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.
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.
fire warriors need those support units to function where as tacticals don't, they are good on their own were fire warriors are not, a fire warrior without ethereal, marker light support, or other fire power multiplier is vastly inferior in power to point ratio than a space marine. tau armies can come unstuck easily if you target support elements rather than the main group.
its also why tau are better the more points you give them as they can afford more of these support elements
minor improvement to tacticals, make bolters salvo 1/2 weapons
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/01/07 14:29:42
Armies
CSM Zenmarine Warband from assorted tratiors and heritics
DARK ANGELS woo woot
the way to win is not to make a grand masterplan, its by making sure your opponents grand masterplan fails
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.
fire warriors need those support units to function where as tacticals don't, they are good on their own were fire warriors are not, a fire warrior without ethereal, marker light support, or other fire power multiplier is vastly inferior in power to point ratio than a space marine. tau armies can come unstuck easily if you target support elements rather than the main group.
its also why tau are better the more points you give them as they can afford more of these support elements
minor improvement to tacticals, make bolters salvo 1/2 weapons
They have the same damage output versus T4 or higher models up to T7; the advantage in BS for the Marine is compensated by the Strength advantage of the Pulse Rifle. The Marine is more durable while the Fire Warrior has a better gun (better vs. vehicles, T3 models, and better range). The Marine sure isn't 55% more durable though. In fact, it's 33% more durable against small arms (AP=>5), 300 % more durable against AP4 (only 100 % if the FWs have 5+ cover though, 33 % if the cover is 4+), and 55 % worse against anything else.
So yeah, the claim that Fire Warriors "need" support units to function whereas Tacticals don't is false.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
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.
fire warriors need those support units to function where as tacticals don't, they are good on their own were fire warriors are not, a fire warrior without ethereal, marker light support, or other fire power multiplier is vastly inferior in power to point ratio than a space marine. tau armies can come unstuck easily if you target support elements rather than the main group.
its also why tau are better the more points you give them as they can afford more of these support elements
minor improvement to tacticals, make bolters salvo 1/2 weapons
Firewarriors don't necessarily need those support options. They can put out plenty of shots without them, at least enough to kill off far more points worth of marines than the marines can kill of firewarriors. If one tactical squad kills one firewarrior squad, the tactical squad still hasn't made its points back, whereas a firewarrior squad only needs to kill 8 marines. I'd still rather take speeder scouts.
I agree the statline is fine, but there needs to be a way to only make them slightly better.
Tactical Squads can aslo be adapted to fit your local Meta unlike Orks and Tau.
Your Meta is into Swarms, Heavy Bolters and Flamers.
Mechanised you load up with Plasma and Metla.
Tanks and MCs Metla, Las-Cannons and Grav weapons.
Anpu42 wrote: Tactical Squads can aslo be adapted to fit your local Meta unlike Orks and Tau.
Your Meta is into Swarms, Heavy Bolters and Flamers.
Mechanised you load up with Plasma and Metla.
Tanks and MCs Metla, Las-Cannons and Grav weapons.
10 Fire Warriors are 90 points. 10 Tactical Marines are 140 points. Let's say the Marines want to fight tanks, so we give them a meltagun and a combi-melta (no heavy because they'll be moving). They're now 160 points. The difference between the two units is now 70 points. Repeat this two more times (3 troops each seems rather reasonable, no?) and the points difference is 210 points. How many Crisis Suits with fusion guns do you reckon you can get for 210 points, and do you think it'll be better equipped to deal with armour than 30 Marines with 6 melta-shots, three of which are one-shots?
Simply put, the points the Tau (or anyone else, for that matter) save by not trying to do everything at once means their army can still do everything at once, but more efficiently, since specialists are better at their thing than generalists by definition.
Long-winded attempt at explanation:
Spoiler:
If the choice were between taking a generalist unit or a specialized unit, it might look as follows:
Unit A costs 200 points. It is excellent at killing infantry, but shoddy at killing everything else.
Unit B costs 200 points, and is so-so at killing infantry, so-so at fighting MCs, and so-so at killing tanks.
If the cost-ratios between specialists and generalists were better balanced, this would be the case. None of the above would be a strictly "better" unit than the other, since they'd have different applications. You'd take unit A when you needed to bolster your anti-infantry firepower and unit B when you wanted to have a troubleshooter unit that wouldn't ever be worthless.
