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.

Tac marines have neither durability nor firepower. ATSKNF does not make up for this in any way.

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Paying to be durable?!

You pay what, two points for ATSKNF and T4 compared to Sisters? Or, heck, one point for a 3+ save compared to Necron Warriors.

A single freaking point.

How much more durable to you want to be?!

Heavy flamers and dual special weapons are the Sisters' stick, anyway, and they pay for it by losing access to plasma and rocket.

Necron warriors glance even Landraiders to death with 6's meaning you don't have to invest in in much AT. They can go in units upto 20 and also have re-animation protocals which can be boosted with orbs and ghost arks. Also coming from a dex which has mass st7 saturation it means they have their weaknesses covered for cheaper far more efficiently than the marine dex does. Ld10 almost makes up for ATSKNF. So no its not just 1pt for a slightly better armour save. That is why silver tide is WAY more effective than tac spam!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dat guy - the chances of making 23 3+ saves is 0.0089% chance. That IS hard to do!

Are you really serious lol? I actually really do have above average rolling for 3+ saves. I do end up making a lot of 10 or greater 3+ saves without failing any, I never knew it was that impressive its so common with me and I mean that in a modest way.


At walrus that is true its a 10% difference but if you take it in intervals of 3 according to your math, orks are about 2.2 to marines 1.8 so they still do getabout 2 rounding to nearest pv. The more it increases though the better the orcs get. Interesting......

Well I am sorry to say I don't death with mathhamer. I talk from experiance.
Full Ork Body Mob vs a fukk 10 man Tactical Squad.
If the Orks get off the Assualt first, the Marines are in BIG trouple and will probably loose.
If the Tactical Squad Gets off the Assualt 1st, my money is on the guys in the Power Armor.
It has always been this way for me and will moslt likely be the same forver.

Dat Guy wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Paying to be durable?!

You pay what, two points for ATSKNF and T4 compared to Sisters? Or, heck, one point for a 3+ save compared to Necron Warriors.

A single freaking point.

How much more durable to you want to be?!

Heavy flamers and dual special weapons are the Sisters' stick, anyway, and they pay for it by losing access to plasma and rocket.

Necron warriors glance even Landraiders to death with 6's meaning you don't have to invest in in much AT. They can go in units upto 20 and also have re-animation protocals which can be boosted with orbs and ghost arks. Also coming from a dex which has mass st7 saturation it means they have their weaknesses covered for cheaper far more efficiently than the marine dex does. Ld10 almost makes up for ATSKNF. So no its not just 1pt for a slightly better armour save. That is why silver tide is WAY more effective than tac spam!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dat guy - the chances of making 23 3+ saves is 0.0089% chance. That IS hard to do!

Are you really serious lol? I actually really do have above average rolling for 3+ saves. I do end up making a lot of 10 or greater 3+ saves without failing any, I never knew it was that impressive its so common with me and I mean that in a modest way.


At walrus that is true its a 10% difference but if you take it in intervals of 3 according to your math, orks are about 2.2 to marines 1.8 so they still do getabout 2 rounding to nearest pv. The more it increases though the better the orcs get. Interesting......

Yep 2/3^23... 89/1000000 or close enough to 1/10000. To make 10 out of 10 3+ rolls is a 1.7% chance.

Space Marines aren't so bad. They are now more flexible than ever. Before, you were forced to give them a heavy and a special weapon (when you took 10). Now, you have the option to do so or not. Back with 5th Ed. marines, the minimum cost for a 10-man unit was 170. Now, you can get a barebones 10-man tact squad for 140. Want practically the same configuration? You still save 10-pts with the same weapons loadout.

One thing I don't like about making changes to a unit is to have it become too much like another unit. Give them 2 special weapons? That makes them too much like grey hunters or chaos space marines. As for slow and purposeful, that means they cannot fire Overwatch when charged. Honestly, that takes away some of their tactical flexibility IMO, not to mention that they lose the flexibility to run. That is a trade-off I would not want.

Here is my solution. And this is not really anything new for them, but at the same time, will keep them uniquely tactical (in other words, bland and boring....lol). Just go back to 4th Ed. Space Marines, where a Tactical unit can take both a Heavy and a Special weapon with 5 guys. You want increased firepower? There you have it. Now run double-FOC and take 12 5-man units, each with 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon. Problem solved, and still uniquely a boring, tactical marine.

 jy2 wrote:
Here is my solution. And this is not really anything new for them, but at the same time, will keep them uniquely tactical (in other words, bland and boring....lol). Just go back to 4th Ed. Space Marines, where a Tactical unit can take both a Heavy and a Special weapon with 5 guys. You want increased firepower? There you have it. Now run double-FOC and take 12 5-man units, each with 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon. Problem solved, and still uniquely a boring, tactical marine.

