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.

Hm...also, what about indeps? Fnp on them is HUGE.
If enchanced marines pay 4 pts for a fnp. Let's say barebones captain is now 120 pts with extra 30 pts for fnp.

I'll try out



I'm not sure if i can take a combi-melta on a captain simultaniously with a stormshield. So just stealth cloaks for scouts for +10 pts per squad to round it up to 1250.

+4 pts for fnp for space marines while +30 for IC cause +20 is somewhat low for such an awesome thing, +2 pts for bolters and combi-bolters being rapid fire 2/3 and stormbolter being assault 3, +1 pts for ccw
Scouts remain the same without any buffs yet.

I'll ask an opponent to go without mc-s or flyers and see what we get. It's just too hard to justify how this new stats are gona interact with stuff that ignores them. And take note, i don't take no dedicated AA or anti-mc.

 koooaei wrote:

And price decrease...u kidding? They're allready very cheap. Ig veterans cost 6 and get ws3, t3, ini3, ld7, 5+ save and s3 ap- guns. If you give them carapace - they cost around 9 per model for a 4+ save. And you get totally better stats for 14 pts. Yep, they die as easilly to bale flamers and ap3 stuff but when they get shot at by something else - marines are like 5 times more durable. Also they can't even be compared in mellee. U're asking too much if you want a further point decrease. U've allready got atsknf and chapter tactix for 1 pts compared to chaos marines.

And how many people take Carapace Vets, again?

CSM get double specials and the option to have both BP/CCW and bolters, AKA "stuff that's actually good for the midfield objective holders Tacticals are supposed to be". They're Grey Hunters without ATSKNF, more or less.

 koooaei wrote:


So let's count - base marine 14 pts atm. +2 pts for better bolter, +4 pts for fnp, +0.5 pts for extra ccw and you got a 20-21 pts cost marine that's totally playable and useful in offence, defence and board controle.
And make a price increase on bikes. They're supposed to be 1/10 of an army and not 9/10. Excluding white scars.

No. Just no. 21 PPM Marines with that stuff wouldn't be playable, because Bolters are rubbish. Ask BA players how much the FNP matters when they have a really low model-count T4 army. If you think 5+ FNP is worth 4 points I can't do anything other than tell you that you're wrong. An extra Bolter shot also isn't worth 2 points.

Your suggestions other than "we suck "?
People take carapace vets from time to time and occasionally take carapace ccs. Some people even take 'ard boyz for 11 pts per an ork boy! Now that's overpriced.

U tell me that +4 pts for fnp is bad? Or a 2 pts for extra bolt shot?.. U want a win button?

If it doen't play out - we can try to lower points a bit. But just giving buffs for free...is not a right way to go.

 koooaei wrote:
Your suggestions other than "we suck - i want wave serpents"?

Read the thread. It's not like I've not been active in it.

In short:

Fix assault rules.

Add CCW.

Allow more special weapons.

Replace the Tactical Marine entry with Grey Hunters.

Start pricing specialists properly in comparison to generalists.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Your suggestions other than "we suck - i want wave serpents"?

Read the thread. It's not like I've not been active in it.

In short:

Fix assault rules.

Add CCW.

Allow more special weapons.

Replace the Tactical Marine entry with Grey Hunters.

Start pricing specialists properly in comparison to generalists.

That's reasonable. But how do you make them more durable and not just glass-cannons?

You remove Heldrakes, Codex: Tau and Codex: Eldar from the game.

I don't have a problem with durability more damage out put which is why I only want to buff their standard equipment not their stats

I mean 2 shot bolters would be enough because grey knight ss are good at shooting hence why hey have a 24" range kill box

I will be testing that ^^ tonight not FNP I think it would be too much and iron hands FNP really dosnt do a lot from what I've been seeing

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
You remove Heldrakes, Codex: Tau and Codex: Eldar from the game.

