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.

Ok I see lots of people using scout as troops why?I don't see the benefits. Also the fact ever one says use tfc I think there not that good as the don't seem to reliable get hits because of the small blast templats. I feel that am like any good hoard weapons

newguy1984 wrote:
I feel that am like any good hoard weapons

Que?
what?
Huh?

but to answer your other questions. people like and use scouts because they are cheaper than regular space marines and a 4+ is almost as good as a 3+ insofar as there are many ap3 and better weapons which will kill scouts and space marines at the same rate, and there are many ap5 and worse weapons that both marines and scouts will get an armor save against. there are not many dedicated ap4 weapons that are not expensive or specialized or otherwise not used as often. scouts also have access to land speeder storms, outflank, scout, infiltrate and objective secured. All rules and vehicles that add to scouts mobility which is key in 7th to taking and holding maelstrom objectives.

people recommend thunderfire cannons not because they get one small blast, but because they get four of them at a time, letting TFC's hit a single model up to four times or hitting hordes up to a dozen times using a specialized shell that will not give any saves or limit that unit's mobility, mobility, once again being very important in 7th ed.

TFC are great for not only horde armies but forcing saves. Sure, they may not kill marines outright (no AP3), but they can put enough wounds on them to force armor saves. Also, 4 small blasts with Barrage do very well for targeted barrages.

As to Scouts, it depends. They're cheap and can do okay in most applications (running and gunning in a Land Speeder Storm, objective holding with camo cloaks and snipers, CC with shotguns and knives). The main draw is they're cheap and you don't have to spend an arm and a leg for them to be effective (unlike Tac squads, where you normally give em a Rhino or a Drop Pod, and load them out to 10 man squads with tons of weapons). Also, since they're only scouts, sometimes people forget about them, and you can score linebreaker or other objectives easily.

Yea, if Scouts could take special weapons my tacticals would be permanently retired.

It's more about tacticals being bad than scouts being super awesome.

Martel732 wrote:
It's more about tacticals being bad than scouts being super awesome.

Or rather scouts being better than tacticals for the price asked. A minimum squad is cheaper, they have more special rules for deploying/mobility, access to a nice transport practically made for them in the LSS and also some special wargear Tacs can't get.

Yes, they're not super awesome but pretty good for the price.

I think bad is a relative term though. Tactical marines are middle of the pack in my opinion as a troop choice compared to what other armies have.

Why are tac squad so bad I find there very good. But I play non comptive so you may not see what other do when it comes to units like tfc just feel it lacking when I use one against orks our tau

newguy1984 wrote:
Why are tac squad so bad I find there very good. But I play non comptive so you may not see what other do when it comes to units like tfc just feel it lacking when I use one against orks our tau

Tacs are considered bad when taking the current meta into account. Bolters aren't great (not bad as a basic infantry weapon, but unupgraded infantry weapons don't do well in the meta), and the ratio of bolters to special weapons isn't going to be better than 5:1 at any point in tac squads. You're also paying a good number of points for that 3+ save, which doesn't mean very much with the amount of AP 3 in the current meta.

Ya I don't play maelstrom games as it really one sided and get card that you can't do. I play older style missions type where you score at the end. Our just table your
Opponent

Newguy1984 (why is x good)

me (x is good because of reasons 1, 2 and 3, in the current meta)

newguy1984 (oh, i don't play in the current meta, or play competitively, and x didn't work for me the time i tried it out once)

me *shakes my fist at the sky about either getting poorly trolled or at least having the goalposts moved on me*

The next time you ask for tactical advice or want to know why people seem to like one unit over another, please remember that most of the discussions pertain to the most current style of game that is being played. It would be helpful if you offered information upfront that you only play in a casual environment using simplified mission rules. otherwise you are wasting not only your time in getting information that isn't relevant to you, but the time of everyone who bothered to offer you up advice in an attempt to be helpful.

Scouts are considered good because they're cheaper than a Tactical Marine Squad, with nearly the exact same stats, except for their armor save. With how much AP3 there is available now, the armor save of a tac marine is pretty much negated, while scouts have the same durability vs. it for a lower cost.

Scouts with Telion and a rocket launcher make for some fun shenanigans

Scouts are cheap and sneaky Tacticals, if all you need is a Bolter.
Against AP4 or massed shots, they're far worse, but they have the same BS and same weapons.
They get more variety in standard weaponry, too.

