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.

You guys should get together and do a battle report of it.

Personally I think Tactical Marines suck %&$* but the codex as a whole is very good.

Basically good things for codex space marines are bs4 scouts, grav-bikes, grav devastators, thunderfire cannons, grav centurions, chapter master smash fether, free transport formation, and the crazy librarian formation, and of course who could forget the almighty skyhammer?

BA basically have to ally in ALL of that crap to be strong. Not really fair is it?

AM don't really have it very good either though. Both codices are behind the power curve.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
You guys should get together and do a battle report of it.

Personally I think Tactical Marines suck %&$* but the codex as a whole is very good.

Basically good things for codex space marines are bs4 scouts, grav-bikes, grav devastators, thunderfire cannons, grav centurions, chapter master smash fether, free transport formation, and the crazy librarian formation, and of course who could forget the almighty skyhammer?

BA basically have to ally in ALL of that crap to be strong. Not really fair is it?

AM don't really have it very good either though. Both codices are behind the power curve.

Somewhat unnecessary. If he but lists what he thinks he's going to take from C:BA to defeat the AM, I can probably describe how I will stop it with a TAC AM list. AM still have a few good things, BA have even fewer good things. That's the difference.

Tactical marines are great in a vacuum comparison against guardsmen, but the game isn't played that way.

It's also worth noting that, while balance even (and especially) in a competitive environment is important, not everyone plays super competitively. Scatter bikes eliminating big chunks of marines every turn is an issue if your opponent brings scatter bikes. My local group has one guy with scatterbikes, and he mostly saves them for tournament games.

The things I face that generally make marines on foot a non-issue are devastators and fast melee stars like thunderwolves or meganobz in truks.

I bring this up as a reminder that potential changes to marine durability should also be considered in environments where scatbikes and wraith knights and demicompanies aren't a thing. Especially since we're having this discussion on a board for homebrew rules that would mos likely not be tournament-permissable anyway.

Fast melee stars are a thing as well. Good melee units will wipe up tacs and guardsmen equally well, except the marine player loses 3 times more per model.

I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

This is the exact problem with tactical marines. They look so awesome against guardsmen, though!

Martel732 wrote:
5th didn't have allies.

Yes it did. Both Daemonhunters and Sisters of Battle had rules for allying to other Imperial armies in their 3rd edition Codices, which were still current (and I use that word loosely) in 5th edition.

Okay. But leafblowers werent reliant on those books.

Problem is, finding a special rule that could apply to all bolter weapon variants that will make the basic boltgun better without making one or another variant hilariously OP is beyond my brain. Shred comes to mind, but is almost too much. Changing the base bolter to a higher strength or better ap invalidates some variants elsewhere.

The boltgun is in a pickle because of the lack of granularity in the game. S4 shooting is too ineffective in general in 7th ed, but adding a very potent special rule is clearly too much. There is nothing between S4 and S5, which is where the boltgun should be, imo. It should be stronger than the marine punching.

Martel732 wrote:
The boltgun is in a pickle because of the lack of granularity in the game. S4 shooting is too ineffective in general in 7th ed, but adding a very potent special rule is clearly too much. There is nothing between S4 and S5, which is where the boltgun should be, imo. It should be stronger than the marine punching.

Generally, if more granularity is needed, you would give the weapon or unit something like Preferred Enemy which makes the weapon better than strength 4 but not quite as good as strength 5. Currently, that doesn't really work because it's redundant with various special rules available to marines. Personally, I'd be all for reinventing marines as more expensive with both better defenses and better gun. Like Movie Marines, but less extreme.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

Trust me, your Bolters can murder my Infantry sections.

BTW, worked out how many Lasgun shots it takes to kill a 10 man Tactical squad: 200 exactly. That is 50 Guardsmen rapid firing over two turns.

 master of ordinance wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

Trust me, your Bolters can murder my Infantry sections.

BTW, worked out how many Lasgun shots it takes to kill a 10 man Tactical squad: 200 exactly. That is 50 Guardsmen rapid firing over two turns.

That may be correct, but lets not forget the easy access you have to things like orders FRFSRF or psykers to give rending to those shots.

OT:From a balance perspective I think all infantry guardsman could easily drop their price by 1ppm so your average guardsmen becomes4ppm, vets become 9ppm, and have conscripts go to 2ppm, but peoples wallets may not agree with me.

 master of ordinance wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

Trust me, your Bolters can murder my Infantry sections.

BTW, worked out how many Lasgun shots it takes to kill a 10 man Tactical squad: 200 exactly. That is 50 Guardsmen rapid firing over two turns.

Not if the bolters never get to range. Last time I checked, IG heavy weapons out-range bolters badly. Furthermore, guardsmen are the sweetest spot for boltguns and boltguns STILL aren't worth bringing, imo.

