Switch Theme:

usefulness of a 3+ save.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





In CC. The thrown one can hurt infantry as normal.

That said, Krak grenades are a distraction that won't die. Of was listed as one of several AP4 weapons.

(Although how could I forget TFCs, Whirlwinds, and Sternies?)

Back on topic:
So we're saying
-SLs kick ass because they kill 20/27ths of a MEQ.
-Heavy Bolters are absolute gak because they kill not much more than 1 T3 4+ or worse.
-t4 3+ isn't worth anything because they die just as fast as t3 4+.

Do you see where I have issues with that understanding?
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

Bharring wrote:

-t4 3+ isn't worth anything because they die just as fast as t3 4+.
If that were the case, why is there a numerical distinction between the two?
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

I am going to throw my 2 pence in now:

There is nothing wrong with Marines. You have T4 and a 3+ save. You are amazingly good. Your codex is one of the top three.

Stop whining and LEARN TO PLAY

Or even better: Get the Imperial Guard codex and play as these oh so overpowered Imperial Guard for a single week. You will be begging to get back to your T4 3+ save ATSKNF LD 9 GW buttmon-poster boys.

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

 master of ordinance wrote:
Stop whining and LEARN TO PLAY


Really? 'STFU and L2P'?

How helpful.

Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




" You are amazingly good. Your codex is one of the top three. "

Let me give you the BA codex and see how much your T4 3+ save does for you.

Not all marines have skyhammer.

Not all marines have invis grav cents.

Not all marines have Tiggy.

Not all marines have the jerk that picks his powers.

Not all marines have decent chapter tactics.


I can take the IG codex and massacre mono BA. I guarantee it. T4 3+ isn't making the vanilla dex good. It's all the other crap. Like dozens and dozens of grav shots.

"-SLs kick ass because they kill 20/27ths of a MEQ. "

20/27 X 40 scatter lasers per Eldar army is a lot of dead marines every turn. 36" firepower that the marines have zero chance of returning at that range. Or a lot of dead vehicles that can't return meaningful fire at that range as well. You can't do that with heavy bolters.

"-Heavy Bolters are absolute gak "

You should have stopped there, but you refuse to see utter brokenness of the Eldar and how marines are reduced to a handful of trick to compete, and even not all chapters have those tricks.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/08/07 02:58:14


 
   
Made in au
Liche Priest Hierophant







Or rather he can see the brokenness of Eldar but doesn't see why marines are the worst off because of it.

SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies.

And before you go "they kill more pts though", I'm sorry Tactical marines are generalists, but that's the way it is. You have to pay points to be able to have X or do Y. Why should marines get X or Y for free on their generalists while other, more specialist armies have to upgrade a specialist unit for a cost to make them generalists?
   
Made in us
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight







I play Orks and GK, I know what I am saying when I state...

Power Armor is too expensive.

Wounds are better than Armor saves, you can easily estimate how many losses you will take and not be inconvenienced by a bit of bad luck. It allows a player to approach the game from a more mathematical PoV.

Do I NEED a save against shooting? Go stand in cover w/ the objective.
Does the opponent not have good shooting? Start walking at him.

In a game like 40k Specialist always are better than Generalist. Points efficiency is the number one concern.

Cheap units (Grots) hold backfield objectives or screen high-value units (Lootas).
Specialist units (Tankbustas, Flamer Boyz) want fast vehicles so they can do their job before they are focused.
Expensive units ('Nauts) are to create an anchor for your army to move around.
Generalists units (Tacticals) act as none of the above, but rather you hope to mass enough of them to bring to bear enough force concentration to overwhelm a point.

The BEST Tactical Marines are Ultramarines in Gladius. Because they get free army points that hope to reach that force concentration.

