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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

Gretchen are among my top 5 with Ork Boys being my number one. So, it's orks and grots for my top 5.

I think all the marines troops are poor, which is why that debate is an endless cesspool.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Rydria wrote:
Most people I've talked to on here and other forums consider a shooting attack to be firing the weapon.

Shooting attack = how many attacks the weapon profile has. (But we could be wrong)

The rules are very clear that an attack is one dice: "Each time a model shoots a ranged weapon, it will make a number of attacks. You roll one dice for each attack being made. The number of attacks a model can make with a weapon, and therefore the number of dice you can roll, is found on the weapon's profile..." Music of the Apocalypse does not do much. The shooting rules simply never use "attack" as a singular noun to refer to using a weapon's full profile, including its number of attacks. You'll note that when the rules want you to use the weapon's full profile, they simply allow you to "shoot", as with Space Marine Ancients.

It specifically says a shooting attack with a weapon of your choice. The attack with the weapon is equal to the number of shots in the weapons profile. For a sonic blaster that is 3. For a blastmaster that is d3/d6. Otherwise this is an exception to all shooting attacks in the game with the wording.

You are making one attack using the weapons profile which is assault 3 if using a sonic blaster.

You are making 3 shots in one attack.

This is no different than the shooting phase where you make an attack using all weapons available, except shooting a weapon and a pistol.

On topic more:

For my list which I have played with:

1)NMs are just beast anyway. They hold objectives and put out tons of dakka.
2)Zerkers are blenders
3)Cultist are so cheap it allows a lot of options.

jade_angel wrote:
My votes for the top three, in arbitrary order, are:

Battle Sister Squads: Cheap, can take a ton of special weapons, still gets 3+ armor and krak grenades. The things they suck at are things that most troop units don't want to be doing anyway. Their 6++ and half-assed deny seem tiny, but do have their uses - in particular, that 6++ makes them ever so slightly harder to delete with AP -4/-5 weapons.

Brimstone Horrors: Cheap, cheap, cheap, and just durable enough to be really annoying. Micro-smite is wussy, but it adds up. Again, cheap, so the suicide factor doesn't matter. If it greases a lone guardsman, that's a fair trade.

Scions: Like Sisters, but with different tradeoffs. They lose some range, a point of armor and the shield of faith factor, and have slightly less special weapon density, but they're a little better in melee, can take orders, can deep strike, and their default weapon has AP -2. The hotshot lasguns, because of that, are arguably better than bolters for trying to ping a few wounds off tough stuff, which somewhat makes up for the loss of the third melta, while FRFSRF makes up for the loss of the third flamer (or storm bolter).

I'm confused, why are Scions better in melee than sisters?

- They have the same number of attacks
- They have the same strenght
- Neither have any melee weapons to alter stats (except for the leader of each squad, which works out the same for each)

- BUT sisters get a 3+ save and a 6++ rerollable invulnerable, vs scions straight 4+ save, so sisters should be more survivable?

Oh... but I guess scions with a tempestor prime can re-roll all 1's to hit and to wound, if they're the only squad being ordered by the tempestor.
But then, if sisters are the only sisters being "ordered" they can use an act of faith to fight twice per turn.

Also, I laugh at the idea that the 6+ invulnerable sisters get actually matters.

Functionally, it is a rule you can forget even exists and have no real impact on 99% of your games.

Mazzyx wrote:

It specifically says a shooting attack with a weapon of your choice. The attack with the weapon is equal to the number of shots in the weapons profile. For a sonic blaster that is 3. For a blastmaster that is d3/d6. Otherwise this is an exception to all shooting attacks in the game with the wording.

You are making one attack using the weapons profile which is assault 3 if using a sonic blaster.

You are making 3 shots in one attack.

This is no different than the shooting phase where you make an attack using all weapons available, except shooting a weapon and a pistol.

You should probably re-read the shooting rules because it never talks about making "an attack" with a weapon's profile where you then get a number of attacks based on that profile. In the shooting phase you attack with your weapons a number of times equal to the number on their profile.

 Melissia wrote:
Also, I laugh at the idea that the 6+ invulnerable sisters get actually matters.

Functionally, it is a rule you can forget even exists and have no real impact on 99% of your games.

It really only matters if you're taking a high-AP hit to the face, so yeah the vehicles get a lot more out of it. Though it means less than it did in previous editions, it's still there.

Niiru wrote:

Oh... but I guess scions with a tempestor prime can re-roll all 1's to hit and to wound, if they're the only squad being ordered by the tempestor.

Just a point, but they can only do one of those at a time.