That is about it.
It is not Tactical Squads that Suck. What sucks is the AP3/2 out there. I rairly fight them and My Tactical Squads do fine. If I take one of my Plasma SPAM List and Marine Army just melt away.

darkcloak wrote:
I am actually liking my Tacs bare bones...

150 points for a 10 man squad and a combi weapon, small games take 5 for 80 points. Hard to beat that. I'm used to the idea of my troops floundering around soaking up shots and not doing much in the way of killing thanks to my adventures with CSM, so keeping them cheap makes sense.

And besides, they're just troops. Leave the real killing to the Elites and Heavies.

That's a losing recipe against Xenos. You are basically flushing 150 pts for those 10 men. Marines don't have the throw weight from their killy stuff to be able to throw away those points. That's the crux of my entire argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
You remove Heldrakes, Codex: Tau and Codex: Eldar from the game.

That is about it.
It is not Tactical Squads that Suck. What sucks is the AP3/2 out there. I rairly fight them and My Tactical Squads do fine. If I take one of my Plasma SPAM List and Marine Army just melt away.

Tactical squads do suck. They specifically suck compared to what Tau/Eldar/Daemons/Necrons and even IG get for troops. The IG pay less for infantry but their guns are just as good as marines with only a 1 BS decrease. Again, tactical marines don't contribute during the match like other lists' troops do. Your tactical marine experience is skewed because you don't face Eldar ever. The suck because they can't threaten even my crappy BA. That's horrible. Especially for what they cost. There is a direct correlation between my win rate vs C:SM and how many tactical squads my opponent. If you bring a lot of tactical marines, my BA are probably going to paddle you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:
Your suggestions other than "we suck "?
People take carapace vets from time to time and occasionally take carapace ccs. Some people even take 'ard boyz for 11 pts per an ork boy! Now that's overpriced.

U tell me that +4 pts for fnp is bad? Or a 2 pts for extra bolt shot?.. U want a win button?

If it doen't play out - we can try to lower points a bit. But just giving buffs for free...is not a right way to go.

Seemed to work fine for the Eldar.

Martel732 wrote:

Tactical squads do suck. They specifically suck compared to what Tau/Eldar/Daemons/Necrons and even IG get for troops. The IG pay less for infantry but their guns are just as good as marines with only a 1 BS decrease. Again, tactical marines don't contribute during the match like other lists' troops do. Your tactical marine experience is skewed because you don't face Eldar ever. The suck because they can't threaten even my crappy BA. That's horrible. Especially for what they cost. There is a direct correlation between my win rate vs C:SM and how many tactical squads my opponent. If you bring a lot of tactical marines, my BA are probably going to paddle you.

Ig also have 1 less str on their lazguns and they're not totally that great. But it is somewhat mitigated by making them rapid fire 2/3 with an order and a possibility of nice overwatch due to numbers once again.

 koooaei wrote:
Your suggestions other than "we suck "?
People take carapace vets from time to time and occasionally take carapace ccs. Some people even take 'ard boyz for 11 pts per an ork boy! Now that's overpriced.

U tell me that +4 pts for fnp is bad? Or a 2 pts for extra bolt shot?.. U want a win button?

If it doen't play out - we can try to lower points a bit. But just giving buffs for free...is not a right way to go.

Seemed to work fine for the Eldar.

 koooaei wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Tactical squads do suck. They specifically suck compared to what Tau/Eldar/Daemons/Necrons and even IG get for troops. The IG pay less for infantry but their guns are just as good as marines with only a 1 BS decrease. Again, tactical marines don't contribute during the match like other lists' troops do. Your tactical marine experience is skewed because you don't face Eldar ever. The suck because they can't threaten even my crappy BA. That's horrible. Especially for what they cost. There is a direct correlation between my win rate vs C:SM and how many tactical squads my opponent. If you bring a lot of tactical marines, my BA are probably going to paddle you.

Ig also have 1 less str on their lazguns and they're not totally that great. But it is somewhat mitigated by making them rapid fire 2/3 with an order and a possibility of nice overwatch due to numbers once again.

 koooaei wrote:
Your suggestions other than "we suck "?
People take carapace vets from time to time and occasionally take carapace ccs. Some people even take 'ard boyz for 11 pts per an ork boy! Now that's overpriced.

