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.

Just one question: every broadside and riptide in the list is going to have an EWO...how may marines do you think are going to have left to shoot up his pathfinders (who were likely bubble wrapped by kroot)?

And the buff commander also allows for remove cover if attached to a unit.

Though this is playing into my earlier concern re: taking the EWO away from riptides

I've played lists very similar to that before. They don't work well against Xenos for a few reasons.

The number one reason is that I can't list tailor. I never know I'm playing Tau until I get to the store most of the time. We make our lists before we arrive, so I have to be willing to use a list like that against any list, which right there is a problem.

Additionally, Tau can get marker lights in other places than Pathfinders. This is becoming increasingly common. And now there is a push for Tetras because up until Escalation, we strictly banned FW, but now that might be changing.

I guess you don't play against too many people that understand how to defend against a drop list. The Tau are masters of bubblewrapping and you will suffer dearly the turn after your alpha strike. Drop pods are old hat for most of my play group because we tried to break them in 5th, and not much has changed on the drop pod.

Martel732 wrote:

 Crantor wrote:
(...)
I don't see how terrain solves the issue of tac marines having pitiful throw weight for their points.

I really find odd that most games do not reach turn 5. Tactical Marines in cover in a place with LOS blocked from most positions should not be that easy to kill.

Anyway, this is not a problem of tac marines "sucking". It is a problem of Tau/Eldar being overpowered. Out of talking with the players about the problem (as per the rules, see page 8 above mentioned), there are few solutions apart from just changing armies.

Marines are Tier 2. There is a Tier 3 and a Tier 4, and perhaps more. They are quite good, but they are not THE best army regarding competition.

By the way, yes I meant big LOS-blocking terrain.

I like the drop pod-list. This should be obvious, but try to get in close combat. Since Tau do not have ATSKNF, they die horribly and quickly if a "pitiful" tac marine touches them. Yeah I know getting there is the difficult part. And kill the pathfinders.

 Crantor wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I don't see how terrain solves the issue of tac marines having pitiful throw weight for their points.

You are exagerating. Pitiful is hardly the word I would use.

Why not do a line by line comparison and how many points base units are.

5 Tact Marines is 70 pts base. Are they better or worse than 10 Guard vets at the same cost? How about 5 scouts? Or the min DE warriors whatever they cost.

If you were to pit a base non upgraded squad against another which one whould you pick? Work from that premise.

Heck even better, max out each troops choice and see how many upgrades and options you could give yourself and see which one you would pick.

Like 10 Tact with ML and plasma gun and combi plasma and razorback. Would you pick that or 30 Gaunts tooled up? Or 10 Fire warriors and a Devil fish?

Strictly from that comparison, you have valid points. I concede that. But that is not the game as a whole. Tactical marines are much poorer in practice than they are on paper. They have many dinky little upgrades that don't save them from ion accelerator to the face. If I'm taking fire from Tau, I think I'd rather have the 30 wounds to give, because my marine defenses aren't that useful. By the same logic, I'd take troop capable of sucking up the wounds that top tier armies can shell out. Against Eldar firepower, I'm paying for T4 that they largely are ignoring with S6/7 guns.

Let's not also forget the additional randomness of marines over Orks and Gaunts and Kroot. One turn, especially early, of bad saves will cripple your list. Lists design to just absorb the wounds don't care as much.

Come to think of it, given the mobility of gaunts, I might always pick the gaunts because your sample tactical squad just isn't that scary. Maybe I'm just completely numb to facing other meq lists.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 da001 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Crantor wrote:
(...)
I don't see how terrain solves the issue of tac marines having pitiful throw weight for their points.

I really find odd that most games do not reach turn 5. Tactical Marines in cover in a place with LOS blocked from most positions should not be that easy to kill.

Anyway, this is not a problem of tac marines "sucking". It is a problem of Tau/Eldar being overpowered. Out of talking with the players about the problem (as per the rules, see page 8 above mentioned), there are few solutions apart from just changing armies.

Marines are Tier 2. There is a Tier 3 and a Tier 4, and perhaps more. They are quite good, but they are not THE best army regarding competition.

By the way, yes I meant big LOS-blocking terrain.

I like the drop pod-list. This should be obvious, but try to get in close combat. Since Tau do not have ATSKNF, they die horribly and quickly if a "pitiful" tac marine touches them. Yeah I know getting there is the difficult part. And kill the pathfinders.

