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.

 Kirasu wrote:

 EYEofTERROR wrote:
I dont understand why people are whining about yellow marines acting like blue marines or whatever color you like. Every other codex has characters from different armies that affect gameplay. If your eldar aren't black, then you cant use eldrad. If you want fluff, read a book. That is one thing that is great about the space marine line, you can use half a dozen codexes (now a word, thanks gw) with the same set of models. I dont use my blood angels as anything but ba or sm, but when i use a sm list, youre damn right i will use whatever character and or rules that best fit the situation. Just like i expect my opponent to bring units that will actually be effective against me. You dont bring a knife to a gun fight.

This really tends to be a space marine player phenomena. Eldar players tend not to bitch if they see Eldrad in a non-uthwe painted army or Farsight in a non-farsight painted army.. but you can barely throw a rock without hitting a space marine player who doesn't get pissed off if they see Calgar in a non-smurf painted army.

I think it's because there are a lot of players out there who play a lot of games of space marine vs space marine each with their own distinctive chapter lore, so it's serious business. (Granted I have a ton of special lore but I honestly couldn't care less what I use my Marines as, or what other people use theirs as.. it's a game)

I guess the difference is that some play a wargame and others role play a wargame. Stop expecting everyone to play your way.

davou wrote:
Orks get what almost ammounts to a razorback, but with tons of options for gear, fast vehicle, and open topped to deliver assault units. Also, when it explodes, the damage is only str 3

I can go on and on, but razorback is absolutely not one of the selling points of the tactical squad, especially when you consider that whats inside looses its ability to shoot out the top.

Hmm? Open-topped transport does S4 hits to units inside it in 6th Edition. Still, the fact that it allows for charging is definitely worth it.

Regardless, Razors indeed aren't that great on their own, with no fire points, but I still kinda like 'em. And now that they will be a bit more reasonable in price compared to the current BT ones I reckon I'll actually get to use them. Just would be nice to have an actual lasplas turret, or an extra TL Assault Cannon if I happen to be using both of my LRC/LRRs and can't borrow from those. They really shouldn't have raised the cost of the TLHB version as much as they did though.

DogofWar1 wrote:Alternatively, if they made them troops I wouldn't mind not rerolling 1s.

It'd be great if Kantor could make even just ONE Sternguard squad into a troops choice, like captains can with bikes. Would certainly make my list-building easier on the CF side of things.

I guess the difference is that some play a wargame and others role play a wargame. Stop expecting everyone to play your way.

I don't remember saying people should play a certain way, but explaining my opinion on the question I was commenting on.

But thank you for getting angry for no apparent reason.

 Kirasu wrote:

I guess the difference is that some play a wargame and others role play a wargame. Stop expecting everyone to play your way.

I don't remember saying people should play a certain way, but explaining my opinion on the question I was commenting on.

But thank you for getting angry for no apparent reason.

I guess that came across differently than I meant it to. I am agreeing with you.

Some people want to play "fluffy" roleplaying and others want to play a miniature war game. I play a wargame. I sit down and build armies based off what I think will be effective and fun for me to play. I don't play an all assault CSM army because its not a very good design within the 5ed codex, not because it isn't the way the ultramarines go into conflict.

The more I try to write my own fluff for my marine army the more I realize its just for me and I can enjoy it how ever I want and just sit down with the rule books and pull out an army.

 tvih wrote:
Hmm? Open-topped transport does S4 hits to units inside it in 6th Edition.

Trukks have the Ramshackle special rule, which specifies that they only take a S3 hit if it pops.

..........

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Exergy wrote:


20 DE with dark lances? Really? A 9 point T3 5+ save guy with a str3 or 4 rapid fire weapon? Those 25 point Dark Lances that are worse against anything but AV14 than a 20 point lascannon? A choice that pratically MUST have a 70 point vehicle to be viable that you failed to mention.