U tell me that +4 pts for fnp is bad? Or a 2 pts for extra bolt shot?.. U want a win button?

If it doen't play out - we can try to lower points a bit. But just giving buffs for free...is not a right way to go.

Seemed to work fine for the Eldar.

Aaaand that's not the right way to go. Having buffs for free - eldar just got so op that they totally dominate. Which is wrong. Cause ideally you must have a 50/50 winrate vs other armies.

This is a tad off topic but in Horus Heresy you can take tac squads with 20 marines for around 200 pts
That sounds good to me.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
This is a tad off topic but in Horus Heresy you can take tac squads with 20 marines for around 200 pts
That sounds good to me.

It's actually 250 points for a 20 strong tac squad with no upgrades, because even though the additional marines are 10 points a pop, there's a very large tax built into the unit from the start (like almost all the other units in the HH rules, for who knows what reason).

And even within the context of HH, that tac squad isn't very good - they get no special or heavy weapons and they don't have ATSKNF (to be fair, no one does) so they quickly disappear in the face of enemy fire or assault. I'd say they're worth the 12 or so points per marine you're paying on average when they're 20 strong, but obviously not worth the 14 or 15 points you pay for the basic squad of 10. Then again, most of the unit costs in HH are pretty inflated.

Long story short, they aren't a good comparison to 40k marines.

Edit: HOWEVER,

The "Fury of the Legion" rule lets them shoot twice with bolters or bolt pistols in one shooting phase, in exchange for not being able to shoot next turn. Like the old Bladestorm exarch power for Dire Avengers. I don't know if that's come up in the thread yet, but I think giving that rule to Tactical Squads for free would be a better way of boosting their damage output than changing their stat line or the stats of their bolters.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:
This is a tad off topic but in Horus Heresy you can take tac squads with 20 marines for around 200 pts
That sounds good to me.

It's actually 250 points for a 20 strong tac squad with no upgrades, because even though the additional marines are 10 points a pop, there's a very large tax built into the unit from the start (like almost all the other units in the HH rules, for who knows what reason).

And even within the context of HH, that tac squad isn't very good - they get no special or heavy weapons and they don't have ATSKNF (to be fair, no one does) so they quickly disappear in the face of enemy fire or assault. I'd say they're worth the 12 or so points per marine you're paying on average when they're 20 strong, but obviously not worth the 14 or 15 points you pay for the basic squad of 10. Then again, most of the unit costs in HH are pretty inflated.

Long story short, they aren't a good comparison to 40k marines.

Edit: HOWEVER,

The "Fury of the Legion" rule lets them shoot twice with bolters or bolt pistols in one shooting phase, in exchange for not being able to shoot next turn. Like the old Bladestorm exarch power for Dire Avengers. I don't know if that's come up in the thread yet, but I think giving that rule to Tactical Squads for free would be a better way of boosting their damage output than changing their stat line or the stats of their bolters.

Fury of the legion would definitely fix TAc squads. I mentioned the HH tac squads because of that rule.

what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

 centuryslayer wrote:
what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

Well not in the face OF OUR DIVINE TAUDAR OVERLORDS!!!!
HAIL TAUDAR!
EVERYTHING BUT TAUDAR SUCKS!
MAKE EVERYTHING TAUDAR!

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 centuryslayer wrote:
what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

Well not in the face OF OUR DIVINE TAUDAR OVERLORDS!!!!
HAIL TAUDAR!
EVERYTHING BUT TAUDAR SUCKS!
MAKE EVERYTHING TAUDAR!

I guess everyone has different coping mechanisms.

Martel732 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 centuryslayer wrote:
what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

Well not in the face OF OUR DIVINE TAUDAR OVERLORDS!!!!
HAIL TAUDAR!
EVERYTHING BUT TAUDAR SUCKS!
MAKE EVERYTHING TAUDAR!