Or just use the BT chapter traits to unlock those nifty crusader squads...

Crusader squads have to use the pants BT CT though...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Problem with a heavy and a special in a 5 man is that we would just see the days of static las-plas msu marine armies that aren't 'tactically flexible' and are about as fun as a tau gunline to play or play against.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Crusader squads have to use the pants BT CT though...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Problem with a heavy and a special in a 5 man is that we would just see the days of static las-plas msu marine armies that aren't 'tactically flexible' and are about as fun as a tau gunline to play or play against.

I don't disagree. You probably will see most people run MSU tact squads because that would perhaps be the most efficient use of them. But what's different between that and, say, a chaos player running 3 heldrakes, Tau player running 3 riptides, an Eldar player running 6 units of jetbikes/wave serpents or Necrons running massed warriors in flyers? Basically, people will flock to the most efficient builds.

However, my proposed rule isn't anything new. It's been done before and was the norm back with 4th Ed. space marines (and similar MEQ codices).

But you're not just limited to las+plas units. Imagine a unit of 5 with melta, combi-melta, multi-melta and meltabombs in a drop pod. How about plasma, combi-plasma and plasma-cannon for a specialized TEQ-killing unit? Just the simple rules change (or rather, rules recycle) and now tact squads are pretty darn good.

Yeh you do make some very good points there. I just got irritated seeing every vanilla marine army being the same las-plas spam in 3rd and 4th. Not that I could complain because BA could actually assault effectively back then so we could always stomp those builds 4 times out of 5.

I suggest you just run scouts if you just want a durable scoring body.

Let's have a look at the difference between the two.

Price:
Scout marines are 3 pt cheaper.

Survivability:
Same Toughness and wounds, same leadership

Armour and Saves
Tacs are 17% less likely to die to AP5/6/-, and 67% less likely to die against AP4. Ap1,2 and 3 kills each equally.

Shooting:
Tacs are 17% more likely to hit.

Assault:
Tacs take 17% less hits against WS4, while dealing 17% more against WS3.
Tacs and Scouts take equal hits from WS5 and above.
Tacs hit WS7 and 8 17% more often than scouts, but hit WS9/10 at the same rate.

So, what's the pattern? Differences of about 17% in all combat areas, with survivability being 17% better assuming no AP3 is around.

But, Yeah right, right? Who does't take a baleflamer chicken?

For this reason, I believe scout marines, with their 21% price reduction are a better, more survivable option when it comes to a field littered with AP1,2 and 3, as we most often see today. Seriously, when was the last time a competitive player actually took a heavy bolter that wasn't part of the barebones unit? Compare this to the last time a competitive player actually took a baleflamer heldrake.

It's not that tactical marines suck, it's that they don't have the fire power to be an awesome xenos level shoter, and don't have the survivability to be a tough scorer. Save your 15 pts - get something else with it.

 jy2 wrote:


Here is my solution. And this is not really anything new for them, but at the same time, will keep them uniquely tactical (in other words, bland and boring....lol). Just go back to 4th Ed. Space Marines, where a Tactical unit can take both a Heavy and a Special weapon with 5 guys. You want increased firepower? There you have it. Now run double-FOC and take 12 5-man units, each with 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon. Problem solved, and still uniquely a boring, tactical marine.

That'd more or less kill the only thing Chapter Tactics: Black Templars has going for it though.

I'm still kind of new to WH40K so forgive me if what I'm about to say is completely ignorant, but what about improving their gear instead of their statline?

As in, why not make the bolter S5 or AP4? Maybe make Rhinos a little more survivable, give it an extra armor point or maybe a Heavy Bolter. Maybe make the ML a more viable weapon, or maybe even make Veteran Sergeants more useful.

 robam45 wrote:
I'm still kind of new to WH40K so forgive me if what I'm about to say is completely ignorant, but what about improving their gear instead of their statline?

As in, why not make the bolter S5 or AP4? Maybe make Rhinos a little more survivable, give it an extra armor point or maybe a Heavy Bolter. Maybe make the ML a more viable weapon, or maybe even make Veteran Sergeants more useful.

Because AP4 would make any armour except Power Armour or better completely invalid. The AP system GW has decided to use currently invalidates anything with an armour save worse than the greater majority of weapons fired and since Bolters are the greater majority in and of themselves, any changes to the Bolter is not a small change but will completely change the core game. This is what you get for over-promoting a single army.