Marines are tier 2. For now. Actually, maybe tier 3 because I think they are still worse than Necrons/GK. It's not that important, because the gap between tier 1 and 2 is so big. Tier 2/3 distinction is just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.

Oh, and for all the bellyaching about the Tyranids, I got to look at their codex, and I do NOT feel comfortable taking them on as marines.

I don't list tailor. I would never field that list against an unknown foe. If I draw Space Wolves, I just lose. Also, cover doesn't matter against wound spam.

Martel732 wrote:
I've played lists very similar to that before. They don't work well against Xenos for a few reasons.

The number one reason is that I can't list tailor. I never know I'm playing Tau until I get to the store most of the time. We make our lists before we arrive, so I have to be willing to use a list like that against any list, which right there is a problem.

Why Not, House Rules?
I normally know what I am dealing with.
By the way List Tailoring is going “I know what Fred is playing so now I will Make my List now.”
Showing up with a Nid List, a TauDar List and a Marine List is just being prepared.
The List I gave you is a risky TAC Army, but should work vs. most.

Additionally, Tau can get marker lights in other places than Pathfinders. This is becoming increasingly common. And now there is a push for Tetras because up until Escalation, we strictly banned FW, but now that might be changing.

Yes one herer and one there, the only units you get massed one are Pathfinders, Fire Warrior [by giving up their Pulse Rifles] and drone Squadrens.

I guess you don't play against too many people that understand how to defend against a drop list. The Tau are masters of bubblewrapping and you will suffer dearly the turn after your alpha strike. Drop pods are old hat for most of my play group because we tried to break them in 5th, and not much has changed on the drop pod.

Then Turn one is “Kill off the Bubble Wrap!”. Unless there is some sort of fealess going on, some units will be forced to run off the board.
Also when was the last time a Pod Army was used in you group.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I've played lists very similar to that before. They don't work well against Xenos for a few reasons.

The number one reason is that I can't list tailor. I never know I'm playing Tau until I get to the store most of the time. We make our lists before we arrive, so I have to be willing to use a list like that against any list, which right there is a problem.

Why Not, House Rules?
I normally know what I am dealing with.
By the way List Tailoring is going “I know what Fred is playing so now I will Make my List now.”
Showing up with a Nid List, a TauDar List and a Marine List is just being prepared.
The List I gave you is a risky TAC Army, but should work vs. most.

Additionally, Tau can get marker lights in other places than Pathfinders. This is becoming increasingly common. And now there is a push for Tetras because up until Escalation, we strictly banned FW, but now that might be changing.

Yes one herer and one there, the only units you get massed one are Pathfinders, Fire Warrior [by giving up their Pulse Rifles] and drone Squadrens.

I guess you don't play against too many people that understand how to defend against a drop list. The Tau are masters of bubblewrapping and you will suffer dearly the turn after your alpha strike. Drop pods are old hat for most of my play group because we tried to break them in 5th, and not much has changed on the drop pod.

Then Turn one is “Kill off the Bubble Wrap!”. Unless there is some sort of fealess going on, some units will be forced to run off the board.
Also when was the last time a Pod Army was used in you group.

We still see pods all the time, because we still have a Space Wolf player.

No, we simulate tournaments where you don't know your next foe. We often randomize games after meet up. So there is no way to construct a list a priori. This is by design. If you have to tailor to win, you didn't win in my estimation.

You won't have an army left after spending a turn killing the bubble wrap. That's what I'm trying to get through to you.

I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

I like the set up. I hate list tailoring. I like competitive lists. What I don't like is how GW has hosed up army balance *again*.

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

I like the set up. I hate list tailoring. I like competitive lists. What I don't like is how GW has hosed up army balance *again*.

If you don't list tayloring then you are NERFING yourself if you are the only one.

That is not what I asked:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

I like the set up. I hate list tailoring. I like competitive lists. What I don't like is how GW has hosed up army balance *again*.

That is not what I asked:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

No, not really, because I have neither the money nor the inclination to buy a power list.

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

I like the set up. I hate list tailoring. I like competitive lists. What I don't like is how GW has hosed up army balance *again*.

That is not what I asked:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

No, not really, because I have neither the money nor the inclination to buy a power list.

The talk to others that feel the same way as you and play with them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Does whre you play have a bulliten Board?

A physical one.