However the best Power Armor unit (IMO) are the Siege Assault Vanguard Tactical Marines w/ Mantlets. 3+ rerollable armor save, the upgrade is for the whole squad for 50 points. This makes them more survivable than terminators. As a bonus they may take two special weapons per squad making them an actually good fighting unit. This unit can defend any point on the battlefield well against anything but AP3. A friend runs them as Raptors so when they are stationary their bolters become Rending, quite evil. A nice 220 points for a squad w/ 2 meltas.

 SHUPPET wrote:

wtf is this buddhist monk ascendant martial dice arts crap lol
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Or rather he can see the brokenness of Eldar but doesn't see why marines are the worst off because of it.

SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies.

And before you go "they kill more pts though", I'm sorry Tactical marines are generalists, but that's the way it is. You have to pay points to be able to have X or do Y. Why should marines get X or Y for free on their generalists while other, more specialist armies have to upgrade a specialist unit for a cost to make them generalists?


Paying points for upgrades that don't matter seems like a non-upgrade to me.

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+ with Eldar except DA in WS.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/08/07 03:21:34


 
   
Made in au
Liche Priest Hierophant







Um... when did I say the SL were shooting Eldar?

Firewarriors are T3 4+
Scions are T3 4+
Carapace Guard Vets are T3 4+

Eldar aren't the only army with T3 4+ models.

SLs also kill more T4 4+ than T4 3+
SLs also kill more T3 5+ than T4 3+
SLs also kill more T3 6+ than T4 3+

So you'd rather cost 1 point less and lose that rule you call eternally useless; ATSKNF? You'd rather lose 1 of almost every stat for 1 point less and become SoB?

If you don't like playing a generalist army then play a specialist army instead and stop complaining your generalists pay for their rounded nature. At least a generalist is always useful to some degree, or would you rather rock up to a game with a specialist unit designed to wreck infantry only to find your opponent is playing a mechanised list, or is running a monstermash list?
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

Martel732 wrote:

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+


-Scout Marines
-Carapace Veterans
-Tempestus

And it's proof that 3+ *does* mean something.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Selym wrote:
Martel732 wrote:

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+


-Scout Marines
-Carapace Veterans
-Tempestus

And it's proof that 3+ *does* mean something.

It doesn't, because the cover save is that blasted easy to get.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Selym wrote:
Martel732 wrote:

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+


-Scout Marines
-Carapace Veterans
-Tempestus

And it's proof that 3+ *does* mean something.

It doesn't, because the cover save is that blasted easy to get.

Unless you don't have tons of money with which to fill a table.
Really, the most cover I've seen is in an apocalypse battle, where the center of the board had about 3 items per 2"x2". The normal amount I see is about less than half that.

And almost none of it is area.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait. You're finding 3+ cover? Huh.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/08/07 06:30:09


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 Selym wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Selym wrote:
Martel732 wrote:

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+


-Scout Marines
-Carapace Veterans
-Tempestus

And it's proof that 3+ *does* mean something.

It doesn't, because the cover save is that blasted easy to get.

Unless you don't have tons of money with which to fill a table.
Really, the most cover I've seen is in an apocalypse battle, where the center of the board had about 3 items per 2"x2". The normal amount I see is about less than half that.

And almost none of it is area.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait. You're finding 3+ cover? Huh.

You clearly miss the point, and probably on purpose.

The 3+ value is diminished because of how easily a 4+ save and higher unit can go to cover and not care about those weapons that would ignore their armor. The 3+ save ends up costing a lot. A Tactical Marine is about the same cost as 3 Guardsmen. When shooting at each other, the Guardsmen can benefit from cover, whereas the Marine will get no benefit. SURE Flamers exist, but that's an oddly specific situation, don't you think?
As a Space Marine, Chaos Space Marine, and Necron player, and one that played in a few tournaments and lives in a competitive environment, I can tell you the 3+ is HIGHLY overvalued in this forum. Along with grenades, though that's a different topic.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

I think you're missing the point that a 3+ save is better than a 4+ or 5+ cover save, that T4 is better than T3, and that when the anti-tank weapons get pointed at you, you're still entitled to jump into that very same cover.
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

 Selym wrote:
I think you're missing the point that a 3+ save is better than a 4+ or 5+ cover save, that T4 is better than T3, and that when the anti-tank weapons get pointed at you, you're still entitled to jump into that very same cover.