And it's unlikely Battle Sisters would ever be the ones to benefit from an act of faith in most lists, which are MSU. A full fifteen-girl squad might, but not the 5-girl ones most people use.

The AoF is reserved for more powerful specialist squads in most lists, like dominions or celestine, or even retributors.

 Melissia wrote:
And it's unlikely Battle Sisters would ever be the ones to benefit from an act of faith in most lists, which are MSU. A full fifteen-girl squad might, but not the 5-girl ones most people use.

The AoF is reserved for more powerful specialist squads in most lists, like dominions or celestine, or even retributors.

Which brings us back to the matter of comparing the troop units point for point vs a more holistic approach to how they perform in their respective armies.

"Best" is very undefined. "Best" is very contextual based on army and purpose. Conscripts, Genestealers, Sisters and Custodes are all so different.

Obviously, my choice is Tacticals though I think they have more equipment options than any other troop in the game. Right now I'm leaning towards Salamanders 5 man w/lascannon squad. Reroll to hit and wound on a Lascannon, for free, is intense.

 Melissia wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

The Camo Cloaks should only be one point. If you're using them in this analysis, that's your own fault. Completely and overly costed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
Also, I laugh at the idea that the 6+ invulnerable sisters get actually matters.

Functionally, it is a rule you can forget even exists and have no real impact on 99% of your games.

Anyone using that 6++ as a defending point has lost.

 Insectum7 wrote:
"Best" is very undefined. "Best" is very contextual based on army and purpose. Conscripts, Genestealers, Sisters and Custodes are all so different.

Obviously, my choice is Tacticals though I think they have more equipment options than any other troop in the game. Right now I'm leaning towards Salamanders 5 man w/lascannon squad. Reroll to hit and wound on a Lascannon, for free, is intense.

What good are options? It's not like you can chose in the middle of the battle like an obliteratre used to. You have to pick which options - usually it's the same deal - a single las cannon or 2 plasma guns on a 5 man. Who cares that you can take a multi melta or a plasma cannon - you are never going to do it.

He's trolling you. Just chill.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

The Camo Cloaks should only be one point. If you're using them in this analysis, that's your own fault. Completely and overly costed.

LMAO!

With that attitude, you're damn right tactical marines are useless. If you can't see how arbitrarily making everything cheaper than tactical marines, - I don't know what to tell you - of course marines will be bad.

Perhaps the scout squad with camo-cloaks is priced very specifically to leave some space for Tacticals? *waggles eyebrows*

Tac marines are worse than the sum of their parts. Always have been, always will be, more than likely. Anyone denying this is really ignoring 20 years of competitive history in this game. The AP system hurts marines in general as well. Not 2nd ed bad, but the hit is contributing for sure.

Marines are now reset back to their 5th ed status, I think, which is shockingly mediocre at best. At worst, we're talking overcosted across the board, because of the curse of the generalist. Tac marines just aren't worth 13 pts when fire warriors are 8 and guardsmen are 4. They just aren't. You can't leverage their stats well enough game in and game out, no matter how good you think you are at the game.

Any cheap troop, ie 4 pts or less, is almost necessarily better than any marine troop just via the wound table and board coverage mechanics. I don't include gretchin because T2 is real liability. But T3 and above cheap guys are so much better than marines. Then we can talk about harlequins and scions.

There isn't even a clearly best troop unit since all the troops mentioned so far are better at different things. You're never going to catch anyone using Berserkers or Genestealers as backfield objective campers.

Best campers: Brimstones, Conscripts, Noise Marines, cultists
Best aggressive (proactive): Berserkers, Genestealers, Sisters, Boyz

Even then there good at there jobs for different reasons, the reason Noise marines are great objective campers is because they have long ranged fire support, while the other 3 are good because they ridiculously hard to shift

 Rydria wrote:
There isn't even a clearly best troop unit since all the troops mentioned so far are better at different things. You're never going to catch anyone using Berserkers or Genestealers as backfield objective campers.

Best campers: Brimstones, Conscripts, Noise Marines, cultists
Best aggressive (proactive) troops: Berserkers, Genestealers, Sisters, Boyz

This is a clever way to break it down.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

The Camo Cloaks should only be one point. If you're using them in this analysis, that's your own fault. Completely and overly costed.

LMAO!

With that attitude, you're damn right tactical marines are useless. If you can't see how arbitrarily making everything cheaper than tactical marines, - I don't know what to tell you - of course marines will be bad.

Perhaps the scout squad with camo-cloaks is priced very specifically to leave some space for Tacticals? *waggles eyebrows*

What space is that? Scouts really aren't much less survivable. So no, Camo Cloaks are just overpriced. I'm content just not buying them. Don't pretend that gives Tactical Marines any edge because one upgrade is useless.