How are CSM better? They dont have chapter tactics, they dont have ATSKNF. They can take marks, but none of them are worth the points. They MUST take a veteran sergeant who MUST challenge in an edition when combat sergeants arent worth it and challenges are only good if you have the choice. The only thing they do that C:SM tacticals cannot do is come stock with CCW pistol instead of bolter or take double special weapons at 10 men. Sure they can have 20 models if you like, sure they can pay 40 points for a 6++ or fearless or +1 inititive but what do you really want to do?

Neither of these choices has ATSKNF, an incredible ability

You don't really know Dark Eldar do you? You've got their weapons and transport options wrong. Seems like a waste to go further on the subject with you. Take my word for it or don't but the SM and BA Tactical squads don't currently match up with any reasonable troop choice in 40k. They're simply outclassed at the moment. The new book, based on my current experience with DA Tacticals, will make tacticals usable again. It'll make them a contributor to the army as a whole and not a point sink. They won't be instant win by any means or suddenly the greatest ever but they will no longer be a drag on your forces.

My personal opinion and all. I've been wrong before, or so my wife keeps telling me

I have played DE since 3rd edition when their codex came out with god awful looking breakable models and they had no vehicle upgrades.
Posion is great against MCs, but against tacticals its like have a str4 weapon. Against IG its like having str3 weapons. When it comes to troops, I would much rather have a versitile, durable scoring squad of tacticals than 20 DE warriors to get shot, killed, and broken to run off the board. I really should ask you who takes 20 of them with 2 dark lances? That is not a load out I am terribly familar with as it is terrible. 230 points for 2 missile launchers?

 wtwlf123 wrote:

Trukks have the Ramshackle special rule, which specifies that they only take a S3 hit if it pops.

Oh, so they do, my bad I have orks that I need to get around building as I've only played in two small games, and only ever used a trukk once and it didn't blow up. Well, that particular rule certainly does make it better than a Rhino. Though it already was even without it

 Hulksmash wrote:
Take my word for it or don't but the SM and BA Tactical squads don't currently match up with any reasonable troop choice in 40k. They're simply outclassed at the moment. The new book, based on my current experience with DA Tacticals, will make tacticals usable again. It'll make them a contributor to the army as a whole and not a point sink. They won't be instant win by any means or suddenly the greatest ever but they will no longer be a drag on your forces.

With the increased cost of special/heavies that go along with the DA Tact costs, I'm generally seeing just a .5 pt per model decrease for my Tac squads. Being a Raven Guard player I'm looking at allying Shrike, Scouts, VV's to a Raven Guard "counts as" UM list. I'm just wondering if the UM buff will make the tacticals good enough to be a large part of my force. If not I'll do what I've been doing with the old SM dex and run as few troops and as many Sternguard as possible. IMO it's not that my Tacticals missed too much, they just didn't have enough bodies/bolters to kill quickly enough to get their points back.

 tvih wrote:

Hmm? Open-topped transport does S4 hits to units inside it in 6th Edition. Still, the fact that it allows for charging is definitely worth it.

Ork truks have a special rule that replaces their own explode/wrecked effects with something else. The explode only ever does str3, also Damn, ninjad

@Exergy

Never said people take it. I was using it as an example of how crappy current SM & BA tacticals are that such a unit provides more for it's army than a tactical squad does for BA or SM.

@dracpanzer

Yeah, it's actually a pretty small point break but it's the options for the DA that matter. That's the ability to take a special or heavy at 5 models. Making tacticals in pods a good idea in 5-man units but limiting the viability of full tacticals. The new rumored Chapter Tactics shift it further into a full 10-man being useful.

So to recap SM & BA tacticals are pretty much garbage. DA tacticals in 5-mans either podding or with a heavy are passable. New SM with chapter tactics could make 10-mans passable/viable.

 wtwlf123 wrote:
Using Kantor to make Sternguard score when you're trying to use the UM Tactical Doctrine would be powergaming. But fielding a totally legal army from the codex that's incidentally painted up in a different color is not. Anybody that would whine about something like that isn't a player I'd be remotely interested in playing against anyways (considering that there's nothing wrong with that).