Exactly. I think that half the whining that comes out of Marine players is down to the fact that they expect their troops to be 'da bestest because GW says so' and 'noone should be able to kill da marin' and certainly not 'puny gwardsman'. These are that players whom try to advance through the open, completely bypassing cover and taking it all on their armour and then get pissy when they start coming under AP3/AP2 fire.

As Melissa said at the beginning of this thread the T4 3+ save is actually incredibly good. However the problem is that around half the 40K players - maybe a bit more than that - play Space Marines. This means that most lists are geared up to fight these big nasty power armoured poster boys and this means a prevalence of AP3 and AP2 with a good liberal sprinkling of AP1. So naturally the player whom attempts to advance in the open dies a messy and bloody death as the enemy brings as much low AP weaponry to bare as is possible. And sadly it seems that an awful lot of players have forgotten that the vaunted poster boy Space Smurf is not immune to all gunfire, there are specialised AT weapons and even one or two specialised Heavy Infantry killers (plasma, Grav) that can kill them.
ALL Infantry need cover. Its simple basic bloody tactics but I so rarely see people with Space Marines optimising it.

Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in it
Death-Dealing Devastator





Italy

 master of ordinance wrote:
 Selym wrote:
I think you're missing the point that a 3+ save is better than a 4+ or 5+ cover save, that T4 is better than T3, and that when the anti-tank weapons get pointed at you, you're still entitled to jump into that very same cover.


Exactly. I think that half the whining that comes out of Marine players is down to the fact that they expect their troops to be 'da bestest because GW says so' and 'noone should be able to kill da marin' and certainly not 'puny gwardsman'. These are that players whom try to advance through the open, completely bypassing cover and taking it all on their armour and then get pissy when they start coming under AP3/AP2 fire.

As Melissa said at the beginning of this thread the T4 3+ save is actually incredibly good. However the problem is that around half the 40K players - maybe a bit more than that - play Space Marines. This means that most lists are geared up to fight these big nasty power armoured poster boys and this means a prevalence of AP3 and AP2 with a good liberal sprinkling of AP1. So naturally the player whom attempts to advance in the open dies a messy and bloody death as the enemy brings as much low AP weaponry to bare as is possible. And sadly it seems that an awful lot of players have forgotten that the vaunted poster boy Space Smurf is not immune to all gunfire, there are specialised AT weapons and even one or two specialised Heavy Infantry killers (plasma, Grav) that can kill them.
ALL Infantry need cover. Its simple basic bloody tactics but I so rarely see people with Space Marines optimising it.


The only thing I add to your post is that another way to bring down a marine in weight of fire, but who doesn't suffer it? It's a general problem.
I just mentally reviewed my last match (the 5th in my life) where I almost got tabled by a Ravenwing army, and I feel stupid because I was standing basically in the open with my bikers, forcing them to jink and lose firepower.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/07 09:33:59


 the_Armyman wrote:
...grav is almost always a better choice. Grav is gravy. Grav all day errday. Grav über alles. 360 mlg noscope 420 grav it.

DQ:90S--G+MB++IPw40kPw40k(HoR_Kill_Team)16+D+A++/m 
   
Made in gb
Worthiest of Warlock Engineers






preston

 mathaius90 wrote:
 master of ordinance wrote:
 Selym wrote:
I think you're missing the point that a 3+ save is better than a 4+ or 5+ cover save, that T4 is better than T3, and that when the anti-tank weapons get pointed at you, you're still entitled to jump into that very same cover.


