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.
2019/07/29 19:51:29
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
It should be competitive. But to use the tactic, the glass cannon factor comes in. You do damage for two turns, and then your dudes are dead. I really don't understand how GW can't just watch half a dozen marine batreps and see this trend.
The more I play, I really think durability/pt is a bigger problem for marines than firepower/pt. It certainly is for BA.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/07/29 19:54:54
2019/07/29 19:55:37
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Never attribute to stupidity what is equally attributable to malice?
More seriously, it seems likely that GW intends Tacs to remain uncompetitive, with Primaris being the way of the future. Much like how they basically abandoned Cents (among other things), they'll remain "suboptimal" so that Primaris look better comparitively. They can't directly nerf them without pushback, but they can just watch while buffs elsewhere push them further and further out of the game.
Tacs not getting a buff are unlikely because GW doesn't realize how bad they are. There's a reason they didn't get a buff. CA seemed to clearly be written with Tacs going down in points, but GW didn't include that change for a reason.
2019/07/29 19:57:33
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
I mean all marines. Look how long their precious gravis idiots last when dissy cannons get pointed their way. Or star cannons. Or autocannons. Or battle cannons. Or plasma. Or kellermorphs. Or......
Thanks to relying on T5 instead of 2+, even wyverns disintegrate them outside of over. Or inside with the formation.
"We have a milion shots!" Once. Then you die. That just screams "elite shock troops", doesn't it?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/07/29 19:59:54
2019/07/29 20:08:54
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Martel732 wrote: I mean all marines. Look how long their precious gravis idiots last when dissy cannons get pointed their way. Or star cannons. Or autocannons. Or battle cannons. Or plasma. Or kellermorphs. Or......
Thanks to relying on T5 instead of 2+, even wyverns disintegrate them outside of over. Or inside with the formation.
"We have a milion shots!" Once. Then you die. That just screams "elite shock troops", doesn't it?
So what, I also face all those weapons and my army isn't just gone after a couple of turns.
Do you play with enough big shot blockers? Do you play on planet Bowling Alley? Maybe you need to work on how to deploy your army so that it doesn't matter who gets the first shooting fase: Deploy for surviveability and not potential damage output. Let them come for you so you can concentrate your shooting and assault in the latter half of the game.
"Honour, Compassion and Self-sacrifice"
2019/07/29 20:12:45
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Bharring wrote: This thread reminds me of the dozens-of-pages thread we had back when Gman/Razorbacks were the big thing, and the prominent GT was won with 5-6 5-man Tac squads each with a LC.
The usual posters went on ad nausium about how bad the list was. How they could do better. How *obviously* it should have been dev squads not tacs. But the usual posters spouting that drivel *haven't* gone on to any notable tournament wins.
Bottom line; don't take posts on DakkaDakka as gospel. Some is more reliable than others (you probably want 5man Tacs instead of 10mans). But that was answered in the first couple posts. Now we'll have a dozen pages about how Tacs have always been the worst Troop, how Marines have been the worst army in the game for decades, and how it's impossible to not lose if you take any Tacs.
How different was the game then?
Tons. Which is why an anectdote about how the thread goes off the rails discussing marines from a while back should be taken more as evidence that this thread will continue off the rails than a comment on modern balance/options.
Perhaps additional hints in that direction - such as phrases like "back when [thing] were the big thing" or "this thread reminds me...". Or all the past-tense. Perhaps I should have included one of those things in my post...
It's almost like they shouldn't have nefred it because every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs.
This is why it's hard to take all this "But Mahreens" complaints seriously. GMan still pops up from time to time, as is. The nerfs were to *him* and Razorbacks, not to Tacs. If he's still occasionally good enough now, he'd be absurdly OP at his old cost. Now, maybe Razorbacks went up a little too much, but this is just silly.
As for "every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs", hell no.
IG received only a couple marginal buffs. And larger marginal nerfs. They're mostly in the same place as a book - but IoM as a whole (which includes Marines) got a lot more toys. Like Knights.
CWE had their deathstar at the time nerfed. Then they got their replacement deathstar nerfed. Then they got their replacement deathstar nerfed. Then various other parts got further nerfed. A couple sidelined units got buffed, but nowhere close to balanced. They're much worse off than in Gman's heyday.
And Ynnari got a couple nerfs, then outright destroyed. Ynnari is a joke compared to what they were then.
Chaos has gone up and down, but things like Infiltrating Zerkers aren't even a thing anymore.
The top armies in those days were *not* buffed. Most were nerfed. The ones that were closest to Gman got nerfed the hardest.
"every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs" is just so very incorrect on so many levels. It buggers belief that people think that.
