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 a thought, Black Templar can have a 15 man tactical squad with the 10 normal marines and 5 "scouts" with enough room for a character in a LRC.
That tends to be a nice unit and not be the black hole of points like using terminators instead.

Martel732 wrote:
The scouts were a life support system for a grav star. Shocker.

He brought significantly more than minimum troops for his detachments. They were an important part of his strategy.

Martel732 wrote:
The scouts were a life support system for a grav star. Shocker.

Yes, exactly
A large body of scouts makes a critical mass (no reason you can't do this with tacticals either, yes you get a few less bodies point for point blah blah) that you can't just wipe off the table, combined with a grav star that is also tough to just knock off. A few minimal squads is easy you just focus on them until they are gone or you focus on the death star / toys if you can. In this case doing either one does get you anything, you kill the big toys the board is still covered with enemies. you focus on the bodies, well there is alot of them so it's going to take you a while and the big toys are going to be pushing you around.

I'm only saying there is a tipping point were they become significantly more effective just because you can't kill them all. And prior to that point your better off just running more toys and putting as few points as possible into troops.

Kisada II wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The scouts were a life support system for a grav star. Shocker.

Yes, exactly
A large body of scouts makes a critical mass (no reason you can't do this with tacticals either, yes you get a few less bodies point for point blah blah) that you can't just wipe off the table, combined with a grav star that is also tough to just knock off. A few minimal squads is easy you just focus on them until they are gone or you focus on the death star / toys if you can. In this case doing either one does get you anything, you kill the big toys the board is still covered with enemies. you focus on the bodies, well there is alot of them so it's going to take you a while and the big toys are going to be pushing you around.

I'm only saying there is a tipping point were they become significantly more effective just because you can't kill them all. And prior to that point your better off just running more toys and putting as few points as possible into troops.

120 str 6 shots at 1k points says what? critical mass? Meet critical blast.

Assuming we are talking about the supposed rules for eldar jetbikes at 24" you kill 16 marines with that (again assuming they can all fire and the rules that i've seen are correct), and the marines kill 10 or you at 24" (again assuming they can all fire). Leaving the marines ahead since they outnumber you more than 2 to 1...

Also it looks like you can't get 30 of those bikes in 1k without being unbound (again just with the leaked rules).

Only 30. Whatever will they do?

Um. There's a CAD still. And they're still troops. So yes you could snag more than 30. You don't have to run the warhost things.

I just meant what we were seeing is 32 points each with scatter laser so 32 * 30 = 960 (no room for HQ) to get those 120 str 6 shots at 24"

vs. 6 X 10 man tact squads with plasma and a libby
Both those lists are dumb but the marines do actually win out.

I appreciate all the imputed folks.

For the record I asked about tackle squads because it's what I have a lot of. I can field four 10 man squads atm. All with rhinos as well as jump marines and devs.

I usually start my SM forces with 2x10-man Tacs, 1x10man Dev, and a 6+-man ASM squad. Seems to be a recipe for a good game, even if it's not the most effective way to do it.

(And does every threw need to be 'Windrider OP'? That isn't the only potential opponent he'll have...)

Kisada II wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
The scouts were a life support system for a grav star. Shocker.

Yes, exactly
A large body of scouts makes a critical mass (no reason you can't do this with tacticals either, yes you get a few less bodies point for point blah blah) that you can't just wipe off the table, combined with a grav star that is also tough to just knock off. A few minimal squads is easy you just focus on them until they are gone or you focus on the death star / toys if you can. In this case doing either one does get you anything, you kill the big toys the board is still covered with enemies. you focus on the bodies, well there is alot of them so it's going to take you a while and the big toys are going to be pushing you around.

I'm only saying there is a tipping point were they become significantly more effective just because you can't kill them all. And prior to that point your better off just running more toys and putting as few points as possible into troops.

Part of the critical mass of Scouts is that they have Infiltrate and Scout USRs, allowing them to outflank onto the board, null deploy, or start much further afield. SM Scouts are also not as vulnerable to, say, Grav weapons due to 4+ armor and access to Camo Cloaks for +1 to their cover saves. However, Tacs do not come with the Infiltrate/Scout USRs, have no wargear options to improve their cover, and must either footslog or use a Rhino. Yes, even if you 'pod them in, you have to footslog, because once you get out of the pod you have no transport. Something that's particularly mobile- like a mech force, anything that's Jet/Jump Infantry or Bike/Jetbike heavy, or something similar- can just move away from your Tacs, leaving them to either pretend that they can chase the enemy down or be shot off of objectives.