But the point is that other players shouldn't have to self nerf. Where is the middle ground? How many Riptides is too many? Which units should be banned? Negotiating that for each and every game is insane to me.

It's also a bit degrading, don't you think? "Please don't use your REAL list." Hell, I'm not sure how many own the non-optimal models for these lists.

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I have one Question:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

I like the set up. I hate list tailoring. I like competitive lists. What I don't like is how GW has hosed up army balance *again*.

That is not what I asked:
Do you enjoy your gaming enviroment as it stands right now?

No, not really, because I have neither the money nor the inclination to buy a power list.

That was... priceless.

The point of the game is having fun. Talk with the rest. Perhaps you will find more people willing to play with Tier2/3 armies, or House Rules to fix it up. Join forces with people who love armies they cannot field anymore.

By the way: many people have neither the money nor the inclination to buy a power list.

GW is NOT going to fix the game. Actually I am pretty sure they are focusing on breaking it further.

Thank goodness for Starcraft then.

Maybe it's a mental block, but my record against Necrons sucks too. But I haven't played them with C:SM, just BA. Too many flying pastries.

Martel732 wrote:
A physical one.

Put an add up for other that just want to play and have fun.
Use the player finder here on Dakka-Dakka

But the point is that other players shouldn't have to self nerf.

Don’t ask them to.

Where is the middle ground? How many Riptides is too many? Which units should be banned? Negotiating that for each and every game is insane to me.
It's also a bit degrading, don't you think? "Please don't use your REAL list." Hell, I'm not sure how many own the non-optimal models for these lists.

Don’t restrict anything. You might be surprised at what happens. I have found that most peope are happy to play within guidelines if just asked.

These are some of the house rules we have come up with.
FOC Modification: This is an optional Rule, we really don’t enforce self it, but we encourage its use.
HQ: 1-2
Troop: 2-6
Elite: 1-3
Fast Attack: 1-3
Heavy Support: 1-3
Fortifications: 0-1
Lord of War: 0-1 [Let others know you are using this one in advance.]
Double FOC: We just ask that you let the other player you will be using it in advance.
Allies: We just ask that you let the other player you will be using them in advance.
Flyers: We just ask that you let the other player you will be using any in advance.

The last four do cause a little list “Tailoring”, but it also becomes a common courtesy after a while. If player A goes “Hey I am going to bring my new Fighter next week", you know you will need some sort of Anti-Aircraft. If you get some guy who like to play the same 3 Riptides every game you can also ask him to please play something else because they are Boring to fight up against.
I stopped going to my Local Game Store because of the Ultra-Elitist Attitude. I now play at home, the library or even my local Starbucks and I enjoy the games much more.
Suggest something like my list to the store owner or maybe suggest it as a campaign setup.

"I stopped going to my Local Game Store because of the Ultra-Elitist Attitude"

Describe what qualifies as ultra-eltist. I'm trying to avoid asking people to not bring their Riptides. I'm sure for some that's all the Tau elites they own.

Joining the conversation way too late......

Give them pistol, bolter, AND cc weapon. OMG done

 namiel wrote:
Joining the conversation way too late......

Give them pistol, bolter, AND cc weapon. OMG done

That would help against Nids and some other tier 2/3 foes, but does nothing against the big boys. I think most people have just kind of given up on tier 1 foes. Subtracting out tier 1 foes, the tactical marine goes from poor to adequate I'd say.

Martel732 wrote:
"I stopped going to my Local Game Store because of the Ultra-Elitist Attitude"

Describe what qualifies as ultra-eltist. I'm trying to avoid asking people to not bring their Riptides. I'm sure for some that's all the Tau elites they own.

Ok, one of my Horror Stories:

We used to have an open game day and I had been going to it for 2-3 months now and not really getting any games in because of various things.
Well one day I see this guy pull out his army and think to myself “Lets see if I can get a game in.
Me: “Hey you want to get a game in?”
Him: “No I am waiting for a buddy who is going to show up later.”
Thinking maybe we can get a quick 500point or so game in.
Me: “Well what time is he expected?”
Him: “About 6:00”
Look up at the clock reading about 1:30

That's not elitist. That's just dumb.

I HAVE had people refuse pick up games against BA because they "want a game".

Martel732 wrote:
That's not elitist. That's just dumb.

Actualy 90% of the people only played the same people only.
This goes for the players of:
WH40k
Axis & Alies: Minis
Heroclicks
Flames of War
Star Wars Minis

The only two groups who were willing to play with new people were the CCG people and the Warmachine players, the Warmachine Players would not let you proxy so you could lern to play.

