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.

Any captain or chapter master can give you a mini-rowboat. Captain will let you re-roll ones on everything, chapter master gives full re-rolls on everything. Just doesn't have the other rowboat goodies like +3CP and imperium-wide auras.

I'm looking into using Dante, but he's a turd compared to Rowboat. Again, gimmick-time.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Razorbacks are effective firepower and relatively tough for their points - but they have a huge weakeness that gets exploited every time I play with them. I've basically stopped using them.

Their biggest issue is that they are -1 to hit when they move. The second issue is that if they get assaulted they can't shot. (this is a pretty huge weakness) Effectively they don't want to move - or be assaulted - but their primary weapon is 24" range. This weapon range problem exposes them to their weaknesses every game.

Yup they need re-rolls to hit, then the -2 is not really a huge deal. (hit almost 75% of the time at that point).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm looking into using Dante, but he's a turd compared to Rowboat. Again, gimmick-time.

No army currently works with out what you consider a gimmick. Dante is also 145 points cheaper than Rowboat not even considering that you need another HQ in addition to Rowboat unless you are playing all super heavies or all flyers + superheavies.

Let's assume that's true. There's still no reason to ever use tactical marines. You can get razorbacks from taking ANY unit.

Dante still sucks in comparison.

Martel732 wrote:
Let's assume that's true. There's still no reason to ever use tactical marines. You can get razorbacks from taking ANY unit.

Dante still sucks in comparison.

I'm not saying he is as good, but he is also not bad and is way less expensive. As for tactical marines, you are right you don't need to take them. I think a lot of that depends on what chapter. They are actually decent for say salamanders, and certainly not near the worst troop unit in the game. They are easily better than Dire Avengers, Gretchin, wytches, and probably several others. If for no other reason that they have chapter tactics right now.

That said they are far from the best troops in the game as well, and probably closer to the bottom units than those on top.

Probably by sheer number of other troops they are not the worst, but they are far lower than many realize, due to complex interactions such as poor table coverage and poor firepower/pt.

Of course, BA tacs have no chapter tactics.

Not yet, you will get chapter tactics or equivalent soon, including more psychic powers, stratagems, and relics.

Dante is a solid multiplier in that he can deep strike to provide a reroll bubble. This is how i use Draigo.

Anyway, this is the gimmick edition. And it's made worse for armies like GK and BA because we get lumped in with all marines, who have Azrael, and Guilliman, although Guilliman is more of an IG multiplier than an SM multiplier.

my thought it that the worst troops are in this order.

1. Dire Avengers (4+ save Gardians with 7 point weapon inferior to bolter(free))
2. Gardians (t3 5+ save and We've got shotguns? that rend on 6's? WTF)
3. Tactical marines (look at these stats! here take a bolter)

after that there is a huge list of crap troops that aren't much better than a tactical marine but they are still better.

The other troops get more cm^2 board coverage for less points while still accomplishing nothing.

 koooaei wrote:
You guyz are diliberately forgetting the No escape rule that witches possess and that probably costs 2-3 points a piece on it's own. It's amazing when the stars are right. They do have a niche which is the main thing that differentiates them from things like dire avengers and grots. And arguably tactical marines - but tactical marines at least have passable statlines.

You say that about Wyches, but you mentioned using the No Escape rule on a Razorback, which is an invalid target. In my experience, the rule is good, but it's so limited, because once you're restricted to using it on infantry, it just doesn't matter as much. That, in combination with the rest of Wych deficiencies (that everyone else has pointed out) makes them pretty irredeemably bad. They probably aren't the worst troop choice, but they're in my top 3. I'd rather have a mediocre TAC tactical marine unit than Wyches, which can't really do anything well.

At least wyches cost less to accomplish nothing.

I wouldn't consider your faction's main HQ pick to be a "gimmick", unless you consider anything other than unsupported naked tacticals to be a "gimmick".

The thing is, broadly speaking it seems GW has reworked space marines (and tau) to work more like imperial guard in how their officers interact with their troops. There is a word for Imperial Guard troops who have lost their officer support: "losing".

While Tau and SM still aren't quite as severe on that front, since their troops are still somewhat useful unsupported, they have been moved in that direction enough that any serious strategy has to include officers and has to account for their abilities. You won't know what a tactical is really capable of until you've determined what officer and chapter tactic he has.

I'm not sure why GW is trying to make other factions imitate IG's command structure (other than "character models get more markup"), but that's what they've done: a little bit of IG strategy has crept into many other factions in 8th.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
You guyz are diliberately forgetting the No escape rule that witches possess and that probably costs 2-3 points a piece on it's own. It's amazing when the stars are right. They do have a niche which is the main thing that differentiates them from things like dire avengers and grots. And arguably tactical marines - but tactical marines at least have passable statlines.

You say that about Wyches, but you mentioned using the No Escape rule on a Razorback, which is an invalid target. In my experience, the rule is good, but it's so limited, because once you're restricted to using it on infantry, it just doesn't matter as much. That, in combination with the rest of Wych deficiencies (that everyone else has pointed out) makes them pretty irredeemably bad. They probably aren't the worst troop choice, but they're in my top 3. I'd rather have a mediocre TAC tactical marine unit than Wyches, which can't really do anything well.

I don't know how you can rate a unit that has a purpose and does it cheaply lower than a unit that has no purpose and does it not cheaply like tactical marines.

 ross-128 wrote:
I wouldn't consider your faction's main HQ pick to be a "gimmick", unless you consider anything other than unsupported naked tacticals to be a "gimmick".

It's a fun little circular argument.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
You guyz are diliberately forgetting the No escape rule that witches possess and that probably costs 2-3 points a piece on it's own. It's amazing when the stars are right. They do have a niche which is the main thing that differentiates them from things like dire avengers and grots. And arguably tactical marines - but tactical marines at least have passable statlines.

You say that about Wyches, but you mentioned using the No Escape rule on a Razorback, which is an invalid target. In my experience, the rule is good, but it's so limited, because once you're restricted to using it on infantry, it just doesn't matter as much. That, in combination with the rest of Wych deficiencies (that everyone else has pointed out) makes them pretty irredeemably bad. They probably aren't the worst troop choice, but they're in my top 3. I'd rather have a mediocre TAC tactical marine unit than Wyches, which can't really do anything well.

I don't know how you can rate a unit that has a purpose and does it cheaply lower than a unit that has no purpose and does it not cheaply like tactical marines.

Purpose of tactical marines, camp objectives in cover, fire their single heavy weapon. Not sure how they have no purpose. They are actually relatively good at camping in cover to get a 2+, and firing a single lascannon or missile at things. Not super cheap, and not top level competitive but far from the worst things. What is the purpose of wyches? Try to tie things up in combat, if they can make it there?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ross-128 wrote:
I wouldn't consider your faction's main HQ pick to be a "gimmick", unless you consider anything other than unsupported naked tacticals to be a "gimmick".

The thing is, broadly speaking it seems GW has reworked space marines (and tau) to work more like imperial guard in how their officers interact with their troops. There is a word for Imperial Guard troops who have lost their officer support: "losing".

While Tau and SM still aren't quite as severe on that front, since their troops are still somewhat useful unsupported, they have been moved in that direction enough that any serious strategy has to include officers and has to account for their abilities. You won't know what a tactical is really capable of until you've determined what officer and chapter tactic he has.

I'm not sure why GW is trying to make other factions imitate IG's command structure (other than "character models get more markup"), but that's what they've done: a little bit of IG strategy has crept into many other factions in 8th.

Because if characters don't buff things, they are pretty useless unless they are super beasts in CC by themselves. Almost all characters in this edition are support characters or smite bots. I mean if you took away the aura buffs all SM HQs are basically garbage.

I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

Tyel wrote:
I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

I don't think they are too weak, I just think they are highly overrated. They seem kinda average to me. They economical, but frequently move and are turned off by any assault. They have failed to stop my BA several times now; the same BA that have yet to eve n get close vs IG or Mechdar.

Tyel wrote:
I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

I'd rather have 3 units of Wyches than 1 Drazhar, he is the worst thing in DE codex IMO. BUT sense this is about troop.............. Wyches are the worst in DE codex.

Witches can make it into combat - they have Raiders which are probably the best all around transport in this game. 5++ save with 10 wounds makes it tougher than a razorback. It gets no negative for moving and shooting with it's awesome assault weapons and it moves fast AF and has the fly special rule (Open top too but this doesn't help witches). It's also got decent close combat ability so going in and taking overwatch for your witch squad has a nice bonus of maybe killing a modle or 2 as well. Plus! if the witches lock the unit - you can't shoot at the freaking raider. THAT'S CALLED SYNERGY PEOPLE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

I don't think they are too weak, I just think they are highly overrated. They seem kinda average to me. They economical, but frequently move and are turned off by any assault. They have failed to stop my BA several times now; the same BA that have yet to eve n get close vs IG or Mechdar.

Extremely over rated. If you over load them in your list - a good opponent will just bum rush you to take away your shooting for the rest of the game. Is there a strategy that nulifies a 50 man conscript unit like this? NOPE.

 Melissia wrote:
There's a sizable number of people who have disagreed with you on that, as in practice they have made tacs work for them.

Then why aren't there any tournament results that have shown that on a consistent basis?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Witches can make it into combat - they have Raiders which are probably the best all around transport in this game. 5++ save with 10 wounds makes it tougher than a razorback. It gets no negative for moving and shooting with it's awesome assault weapons and it moves fast AF and has the fly special rule (Open top too but this doesn't help witches). It's also got decent close combat ability so going in and taking overwatch for your witch squad has a nice bonus of maybe killing a modle or 2 as well. Plus! if the witches lock the unit - you can't shoot at the freaking raider. THAT'S CALLED SYNERGY PEOPLE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

I don't think they are too weak, I just think they are highly overrated. They seem kinda average to me. They economical, but frequently move and are turned off by any assault. They have failed to stop my BA several times now; the same BA that have yet to eve n get close vs IG or Mechdar.

Extremely over rated. If you over load them in your list - a good opponent will just bum rush you to take away your shooting for the rest of the game. Is there a strategy that nulifies a 50 man conscript unit like this? NOPE.

Wait, wuhhhh... Raiders? Raiders are decent, but I'd take a Venom over them any day (unless I needed the transport capacity). Also, it has one WEAPON singular -- a weapon that you certainly can't rely on to hit, even with it being a 3+. The Raider isn't bad, but it's not even the best DE transport, let alone the best transport in the game. And circling back, I'll agree with Breng; Wyches and Razorbacks don't belong in the same conversation.

Yeah, we played it wrong with witches tying up razors. I still think that a witch squad with a blastpistol in a transport are better than kabalite warriors in a transport. Kabalites literally do nothing you ain't getting elsewhere allready. And yet people bash on witches that can at least tie up something and have 6+++, 4++ in mellee and t4 from drugs (for 1 squad at least).

 koooaei wrote:
Yeah, we played it wrong with witches tying up razors. I still think that a witch squad with a blastpistol in a transport are better than kabalite warriors in a transport. Kabalites literally do nothing you ain't getting elsewhere allready. And yet people bash on witches that can at least tie up something and have 4++ and t4 from drugs (for 1 squad at least).

Kalabite Warriors have a Chosen equivalent which pretty much makes them bad.

That said they're cheap to buy into though. You can't say that for Tactical Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
You guyz are diliberately forgetting the No escape rule that witches possess and that probably costs 2-3 points a piece on it's own. It's amazing when the stars are right. They do have a niche which is the main thing that differentiates them from things like dire avengers and grots. And arguably tactical marines - but tactical marines at least have passable statlines.

You say that about Wyches, but you mentioned using the No Escape rule on a Razorback, which is an invalid target. In my experience, the rule is good, but it's so limited, because once you're restricted to using it on infantry, it just doesn't matter as much. That, in combination with the rest of Wych deficiencies (that everyone else has pointed out) makes them pretty irredeemably bad. They probably aren't the worst troop choice, but they're in my top 3. I'd rather have a mediocre TAC tactical marine unit than Wyches, which can't really do anything well.

I don't know how you can rate a unit that has a purpose and does it cheaply lower than a unit that has no purpose and does it not cheaply like tactical marines.

Purpose of tactical marines, camp objectives in cover, fire their single heavy weapon. Not sure how they have no purpose. They are actually relatively good at camping in cover to get a 2+, and firing a single lascannon or missile at things. Not super cheap, and not top level competitive but far from the worst things. What is the purpose of wyches? Try to tie things up in combat, if they can make it there?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ross-128 wrote:
I wouldn't consider your faction's main HQ pick to be a "gimmick", unless you consider anything other than unsupported naked tacticals to be a "gimmick".

The thing is, broadly speaking it seems GW has reworked space marines (and tau) to work more like imperial guard in how their officers interact with their troops. There is a word for Imperial Guard troops who have lost their officer support: "losing".

While Tau and SM still aren't quite as severe on that front, since their troops are still somewhat useful unsupported, they have been moved in that direction enough that any serious strategy has to include officers and has to account for their abilities. You won't know what a tactical is really capable of until you've determined what officer and chapter tactic he has.

I'm not sure why GW is trying to make other factions imitate IG's command structure (other than "character models get more markup"), but that's what they've done: a little bit of IG strategy has crept into many other factions in 8th.

Because if characters don't buff things, they are pretty useless unless they are super beasts in CC by themselves. Almost all characters in this edition are support characters or smite bots. I mean if you took away the aura buffs all SM HQs are basically garbage.

Devastators do that role you mentioned and do it better.

Not really as they don't have objective secured and as such can have the objective taken from them. They are objectively worse at holding objectives, they are just better at killing things.

 koooaei wrote:
Yeah, we played it wrong with witches tying up razors. I still think that a witch squad with a blastpistol in a transport are better than kabalite warriors in a transport. Kabalites literally do nothing you ain't getting elsewhere allready. And yet people bash on witches that can at least tie up something and have 6+++, 4++ in mellee and t4 from drugs (for 1 squad at least).

No...... Trueborn are better than both (tho they are not troops), they have same attacks as Wyches, 4 specials and 2 heavy weapons if you like. Kabals are still better than Wychs b.c you can sit in Raiders/Venoms for a few turns pumping out shots and still able to have an Agoniser to get a couple wounds in. Over all Wychs dont do damage.

Breng77 wrote:
Not really as they don't have objective secured and as such can have the objective taken from them. They are objectively worse at holding objectives, they are just better at killing things.

That's a bigger concern to me playing marines. If the ig blob gets to an objective, they will win that battle anyway.

I'm going to throw a different unit into the ring as a terrible troop choice. That unit is Blue Horrors. Yes I know Brimstones are amazing, but it's because Brimstones are amazing that Blues suck so bad. Why would you ever take a blue for 2 more points (66% increase) for +1 str, -1 attack, and not dying when casting smite (you only need 1 for that). Even splitting is pointless because you could have just bought 2 brims to have that additional melee attack all the time. Pink Horrors cost 60% more than a blue, but they do have a shooting attack and have a bump to smitting at 10.

I just personally see no point in ever taking a blue beyond the 1 in a brim squad.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Witches can make it into combat - they have Raiders which are probably the best all around transport in this game. 5++ save with 10 wounds makes it tougher than a razorback. It gets no negative for moving and shooting with it's awesome assault weapons and it moves fast AF and has the fly special rule (Open top too but this doesn't help witches). It's also got decent close combat ability so going in and taking overwatch for your witch squad has a nice bonus of maybe killing a modle or 2 as well. Plus! if the witches lock the unit - you can't shoot at the freaking raider. THAT'S CALLED SYNERGY PEOPLE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Tyel wrote:
I struggle with the idea that wyches have a role but razorbacks are too weak for the current meta.

I don't think they are too weak, I just think they are highly overrated. They seem kinda average to me. They economical, but frequently move and are turned off by any assault. They have failed to stop my BA several times now; the same BA that have yet to eve n get close vs IG or Mechdar.

Extremely over rated. If you over load them in your list - a good opponent will just bum rush you to take away your shooting for the rest of the game. Is there a strategy that nulifies a 50 man conscript unit like this? NOPE.

Wait, wuhhhh... Raiders? Raiders are decent, but I'd take a Venom over them any day (unless I needed the transport capacity). Also, it has one WEAPON singular -- a weapon that you certainly can't rely on to hit, even with it being a 3+. The Raider isn't bad, but it's not even the best DE transport, let alone the best transport in the game. And circling back, I'll agree with Breng; Wyches and Razorbacks don't belong in the same conversation.

venom is only 5 man capacity. Sure witches belong in the conversation of razors. Melle units destroy razors - a unit of 10 could easily prevent it from falling back. Also - I said all around transport - being able to hold 10 models is a pretty important feature. And dark lances arent mediocre weapons - they are great weapons. Disintegrators have multiple shots too.

Breng77 wrote:
Not really as they don't have objective secured and as such can have the objective taken from them. They are objectively worse at holding objectives, they are just better at killing things.

Literally anyone can kill 5 Marines. They aren't holding the objective better even though they've got a rule that would take that assumption.

Just came in 2nd in a local tourney with a 1500 point list with 30 generic csm. Basic marines aint too bad.