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

Trust me, your Bolters can murder my Infantry sections.

BTW, worked out how many Lasgun shots it takes to kill a 10 man Tactical squad: 200 exactly. That is 50 Guardsmen rapid firing over two turns.

Not if the bolters never get to range. Last time I checked, IG heavy weapons out-range bolters badly. Furthermore, guardsmen are the sweetest spot for boltguns and boltguns STILL aren't worth bringing, imo.

Ugh, dont. Been trying to find a use for my HWT's for ages now. They just... dont.

My favorite fluff vs stat comparison...

You always read about orks tearing humans apart with their bare hands, and even tearing space marines apart...but they represented at S3.....and every guardsman is also S3...leading to believe, all of my guardsmen should be able to tear eachother in half, along with all T4 models as well.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I still think most of the problem is the weakness of bolter weapons. Marines wouldnt die so badly if they could kill some dudes that would shoot at them next turn. It would increase their survivability by decreasing that of their opponents. Bolt weapons need a special rule.

Trust me, your Bolters can murder my Infantry sections.

BTW, worked out how many Lasgun shots it takes to kill a 10 man Tactical squad: 200 exactly. That is 50 Guardsmen rapid firing over two turns.

Not if the bolters never get to range. Last time I checked, IG heavy weapons out-range bolters badly. Furthermore, guardsmen are the sweetest spot for boltguns and boltguns STILL aren't worth bringing, imo.

Ugh, dont. Been trying to find a use for my HWT's for ages now. They just... dont.

Mass up autocannons. It works. I've faced lists with 30+ autocannons. That's all my transports dead in one turn, and 30+ power armor saves a turn just from those guys.

I dont see how SM players could be complaining about Bolters being too weak...They shred over half of the other basic troop types in the game with ease...Marines also have the above average statline across the board, and a bolt pistol allowing for moving and firing and moving and charging...I would like to know exactly what it is your Bolters arent killing that they are designed to be killing? Av10? not a problem, 5+ or 6+ armor not a chance. T 3/4/5 models no issues here....

Please help me understand what the problem is...

 Tenzilla wrote:
I dont see how SM players could be complaining about Bolters being too weak...They shred over half of the other basic troop types in the game with ease...Marines also have the above average statline across the board, and a bolt pistol allowing for moving and firing and moving and charging...I would like to know exactly what it is your Bolters arent killing that they are designed to be killing? Av10? not a problem, 5+ or 6+ armor not a chance. T 3/4/5 models no issues here....

Please help me understand what the problem is...

No one fields basic troop types. I face armies of WKs, scatterbikes, and units riding in waveserpents. Necrons don't care about boltguns because they get two saves against them. Other marines don't care because Skyhammer is raping you much faster than boltguns can kill back. There are no good targets there for boltguns and tacs can only field one heavy, which is usually passed over for special weapons. Basically, S4 24' rapid fire on a 14 pt model is anemic firepower in a game where a 23 pt model gets four S6 shots.

My boltguns? I play daemons... I have an outside perspectice on the weakness of a boltgun. I've had lasguns shoot my lord of change out of the air and kill him in one volley and have never hesitated to place him directly beside a tac squad. I realize however that AM is an outdated codex and is behind the power creep. But i dont believe it should be the standard we compare things to.

Boltguns will kill chaff units and that's it. Ive played against alot of space marines and can tell you that for the points, the weakness of a bolter makes tac marines durability and overall utility too low. I can easily bring the right weapons to bear against them without much fear of meaningful retaliation. That's the point i'm making. They arent "my boltguns."

I will say that I think guardsmen need a boost as well.. But this isnt a thread about that, is it?

Like i said...designed to kill, I dont try to use my lasguns to kill MCs....IF a bolter is underpowered what is a slugga/lasgun/splinter rifle etc etc

I also consistently ignore other tac squads with my BA and have very rarely been burned.

Again, the idea behind the IG is that full tac squads don't get anywhere close to your lines without a drop pod.

I guess it seems a moot point, you dont have to take tac squads. But are complaining about them being beaten by other set ups.
Maybe the issue is list building? I dont think there is any issue with the bolter, I think the issue is detachments/formations/and unbound. The rules, and stats were not designed to be played as such.

 Tenzilla wrote:
I guess it seems a moot point, you dont have to take tac squads. But are complaining about them being beaten by other set ups.
Maybe the issue is list building? I dont think there is any issue with the bolter, I think the issue is detachments/formations/and unbound. The rules, and stats were not designed to be played as such.

Scouts fare no better, though, and those are the troop choices for most marine lists. There is a big issue with the bolter when most lists can ignore its existence. Which they do.

Well I for one would start the fix of tacticals by making combi-weapons a 5pt upgrade. And making combi-flamers S5.