You do realize when other armies got codex compared to index...this was a massive buff? This army you speak of was facing index armies and GK and CSM before mortarion (actually Im not sure if 8th ed codex mortain was on the table at this point). Before Imperial knights. Literally every army got better. Minus maybe Ynnari which isn't actually an army - it's a craftworld basically. Eldar on the whole are massively buffed compared to their index. Massive. They probably got buffed harder in the codex than any other army except maybe imperial knights or IG.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: It should be competitive. But to use the tactic, the glass cannon factor comes in. You do damage for two turns, and then your dudes are dead. I really don't understand how GW can't just watch half a dozen marine batreps and see this trend.
The more I play, I really think durability/pt is a bigger problem for marines than firepower/pt. It certainly is for BA.
Absolutely. Durability is the most important problem for marines. They can do plenty of damage. They just can't take it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/29 20:24:58
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/07/29 20:27:26
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Bharring wrote: This thread reminds me of the dozens-of-pages thread we had back when Gman/Razorbacks were the big thing, and the prominent GT was won with 5-6 5-man Tac squads each with a LC.
The usual posters went on ad nausium about how bad the list was. How they could do better. How *obviously* it should have been dev squads not tacs. But the usual posters spouting that drivel *haven't* gone on to any notable tournament wins.
Bottom line; don't take posts on DakkaDakka as gospel. Some is more reliable than others (you probably want 5man Tacs instead of 10mans). But that was answered in the first couple posts. Now we'll have a dozen pages about how Tacs have always been the worst Troop, how Marines have been the worst army in the game for decades, and how it's impossible to not lose if you take any Tacs.
How different was the game then?
Tons. Which is why an anectdote about how the thread goes off the rails discussing marines from a while back should be taken more as evidence that this thread will continue off the rails than a comment on modern balance/options.
Perhaps additional hints in that direction - such as phrases like "back when [thing] were the big thing" or "this thread reminds me...". Or all the past-tense. Perhaps I should have included one of those things in my post...
It's almost like they shouldn't have nefred it because every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs.
This is why it's hard to take all this "But Mahreens" complaints seriously. GMan still pops up from time to time, as is. The nerfs were to *him* and Razorbacks, not to Tacs. If he's still occasionally good enough now, he'd be absurdly OP at his old cost. Now, maybe Razorbacks went up a little too much, but this is just silly.
As for "every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs", hell no.
IG received only a couple marginal buffs. And larger marginal nerfs. They're mostly in the same place as a book - but IoM as a whole (which includes Marines) got a lot more toys. Like Knights.
CWE had their deathstar at the time nerfed. Then they got their replacement deathstar nerfed. Then they got their replacement deathstar nerfed. Then various other parts got further nerfed. A couple sidelined units got buffed, but nowhere close to balanced. They're much worse off than in Gman's heyday.
And Ynnari got a couple nerfs, then outright destroyed. Ynnari is a joke compared to what they were then.
Chaos has gone up and down, but things like Infiltrating Zerkers aren't even a thing anymore.
The top armies in those days were *not* buffed. Most were nerfed. The ones that were closest to Gman got nerfed the hardest.
"every single army it was facing was going to get significant buffs" is just so very incorrect on so many levels. It buggers belief that people think that.
You do realize when other armies got codex compared to index...this was a massive buff? This army you speak of was facing index armies and GK and CSM before mortarian.
And Codex IG. And Codex CWE. Those were both in play at the time.
Before Imperial knights.
I can't believe I missed this one. Perhaps I should have mentioned Knights (Note: sarcasm, as I did).
Literally every army got better.
So Codex CWE got better after the Gman nerf because their Codex was released? Your timeline is way off. Codex CWE was in play at the tourny in mention. It came out notably before the (first) Gman nerf. They certainly didn't get better.
IG, too, already had their Codex.
So "Literally every army" except for two of the three factions Gman went up against. "Maybe one faction" is a far cry from "literally every army".
Minus maybe Ynnari which isn't actually an army - it's a craftworld basically.
I'm not sure that changes much. Either way, they've only seen nerfs since the point in time in question.
Eldar on the whole are massively buffed compared to their index. Massive. They probably got buffed harder in the codex than any other army except maybe imperial knights or IG.
Which happened *before* Gman got nerfed. *Before* the tournament in question. *Before* the discussion mentioned. Since that point, where Gman was winning, CWE have received far more nerfs than buffs. And that's not even counting the "Ynnari are really CWE" BS you've got going.
Your point only makes sense if you redefine history to fit the skew you're trying to present.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/29 20:28:02
2019/07/29 20:28:36
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Martel732 wrote: I mean all marines. Look how long their precious gravis idiots last when dissy cannons get pointed their way. Or star cannons. Or autocannons. Or battle cannons. Or plasma. Or kellermorphs. Or......
Thanks to relying on T5 instead of 2+, even wyverns disintegrate them outside of over. Or inside with the formation.
"We have a milion shots!" Once. Then you die. That just screams "elite shock troops", doesn't it?
So what, I also face all those weapons and my army isn't just gone after a couple of turns.
Do you play with enough big shot blockers? Do you play on planet Bowling Alley? Maybe you need to work on how to deploy your army so that it doesn't matter who gets the first shooting fase: Deploy for surviveability and not potential damage output. Let them come for you so you can concentrate your shooting and assault in the latter half of the game.
Los blockers hurt marines as much as helps unfortinately.
2019/07/29 20:58:04
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
IDK. I can't find the information anywere on book of kittens. I just know it was was the beginning of the eddition and before the first big FAQ. It was pre first FAQ and Tornaments all have a cutt off to what rules are allowed to be played.
Martel732 wrote: I mean all marines. Look how long their precious gravis idiots last when dissy cannons get pointed their way. Or star cannons. Or autocannons. Or battle cannons. Or plasma. Or kellermorphs. Or......
Thanks to relying on T5 instead of 2+, even wyverns disintegrate them outside of over. Or inside with the formation.
"We have a milion shots!" Once. Then you die. That just screams "elite shock troops", doesn't it?
So what, I also face all those weapons and my army isn't just gone after a couple of turns.
Do you play with enough big shot blockers? Do you play on planet Bowling Alley? Maybe you need to work on how to deploy your army so that it doesn't matter who gets the first shooting fase: Deploy for surviveability and not potential damage output. Let them come for you so you can concentrate your shooting and assault in the latter half of the game.
Los blockers hurt marines as much as helps unfortinately.
It hurts more actually. Army have 0 mobility and doesn't want to move anyways. Know whats easy to hide from? Units that are slow and don't want to move.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/29 20:58:53
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/07/29 23:03:06
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Backspacehacker wrote: How do you figure? because they can take any heavy weapon on them?
If thats your reasoning, why would you not take a dev squad with a single heavy weapon? Same cost as a tach squad but you can give your heavy weapon a +1 to hit. Literally better in every way then a tac squad.
You can only take 3 Devastator Squads, and Devs are not Troops. If I want to generate CPs I need Troops, and of the Troop Choices, Tacticals do the most damage against the widest array of targets.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: I disagree. AP-1 on all your guns is actually the winner based on versatility.
Vs Leman Russ
10 Intercessor shots (10x.666x.17x.05) = .56
1 Lascannon (1x.666x.666x.83x3.6) = 1.28 + longer range, plus more bolters to shoot at whatever.
Not that it helps much but they get a free grenade at 30".
Ah, fair enough. Is that in addition to or instead of the bolt rifle?
It would be instead. The Aux Launcher shoots a grenade at 30". So you you theoretically in your scenario use two separate squads for 8 Bolt Shots and 2 Krak shots.
I was giving a single Intercessor squad Rapid fire to help them out. So 8 Bolt rifle shots and 1 Krak grenade. Which looks like .674 wounds against a LR rather than .56
Backspacehacker wrote: How do you figure? because they can take any heavy weapon on them?
If thats your reasoning, why would you not take a dev squad with a single heavy weapon? Same cost as a tach squad but you can give your heavy weapon a +1 to hit. Literally better in every way then a tac squad.
You can only take 3 Devastator Squads, and Devs are not Troops. If I want to generate CPs I need Troops, and of the Troop Choices, Tacticals do the most damage against the widest array of targets.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: I disagree. AP-1 on all your guns is actually the winner based on versatility.
Vs Leman Russ
10 Intercessor shots (10x.666x.17x.05) = .56
1 Lascannon (1x.666x.666x.83x3.6) = 1.28 + longer range, plus more bolters to shoot at whatever.
Not that it helps much but they get a free grenade at 30".
Ah, fair enough. Is that in addition to or instead of the bolt rifle?
It would be instead. The Aux Launcher shoots a grenade at 30". So you you theoretically in your scenario use two separate squads for 8 Bolt Shots and 2 Krak shots.
I was giving a single Intercessor squad Rapid fire to help them out. So 8 Bolt rifle shots and 1 Krak grenade. Which looks like .674 wounds against a LR rather than .56
Which is still about half a Lascannon.
You really want to be getting 4 shots each when you use that stratagem. 40 shots ap-1 with gman buff is basically the best thing out right now for just a 174 point unit - to really get the most out of it I take 4 10 mans so I am always able to get full value out of the strat. Plus that is a lot of CC attacks to.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/07/30 01:54:34
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/07/30 03:03:07
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Oh wait, is that one of the Vigilus things? I really didnt pay close attention to those.
You should man - it's beast. Yes the vigilis detachment.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
2019/07/30 08:36:22
Subject: What's Best A Squad Of 5 Or 10 Space Marines?
Oh wait, is that one of the Vigilus things? I really didnt pay close attention to those.
You should man - it's beast. Yes the vigilis detachment.
I'm less impressed. It costs you 1 CP to start the ball rolling as a Indomitus Detach, then 1 CP - PER INTERCESSOR SQUAD - to make them Veterans, then ANTOHER CP to give them Rapid Fire 2 for one turn. 3 CP to do it the first time, and 1 more each additional. The guy who wrote that series, and the guy who wrote the guard sets is not the same guy, or he has a serious soft spot for Guard and hates Vanilla Marines.