But then you couldn't do that before either. You had to decide which characters CT you were going to use...so you couldn't take you blue marines, stick Pedro in their to make SternGuard scoring, then stick Vulkan in their to make their combi-melta/flamer's twin linked.

Waiting for the Dex...but i suspect with the the new Space-Marine Chapter Ally, the allied unit can use their specific Chapter Tactic...So you can run UMs with all of their Tactical Squad rerolling goodness, then ally Pedro with SternGuard (scoring, but losing the re-rolls...or Vulkan to ensure your T/L Melta's don't whiff on their one shot at glory) in Pods. In that case however, I would expect to see at least 2 different colors of Marines on the table (regardless if they were Blue and red, green and Yellow, or even Black and Silver) if for no other reason that to prevent "that" particular SG unit from suddely gaining bolter rerolls after Vulkan twin-linked his combi-melta's last turn.

@Dkellyj

Mine won't be different colors if I do it. However my allied marines will have crested helms that seperate them quite easily from the remaining Iron Warriors. But yeah, in general I agree. They should be easily distinguisable if you're allying in seperate chapter tactics.

 dracpanzer wrote:
Being a Raven Guard player I'm looking at allying Shrike, Scouts, VV's to a Raven Guard "counts as" UM list.

Interesting. So, by this logic, nobody will mind if I run an UM detachment with a 'counts as' UM successor so I can get 3 UM HQs...

UltraPrime wrote:

 dracpanzer wrote:
Being a Raven Guard player I'm looking at allying Shrike, Scouts, VV's to a Raven Guard "counts as" UM list.

Interesting. So, by this logic, nobody will mind if I run an UM detachment with a 'counts as' UM successor so I can get 3 UM HQs...

Yes they will, I'm pretty sure the requirement was that the ally you take from the same dex carry a seperate chapter tactics. The person you were talking about is looking at taking ultramarines with a small detachment of Raven guard. What you wanna do is add another force org slot in each category.

Bah. Hole in my logic...

One thing I'm noticing is that people seem to be under the impression that Chapter Tactics will be on vehicles as well as infantry. IIRC, in the present codex, Chapter Tactics is not a rule on vehicles - is there a reason to think this has changed?

I haven't seen specifically a reference to Chapter tactics being on vehicles yet in the rumours, anyone else?

I'm generally assuming you don't get the chapter tactics for the allied detachment, either from the primary detachment's CT or the CT they would have from their chapter if they were a primary detachment. So when I run Kantor and Tigurius, I would have to choose to either the UM tactical CT or the IF CT, and it likely will only apply to the primary detachment, not the seconary detachment.

Those limitations are not unreasonably OP, and not having any CT on the secondary detachment might make it slightly underpowered, but we'll see how the rules shake out.

I hardly think combinations of two chapters allied together is gonna break anything anywhere.

 Dracos wrote:
One thing I'm noticing is that people seem to be under the impression that Chapter Tactics will be on vehicles as well as infantry. IIRC, in the present codex, Chapter Tactics is not a rule on vehicles - is there a reason to think this has changed?

I haven't seen specifically a reference to Chapter tactics being on vehicles yet in the rumours, anyone else?

the iron hands one has it grants itwd on vehicles if i remember correctly?

 pizzaguardian wrote:
the iron hands one has it grants itwd on vehicles if i remember correctly?

Good catch. Hmmm, if all the vehicles can reroll those 1s as well this is a huge buff...

 Hulksmash wrote:
@Exergy

Never said people take it. I was using it as an example of how crappy current SM & BA tacticals are that such a unit provides more for it's army than a tactical squad does for BA or SM.

No what you did is make a blind comparison to an army you dont seem to know and then made condescending remarks about how I dont know a Xeno army I have been playing for 15 years.

 Hulksmash wrote:

You don't really know Dark Eldar do you? You've got their weapons and transport options wrong. Seems like a waste to go further on the subject with you. Take my word for it or don't but the SM and BA Tactical squads don't currently match up with any reasonable troop choice in 40k. They're simply outclassed at the moment.