I do think Martel is underselling the Scouts, as the list did use a buttload of them... but he's not really wrong to argue that the primary strongpoint of the list was the GravCents.

I'm convinced that scouts are better than tacs. I'm not arguing that. I'm just not convinced that scouts are that good in the scheme of 40K.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
I usually start my SM forces with 2x10-man Tacs, 1x10man Dev, and a 6+-man ASM squad. Seems to be a recipe for a good game, even if it's not the most effective way to do it.

(And does every threw need to be 'Windrider OP'? That isn't the only potential opponent he'll have...)

I think it's very telling that I would never consider fielding that. Ever. That's a tabling waiting to happen.

Not that I don't appreciate the advice here...but Martel you are coming off as dang full of yourself here.

Maybe is has something to do with watching tactical squads get abused for 20 years with a brief break during 3rd ed. I'm not full of myself as much as jaded.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm convinced that scouts are better than tacs. I'm not arguing that. I'm just not convinced that scouts are that good in the scheme of 40K.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
I usually start my SM forces with 2x10-man Tacs, 1x10man Dev, and a 6+-man ASM squad. Seems to be a recipe for a good game, even if it's not the most effective way to do it.

(And does every threw need to be 'Windrider OP'? That isn't the only potential opponent he'll have...)

I think it's very telling that I would never consider fielding that. Ever. That's a tabling waiting to happen.

Depends what you're up against and how you equip em. With Ultramarines CTs, that could be a decent list

"Depends what you're up against "

For me, usually pure death.

How about Raven Guard Tactical squads? It would seem they'd be worth it with the flanking. Use the rhino points to field more Assault Marines maybe.

The problem with tactical squads is that they aren't durable enough, especially on foot in a shooty edition. They also suffer from "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome, where they do a bit of everything well, but not as well as specialist units.

As others have said, scouts make better cheap scoring troops. If you want to run Tac squads, you have to invest heavily in your marines. This means giving them transports, 10 man squads, special + heavy, etc.

Drop pods beat rhinos any day. Razorbacks are more expensive and hold fewer, but can be good for a small squad rushing up to take an objective, or to give mobility to Devastators.

The ultimate transport for CC is the Land Raider Crusader/Redeemer. Load up 10 Black Templars with neophytes and a chaplain and murder MEQ and GEQ.

Assault marines are better Deep-Striking, as that means they don't have to absorb fire before getting in shooting range. Remember: you aren't death company. Don't act like them.

Tacticals may not be the best thing on the competitive scene, but in pickup and casual games they are more than capable of winning games with the proper tactics. The mark of a good player is that they can make supposedly "bad" units work wonders on the tabletop.

Martel732 wrote:
"Depends what you're up against "

For me, usually pure death.

Against a LVO army? Probably, but against a semi-fluffy list, I think it could do fine.

 TheNewBlood wrote:
The problem with tactical squads is that they aren't durable enough, especially on foot in a shooty edition. They also suffer from "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome, where they do a bit of everything well, but not as well as specialist units.

I wouldn't quite say that; not the part about durability, as I agree in that regard- against the S6/7 spam that dominates the meta right now, T4/3+ isn't very useful.

Really it's not so much that they're not as capable as a specialist unit, it's that they pay through the nose to be generalists, and so end up paying for equipment that they very rarely use. For example, a Tac Marine will very rarely use his Bolt Pistol, Frag, or Krak Grenades. All of these are primarily used in an assault... which a Tac Marine isn't likely to actually get into.

Whiskey144 wrote:

 TheNewBlood wrote:
The problem with tactical squads is that they aren't durable enough, especially on foot in a shooty edition. They also suffer from "jack of all trades, master of none" syndrome, where they do a bit of everything well, but not as well as specialist units.

I wouldn't quite say that; not the part about durability, as I agree in that regard- against the S6/7 spam that dominates the meta right now, T4/3+ isn't very useful.

Really it's not so much that they're not as capable as a specialist unit, it's that they pay through the nose to be generalists, and so end up paying for equipment that they very rarely use. For example, a Tac Marine will very rarely use his Bolt Pistol, Frag, or Krak Grenades. All of these are primarily used in an assault... which a Tac Marine isn't likely to actually get into.

Good point. Tac Marines a great jack of all trades unit, but a bit overpriced for that role. I think even a couple ppm reduction would make them a lot better.