Martel732 wrote:
That would help against Nids and some other tier 2/3 foes, but does nothing against the big boys. I think most people have just kind of given up on tier 1 foes. Subtracting out tier 1 foes, the tactical marine goes from poor to adequate I'd say.

Honestly, trying to change a unit that fits fine in many theoretical (because in practice a lot of thing aren't played competitively) matchups but lacking against small number of extremely powerful (becuase of both raw power and versatility) compositions is quite bad idea. You bring them on the level of current FOTM, and then you feel that you need to do the same with every little thing that isn't T1 in every army too.

I just feel that entire idea of doing something to tacs is a wrong angle to approach the actual problem from.

And, concerning additional CCW: many units from non-C:SM marines armies have ar can take those, not that it helps them in most problematic MUs at the moment...

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Crikey, you really need to read the thread you're responding to.

Cultists get 10 wounds for 50 points, Marines get 5 for 70. The 10 Cultists are just as durable against bolters in 4+ cover as the Marines, and more durable against AP3 stuff (and if they go to ground for a 3+ or 2+ cover save, they live longer). The points saved add up, allowing you to purchase specialized units that perform better. Whether or not the Marines kill Cultists or not is irrelevant, neither of the two Troops choices can meaningfully threaten killy things, so the only thing left to do for them is to objective camp. Cultists are better at that.

You're playing to the strength of the Tactical Marines but ignore the fact that a fully kitted Tactical Squad is in excess of 140 points, whereas 10 Cultists are 50 points. If you hide the Cultists in reserve and walk them on later in the game they'll live long enough to score, freeing up at least 90 points that you could be spending on something else. Let's put it this way: Would you rather have 20 Marines or 20 Cultists and a Heldrake?

Battle Sisters aren't worse than Tacticals, because they can actually contribute. Same with CSM; double special weapons matters when the only meaningful part of the squad is the special weapons. The fact that there are Troops that are worse than Tacticals doesn't mean that they're good anyway, it just makes them not as bad as the others, most of which are in armies that have other options.

Well, Firstly, the cultists will have to pass a ld test for losses, than try to regroup again with a ld test. Or they can be killed by a few random models that came around in close combat cause when they loose combat they get swept. Than there are many weapons that ignore cover and have bad ap.

Basically, i think that 5 marines are way better as pointholders than cultists. Just cause they're more durable and less prone to ld fails. The thing is that sm have even better option as sniper scouts. And csm have only cultists or...well...csm that have issues with ld.

The main issue is not with just pointholding but with offensive capabilities. I agree that 2 special weapons are good and i do prefer csm for offence cause their rhinos also have havoc launchers But they're not much better. And they got issues with ld once again.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm seriously considering your suggestion of moving on because I do enjoy other games much more and I refuse to put more money into this one.

I think that's your winning move, I genuinely think part of it it down to your local group, it's just my opinion by they sound horrible to play games with. I think if you had a group like the one we've built it would take some getting used to but you would have a blast again. Games are tight, close and above all fun (barring those ones where lady luck is playing favourites )

I would try as I think it was Anpu said though, see if you aren't alone first. If you are just walk away, but if you aren't that may well be the starting blocks of your new group that answers. You say no-one should have to self nerf, but even in a perfectly balanced game like chess it's something you have to do.

I play games with my wife all the time, I'm a stronger player. I could go all out and destroy her every time but what's the point? Instead maybe I pick a weaker race combination, point out what it is I'm trying to do before I do it, little self nerfs here and there. I never let her win but now victory is possible, the game is closer and produces more memorable and fun moments. As she learns a game and gets better I can do it less but I'm always going to have to do it a little because I just have more of a head for strategy than she does.

It's the same with 40k armies, 2 even players can find themselves in a disparate matchup because of the armies involved. Now the player with the stronger army can lord it up because he spent his money on Riptides not Deathwing (which is hardly indicative of Creed! levels of tactics) and ride his easy win. The alternative is that his friend is looking at running his Baharoth/Jain Zar 30 Swooping Hawks and 30 footslogging Banshees theme list and say maybe today I'll field those Sniper Drones and Piranha's rather than the 3 Riptides, or maybe I'll play with Riptides but give myself a points or some other handicap.
The game can still be very tactical and fun without "optimised" lists.