I guess everyone has different coping mechanisms.

Coping with what... HAIL TAUDAR!

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 centuryslayer wrote:
what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

Well not in the face OF OUR DIVINE TAUDAR OVERLORDS!!!!
HAIL TAUDAR!
EVERYTHING BUT TAUDAR SUCKS!
MAKE EVERYTHING TAUDAR!

I guess everyone has different coping mechanisms.

Coping with what... HAIL TAUDAR!

Exactly. You use mockery to frame the current state of 40K. To each their own.

Martel732 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 centuryslayer wrote:
what the heck? Tactical Marines are pretty darn great! O__o

Well not in the face OF OUR DIVINE TAUDAR OVERLORDS!!!!
HAIL TAUDAR!
EVERYTHING BUT TAUDAR SUCKS!
MAKE EVERYTHING TAUDAR!

I guess everyone has different coping mechanisms.

Coping with what... HAIL TAUDAR!

Exactly. You use mockery to frame the current state of 40K. To each their own.

Oh I see. Sorry just it begins to get tiring with absolutely everything being compared to Taudar. I know it's a popular tourney list but Tac marines aren' that terrible.

 koooaei wrote:
As said before, rapid fire 2/3 makes bolters effective now and not too overwhelming. No ignore-cover or rending or pinning - just plain bolter + 1 shot.

That's the Salvo rule. If you fire, you can't charge, if you move, you can't fire 3 shots, if you stay still, you can fire 3 shots. That's Salvo.

Though another issue is not being able to charge after firing their bolters. Why can a rather large man not charge into combat AND fire his bolter? I understand for IG maybe, but marines?

Which leads me to another issue...standardizing equipment. An IG bolter is the same as a SM bolter. An IG chainsword is the same as a SM chainsword. Considering that Space Marines are much stronger that IG, you'd think there would be some sort of difference.

What should we compare to then? Aren't NFL quarterbacks compared to Brady/Manning? Why shouldn't lists be compared to the best available competition.

Tac marines are terrible enough that they can be largely ignored in a real game, even by weaker codices. That's pretty damn bad.

 McNinja wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
As said before, rapid fire 2/3 makes bolters effective now and not too overwhelming. No ignore-cover or rending or pinning - just plain bolter + 1 shot.

That's the Salvo rule. If you fire, you can't charge, if you move, you can't fire 3 shots, if you stay still, you can fire 3 shots. That's Salvo.

rule nazieing (that's a word, I promise!) here, when you move you'd fire 2 shots at half range as well ^^

Martel732 wrote:
What should we compare to then? Aren't NFL quarterbacks compared to Brady/Manning? Why shouldn't lists be compared to the best available competition.

Tac marines are terrible enough that they can be largely ignored in a real game, even by weaker codices. That's pretty damn bad.

Do they have some flaws.Yes. Are they so weak that they need a but ton of special rules to fix them? Definitely not. They need a few changes (putting in a variation of fury of the Legion rule would be nice) but I don't think that they are the paper thin weaklings everyones been making them seem like.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What should we compare to then? Aren't NFL quarterbacks compared to Brady/Manning? Why shouldn't lists be compared to the best available competition.

Tac marines are terrible enough that they can be largely ignored in a real game, even by weaker codices. That's pretty damn bad.

Do they have some flaws.Yes. Are they so weak that they need a but ton of special rules to fix them? Definitely not. They need a few changes (putting in a variation of fury of the Legion rule would be nice) but I don't think that they are the paper thin weaklings everyones been making them seem like.

And Chapter Tactics help alot to.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What should we compare to then? Aren't NFL quarterbacks compared to Brady/Manning? Why shouldn't lists be compared to the best available competition.

Tac marines are terrible enough that they can be largely ignored in a real game, even by weaker codices. That's pretty damn bad.

Do they have some flaws.Yes. Are they so weak that they need a but ton of special rules to fix them? Definitely not. They need a few changes (putting in a variation of fury of the Legion rule would be nice) but I don't think that they are the paper thin weaklings everyones been making them seem like.