Kisada II wrote:
I just meant what we were seeing is 32 points each with scatter laser so 32 * 30 = 960 (no room for HQ) to get those 120 str 6 shots at 24"

vs. 6 X 10 man tact squads with plasma and a libby
Both those lists are dumb but the marines do actually win out.

How are the marines getting into firing range?

Back to tactical marines. They're recieving lots of hate, yep. But you got to realise that they're not all about killing the enemy outright. They're tactical marines. Not point and click marines. Ultramarines with 5-6 squads of them with Calgar win not because they obliterate everything. But because they drop in, go extreme MSU, do some initial damage in 1-2 turns with twin-linked bolters to chew some infantry and blow a tank or two with meltas and combi-meltas and swarm the map with lots of obsec units which are not that easy to deal with as they can fall back or stay at will. Besides, you've got a ton of 12-12-12 obsec pods. Also, don't forget about melta bombs on sarges.

Same goes to ravenguard - they do less damage but with everything in scouting rhinos, they're quite resilient to damage . ObSec is key once again. You don't kill much but you're everywhere.

Playing mass tac marines requires good positioning as they hate being multicharged by something killy. You got to use your marines as a bauble-wrap upon a bauble wrap. The longer you hold your foes occupied - the better. By the end of a game, you're mostly left with a handful of guyz and a few pods/rhinos but you're so much ahead on VP that it doesn't matter.

Tacticals are good even without being spammed. The tactix is different but 5 in a dozer rhino with special + combi to roll around the map, grab points and occasionally shoot something or 10 in a pod to combat-squad and drop somewhere on the flank alongside sternguards or dread are pretty fine in any list.

About eldar. It's fun bat mass UM tacticals might actually have chances against them! Having popped tactical doctrine, a combat squad of 5 with melta kills 1-3 bikes. If they kill not enough to force LD (bikes are ld8), shoot pods or other marines so that you kill 3-4 and force a LD check. Another squad shoots another jetbike squad. Sternguards take care of squads with farseers as they deal ~2 wounds per 5 sternguard with poison or more wounds / force to jink with ap3 ammo / melta.

But there's probably no use comparing anything to new eldar as they're gona be banned with such rules anywayz. They'll probably have to stick to 6-th dex to play games.

Echoing a sentiment above. Tacticals pay a ton of points for their "sum of parts," but are actually worse than the sum of their parts, because only certain parts can be used at a time.

If you're paying for a bolt pistol, 3+ armor, WS/S/T/I 4, ATSKNF, and grenades, but then all you do is move up, fire one long range bolter shot, and then get killed by a s6+ ap3 or better shot, then all the bells and whistles you were forced to pay for never did anything. You were just a walking 1 wound bolter with BS4 and no save. With how the destructive potential of units has escalated in the past several years, this problem has become deeply rooted into the game. In 3rd edition, I was able to actually cross the field in Rhinos and have marines actually on the table for more than one shooting phase outside cover. I miss those days.

Another issue I have is that tacticals are abysmal at melee. Having a good combo of the melee stats is alright, but the attack stat in melee is king. I believe any model that pays that much to be a "generalist" should at least have 2 attacks. That would put them "on par" with a shoota boy in melee damage output, (with both parties charging) but at exactly double the point cost.

A tactical marine kills 0.417 shootaboy on a charge and 0.208 without a charge.
A shootaboy kills 0.25 marine on a charge and 0.111 without a charge.

A tactical costs 14 ppm, a shootaboy costs 7 ppm.

So, marines are actually somewhat on par with shootaboyz in mellee point-to point in vacuum.

Another thing is that boyz may have pk nobz, assault vehicles, WAAGH and 'ere we go. But so do tacticals have huge benefits like chapter tactics, krak nades, good transports and special weapons.

T4 3+ might not be as useful against S6 as S4, but they still lose only half what the 5+ guys lose, or 2/3rds what 4+ guys lose.

Sure, some 5+ guys (Guardsmen, Gaunts) are less than half the price of a Marine, but others are substantially more (Guardians, Kalabites, Tau Pathfinders, etc).

S6 spam is quite inefficient against 3+, relative to other troop options. Yes, some builds can spam so much that you might not notice the difference, but those 5+ / 4+ options are just as boned in those cases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaWolves, what kind of meta are you in? What type of armies do you usually face?

 koooaei wrote:
A tactical marine kills 0.417 shootaboy on a charge and 0.208 without a charge.
A shootaboy kills 0.25 marine on a charge and 0.111 without a charge.

A tactical costs 14 ppm, a shootaboy costs 7 ppm.

So, marines are actually somewhat on par with shootaboyz in mellee point-to point in vacuum.