 Barrogh wrote:

Honestly, trying to change a unit that fits fine in many theoretical (because in practice a lot of thing aren't played competitively) matchups but lacking against small number of extremely powerful (becuase of both raw power and versatility) compositions is quite bad idea. You bring them on the level of current FOTM, and then you feel that you need to do the same with every little thing that isn't T1 in every army too.

Give that man an exalt.

 da001 wrote:

I see you never played with an army that depends on Morale.
You never suffered Sweeping Advance. It is a rule that quickly destroys any unit you make a mistake with.
ATSKF is broken. Really broken. It allows marines to completely ignore a lot of things that will destroy anything else. And in 6th it has gone worse: now if you retreat you regroup and do not suffer any inconvenience for it.

No, really, read the thread. It's been discussed already. ATSKNF doesn't matter when you're dead, and even if you have two or three marines that survive due to it that is usually a DRAWBACK, as it means you can't shoot the enemy unit.

If Imperial Guard had ATSKNF it'd be broken; we've already seen how popular Azrael or a Rune Priest in a blob was at the beginning of 6th. Marines don't have the numbers to make the rule broken.

 da001 wrote:

Hit and Run for all units, together with +1 S HoW, ignore Dangerous Terrain and +1 JInk saves? What else do you want for free?
It is the rule every player was dreaming with for years. The fact that there are marine players that do not even appreciate it is really disturbing.What else do you want?

Yes, I'm sure better HoW and improved Jink Saves make Tactical Marines so much better than CSM. You got me there.

 da001 wrote:

This proves beyond doubt you haven´t play with Cultists. They are not "more durable" in any real situation, unless you are theorizing. A Tactical Space Marine squad can destroy a points-equivalent Cultist unit by looking at it in most cases. The lack of ATSKNF means a useless X points Cultist squad have zero chances of surviving in an assault against a vastly superior X points Tactical Space Marine squad. More wounds? Tell that to Sweeping Advance.

It is extremely easy to take them out of objectives. Compared to that, it is hell to do the same with tactical SM. Use a flamer? Cultists die, Astartes ignore it. You need special, costy weapons to deal with MEQs.

Use a Baleflamer, Riptide, or D-Scythe and the 14 point Marines die like 5-point Cultists, and they're weapons you'd have taken anyway, because they kill things that are actually dangerous too. I showed you the math. Cultists benefit from free saves from cover, whereas Marines pay for theirs. And yes, ATSKNF makes Marines more durable in melee than cultists, but it's a moot point. Think about it, what are the CC units you see in 6th edition? Juggerlords, FMCs, Wraiths, Daemonettes, Khorne Hounds and the like. Do you honestly think ATSKNF is going to save Tactical Marines from those?

 da001 wrote:

The points saved add up, allowing you to purchase specialized units that perform better. Whether or not the Marines kill Cultists or not is irrelevant, neither of the two Troops choices can meaningfully threaten killy things, so the only thing left to do for them is to objective camp. Cultists are better at that.

Wrong.
A Tactical Space Marine properly customized can threat anything.
A basic Tactical Space Marine can still deal with small objectives, including walkers and light vehicles and most "infantry that suck". They can do it reliably and they are tough. They need special gear to be properly dealt with.
A Cultist, against most targets, can only cry, and pray to the Darks Gods the Marines player focuses on other things.

Oh for the love of... READ what you're responding to. A Tactical squad with a Heavy Bolter does not meaningfully threaten a squad of Boyz, just like a Tactical Squad with a Lascannon does not meaningfully threaten a Land Raider.

 da001 wrote:

This sounds true. Except the "have other options" thing. All armies lack the number of options the Marines have.

Tactical Space Marines are way better, point by point, than most other equivalent units. They are also highly customizable and with lots and lots of options. Are they good?
It depends of how you define good: they are Troops, they are supposed to be the low-tier units. In that, they excel.

"Options" as in "can take other troops". Marines are stuck with Tacticals and Scouts unless you want to play a Bike list.

And no, Tactical Marines absolutely aren't better point for point. Cheaper Troops choices benefit from cover much, much more, and can usually come with some sort of specialized weapon that means you can use the rest of the list to do other things.

 da001 wrote:

You are talking about a unit that is equal or far worse than Tactical Marines at every single thing, at 2 points less. I have seen full battle sisters squads wiped out by Termagants in a single assault. Remember: they lack ATSKNF, they die as easy as anyone else except marines.