The issue, though, is that with the current points system it's more like this:
Unit A costs 100 points. It is excellent at killing infantry, but shoddy at killing everything else.
Unit B costs 200 points, and is so-so at killing infantry, so-so at fighting MCs, and so-so at killing tanks.
Unit C costs 100 points. It is excellent at killing tanks and MCs, but shoddy at killing infantry.
Under these circumstances, why would you ever want the 200-point unit that's so-so at everything when you, by taking the two other units, could have an army that, as a whole, was excellent at killing everything? This is the issue of Fire Warriors vs. Tacticals; the Fire Warriors are better offensively, generally more durable point-for-point (and this is Fire Warriors we're talking about, the "Flimsy McWeaksauce" of troops choices), and leave enough points over that you can be better at everything than the Marines.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: specialists are better at their thing than generalists by definition.
I have never disputede that.
Let me try this:
Just becouse there is a better unit for X Job, does not mean it "Sucks".
I could take a 200+ Point Tactical Squad, pod in next to your Specialist Crisis Suit team and blast it into the stone age with Plasma/Melta/Grav weapons.
I could do the same to two units with a Combat Squaded Sternguard out of Drop Pod.
The Sternguard can do it better, but that does not make the Tactical Squad Suck.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: specialists are better at their thing than generalists by definition.
I have never disputede that.
Let me try this:
Just becouse there is a better unit for X Job, does not mean it "Sucks".
I could take a 200+ Point Tactical Squad, pod in next to your Specialist Crisis Suit team and blast it into the stone age with Plasma/Melta/Grav weapons.
I could do the same to two units with a Combat Squaded Sternguard out of Drop Pod.
The Sternguard can do it better, but that does not make the Tactical Squad Suck.
I didn't mean to say that you had disputed that, but when you're forced to take generalist troops who are worse than if you'd had specialist troops it affects the entire army.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: specialists are better at their thing than generalists by definition.
I have never disputede that.
Yes, once you take everything out of it's vacum it changes everything.
I usaly take 3-4 Tactical Squads on one of my list. I know that unless I face those units that just make them vanish [like a HeckTurkey] they should still be there on turn three. This lets me have a stable background to work with while the rest of my army do thier jobs. My normalload out lets me deal with all but lots of AV14. I can deal with Swarms, MCs, and even with flyers if I take an ADL.
Yes they are Generalest, but they are also Flexable.
I think the discussion about Tact marines is getting OT. Want to compare marines to fire warriors or orks? I suggest you guys open up a new thread in the 40K Discussion forum or maybe even the Tactics forurm.
The problem is Tactical Marines is they are the fine ballance. To mess with them to much would make them start to become the defalt must take Unit.
The only fix I would like is for them is to allow the Sarge's to be able to take two Specialist Weapons again. I want my Combi-Plasma Lighitng Claw. That is a personal preferance.
Anpu42 wrote: The problem is Tactical Marines is they are the fine ballance. To mess with them to much would make them start to become the defalt must take Unit.
The only fix I would like is for them is to allow the Sarge's to be able to take two Specialist Weapons again. I want my Combi-Plasma Lighitng Claw. That is a personal preferance.
You can already do that.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Anpu42 wrote: The problem is Tactical Marines is they are the fine ballance. To mess with them to much would make them start to become the defalt must take Unit.
The only fix I would like is for them is to allow the Sarge's to be able to take two Specialist Weapons again. I want my Combi-Plasma Lighitng Claw. That is a personal preferance.
You can already do that.
They can replace thier bolt pistol for a "Special Weapon and thier Bolt Gun fro a Chain sword
I've read through a good deal of this thread and the two main arguments seem to be as follows:
Marines are good as they are because they are a jack of all trades unit that can take more punishment than other troop choices and have good rules in the form of ATSKNF and the ability to deploy in Combat squads
And Marines are not good as they are because the increase in Xenos firepower has left them highly vulnerable, robbing them of their staying power.
Both good points I feel, and both are right. Space marines ARE a very solid troop choice, they are incredibly dependable when required to make any leadership check and have a solid armour save of 3+. And in smaller games the ability to deploy in Combat squads is very powerful. That being said they ARE weaker due to Xenos weaponry becoming more powerful. Hell, I have very fond memories of my Noise marines literally wiping out whole squads in a single turn of shooting, or any number of my Tau units doing the same. This being said, C:SM has some very hard hitting units itself. I don't want to flog a dead horse, but THSS Terminators are one of the most durable units in the game, and no one is going to argue that the ranged power a marine army can bring to the table is pretty damn solid. Add to this a large array of tactical options and unit choices and you get a very solid army.
The reason I am taking all of this into consideration is that when you put the Tactical marines in the context of the army, instead of straight up comparing them to other troop choices then they make a great deal of sense. For example you would never compare a Guardsman to a Space marine because the Space marine is obviously better but this doesn't factor in the positioning, unit strength and supporting units. Guardsman are typically pretty numerous and backed by Vehicles. For what they do in the army they are in, Space marines are right where they need to be.
Tactical Marines need both a slightly power boost (very slight, they are indeed a jack of all trades unit) and a slight survivability boost.
I really don't think tactical marines are that bad off (especially when you consider that chaos marines are only slightly cheaper and significantly worse). But I agree that a slight boost to them wouldn't be bad, as they don't really live up to their fluff.
Instead of messing with any stats or core rules though, I propose two things:
1) Let sergeants take auspexes (and maybe even boost the role of the auspex slightly, grants Interceptor to the squad against units arriving from reserves within 12"?) I can't conceive of why they'd leave this option off when it's been a bit in the tactical squad box since 3rd edition.
2) Make apothecaries 1-3 per Elites slot like in the 30k rules, or a 1 per HQ choice, filling no slot, instead of automatically stuck in the command squad. Then you can potentially spread FnP to a tactical squad by attaching an apothecary.
I think both of these are pretty mild. They give ways of boosting marine firepower and durability without changing the marines themselves, just by giving players options they should already have.
These are excellent suggestions, very fluffy fixes that would make tacticals a little bit better without altering any of their base mechanics.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/01/07 21:11:48
Hexwolf wrote: I've read through a good deal of this thread and the two main arguments seem to be as follows:
Marines are good as they are because they are a jack of all trades unit that can take more punishment than other troop choices and have good rules in the form of ATSKNF and the ability to deploy in Combat squads
And Marines are not good as they are because the increase in Xenos firepower has left them highly vulnerable, robbing them of their staying power.
Both good points I feel, and both are right. Space marines ARE a very solid troop choice, they are incredibly dependable when required to make any leadership check and have a solid armour save of 3+. And in smaller games the ability to deploy in Combat squads is very powerful. That being said they ARE weaker due to Xenos weaponry becoming more powerful. Hell, I have very fond memories of my Noise marines literally wiping out whole squads in a single turn of shooting, or any number of my Tau units doing the same. This being said, C:SM has some very hard hitting units itself. I don't want to flog a dead horse, but THSS Terminators are one of the most durable units in the game, and no one is going to argue that the ranged power a marine army can bring to the table is pretty damn solid. Add to this a large array of tactical options and unit choices and you get a very solid army.
The reason I am taking all of this into consideration is that when you put the Tactical marines in the context of the army, instead of straight up comparing them to other troop choices then they make a great deal of sense. For example you would never compare a Guardsman to a Space marine because the Space marine is obviously better but this doesn't factor in the positioning, unit strength and supporting units. Guardsman are typically pretty numerous and backed by Vehicles. For what they do in the army they are in, Space marines are right where they need to be.
I disagree, because in practice, they don't perform like a 14 pt model. Too much gear they don't need. A weapon that no one cares about.
The bottom line is that Xenos can invest fewer list points into units that don't do anything. Actually dire avengers do one thing really well: they let you take a Wave Serpent.
I actually don't find marine lists' firepower that impressive. So I will argue that. Every killy thing, except the TFC, costs the marines DEARLY. And most of it is protected by the 3+ tissue paper armor, so failing that 3+ makes you lose even more points.
Actually, comparing them directly to other troops make them look BETTER than they actually are. In practice, they are units that can literally be ignored until it comes time to worry about objectives. In a game about being killy, they fail utterly still.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Anpu42 wrote: The problem is Tactical Marines is they are the fine ballance. To mess with them to much would make them start to become the defalt must take Unit.
The only fix I would like is for them is to allow the Sarge's to be able to take two Specialist Weapons again. I want my Combi-Plasma Lighitng Claw. That is a personal preferance.
Anything "balanced" in 6th is overcosted. Assault is garbage in general. You want as much efficient firepower as you can get. Marines are anything but.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/07 21:16:49
They can replace thier bolt pistol for a "Special Weapon and thier Bolt Gun fro a Chain sword
What are you talking about? The can take items from Melee and Ranged lists, either of which allow to replace a melee weapon or a pistol.
Exactly, I can trade in my Bolt Pistol for A Melee or Ranged Weapon.
The Bolt Gun you can trade in for a Chain Sword.
So I can trade in the Bolt Pistol and get either a Comb-Plasma or a Lighting Claw, but I can not rake in my Bolt Gun for either.
Hexwolf wrote: This being said, C:SM has some very hard hitting units itself. I don't want to flog a dead horse, but THSS Terminators are one of the most durable units in the game
They're less durable than Tactical Marines against small-arms for their points. They're durable compared to Marines against AP3 and lower, but the giant torrent of fire from Tau and Eldar is still going to murder them dead. Then there's the issue of them more or less being forced to take a Land Raider in order to perform.
They can replace thier bolt pistol for a "Special Weapon and thier Bolt Gun fro a Chain sword
What are you talking about? The can take items from Melee and Ranged lists, either of which allow to replace a melee weapon or a pistol.
Exactly, I can trade in my Bolt Pistol for A Melee or Ranged Weapon.
The Bolt Gun you can trade in for a Chain Sword.
So I can trade in the Bolt Pistol and get either a Comb-Plasma or a Lighting Claw, but I can not rake in my Bolt Gun for either.
1. Exchange Bolt Pistol for Lightning Claw.
2. Exchange Bolter for Chainsword
3. Exchange Bolter for Combi-plasma
4. ???
5. Profit!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/07 21:27:20
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
3+ is tissue paper armour? It's the second best armour in the game.
Which doesn't matter when the enemy has Bladestorm on every single weapon, or throws around 1204162371254609125460125402184658021652401625402.5 shots. Fpr the points, Power Armour is rubbish, which is what we've been saying throughout the thread.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
3+ is tissue paper armour? It's the second best armour in the game.
It has been rendered tissue paper in the current meta, either through AP2 or by sheer weight of wounds. This game is now about what you can kill in the shooting phase, and for tactical marines, the answer is precious little.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/07 21:36:02
Hexwolf wrote: This being said, C:SM has some very hard hitting units itself. I don't want to flog a dead horse, but THSS Terminators are one of the most durable units in the game
They're less durable than Tactical Marines against small-arms for their points. They're durable compared to Marines against AP3 and lower, but the giant torrent of fire from Tau and Eldar is still going to murder them dead. Then there's the issue of them more or less being forced to take a Land Raider in order to perform.
They can replace thier bolt pistol for a "Special Weapon and thier Bolt Gun fro a Chain sword
What are you talking about? The can take items from Melee and Ranged lists, either of which allow to replace a melee weapon or a pistol.
Exactly, I can trade in my Bolt Pistol for A Melee or Ranged Weapon.
The Bolt Gun you can trade in for a Chain Sword.
So I can trade in the Bolt Pistol and get either a Comb-Plasma or a Lighting Claw, but I can not rake in my Bolt Gun for either.
1. Exchange Bolt Pistol for Lightning Claw.
2. Exchange Bolter for Chainsword
3. Exchange Bolter for Combi-plasma
4. ???
5. Profit!
I am not sure that is RAW or RAI?
It does not seem leagal, the only time you take a peice of war gear and then make trades on it is Terminator Armor and then it tells you what you can trade it in on. There is no wording like that with the Bolt Gun to a Chain Sword.
Rautakanki wrote: What? I would be so happy to have Space Marines as troops. Combatsquads, actual weapon options that do something, saves and ATSKNF.
Exactly. Enough said.
But I want to say more!
People want something that's going to have that wow effect and the I just wrecked you statement from these guys.