If you are paying for a sniper rifle already, you can double your save vs crap like wvyerns for 3 pts. I don't know. It's all pretty bad, I think.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

The Camo Cloaks should only be one point. If you're using them in this analysis, that's your own fault. Completely and overly costed.

LMAO!

With that attitude, you're damn right tactical marines are useless. If you can't see how arbitrarily making everything cheaper than tactical marines, - I don't know what to tell you - of course marines will be bad.

Perhaps the scout squad with camo-cloaks is priced very specifically to leave some space for Tacticals? *waggles eyebrows*

What space is that? Scouts really aren't much less survivable. So no, Camo Cloaks are just overpriced. I'm content just not buying them. Don't pretend that gives Tactical Marines any edge because one upgrade is useless.

But without cloaks, tactical marines become better objective campers than scouts...

If tacticals are average and scouts are debatably slightly better or slightly worse, doesn't that mean neither are close to being one of the best troop unit ?

Martel732 wrote:
Tac marines are worse than the sum of their parts. Always have been, always will be, more than likely. Anyone denying this is really ignoring 20 years of competitive history in this game. The AP system hurts marines in general as well. Not 2nd ed bad, but the hit is contributing for sure.

Marines are now reset back to their 5th ed status, I think, which is shockingly mediocre at best. At worst, we're talking overcosted across the board, because of the curse of the generalist. Tac marines just aren't worth 13 pts when fire warriors are 8 and guardsmen are 4. They just aren't. You can't leverage their stats well enough game in and game out, no matter how good you think you are at the game.

Any cheap troop, ie 4 pts or less, is almost necessarily better than any marine troop just via the wound table and board coverage mechanics. I don't include gretchin because T2 is real liability. But T3 and above cheap guys are so much better than marines. Then we can talk about harlequins and scions.

I think the opposite. The Tactical Marine itself is worth 13-14 points, but the way you kit out the squad makes them never worth it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
She is saying the Marines + Lascannon are the same price as Scouts with cloaks and rifles. I think if you add the ML then you get the extra 21 points. But I only have Imperium 1, not the 'dex, so I have no idea.

You are correct.

Scouts with cloaks are one point per model more expensive than tacticals, for the same defense against shooting while in cover but worse defense against assault. Scouts with sniper rifles add four points on top of that, making them five points per model more expensive than tacticals. Add a missile launcher, which is 25 points, or 25-4=21 to replace a sniper rifle, and you have a 111 point squad that's less effective defensively than a tactical squad, and only arguably better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, I like scouts. I even use the SR+ML team mentioned here in my own list. But one has to be realistic with what they can accomplish.

The Camo Cloaks should only be one point. If you're using them in this analysis, that's your own fault. Completely and overly costed.

LMAO!

With that attitude, you're damn right tactical marines are useless. If you can't see how arbitrarily making everything cheaper than tactical marines, - I don't know what to tell you - of course marines will be bad.

Perhaps the scout squad with camo-cloaks is priced very specifically to leave some space for Tacticals? *waggles eyebrows*

What space is that? Scouts really aren't much less survivable. So no, Camo Cloaks are just overpriced. I'm content just not buying them. Don't pretend that gives Tactical Marines any edge because one upgrade is useless.

But without cloaks, tactical marines become better objective campers than scouts...

Not for the price if you really want that Lascannon?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rydria wrote:
If tacticals are average and scouts are debatably slightly better or slightly worse, doesn't that mean neither are close to being one of the best troop unit ?

I say Scouts are one of the best actually though I know that's an sizeable minority.

There is no way a tac marine is worth 13 pts the way the game currently functions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rydria wrote:
If tacticals are average and scouts are debatably slightly better or slightly worse, doesn't that mean neither are close to being one of the best troop unit ?

Tacs aren't average because of their vulnerability/pt to antuli-infantry tech in 8th. On top of the curse of the generalist.

I think Tacs are worth their points, but I also think that some models are too cheap and it skews the perception of Tacs.
Conscripts and Brims are too cheap because they do not include the potential for how their army can use/buff them.
Tactical are probably at their points cost for 2 reasons:
1) GW redesigned 8E stating with Tacs and since they wer 13ppm in 7E, that was probably used as the "fixed point" that GW redesigned everything else around
2) GW intended Tacticals to be used with Chapter Tactics in mind, so any "over costing" was acceptable to maintain balance once their Codex was released.

Whether this was successfully achieved is clearly up for debate, but that is how I think GW approaches it.