5-strong squads helped Sisters become more viable, but then, they do double up special weapons.

The problem with doubling up a heavy and a special in a 5-strong squad is the same as any other army has to cope with for doing the same in any size of unit. Either the heavy weapon is moving to get the special weapon into range, or the special weapon is waiting for range while the heavy weapon shoots.

Anyway, it's not heavy bolters you have to worry about with Scouts, its heavy flamers. Heavy bolters will still bounce off your 4+ or 3+ cover save.

But sure, by all means, turn bolters into pulse rifles. Sisters of Battle wounding on a 2+. Oh yeah.

Chapter Tactics has also been a “Game Changer” for Tactical Squads.

Ultramarines: Once a game Re-Roll Misses, twice if you have Calgar. The correct timing can be devastating.
>CAPTAIN SICARIUS: One Tactical Squad can now have Counter Attack, act like a scout or become an Anti Armor Unit.

What Scars: Ok, Why do you have Tactical Squads?
>KOR'SARRO KHAN: Oh, this way, Rhino Scouts.

Imperial Fist: Re-Roll of 1s with Bolt-Guns.
>PEDRO KANTOR: Favored Enemies [Orks]

Iron Hands: Army wide FNP, so it is a 6+, this is still a second Save.

Salamanders: Re-Roll Wounds and Armor Saves with Flamers, good, especially during an Overwatch.
>VULCAN: Melta-Weapons become Mastercraft. Your Sergeant can take a Mastercraft something.

Raven Guard: Your Tactical Squads are now 3+ Save Scouts, what more do you need.

Or take Black Templars Crusader Squads, who have the ability to take 2 power fists, a power weapon, a heavy and a special weapon in a 5-man squad ^_^

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 jy2 wrote:


Here is my solution. And this is not really anything new for them, but at the same time, will keep them uniquely tactical (in other words, bland and boring....lol). Just go back to 4th Ed. Space Marines, where a Tactical unit can take both a Heavy and a Special weapon with 5 guys. You want increased firepower? There you have it. Now run double-FOC and take 12 5-man units, each with 1 heavy weapon and 1 special weapon. Problem solved, and still uniquely a boring, tactical marine.

That'd more or less kill the only thing Chapter Tactics: Black Templars has going for it though.

I'd have to look into this later as I don't have my codex with me now.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
The problem with doubling up a heavy and a special in a 5-strong squad is the same as any other army has to cope with for doing the same in any size of unit. Either the heavy weapon is moving to get the special weapon into range, or the special weapon is waiting for range while the heavy weapon shoots.

And there you have the balancing factor - the main reason why 5-man squads with a special and heavy weapon won't be OP. Move and you will only be snap-shooting with your big gun. Stay still and there is a good chance your small gun won't be in range.

Of course nowadays, you can move your special weapons guy while keeping your heavy weapon guy stationary to add a little bit more range to the special weapon.

There is probably never going to be resolution to this, as GW refuses to acknowledge the existence of the maths.

Some want to explain things away or hand wave them away, but at the end of the day, the tactical marine is inferior to dire avenger in the 6th edition rules and probably the shoota boy as well. In practice, that is.

Martel732 wrote:
There is probably never going to be resolution to this, as GW refuses to acknowledge the existence of the maths.

Some want to explain things away or hand wave them away, but at the end of the day, the tactical marine is inferior to dire avenger in the 6th edition rules and probably the shoota boy as well. In practice, that is.

Frankly, I don't see this as a problem that really needs resolving. Tactical marines are neither inferior to dire avengers or shoota boys, nor are they really superior to them either. Rather, they are just different and with a different playstyle. And I'd rather they stay that way instead of having rending boltguns or 30 marines with crappy armor in a unit. It's the differences between the different troop units that gives them character.

 jy2 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There is probably never going to be resolution to this, as GW refuses to acknowledge the existence of the maths.

Some want to explain things away or hand wave them away, but at the end of the day, the tactical marine is inferior to dire avenger in the 6th edition rules and probably the shoota boy as well. In practice, that is.

Frankly, I don't see this as a problem that really needs resolving. Tactical marines are neither inferior to dire avengers or shoota boys, nor are they really superior to them either. Rather, they are just different and with a different playstyle. And I'd rather they stay that way instead of having rending boltguns or 30 marines with crappy armor in a unit. It's the differences between the different troop units that gives them character.