There was a big improvement in the 6th Codex for Sisters regarding troops. Before, you didn´t get the extra special and it was 10 models. That was a tax. They never achieved anything, you just paid points to access other units. And no it is not the case of marines, a 70 points tactical squad can wipe out a Sisters 140 points squad in a single turn, with ease and with no risk, if they get near. Seriously try it: minimal Tactical SM assaults a battle sister squad doubling in numbers and points. And then remember than tactical are not supposed to excel in close combat.

Marines are BS4, Sisters are BS4. Marines get 1 meltagun/flamer, Sisters get 2. Sisters have a 6++ at all times, Marines don't. If you're going to use absolute statements, make sure they're actually true.

Guess what? I've seen Tactical Marines wiped out in a single assault phase by Termagants too. Know why? Because Tacticals are rubbish at melee. Sure, they'd probably kill a Sister squad if they got to melee, but how on earth are they?

 da001 wrote:

Crikey, you really need to read the thread you're responding to.

Why so? I read some posts and it was enough.

No, no it wasn't. You're dragging up arguments we've already had.

 da001 wrote:


It is painfully obvious that you haven´t played any other army. ATSKNF (totally broken), Combat Squads (tactical heaven) and Chapter Traits (endless customization, picking up special rules for free!!) are three of the best rules in the game. Most of you are saying that they do not matter, and then say things about other armies that are just plain wrong.

Oh look, another thing you're wrong about. I've played Orks, IG and CSM too. And guess what? They have ways of coping with morale too. Orks get Fearless and Boss Poles, IG have Orders and Commissars, Chaos has VotLW and Fearless. The same is true for Tau (Bonding Knives), Daemons (what morale test?), and Tyranids have Fearless. It's not just Marines that have ways around morale.

Fearless is given out like candy. ATSKNF is a footnote more than anything else.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
(Chapter Tactics sucks)

I said: you can get stuff like Hit and Run for your army, together with +1 S HoW, ignore Dangerous Terrain and +1 JInk saves. Your answer was "Yes, I'm sure better HoW and improved Jink Saves make Tactical Marines so much better than CSM. You got me there."
You ignored the "Hit and Run" part? Does this mean a part of you is actually starting to think about how good Chapter Tactics and Tactical Marines are instead of trying to pick some witty reason (yes I should have worded it better, ha ha) to ignore the reasonings people do?
Or do you mean that "Hit and Run" sucks too?
You also missed Combat Squads, another really powerful rule, if you like, you know, using tactics when you deploy your army.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Use a Baleflamer, Riptide, or D-Scythe and the 14 point Marines die like 5-point Cultists,

And?
Use anything and Cultists die as if they were made of toilet paper. Use most things and Tactical Marines endure. You need special weapons to fight Tactical Marines. Your opponent need to outsmart you and face your Rock with a Paper and your Scissor with a Rock.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I showed you the math.

That is not math.

You keep comparing marines to other units in a 100% best case scenario for your reasoning like if the world was made of Riptides and Heldrakes. Guess what? There are other units and other armies, and most of them are in a far worse state than Marines. With far worse Troops options.

Big question: Would you feel better if tactical marines get Hit and Run, ATSKNF, Rage, Battle Focus, Supporting Fire and Master-crafted in all weapons, for free?
Following your reasoning... it seems your answer will still be NO. Riptides and Plasma will still kill your marines, they will never achieve a thing because they are gonna die... every single "reason" you gave for Tactical Marines to suck will be still there. They will still be far better than most other Troop units, but they will still fail to meet your expectatives of what a basic unit is mean to do.

So what else do you want? Tac Marines able to deal with Riptides by themselves?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Do you honestly think ATSKNF is going to save Tactical Marines from those?

Given that many of the units you said are close combat units, yes definetely ATSKNF provides a good chance of them surviving the assault. You need to kill all the marines to destroy the unit. That´s big. Tactical Marines go through a lot and survive. Most other Troops? They will lose the combat (like marines) and they will DIE. Also you keep comparing Troop "basic" cheap choices with "killy" expensive elite specialists.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 da001 wrote:

The points saved add up, allowing you to purchase specialized units that perform better. Whether or not the Marines kill Cultists or not is irrelevant, neither of the two Troops choices can meaningfully threaten killy things, so the only thing left to do for them is to objective camp. Cultists are better at that.

