes into 1 with two flamers while the other has 2 heavy boltersor something like tht

Meh, in my case, if I were to play Marines, I'd play Marines tac-heavy. Four tac squads, one or two assault squads, three preds, and a jump pack chappie... or four tacs, three preds, and a TH/SS termie squad with a termie captain.

But then my idea on what makes a good army is different because I've never actually OWNED a Space Marine army before... I just own Sisters, Orks, and Guard. Which means I don't have all that stupid baggage from previous editions and previous codices as far as Marines go.

If I played marines, I would play BA and use CSM models.

An entire army of Raptors? Yes please

hehe FAIL! wrote:tac squads are awesome! split em into combat squads sgt goes into 1 with two flamers while the other has 2 heavy boltersor something like tht

Not in my codex!

hmm a thought occures, why bother trying to improve the tac sqaud when other stuff in the marine codex needs it more

Like Tactical termies