Also the fact everyone says use TFC. I think they're not that good as they don't seem to reliably get hits because of the small blast templates. I feel that they make good hoard weapons.

[Tidied-up]
The TFC is versatile, with 3 fire options. It is not just a normal cannon. It is also fairly cheap.
Small blast templates will always land somewhere, but do not always hit any models. Templates always 'hit', where-as normal shots can miss and not connect with anything.

 Skinnereal wrote:
Scouts are cheap and sneaky Tacticals, if all you need is a Bolter.
Against AP4 or massed shots, they're far worse, but they have the same BS and same weapons.
They get more variety in standard weaponry, too.

Also the fact everyone says use TFC. I think they're not that good as they don't seem to reliably get hits because of the small blast templates. I feel that they make good hoard weapons.

[Tidied-up]
The TFC is versatile, with 3 fire options. It is not just a normal cannon. It is also fairly cheap.
Small blast templates will always land somewhere, but do not always hit any models. Templates always 'hit', where-as normal shots can miss and not connect with anything.

Don't forget, you also get a free Techmarine. Sticking a TFC near your mechanized gunline can be very satisfying.

Ok is a whirlwind a ok instead of tfc. So why does how I play affect the units I usel

The issues with Tacticals?
1. Only one special weapon and one heavy weapon. Combat Squad is basically a frickin gimmick. Let us double up on either so they can, ya know, specialize.
2. Poor damage output for the cost. Sternguard and Bikers do much more for the points you spend on them (and get two Special Weapons to boot). Bolter Scouts end up doing more too. Plus if you need Special Weapons for Scouts, you can get a Multi-Melta on the Storm, a Combi-Melta, and a Melta Bomb to cover that niche.

Tacticals only have one niche, and that's for getting free Razorbacks. Even then, you're only using them because you have to.

Whirlwind's aren't that bad. The TFC is arguably more versatile though, with 3 firing modes instead of two. Where the Whirlwind shines the most is in the formation that includes them, or in squadrons.

 War Kitten wrote:
Whirlwind's aren't that bad. The TFC is arguably more versatile though, with 3 firing modes instead of two. Where the Whirlwind shines the most is in the formation that includes them, or in squadrons.

Yes, but a TFC is a little easier to deploy and harder to destroy, I'd argue. How does it compare points wise?

Not sure, don't have my book on me at the moment. TFC is probably cheaper points wise, but I don't think our friend here cares about that. He said he doesn't like the TFC, and asked about the Whirlwind

Whirlwinds are only 65 points so it's a cheap tank but the AV isn't great

If there is one positive thing you can say about the Whirlwind, it's really cheap. Plus if you wanted them and Speeders anyway, that formation actually isn't bad for the benefits.

My problem is I always run against the crowd everyone use grav so I won't use it. Like I can't stand the idea of my sm army being just like ever one else with grav gun tfc etc. Heck half the time I run my 2 dev squad with hb just so my devs are different then rest.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Iike I finely total understand how good grav cents can be but I don't if all ever run them because
Won't That make me a dick player. Guess I feel if I run good stuff all be tfc waac asshate player

No, using Grav Cents won't make you a dick. Using them with a Librarian (like Tiggy) to make a Centstar might start edging you that way. Just getting Centurions in general is a good idea, even if you don't use Grav, they're just a good unit. And everyone uses Grav because it's one of the best weapons we can get as Marine players, it has nearly all the benefits of plasma against MEQ's or better, with almost none of the draw backs (no get's hot!). I can understand that you don't want your army to be like the rest, but refusing to use things because you think it'll make you seem like a dick is just shooting yourself in the foot.

So is ok if my sm list uses some of the same stuff as other others list. Am I really hurt my self that bad by not taking any of the so called good stuff. Now back to whirlwind I was thinking of use 2 in my list because I feel I more likely will hit something with large blast over small one

You're not necessarily hurting yourself, but refusing to use the "good" units just because lots of people use them certainly isn't doing yourself any favors. I've had decent success with my Whirlwind, but it's hurt somewhat by the lack of AP3 on both it's missiles. So that means you have to pick your targets somewhat. The large blast can catch more models, but the other one has ignores cover...

The Whirlwind also suffers from being in a very crowded slot, especially if your using a CAD. Between TFC, Cents, Preds, and Stalkers it's a tough sell. I've had decent success with the Landspeeder formation though, and Speeders are always a good unit to have.

Well there's the armored task force if you don't want to kill slots...

Ignore this post please.