^That and have you done the math with Re-Rollable Bolt Weapons or vs the Rending with a 2+ Cover save thanks to Chapter Tactics.

10 Space Marines vs 10 Firewarriors. Stand them in a line across from each other and just shoot (no assaults allowed) see who wins. You might be surprised.

Its for not rapid fire

Space marines kill 2.22 fire warriors
Fire warrior kills 1.11 Space marines

space marines cost 14 per
while fire warriors are 9

 6^ wrote:
10 Space Marines vs 10 Firewarriors. Stand them in a line across from each other and just shoot (no assaults allowed) see who wins. You might be surprised.

What about if we stand the fire warriors 29" away?

 jy2 wrote:

 6^ wrote:
10 Space Marines vs 10 Firewarriors. Stand them in a line across from each other and just shoot (no assaults allowed) see who wins. You might be surprised.

What about if we stand the fire warriors 29" away?

The Maries move forward 6" on their turn making it 23"

 6^ wrote:
10 Space Marines vs 10 Firewarriors. Stand them in a line across from each other and just shoot (no assaults allowed) see who wins. You might be surprised.

Firewarriors are cheaper and have a lot more potential for support boosting their output.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 6^ wrote:
10 Space Marines vs 10 Firewarriors. Stand them in a line across from each other and just shoot (no assaults allowed) see who wins. You might be surprised.

Firewarriors are cheaper and have a lot more potential for support boosting their output.

So do Tactical Squads

No.

No, they do not.

Firewarriors both have excellent support options in things like Fireblades and Ethereals, as well as the fact that they themselves work very well in tandem with, say, Riptides.

Tactical Marines are just forced units to fill out the mandatory 2 troop slots in a non-bike list in comparison. Tacticals can work, but they are a weaker choice.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
No.

No, they do not.

Firewarriors both have excellent support options in things like Fireblades and Ethereals, as well as the fact that they themselves work very well in tandem with, say, Riptides.

Tactical Marines are just forced units to fill out the mandatory 2 troop slots in a non-bike list in comparison. Tacticals can work, but they are a weaker choice.

With the Right Tactics and the Right Chapter Tactics they are no longer a Tax. With Raven Guard it is posible to quickly get into Rapid Fire/Flamer Range. With Imperial Fist it becomes real easy to not miss, the same with Ultramarines.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There is probably never going to be resolution to this, as GW refuses to acknowledge the existence of the maths.

Some want to explain things away or hand wave them away, but at the end of the day, the tactical marine is inferior to dire avenger in the 6th edition rules and probably the shoota boy as well. In practice, that is.

Frankly, I don't see this as a problem that really needs resolving. Tactical marines are neither inferior to dire avengers or shoota boys, nor are they really superior to them either. Rather, they are just different and with a different playstyle. And I'd rather they stay that way instead of having rending boltguns or 30 marines with crappy armor in a unit. It's the differences between the different troop units that gives them character.

^That and have you done the math with Re-Rollable Bolt Weapons or vs the Rending with a 2+ Cover save thanks to Chapter Tactics.

What remotely competent Eldar player would jump all of his Dire Avengers out on turn 1 to shoot your Tacticals when they have 2+ cover? You do realize that the cover buff goes away after turn one, yes?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
There is probably never going to be resolution to this, as GW refuses to acknowledge the existence of the maths.

Some want to explain things away or hand wave them away, but at the end of the day, the tactical marine is inferior to dire avenger in the 6th edition rules and probably the shoota boy as well. In practice, that is.

Frankly, I don't see this as a problem that really needs resolving. Tactical marines are neither inferior to dire avengers or shoota boys, nor are they really superior to them either. Rather, they are just different and with a different playstyle. And I'd rather they stay that way instead of having rending boltguns or 30 marines with crappy armor in a unit. It's the differences between the different troop units that gives them character.

^That and have you done the math with Re-Rollable Bolt Weapons or vs the Rending with a 2+ Cover save thanks to Chapter Tactics.

What remotely competent Eldar player would jump all of his Dire Avengers out on turn 1 to shoot your Tacticals when they have 2+ cover? You do realize that the cover buff goes away after turn one, yes?

Then I drop to a 3+ Cover save. If I plan things right the DA will be to buisy dealing with my 1st turns shooting.

We could tit-for-tat this back and forth for decades.
I am speaking form Experiance, not Mathhammer. When my Tactical Marines beat the Ork Boys Mob 90% of the time, to me that tells me they don't "Suck". When the 6th Edition Ork Codex comes out that may change.