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.

So It's been a question I have been trying to figure out... why can tactical squads only take either 1 special weapon or 1 heavy? Almost every other marine book can take two weapons in the troop squads, and hell even bikes are able too!

Tradition. It’s the way it was back in the RT days, and continues forward to now. The fact that some of the chapters diverge from this is one of the things that make them stand out.

The concept of the marine in 40k is flawed to begin with as the reason you clad a superhuman in power armor is turn them into a walking and mobile tank. Currently they are a tank with a slingshot. Every marine should be carrying a heavy or special weapon as not using the ability ofbthe power to life heavy weaponry is just silly.

I get from a balance perspective why this has never and will never happen, it just doesnt make a lot of logical sense.

They should have the option to take either 2 special weapons OR 2 heavy weapons. It's a shame they don't.

When tactical squads were ten men each, you had a heavy weapon and special weapon per squad. With 2nd edition they got split into five-man groups.

 Tiger9gamer wrote:
So It's been a question I have been trying to figure out... why can tactical squads only take either 1 special weapon or 1 heavy? Almost every other marine book can take two weapons in the troop squads

Erm. Do you actually have a codex or are you using Army Builder?

Yes, i do, but thats besides the point. Im asking why can't a squad of ten guys take 2 special weapons or 2 heavy. I apologize for bad grammar formation. I should slow down and type.

Play Chaos Marines. They can take 2 specials and their champion can take a matching combi-weapon.

Ask roboute guilliman. He wrote the codex astartes or something. I'm not actually a history buff.. (i don't remember)
The point is, why can't they take 10 special weapons? They're all strong enough. Oh and bolt gun, while in the 41st millennium may feel more like a pea shooter is more like a mini rocket launcher. But I digress..

 PaperworkNinja wrote:
When tactical squads were ten men each, you had a heavy weapon and special weapon per squad. With 2nd edition they got split into five-man groups.

Actually, midway through 2nd they gained the ability to buy an understrength "combat squad" instead of having to buy a full strength 10-man squad. However, this understrength squad still retained both weapon options, ie it could have both the heavy and the special weapons. The rule was written on napkins at lunch at the first US Grand Tourney by Jervis etal and published shortly afterwards in White Dwarf. At least one tournament player (that was playing Marines) was included in the discussion. It was much later that they gained the current ability to split into two 5-man squads.

I thought it was a hard split into five-man squads for the 2nd edition.

GW have never really written compelling rules for tactical squads. The closest they ever came was in the early 5th, when they were cheap as chips and came with special heavy built in, plus gained combat squads. Less than a year later Grey Hunters made a complete mockery of tactical squads, and they've never regained their mojo.

It's a shame, because it's an easy fix. especially with the 6th edition rapid fire rules, I'd always have Tactical marines fire one extra bolter shot. That increases their firepower, and distinguishes them from Devestators and non-codex marines.

The reason marines don't all pack heavy/special weapons is the same reason not every rifleman runs around with a full fledged machinegun or RPG instead of a rifle, in that they either lack sustainability of use or are unwieldy, and thus are best handled by a couple specialists with support from more flexible riflemen. Marines may be able to wield heavy weapons easier than guardsmen, but they're still unwieldy and can only carry so much ammunition, and need someone to watch their back. Special weapons likewise face similar issues, flamers are extremely range limited and effective against a limited range of targets (not to mention are extremely limited in terms of fuel duration), meltaguns face similar problems, while equipping everyone with plasma guns is likely to result in huge numbers of catastrophic failures and unacceptable losses. Grav guns are probably the only weapon one could make the case for to replace a bolter as a standard weapon, and there probably just aren't enough of those.

 Polonius wrote:
GW have never really written compelling rules for tactical squads. The closest they ever came was in the early 5th, when they were cheap as chips and came with special heavy built in, plus gained combat squads. Less than a year later Grey Hunters made a complete mockery of tactical squads, and they've never regained their mojo.

It's a shame, because it's an easy fix. especially with the 6th edition rapid fire rules, I'd always have Tactical marines fire one extra bolter shot. That increases their firepower, and distinguishes them from Devestators and non-codex marines.

That'd be *really* powerful, increasing their wound output significantly, particularly at 12-24". The problem isn't with the Tac marine, it's that GW can only seemingly distinguish other marines by making them "Tac's+1".

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
It's a shame, because it's an easy fix. especially with the 6th edition rapid fire rules, I'd always have Tactical marines fire one extra bolter shot. That increases their firepower, and distinguishes them from Devestators and non-codex marines.

That'd be *really* powerful, increasing their wound output significantly, particularly at 12-24". The problem isn't with the Tac marine, it's that GW can only seemingly distinguish other marines by making them "Tac's+1".

You think one more bolter shot is that big a deal? That's, what, seven more bolter shots a round from a full strength squad?

If you need to up the points to compensate, that's fine, but it'd be nice to see bolter marines actually do something.

One special weapon....bit silly, it makes the sqauds lack firepower.

Devestators can pack tons more firepower, I know that's there job but tac marines lack somthing

They do everything. Which is their entire point.