You just compared a fairly common C:SM troop choice with a rhino to a pretty awful DE option that no one takes. Now you are trying to say that it provides more to its army. 230 points for 20 T3 5+ Ld8 bodies with 2 missile launchers isnt providing much for DE which get 3 of those missile launchers on a mobile platform for 105 points.

You want to compare it to 5 wyches with haywires in a double cannon venom fine
5 warriors with a blater in a doulbe cannon venom fine
10 warriors with a splinter cannon in a raider with racks fine

DE have worse problems with their troop choices. They have trouble keeping them alive, trouble getting value out of them and the ones they do have are not versatile.

Tactical mariens arent very good, I will give you that. The 16 points per model with the special and heavy weapons rolled in is kind of screwy. I am happy they are moving to 14 ppm and ala carte. But tactical marines have always been tactical. With 2 types of grenades, combat tactics, ATSKNF, pistol and rifle, choice of 3 special weapons, choice of 5 heavy weapons, choice of three dedicated transports, and combat squading they have so many options.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dracos wrote:

 pizzaguardian wrote:
the iron hands one has it grants itwd on vehicles if i remember correctly?

Good catch. Hmmm, if all the vehicles can reroll those 1s as well this is a huge buff...

they will only get 1 set of CT
but assuming that all of the CT work on vehicles...
reroll 1s to hit will be awesome on preditors for instance
stealth will be great on just about anything
IWND will be ok
Tank Hunters will be good on a lot of things
not sure what the Sally trait brings, but rerolling meltas would be great

Right I wasn't trying to say that you get all the Chapter Tactics options at once, but that the Iron hands example implies that Chapter Tactics is a special rule on vehicles in the new codex (as opposed to the old codex).

AC/las predators were exactly what I was thinking about for the Tactical UM CT.

edit: I had previously assumed Chapter Tactics would be on infantry only, as is in the current codex.

 Hulksmash wrote:
@Dkellyj

Mine won't be different colors if I do it. However my allied marines will have crested helms that seperate them quite easily from the remaining Iron Warriors. But yeah, in general I agree. They should be easily distinguisable if you're allying in seperate chapter tactics.

If they are colored differently in any way it should be enough. How do CSM players denote MoN, MoT or MoK (duh they use color) so this should be perfectly fine to have some color or something that differentiates the two chapters, should be no problem.

I think the ability to ally 2 SM chapters together with different CT is largely being exagerated in power. allying C:SM and SW or C:SM and DA together gives you more options to cherry pick the good units in the codexes. You ally 2 C:SM chapters together and you still get the same list of units. You cannot take IG allies which are strong and abuseable. I really dont see what the problem is.

@Exergy

Put your epeen away friend. It doesn't matter how long you've been playing them as time doesn't always equal knowledge. I was using max units as a comparison as those are the only ways to logically compare them since the current SM squad has no options until it's maxed out.

This isn't a conversation about DE specifically. You seem to be missing my point because I've offended your take on DE. Feel free to take it to PM with me.

 Dracos wrote:
Right I wasn't trying to say that you get all the Chapter Tactics options at once, but that the Iron hands example implies that Chapter Tactics is a special rule on vehicles in the new codex (as opposed to the old codex).

AC/las predators were exactly what I was thinking about for the Tactical UM CT.

edit: I had previously assumed Chapter Tactics would be on infantry only, as is in the current codex.

yeah when i was originally looking at Ultra Tactical Doctrine I thought it applied to vehicles, but reroll 1s doesnt give you jack on a LR protius (well ok the pintle mounted Storm Bolter)
Similarly a lot of the recent C:SM models have a lot of twin linking. (most razorbacks, storm raven and storm talon for instance)
so reroll 1s doesnt help them.

might help with the multi-melta

So things like razorbacks, landraiders, stormtalon and stormeagle will all be poor choices when using the UM Tactical doctrine.