In any case, Tacitcals are far from the best Troop in 40k, but I would argue that they are the "ideal" Troop in terms of balance. They can serve a purpose, but you can't win games with just them alone.

-

 Galef wrote:
I think Tacs are worth their points, but I also think that some models are too cheap and it skews the perception of Tacs.

The point system is relative, if other models have more impact per pt within the same role as tac marines and they have no other redeeming features then they are not worth their points. That doesn't mean that they are terrible, just not competitive. Other units might be overcosted if we assume that a tac marine is the baseline, but until those pts costs are changed it is what it is.

Martel732 wrote:
There is no way a tac marine is worth 13 pts the way the game currently functions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rydria wrote:
If tacticals are average and scouts are debatably slightly better or slightly worse, doesn't that mean neither are close to being one of the best troop unit ?

Tacs aren't average because of their vulnerability/pt to antuli-infantry tech in 8th. On top of the curse of the generalist.

Depends on what you mean by "anti-infantry" tech. I think a stormlord festooned with heavy bolters is a good bet for a buttload of really good anti-infantry firepower. With all the gubbins, it's 592, though I'll discount you the four lascannons (and not include them in the calculations) because they're pretty agreeably antitank weapons.

Shooting at Space Marine Tactical Marines with the Raven Guard Chapter Tactic in cover with my 512 point Stormlord

Stationary:
Main Gun: 1.67 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 2.22 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 0.22 wounds
Stationary Total: 4.11 wounds (or 53.48 pts. I spent 9.57 points per 1 point of damage inflicted)

Moving:
Main Gun: 0.83 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 1.11 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 0.11 wounds
Moving Total: 2.05 wounds (or 26.69 pts. I spent 19.14 points per 1 point of damage inflicted)

Shooting at Imperial Guard Infantry Squads in cover with my 512 point Stormlord

Stationary:
Main Gun: 5.20 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 6.67 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 1.33 wounds
Stationary Total: 13.2 wounds (Or 52.8 pts. I spent 9.69 points per 1 point of damage inflicted)

Moving:
Main Gun: 3.47 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 4.44 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 0.88 wounds
Moving Total: 8.79 wounds (or 35.16 points. I spent 14.56 points per 1 point of damage inflicted).

It seems to me to be the case that Tactical Marines are roughly as durable per-point as Guardsmen when the tank is firing at them stationary, which is balanced, and are more durable per point than Guardsmen when the tank is firing at them after moving.

Doesn't seem like they're any more vulnerable to anti-infantry weapons than Imperial Guardsmen, and I don't think anyone is saying Imperial Guardsmen are in a super bad spot right now durability wise, per point.

Not all marines are raven guard, and they don't always have cover. I know a humble flamer, on average, kills twice as many points of marines as conscripts. It would be slightly better for guardsmen, but no where near even.

I frequently don't objective camp at all, but rush with absolutely everything trying to get through 8th ed shooting lists. One almost never has cover under these circumstances.

Martel732 wrote:
Not all marines are raven guard, and they don't always have cover. I know a humble flamer, on average, kills twice as many points of marines as conscripts. It would be slightly better for guardsmen, but no where near even.

I frequently don't objective camp at all, but rush with absolutely everything trying to get through 8th ed shooting lists. One almost never has cover under these circumstances.

I can do the math without cover if you want. As for the "not all marines are Raven Guard" well, chapter tactics not being balanced is a whole 'nother issue, but Space Marines are paying for chapter tactics so to not include them is disingenuous. Here's the out of cover:

512 pt Stormlord vs Raven Guard Space Marines out of cover:

Stationary:
Main gun: 2.22 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 3.33 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 0.44 wounds
Stationary Total: 5.99 wounds (round to 6): 78 pts, 6.56 pts spent to per point killed

Moving:
Main gun: 1.11 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 1.67 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 0.22 wounds
Moving Total: 3 wounds, 39 pts, 13.13 pts spent per point killed

512 pt Stormlord vs Imperial Guard Infantry Squad out of cover:


Stationary:
Main gun: 6.25 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 8.33 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 1.78 wounds
Stationary Total: 16.36 wounds, 65.44 pts, 7.82 pts spent to per point killed

Moving:
Main gun: 4.17 wounds
Heavy Bolters: 5.56 wounds
Heavy Stubbers: 1.19 wounds
Moving Total: 10.92 wounds, 43.68 pts, 11.72 pts spent per point killed

So again, Space Marines are just about balanced with an IG Squad. (I get slightly more efficiency against the Marines when stationary, and slightly more efficiency against IG when moving).