Plus 2 specials/ heavies per 5.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Well I for one would start the fix of tacticals by making combi-weapons a 5pt upgrade. And making combi-flamers S5.

Plus 2 specials/ heavies per 5.

Two special/heavy per 5 would help a lot for sure. Boltgun is still garbage, but you have less of them.

Martel732 wrote:

 Tenzilla wrote:
I guess it seems a moot point, you dont have to take tac squads. But are complaining about them being beaten by other set ups.
Maybe the issue is list building? I dont think there is any issue with the bolter, I think the issue is detachments/formations/and unbound. The rules, and stats were not designed to be played as such.

Scouts fare no better, though, and those are the troop choices for most marine lists. There is a big issue with the bolter when most lists can ignore its existence. Which they do.

What you are doing is comparing a single troop choice to an entire army. Yes IG guns will blow it apart from a distance, not a regular platoon of the same point value though. Show me a 14 point troop model that is superior to a tac marine....you are asking for a troop choice to be balanced to compete with a walker or a tank....It just simply isnt going to happen. 40K has never been a very balanced game.

Boltguns, in all the games i've played, have never killed anything meaningful, yet when i remove them from the board somehow i can feel the opponents list suffering because of the points sunk into the tac marines. There just isnt enough damage output there. I dont think they need a huge boost, just a little bit.

The durability skew just isnt working for them, to the point where their 3+ saves are almost a weakness because everyone plans to be able to kill a high amount of MEQ's per turn. It would be nice for them to be able to threaten things before they die, at least. Every other basic troop type in the game still feels threatening, yet i relish the moments when i get a chance to hit a full squad of tac marines. I literally dont have to think about defending against them because as soon as the right weapon gets there, they're gone. And they arent cheap.

 Tenzilla wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Tenzilla wrote:
I guess it seems a moot point, you dont have to take tac squads. But are complaining about them being beaten by other set ups.
Maybe the issue is list building? I dont think there is any issue with the bolter, I think the issue is detachments/formations/and unbound. The rules, and stats were not designed to be played as such.

Scouts fare no better, though, and those are the troop choices for most marine lists. There is a big issue with the bolter when most lists can ignore its existence. Which they do.

What you are doing is comparing a single troop choice to an entire army. Yes IG guns will blow it apart from a distance, not a regular platoon of the same point value though. Show me a 14 point troop model that is superior to a tac marine....you are asking for a troop choice to be balanced to compete with a walker or a tank....It just simply isnt going to happen. 40K has never been a very balanced game.

Simply isn't going to happen? Scatterbike? Necron warrior?

I'd argue that for the role that they play, guardsmen are superior to tac marines. They are paying fewer pts/wound to accomplish very little. Marine armor means little when I can ignore the squad with few negative consequences. Tacs always die after the real threats are mopped up. They are a total liability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
Boltguns, in all the games i've played, have never killed anything meaningful, yet when i remove them from the board somehow i can feel the opponents list suffering because of the points sunk into the tac marines. There just isnt enough damage output there. I dont think they need a huge boost, just a little bit.

The durability skew just isnt working for them, to the point where their 3+ saves are almost a weakness because everyone plans to be able to kill a high amount of MEQ's per turn. It would be nice for them to be able to threaten things before they die, at least. Every other basic troop type in the game still feels threatening, yet i relish the moments when i get a chance to hit a full squad of tac marines. I literally dont have to think about defending against them because as soon as the right weapon gets there, they're gone. And they arent cheap.

And tac marines fare no better against real CC units than guardsmen. And since assault marines are just tac marines with a knife, they suck in CC as well. The suckitude of the tac marine gets propagated down to everything based off of them as well. What units are good marine lists build around? Bikes and centurions. Not tacs, devs, and asm.

So your problem with bolter and tac marines is that you cant butcher other marines with a bolter the way that bolter butcher lesser troops?

how are lasguns in anyway better then bolters? or 2 guardsmen better then a space marine?

You are not making fair comparisons here....the necron warrior has one advantage to a space marine...where the space marine is superior in every other way....and you pay for it....

Now I am not saying that bolter and tac marines are the best things out there.....but for what they are and what they cost they are perfectly fine. Why are people not taking tac marines anymore?

Why are lists built around other things? because 40k is not balanced. But you cant expect to have your troops magically buffed or your guns buffed because something else does their job better.

As far as people coming prepared to kill MEQs...its because for so long SM have been above the rest, and people are compensating for it. That doesnt mean you should have better weapons or more durability, to kill your marines I have to pay 15 points for a plasma gun on top of my 10 pt vet....and he still dies if you look at him the wrong way...I pay 25 pts to possibly kill a 14 pt model...hoping I dont kill myself first...does that sound balanced?