Another thing is that boyz may have pk nobz, assault vehicles, WAAGH and 'ere we go. But so do tacticals have huge benefits like chapter tactics, krak nades, good transports and special weapons.

I wouldn't call most chapter tactics a "huge" benefit. Nor krak grandes. And marine transports are pretty poor, while special weapons are sparse and scarce. And special weapons are quite the trap when list tailoring is not an option. Especially compared to "every bike gets a scatterlaser". Ah yes, the new standard to be judged by: the scatterlaser.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
T4 3+ might not be as useful against S6 as S4, but they still lose only half what the 5+ guys lose, or 2/3rds what 4+ guys lose.

Sure, some 5+ guys (Guardsmen, Gaunts) are less than half the price of a Marine, but others are substantially more (Guardians, Kalabites, Tau Pathfinders, etc).

S6 spam is quite inefficient against 3+, relative to other troop options. Yes, some builds can spam so much that you might not notice the difference, but those 5+ / 4+ options are just as boned in those cases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaWolves, what kind of meta are you in? What type of armies do you usually face?

The 5+ armor units (guardsmen) cost less than half a marine. So the S6 is more efficient against marines. I know that it doesn't help your position, but please look at thing on a point basis and not a model basis. Losing half as many models doesn't help marine players when they are paying more than twice as much for the privilege. This exact math is why terminators are terrible at their price point. As it turns out, S6 spam is VERY efficient against 3+ because it negates the T4 and makes cover moot, which are features that plasma, reaper launchers, and other AP-based solution lack. It makes for a very steady and predictable marine loss rate, performed from a safe range. Plus, S6 is ALSO anti-horde. And anti-light and anti-mid vehicle. And anti-MC. It's anti-everything, except for a few niche units.

Martel732 wrote:

I wouldn't call most chapter tactics a "huge" benefit. Nor krak grandes. And marine transports are pretty poor, while special weapons are sparse and scarce. And special weapons are quite the trap when list tailoring is not an option.

Marine Transports are probably among the best in the game for their (very low) cost. Pods can get you ANYWHERE from T1, and with minimal risk, no it to mention an av12 ObSec blob to park somewhere and potential score VPs/block movement/provide cover. The Rhino is again insanely cheap (cheap enough you can really provide armour saturation) and if you get even 1 turn out of them, you're approaching effective range unless the enemy are hugging their back line.

As for Special Weapons, I hardly call them a trap. Melta will reliably bust tanks, flamer is good for anti-infantry/Defence and Plasma is the all-rounder. Most lists except the most skewed will have something each of those will work on, and you can increase/decrease the amount of each as necessary depending on your meta if you are really struggling to get use from one type or another.

Especially compared to "every bike gets a scatterlaser". Ah yes, the new standard to be judged by: the scatterlaser.

And this is where your argument falls down. Just like DecuriCrons/SerpentSpam/Triptide/Gravstar before it, you are using the most anomalously imbalanced units as a measuring stick for the whole game, which is the completely backwards way of looking at it. A codex/unit/model that can't handle the exploitation of the most imbalanced units around is not automatically bad, and each time a book is released that doesn't have an answer for cheese lists, that can only be a good thing for game! The answer to imbalance is not to create more imbalance, and using the uppermost anomalies as the benchmark is just wrong, and unhelpful.

Against most lists, ones that don't exploit the game's imbalances, Tacticals are a great tool, and so long as you can make use of just their shooting, they do fine! Utilitise their good LD, CC power against weaker units, Combat Squad flexibility and the gear they have/can have, and Tacticals are good units.

Guardsmen are less than half, yes.

Kalabites are substantially more than half.
Tau Pathfinders are, too.
And Guardians.
And Corsairs.

Guardsmen are *not* the only t3 5+ in the game.

Things like Guardsmen and Gaunts are designed to soak heavy weapons like that. So it makes sense to die slower per point, despite dying faster per model. Its their doctrine.

Kalabites and Pathfinders, though, don't. For every 13 point Marine that dies, its two 11/12 point models for them.

S6 cares about 3+. Guardsmen just care a little less (10 vs 13), because they are designed that way. Many others, though, care a hell of a lot more.

To reiterate, Marines die faster per point than Guardsmen to s6ap6 firepower by about 30%. Kalabites and Tau Pathfinders die faster than Marines per point by about 80%.

Guardsmen are cheap, but not all t3 5+ are guardsmen.

Wouldn't say S6 makes it anti-horde. RoF does for sure.