Wrong.
A Tactical Space Marine properly customized can threat anything.
A basic Tactical Space Marine can still deal with small objectives, including walkers and light vehicles and most "infantry that suck". They can do it reliably and they are tough. They need special gear to be properly dealt with.
A Cultist, against most targets, can only cry, and pray to the Darks Gods the Marines player focuses on other things.

Oh for the love of... READ what you're responding to. A Tactical squad with a Heavy Bolter does not meaningfully threaten a squad of Boyz, just like a Tactical Squad with a Lascannon does not meaningfully threaten a Land Raider.

Heavy Bolters?
You equip your Tactical Marines with Heavy Bolters?

Hey perhaps we have found the reason your Tac do nothing. Know what? Heavy Bolters suck.
Use Plasma Cannon -> your Tac Marines are a big menace to Heavy Infantry
Use Lascannon -> Your Tac Marines are a big manace to big scary Heavy Vehicles.
Meltagun, Plasma Guns, Missile Launchers... there are many ways to make a Tactical Marine matters.

And, by the way, you skipped all the Vehicle/Walkers part.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Guess what? I've seen Tactical Marines wiped out in a single assault phase by Termagants too. Know why? Because Tacticals are rubbish at melee. Sure, they'd probably kill a Sister squad if they got to melee, but how on earth are they?

While we have already found why your Tactical Marines do nothing (avoid Heavy Bolters and you will be fine) we have yet to find the answer to this mistery: how can your Marines die against a single Termagant unit in assault? Ans a question such as "how on Earth are they gonna get to melee with Sisters of Battle?" begets another question: how it comes your marines die so easily?

I mean, you know if a couple of Tac marines touches the Sisters, they will probably die, do you? They will lose the combat by two or three -> Sweeping -> all dead. So what if they kill one Marine with meltas? Where are your Meltas? Do you realize both units are similarly costed? How can you compare Tactical Marines to Sisters and claim than "Marines suck" with a straight face?

 da001 wrote:

Crikey, you really need to read the thread you're responding to.

Why so? I read some posts and it was enough. It is painfully obvious that you haven´t played any other army.

No, no it wasn't. You're dragging up arguments we've already had.

I just quoted one of that "arguments", the one with the meaningfully word on it. Reread it.

You said: Whether or not the Marines kill Cultists or not is irrelevant, neither of the two Troops choices can meaningfully threaten killy things, so the only thing left to do for them is to objective camp. Cultists are better at that.
I said: that´s not true. Then I gave you scores of situations where the Tactical Marines were able to do lots of things other than that. Other people posted more situations. On the other side, the Cultist were completely unable to do any other thing that objective camp.

Your answer? You said "Oh for the love of... READ what you're responding to. A Tactical squad with a Heavy Bolter does not meaningfully threaten a squad of Boyz, just like a Tactical Squad with a Lascannon does not meaningfully threaten a Land Raider." and change the size of your sentence.

1: I did answer your question, proving I had read it.
2: You didn´t answer to what I posted. At all. The fact that you quoted part of it makes it even more obvious.
3: Your answer does not make sense at all. Do you admit Tactical Marines can actually do everything I said while still claiming that they are bad just because they cannot kill Boyz with Heavy Bolters? Or do you believe Tactical Marines cannot deal with, say, light vehicles that go too near, walkers, Heavy Infantry (with the help of plasma), and so on?

Oh look, another thing you're wrong about. I've played Orks, IG and CSM too. And guess what? They have ways of coping with morale too. Orks get Fearless and Boss Poles, IG have Orders and Commissars, Chaos has VotLW and Fearless. The same is true for Tau (Bonding Knives), Daemons (what morale test?), and Tyranids have Fearless. It's not just Marines that have ways around morale

Wrong.
If you played that way, you played it wrong.
Here are some reasons why ATSKNF is such an awesome rule. Some reasons why so many people claim it is broken.

-> Tyranids are only Fearless under Synapse. Break the Synapse and they start running, killing themselves by getting out the table or even start attacking each other. A tyranid player who forget morale is bound to be defeated. As a Marine player, you should know this and try to breake the Synapse. If you do, that, the lack of ATSKNF will do the rest.
-> Chaos has VorLW and Fearless?? Really? Check that.
-> Daemons. Well at least you ask "what morale test?" here. I already answer your that question in a previous post. The rule is called Daemonic Instablity. As a Marine player, you should know that units with low Ld will suffer a lot in close combat, if they lose the combat, because the lack of ATSKNF.
-> Orks are only Fearless in numbers. Big units of elite troops are expensive and do not usually have numbers enough to keep it. That´s a major advantage for a Marine player.
-> Tau have Bonding Knives. Oh my! totally like ATSKNF. They still die touching the border, and they die in scores by sweeping advance. A single "useless" tactical marine can destroy the entire Tau line if let alive. Try it. Get some Tac Marines near the Fire Warriors. Either the Tau player will address the 70 points problem (thus ignoring other threats) or the useless tac marines will have a chance of unbalancing the game, all by themselves. And, by the way, this is something you can do with cultists too. The difference is that tac marines have lots of viable options to get there, and actually have a chance of getting close and even surviving some Tau firepower.
-> IG have Comissars? Didn´t know they got them in every unit, for free. That´s the problem: you are assuming Marines should receive incredible expensive special rules and then complain that it is not enough. Comissars are awesome... but they are expensive and if they die you have a problem. ATSKNF is free for every single one of your units.

So you think these armies have a ATSKNF equivalent? A free rule for all models that allows them to ignore Morale?
I said it before and I am saying it again: It is painfully obvious that you haven´t played any other army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Fearless is given out like candy. ATSKNF is a footnote more than anything else.

Et tu, brother?
Marks do not give Fearless (they should).
Basic CSMs do not get any protection against morale (BIG THING HERE)
Most our units have a lot of problems with morale.
Even Terminators! Have you seen a Chaos Terminator running out of the table?

I think tactical are some of the greatest troops merely because there is no one thing they're bad at. They have a fantastic stat line but they are a shade on the expensive side.

 da001 wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Fearless is given out like candy. ATSKNF is a footnote more than anything else.

Et tu, brother?
Marks do not give Fearless (they should).
Basic CSMs do not get any protection against morale (BIG THING HERE)
Most our units have a lot of problems with morale.
Even Terminators! Have you seen a Chaos Terminator running out of the table?

I have not. Thus far all my units either have an IoV, VotLW and/or an Independent in them, making them very difficult to force off via morale. It's sad as I like IoE and IoR, but oh well.

ATSKNF is a good utility ability but it does not suffice to make Tacticals what they should be.

If the Pyrovore had ATSKNF, would it be competetive?

Extreme example for sure, but it's just not enough when it is for a T4 3+ unit that pays a lot for that when it is less relevant than ever.

Green Tide will oneshot you in melee whether you are T3 5+ or T4 3+

(Pseudo-)Rending, AP2/3 large blasts etc are massively common.

You say it is a sign of skill to use these things against Tacticals? That it is just using rock against scissors?

Strange, when I see a Heldrake mow down 500+ points of troops alone (Not even counting in vector strikes) it does not seem very difficult to do at all.

Tacticals should be able to gun down other ranged forces, though not entirely points effectively, and chop down melee enemies, though not entirely points effectively.

They do neither. The 'counter' units are so extremely easy to target the Marines with so their supposed advantages become irrelevant. My Forgefiend does not care if it is Gretchin or Tacticals it is shooting at, and only the Forgefiend (Which is not an awesome unit in itself) pretty much completely invalidates footslogging Tacs unless the enemy can kill it quickly.

Oh, and as a side note; marks should not give fearless. CSM should have fearless or ATSKNF baseline, Legion Tactics, and be 14 pts base just like Tacticals... And even then they need fixes just like Tacs do.

Somehow I've read the entire thread, and while I admire those who have defended the notion that Tactical Marines are not worth their points. I just can't find it in me to argue against those who think all the options Tacticals have somehow make them stronger. They are a point sink, if your Meta doesn't prove that to you each and every game. Good for you. That doesn't mean anything to those of us who take the field against armies that hit the table looking to wreck face every game. Are Tactical Marines the worst troop choice in the game? No. Are they the best? No. Are they worth the points in a competitive Meta?

No.

 da001 wrote:
I mean, you know if a couple of Tac marines touches the Sisters, they will probably die, do you? They will lose the combat by two or three -> Sweeping -> all dead. So what if they kill one Marine with meltas? Where are your Meltas? Do you realize both units are similarly costed? How can you compare Tactical Marines to Sisters and claim than "Marines suck" with a straight face?

Must be nice to play against SoB players who don't run priests AND run melta's in their battle sister squads.