Exactly. I think that half the whining that comes out of Marine players is down to the fact that they expect their troops to be 'da bestest because GW says so' and 'noone should be able to kill da marin' and certainly not 'puny gwardsman'. These are that players whom try to advance through the open, completely bypassing cover and taking it all on their armour and then get pissy when they start coming under AP3/AP2 fire.

As Melissa said at the beginning of this thread the T4 3+ save is actually incredibly good. However the problem is that around half the 40K players - maybe a bit more than that - play Space Marines. This means that most lists are geared up to fight these big nasty power armoured poster boys and this means a prevalence of AP3 and AP2 with a good liberal sprinkling of AP1. So naturally the player whom attempts to advance in the open dies a messy and bloody death as the enemy brings as much low AP weaponry to bare as is possible. And sadly it seems that an awful lot of players have forgotten that the vaunted poster boy Space Smurf is not immune to all gunfire, there are specialised AT weapons and even one or two specialised Heavy Infantry killers (plasma, Grav) that can kill them.
ALL Infantry need cover. Its simple basic bloody tactics but I so rarely see people with Space Marines optimising it.


The only thing I add to your post is that another way to bring down a marine in weight of fire, but who doesn't suffer it? It's a general problem.
I just mentally reviewed my last match (the 5th in my life) where I almost got tabled by a Ravenwing army, and I feel stupid because I was standing basically in the open with my bikers, forcing them to jink and lose firepower.


Depends, weight of fire is... Neglible in some cases and killer in others. 50 Lasgun shots might kill one Marine. 50 Bolter shots will kill 4. 50 Pulse Rifle shots will murder around 6 or 7. And thats only at BS 3. If you increase the BS to 4 then the number of casualites increases too: Lasguns - still just 1. Bolters - 5 to 6. Pulse Rifles - Around 8.

Im glad to see I opened your eyes Cover is one of the most important aspects for all units but it is amazing how many people see some big flashy 3+/2+ save unit and forget this.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/07 10:03:51


Free from GW's tyranny and the hobby is looking better for it
DR:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Pww205++D++A+++/sWD146R++T(T)D+
 
   
Made in it
Death-Dealing Devastator





Italy

Well, that's a bit more marines for 50 lasguns shots
BS3 50*0.5=25
wound on 5s 25*0.33= 8.25
3+ armor 8.25*0.33= 2.7 unsaved wounds

But i see your point, weight of fire must also be cost efficient and actually effective

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/07 10:18:07


 the_Armyman wrote:
...grav is almost always a better choice. Grav is gravy. Grav all day errday. Grav über alles. 360 mlg noscope 420 grav it.

DQ:90S--G+MB++IPw40kPw40k(HoR_Kill_Team)16+D+A++/m 
   
Made in se
Glorious Lord of Chaos






The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer

 Selym wrote:
Martel732 wrote:

"SLs kills more T3 4+ bodies than they kill T4 3+ bodies"

That's great, except no one uses T3 4+


-Scout Marines
-Carapace Veterans
-Tempestus

And it's proof that 3+ *does* mean something.



...Yeah, if you think scouts are T3 4+, I can see how you could regard a 3+ as worthwhile.

Currently ongoing projects:
Horus Heresy Alpha Legion
Tyranids  
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




"Cover is one of the most important aspects for all units but it is amazing how many people see some big flashy 3+/2+ save unit and forget this."

Cover means nothing against scatterlasers.
   
Made in au
Liche Priest Hierophant







Wait, why doesn't cover matter? SLs don't ignore cover.

Unless you mean it's because of the number of shots a Scatbike unit get's, in which case that 3+ still causes more marines to survive than a 4+, 5+ or 6+ would.
   
Made in it
Death-Dealing Devastator





Italy

I guess martel is saying that with a 3+/2+ you won't take the saves on the cover but on the armor.

Imo it would be cool if cover was an "in the way" test like lotrsbg. With a 4+ the shot goes though, otherwise it hits the cover

 the_Armyman wrote:
...grav is almost always a better choice. Grav is gravy. Grav all day errday. Grav über alles. 360 mlg noscope 420 grav it.