 Polonius wrote:


You think one more bolter shot is that big a deal? That's, what, seven more bolter shots a round from a full strength squad?

That's an extra dead marine or an extra 3 dead guardsmen, it's notable. There's a reason IG units need significant Ld reinforcement and the presence of an officer unit in close proximity to get that sort of a firepower boost off on any sort of reliable basis.

If you need to up the points to compensate, that's fine, but it'd be nice to see bolter marines actually do something.

While I'd be fine with that, I'd also guess such a change would inevitably filter through to the other Marine tac equivalents

Yeah, I don't know if we need to encourage bolter gunlining. We already have DA and to a lesser extent slaanesh CSM. The problem with bolters isn't a problem with bolters.

In any case, the comparison is a little bit silly. Yes, regular SM tac squads aren't as specialized, but they come from a different army than those other types. SW have better basic marines, but they also don't get grav guns or bike armies. Etc. etc.

I mean, if it really was so honerous, then just take inquisition forces and run MSU henchmen, you can take a squad with meltaguns, multimeltas, and joakero. Nobody has to take a small arm.

Or, you know, CSM and play an abaddon+chosen army. But nobody does it because the price you have to pay for even just the option of more killing power isn't worth it to field the unit at all.

Better to have a worse unit that's cheap enough to justify fielding, than a more uber-unit that's prohibitively expensive.

 buddha wrote:
Every marine should be carrying a heavy or special weapon

By normal human standards the bolt gun is a special weapon. We take it for granted in 40k, but when you play something like Necromunda you will view them differently. Bolt guns are valuable and badass. They are often much more useful and flexible than the other special weapons.

Smacks wrote:when you play something like Necromunda you will view them differently.

... or when you play guard, or orks, or tyranid. Even if others have better small arms for certain things, you still don't want to get shot at by bolters if you're eldar, dark eldar, tyranid, guard, or orks.

A bolter sure feels like a special weapon when you're more likely to get killed by one than if that model shot you with a meltagun.

Just more MEq-blindness, I suppose. If there is something better at any one thing, then that's just more proof how comprehensively terrible a tac marine is...

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Polonius wrote:


You think one more bolter shot is that big a deal? That's, what, seven more bolter shots a round from a full strength squad?

That's an extra dead marine or an extra 3 dead guardsmen, it's notable. There's a reason IG units need significant Ld reinforcement and the presence of an officer unit in close proximity to get that sort of a firepower boost off on any sort of reliable basis.

If you need to up the points to compensate, that's fine, but it'd be nice to see bolter marines actually do something.

While I'd be fine with that, I'd also guess such a change would inevitably filter through to the other Marine tac equivalents

Ok, then allow tacticals to re-roll hits with bolters, or something. BAsically, tacticals need a raison d'etre, and being able to score isn't enough when scouts do that cheaper. If I had my way, Tacticals would be a good unit, able to take a charge, fight a bit, and shoot reasonably well.

 Polonius wrote:

Ok, then allow tacticals to re-roll hits with bolters, or something. BAsically, tacticals need a raison d'etre, and being able to score isn't enough when scouts do that cheaper. If I had my way, Tacticals would be a good unit, able to take a charge, fight a bit, and shoot reasonably well.

That is pretty much exactly what they do. There just happen to be alot of units that do any one of those things better, and Grey Hunters which do it all better.

pm713 wrote:
They do everything. Which is their entire point.

Seconed. That and if they gave a troop such as marines with there good stats, nothing but spec kit no one would play you. It would be somewhat unfair.

 buddha wrote:
The concept of the marine in 40k is flawed to begin with as the reason you clad a superhuman in power armor is turn them into a walking and mobile tank. Currently they are a tank with a slingshot. Every marine should be carrying a heavy or special weapon as not using the ability ofbthe power to life heavy weaponry is just silly.

Read the fluff around the bolter. It's a big gun with a nasty recoil. There is a reason why every Guardsman carries a flashlight, and it's not because they want to host a rave.

 PaperworkNinja wrote:
I thought it was a hard split into five-man squads for the 2nd edition.

It was. You bought them at 10 men at 300 points, and then before the start of the game could split them into two combat squads. Special went with one and the heavy with the other.

Tacticals are "underpowered" because every thing else in the game is so crazy now. I have always thought they were perfectly fine "generalists" as they should be, and I have had Marines since 2nd edition.

 Polonius wrote:


Ok, then allow tacticals to re-roll hits with bolters, or something.

You mean take Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics?

if they could all take special weapons they wouldn't be special

Bolter is nasty, though 100% fluff you'd deploy about thousand orks to one marine, and a sqaud would seuve them down like grim reelers.

jhe90 wrote:
Bolter is nasty, though 100% fluff you'd deploy about thousand orks to one marine, and a sqaud would seuve them down like grim reelers.

I have and there is still no reason that you would not equip the heavy bolter other more deadly special/heavy weapon as standard kit if your superman is designed to carry it.

Except they're either hard to carry, dangerous, short ranged or ill suited to the task.