People don't realize that the versatility with weapon options, being able to combat squad, and having And They Shall Know No Fear special rule adds a lot to a basic troop choice and good strategy since tournament wise you have a master list and you combat squad your units before warlord traits so if its 6 objectives and you have 3 10 man tactical squads, oh look at that I have 6 separate scoring troops now because I can combat squad. Or this example as well, what?! You did 25% casualties to me in shooting and I failed my ld 8 Morale check and fell back 12"inches off the objective I was on. Oh but look what I can do, I auto regroup 3"then I move 6 and oh snap I am within 3"of the objective still, yeah I won.
ATSKNF is actually not that useful anymore. I'm struggling to have marines survive. There aren't any left to do the regroup trick you are speaking of. Also, realize that sometimes you WANT to be swept in combat so you can shoot more. Especially in 6th.
They don't have weapons that do anything. They don't have a transport that does anything. They aren't a threat in HTH, despite paying for bolt pistol, WS 4, S4.
Until you actually play marines against Xeno lists *that mean business*, not this "oh my meta doesn't use war walkers!" you probably will not understand the frustration. Your guys just die in droves despite their "eliteness".
You do not want marines as troops. They are overcosted and are a tax on your list. They look great on paper, but in reality that have a bunch of rules and gear that don't matter or don't help.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/01/08 17:11:48
Hexwolf wrote: I've read through a good deal of this thread and the two main arguments seem to be as follows:
Marines are good as they are because they are a jack of all trades unit that can take more punishment than other troop choices and have good rules in the form of ATSKNF and the ability to deploy in Combat squads
And Marines are not good as they are because the increase in Xenos firepower has left them highly vulnerable, robbing them of their staying power.
Both good points I feel, and both are right. Space marines ARE a very solid troop choice, they are incredibly dependable when required to make any leadership check and have a solid armour save of 3+. And in smaller games the ability to deploy in Combat squads is very powerful. That being said they ARE weaker due to Xenos weaponry becoming more powerful. Hell, I have very fond memories of my Noise marines literally wiping out whole squads in a single turn of shooting, or any number of my Tau units doing the same. This being said, C:SM has some very hard hitting units itself. I don't want to flog a dead horse, but THSS Terminators are one of the most durable units in the game, and no one is going to argue that the ranged power a marine army can bring to the table is pretty damn solid. Add to this a large array of tactical options and unit choices and you get a very solid army.
The reason I am taking all of this into consideration is that when you put the Tactical marines in the context of the army, instead of straight up comparing them to other troop choices then they make a great deal of sense. For example you would never compare a Guardsman to a Space marine because the Space marine is obviously better but this doesn't factor in the positioning, unit strength and supporting units. Guardsman are typically pretty numerous and backed by Vehicles. For what they do in the army they are in, Space marines are right where they need to be.
While C:SM can indeed bring some firepower, their role as a general purpose army doesn't do anything for them. There's a reason Assault Marines are never taken, or why we're saying that Tactical marines are bad. They simply are. They're a generalist unit that isn't good at anything, yet is priced as if it is.
Martel732 wrote: ATSKNF is actually not that useful anymore. I'm struggling to have marines survive. There aren't any left to do the regroup trick you are speaking of. Also, realize that sometimes you WANT to be swept in combat so you can shoot more. Especially in 6th.
They don't have weapons that do anything. They don't have a transport that does anything. They aren't a threat in HTH, despite paying for bolt pistol, WS 4, S4.
Until you actually play marines against Xeno lists *that mean business*, not this "oh my meta doesn't use war walkers!" you probably will not understand the frustration. Your guys just die in droves despite their "eliteness".
You do not want marines as troops. They are overcosted and are a tax on your list. They look great on paper, but in reality that have a bunch of rules and gear that don't matter or don't help.
No.
I flat out refuse to believe that Marines are less durable than Sisters against basic weapons, and my Sisters don't fold like you're describing.
"That time I only loaded the cannon with powder. Next time, I will fill it with jewels and diamonds and they will cut you to shrebbons!" - Nogbad the Bad.
CSM Zenmarine Warband from assorted tratiors and heritics
woo woot
.....Bay Area Open GT 2013 - Best Tyranids 
.....LVO GT 2014 Team Tournament - Best Generals