DQ:90S--G+MB++IPw40kPw40k(HoR_Kill_Team)16+D+A++/m 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 master of ordinance wrote:
I am going to throw my 2 pence in now:

There is nothing wrong with Marines. You have T4 and a 3+ save. You are amazingly good. Your codex is one of the top three.

Stop whining and LEARN TO PLAY

While L2P isn't exactly helpful, at all, let's address your claim that the marine codex is one of the top 3.

While it is one of the top 3, how much of this is relevant to the standard power armor marine? It is the bikes, centurions, skyhammer, and HQ choices that makes the marine codex good. No competitive players are taking 4 squads of troops, like you see with Necrons, Tau, and Eldar.
Because the T4 3+ save, with the damage output, isn't worth it. You're better off taking other units, and it's been that way for 2 editions now.

I don't know why you hate marine players so much, but let's assume that they know what they are doing and actually come up with counter points instead of turning the caps lock over 9000, hm?

 master of ordinance wrote:

Or even better: Get the Imperial Guard codex and play as these oh so overpowered Imperial Guard for a single week. You will be begging to get back to your T4 3+ save ATSKNF LD 9 GW buttmon-poster boys.

I play Orks, Nids, Guard, Daemons...most armies. After my CSM, my Orks and nids are my most played factions.

So, arguably, I have more experience with weaker saves then you do. I am not begging to go back to my T4 3+ save in my CSM. In fact, in my CSM, I either take plague marines, min squads of cultists, or noise marines with blast masters. Only the noise marines have a T4 3+ save, and they just park in cover and send blast templates downfield, trying to avoid getting shot.
ATSKNF never comes up unless CC happens. Which it rarely does, and often I'd prefer wiping so I can shoot the enemy. Marines are bad against anything that wants to be charging them, and outside of formations, don't have an easy time charging if foot slogging.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Tacs are bad in that they aren't in the top 10% of the game.

But then so is 90% of the game.

So many units out there wish they were as good as Marines. Even if that doesn't mean being the best.
   
Made in us
Unshakeable Grey Knight Land Raider Pilot





Bharring wrote:
Tacs are bad in that they aren't in the top 10% of the game.

But then so is 90% of the game.

So many units out there wish they were as good as Marines. Even if that doesn't mean being the best.

I really don't get people saying Tactical Marines are bad. They are pretty good at what they do, which is holding down a point while the more specialized units take care of their jobs. They can be kitted out to generally handle most threats, but they are obviously not meant to take on most units alone.

I guess people expect Tacs to be able to charge headlong into the enemy and survive?

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I think they expect to hold their own against stuff like ScatterBikes, IKs, Skyhammers, and Grav Spam.

The bulk of the game can't. So when people look at the median, or even the third quartile, Tacs look great. But for those who want to plow people the way TFG FOTM players can with Eldar or the new SM stuff, but do so using Tacs, Tacs seem weak.

They don't care that Tacs outperform what you or I might field. They only care that Tacs can't outperform whatever is most broken this week, at its own game.
   
Made in it
Death-Dealing Devastator





Italy

Bharring wrote:
I think they expect to hold their own against stuff like ScatterBikes, IKs, Skyhammers, and Grav Spam.

The bulk of the game can't. So when people look at the median, or even the third quartile, Tacs look great. But for those who want to plow people the way TFG FOTM players can with Eldar or the new SM stuff, but do so using Tacs, Tacs seem weak.

They don't care that Tacs outperform what you or I might field. They only care that Tacs can't outperform whatever is most broken this week, at its own game.


I think it depends on the meta one is in. Martel & Co. seems to have an over-the-top super competitive game, (which isn't necessarily a bad thing when everyone agrees to cheese together), while I seem to live in a more toned down/fluffy environment.