And Chapter Tactics help alot to.

I forgot that as well. The Forge World Chapter tactics fix a lot of problems.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
What should we compare to then? Aren't NFL quarterbacks compared to Brady/Manning? Why shouldn't lists be compared to the best available competition.

Tac marines are terrible enough that they can be largely ignored in a real game, even by weaker codices. That's pretty damn bad.

Do they have some flaws.Yes. Are they so weak that they need a but ton of special rules to fix them? Definitely not. They need a few changes (putting in a variation of fury of the Legion rule would be nice) but I don't think that they are the paper thin weaklings everyones been making them seem like.

Defensively, they are fine. They are offensive weaklings. Other, cheaper, troops are not. That's a massive problem.

 McNinja wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
As said before, rapid fire 2/3 makes bolters effective now and not too overwhelming. No ignore-cover or rending or pinning - just plain bolter + 1 shot.

That's the Salvo rule. If you fire, you can't charge, if you move, you can't fire 3 shots, if you stay still, you can fire 3 shots. That's Salvo.

Though another issue is not being able to charge after firing their bolters. Why can a rather large man not charge into combat AND fire his bolter? I understand for IG maybe, but marines?

Which leads me to another issue...standardizing equipment. An IG bolter is the same as a SM bolter. An IG chainsword is the same as a SM chainsword. Considering that Space Marines are much stronger that IG, you'd think there would be some sort of difference.

Salvo 2/3 and they'll end up like sitting ducks emperror's children. While rapid fire 2/3 makes them want to use droppods and be mobile rather than sitting immobile in 1 place with salvo. Also, salvo bolters on relentless models...

Have you actually tried rushing forward and shooting an analogue of an auto-gun at the same time? It's literally impossible to hit something when you move quickly with a 2-hand rifle. When you want precise shots on a move - you stop to shoot and then continue moving. That's exactly what a 6' move-and-fire range represents tabletop. While you can make some semi-accurate shots with a pistol or a very-very light auto-gun specifically designed to this. Also you need specific training to do so even with appropriate weaponry.
Charging speed is represented by a 6 + 2d6 move tabletop - exactly the speed of a very-fast running

I tested out giving bolters 2 shots and it works really well.

I played a 1v1v1 against tau AND eldar which are marines biggest problems and a squad of tactical marines actually won a toe to toe fire fight against dire avengers.

Rapid fire was quite brutal aswell

Never got to use the additional cc attack lol

And split fire was good aswell mm taking pops at vehicles whilst the marines rained death on the enemy

I lost though it was "the relic" and a tau commander grabbed in and he was in a massive unit of drones :/

brother marcus wrote:
I tested out giving bolters 2 shots and it works really well.

I played a 1v1v1 against tau AND eldar which are marines biggest problems and a squad of tactical marines actually won a toe to toe fire fight against dire avengers.

So over the Dire Avengers the Tactical's have the ability to deal with MC's/vehicles with krak grenades, practical immunity to morale thanks to ATSKNF, greater durability due to T and save and chapter tactics for a single point per model and now you are happy? Add in the fact you gave them melee weapons as well so they can out-fight, out-shoot, out-survive and out-versatile the unit you hold up as being really good for a *single point per model* and you aren't asking for a balanced marine anymore at that point.

The existence of power build tourney meta lists that revolve around 1-2 undercosted units is no an excuse to expect your own army to get OP toys across the board.

The tactical marine's strength is in his versatility, there is no threat they cannot engage with the right loadout. Balancing them in a world where no-one plays anything but Triptide, Screamerstar, Jetseers when there are like 10 other dexes out there stacks the deck and is worse than what people claim GW do with balance. Tac's are already way better against units like Orks and Gaunts than Avengers, lets be reasonable in our expectations.

I'd love for every unit in the game to be in absolute balance, I really would, but what you guys are talking here isn't balance, it's favouritism.