UM will be the horde marine army I think.

Ok, what is the problem?

You guys disagree with the fluff, does it make sense that salamanders flamers are twin-linked, white scars have hit and run, and raven guard with stealth. I don't see anything wrong with that the problem comes in because you see the Ultramarine Chapter Tactic as being the best. The increase in accuracy is the easiest one to take advantage of but if you wanted you can build a list around the strengths of your Chapter's Tactic and have a scary list.

I understand your pain when you say that a certain special character represents x in my homebrew chapter who do not descend from Ultramarines. Its a minor hit to keep the founding Chapters unique, I wish I could use Mephiston to represent my Chapter's Librarian but I can't. Can you take Mephiston as your only hq choice using the space wolf codex, its the same principal each of these Chapter Tactics makes each Chapter so unique that allowing a SC to be one of the primary hqs is unfair to the other codexes.

Last but not least is this notion that the Ultramarines has the best Chapter Tactic is not true. I plan on getting an Imperial Fist limited edition codex as I hold allegiance to Rogal Dorn. I cant wait to get tank hunters on devastators and the new models, plus my bolters are better. I have nothing to complain about I love my Chapter Tactic, and I think that all of them are good. I don't see the Ultramarine one as the best, and a lot of you are complaining but the reason you are complaining is because you want to use certain chapter tactics with other Special characters which in itself says that you see the benefits of the other Chapter Tactics and Special Characters.

Does it really Matter...Ultra's are Ultramarine because frankly they are probably the best Tactical Chapter out there. They are the living embodiement of Humanity's Noble aspect - You don't like it play something else.

I'm pretty direct and forthright, I like the Iron Hand's no nonsense, economy of effort and unbending will.

Other people I know like the Feral nature of the wolves, still others the dark and broody DA's, others like the Fanatical Hatred of the BT's. Some read things like Twilight and they like BA's .

The Ultra's are special because frankly they aren't special - They aren't Wolves, Vampires, Cyborgs or anything else. They are Romani Space Marines, they believe they are unsullied and have a pure Geneseed - So is it any surprise they need something to show they are reasonable at everything and maybe very good at shooting? They gave birth to like 80% of Chapters their influence is vast, they are like it or not, the definitive archetypal Marines. In much the same way that the SAS is the Archetypal, benchmark Special Forces Unit. They are the one everyone else try's to emulate or better and venerated as the pinnacle of their craft.

 CKO wrote:
Ok, what is the problem?

You guys disagree with the fluff, does it make sense that salamanders flamers are twin-linked, white scars have hit and run, and raven guard with stealth. I don't see anything wrong with that the problem comes in because you see the Ultramarine Chapter Tactic as being the best. The increase in accuracy is the easiest one to take advantage of but if you wanted you can build a list around the strengths of your Chapter's Tactic and have a scary list.

I understand your pain when you say that a certain special character represents x in my homebrew chapter who do not descend from Ultramarines. Its a minor hit to keep the founding Chapters unique, I wish I could use Mephiston to represent my Chapter's Librarian but I can't. Can you take Mephiston as your only hq choice using the space wolf codex, its the same principal each of these Chapter Tactics makes each Chapter so unique that allowing a SC to be one of the primary hqs is unfair to the other codexes.

I don't see the Ultramarine one as the best, and a lot of you are complaining but the reason you are complaining is because you want to use certain chapter tactics with other Special characters which in itself says that you see the benefits of the other Chapter Tactics and Special Characters.

SW have 7 special character
BA have 7 special characters
Ultras have 5 special characters
If I want to play Iron Hands, I will have 0 special characters

I hate taking special characters myself, so I wont mind terribly and i use to hate C:SM having 11 odd special characters that people would abuse but I can see where people are getting their anger from.

@Exergy I agree, me and you as Iron Hands Players have had nothing for years, we were a FOUNDING LEGION!

Did you hear us bitching like some of the People above? (Well no because I got the 4th Ed Black Templar one and ran my IH's as them lol )