Coming from a very competitive MTG group I can understand both worlds, so in a competitive way tacticals are the worst thing in the world, while in the most "common" terms they perform quite good. My experience with tacticals isn't very vast, playing mostly bikes, but I'm looking to field a couple squads in pod/rhinos and maybe try my tactical termies. (competitive players, you may shiver for this last sentence )

I have to admit sometimes I feel bad for playing White Scars, but I know I like them and because of my background with mtg I like efficiency for my army too. I'm just trying not to go over the top too much.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/07 14:14:19


 the_Armyman wrote:
...grav is almost always a better choice. Grav is gravy. Grav all day errday. Grav über alles. 360 mlg noscope 420 grav it.

DQ:90S--G+MB++IPw40kPw40k(HoR_Kill_Team)16+D+A++/m 
   
Made in gb
The Last Chancer Who Survived




United Kingdom

I find tactical marines are *almost* a direct counter to everything my IG army can field. Infantry? Bolters and melee. Tanks? Get them sweet free Kraks in there, the LRBT's can't kill things fast enough.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:
Bharring wrote:
Tacs are bad in that they aren't in the top 10% of the game.

But then so is 90% of the game.

So many units out there wish they were as good as Marines. Even if that doesn't mean being the best.

I really don't get people saying Tactical Marines are bad. They are pretty good at what they do, which is holding down a point while the more specialized units take care of their jobs. They can be kitted out to generally handle most threats, but they are obviously not meant to take on most units alone.


Which is why you see basic marines taken so often in Chaos, yes? Backfield objective holders are usually scouts or cultists hidden in cover. Nearly as survivable as the marines, but much less expensive. Against certain long range weapons (which, if they are sitting back and holding objectives, they will often only be hit by long range weapons) scouts, cultists, and marines are wounded on 2's and getting cover saves. Might as well throw more bodies on the field.

I'm not sure marines can take on everything. A fully kitted out marine squad is pretty expensive, let's see the damage they kick out?
8 bolters, 2 plasma guns do
Bolters, @ 24", Assuming T3 4+ save troops. 5.3 hits, 3.5 wounds, 1.75 killss. At rapid fire range that's just over 3 wounds.
2 Plasma gun, Same assumptions, 1.32 hits, 1.1 wound, no save.
So, at 24", against "weaker" infantry, we see ~3 kills being dealt. With cover, this is more like 2.5 kills being dealt. At rapid fire range, this doubles to 6 and 5, respectively. (I rounded up, its actually less then 6 and 5...more like 5.5).

With T3, 5+ save, it becomes 4.6 kills, 9 at 12" without cover. With cover it becomes 3.1 kills at 24", 6 at 12". So with cover, the difference between a 4+ and 5+ save is roughly 1 wound at rapid fire range

So, 10 marines at rapid fire range kill 6 guardsmen if they are in cover using their "standard" set up. If I do that over 4 rounds, I'll make my points back.

Firing against marines out of cover is
Bolters @ 24 is 5.3 hits, 2.65 wounds, 0.88 kills.
Plasma gun @ 24 doesn't change, 1.1 kills.

With cover, 5+ (most common imo), bolter stays the same and plasma is .73, or 1.6 kills total.
So roughly 2-1.5 kills. So the difference between a Marine and a Dire avenger at 24" is roughly one kill. .
The difference between a marine in cover and a guardsmen outside of cover is 1.5 kills, yet marines cost more then 1.5 a guardsmen in cost. And this is, mostly, against weapons that are supposed to be good at killing guardsmen.

 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:

I guess people expect Tacs to be able to charge headlong into the enemy and survive?

Or maybe people saying this play in more competitive settings then you do?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/07 15:08:23


 
   
Made in us
Unshakeable Grey Knight Land Raider Pilot





Hence why I said they can generally take on most things. I wouldn't expect them to really wipe any unit outright except maybe some grots.

And yeah, I don't really play in a competitive environment, so please take everything I say with a grain of salt.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: