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.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
I'd love it if they could all use their Krak Grenades in CC against vehicles again. Not a huge boost, but I used that ability pretty often.

With Krak Grenades now at damage d3, that's pretty damn powerful.

Ah yeah, good point. Against average vehicle still only wounding on 5s after hitting on 3s, but yeah that'd be pretty nasty.

Just like they used to be I remember assaulting Wave Serpents a couple times and knocking them out in 6th edition, so fun.

Is your opponent brain dead? How did Tactical Marines ever get near a Wave Serpent and live to charge it and do damage?

Drop Pods. You drop enough marines and they can't kill them all. Besides, why engage the poor Tacticals when there are Lascannon weilding Devastators on the horizon? Or Sternguard that just killed your Wraithknight? More threats than can be easily dealt with, the Tac squads are low priority, and the table space is finite making it hard to get somewhere safe.

Because they're free Kill Points and therefore I can just camp my home objectives and win? That shouldn't have been an issue, as 6th edition Eldar was as point-and-click as 7th edition Eldar were.

If you'll open up your 6th edition rulebook you'll find drop pods only count for Kill points in one mission. Likewise for primary objectives in your deployment zone.

If youre talking ITC missions, it might be true for you. But it doesnt jibe with my experience against tourney types in 6th, because a well coordinated alpha strike was usually worth it.

Regardless, are you really going to continue on about how you think a unit thats not the subject of the thread was bad two editions ago?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Torga_DW wrote:
Yeah, as much as i love blood angels, their actual differences (besides arbitrary weapon allowances) haven't diverged enough to justifiy them being their own codex. But having said that, that's currently the space wolves' thing. Grey hunters are just a tactical squad with a few weapon changes, notably in this case that they still carry a ccw when for some reason the other chapters no longer do. I don't think that's a good enough justification for not allowing tacticals to carry a ccw.

Imo the fact that Chaos can get cc weapons is a good reason for Tacticals not to get them. It's a poignant difference in army flavor.

And Tactical Marines don't have an ability to Alpha Strike.

Please stop posting on this thread. We clearly understand there's an issue with Tactical Marines (And SEVERAL people do) and you're one of the ONLY people defending them to the death.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Torga_DW wrote:

Insectum7 wrote:

 Torga_DW wrote:
Yeah, as much as i love blood angels, their actual differences (besides arbitrary weapon allowances) haven't diverged enough to justifiy them being their own codex. But having said that, that's currently the space wolves' thing. Grey hunters are just a tactical squad with a few weapon changes, notably in this case that they still carry a ccw when for some reason the other chapters no longer do. I don't think that's a good enough justification for not allowing tacticals to carry a ccw.

Imo the fact that Chaos can get cc weapons is a good reason for Tacticals not to get them. It's a poignant difference in army flavor.

Well, i disagree here. I don't see it as a poignant difference but an arbitrary one to add a level of distinction to what is basically the same unit across 2 different armies. To me the poignant difference is they can operate at legion sizes (20 men), not that i'd suggest doing that. But outside of that and marks, the units are so similar (for a reason) that fixing tacticals would go a long way towards fixing chaos marines as well.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:2. I'd say it's one of their defining features. Chaos Marines can have either the Bolter or Chainsword (And last edition both, but they overpayed by a point, and I can argue that they should be had it built into their profile). Tactical Marines have the pistol as a sidearm but nothing else. Sisters and Skitarii just don't have pistols outside the sergeant models and such. Grey Hunters are armed to the teeth and over the top, and one of the biggest mistakes of 7th was making it optional for 2 frickin points. You know, when it was already too expensive on the CSM. FW had it right with making Carcharodons paying only 1 point last edition, but remember how bad the rest of the Tactics were...anyway that's mildly off topic. So to me, in my perfect game, it would be laid out as:
A. Tactical Marines get a Special and Heavy at 5 dudes, and an extra of either at 10
B. Chaos Marines have the option to buy the Chainsword, and get the Special and Heavy Weapon of their choice for every 5 dudes (Which is much better encouragement for large squads)
C. Grey Hunters get the Chainsword standard and continue doing their thing, so you can try and create Grey Hunters with Chaos Marines but you pay for it

You say it's grey hunters defining feature, but i see it as just a random arbitrary weapon restriction for an otherwise similar unit. The defining feature i saw in space wolves was that they were marines +1 to the point that they were just about viable.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:3. Honestly, there's a couple of fixes for Assault Marines really that I can think up. These would be:
A. Cut off a point
B. The special pistols don't interfere with buying Eviscerstors (So you can theoretically get 2 of each at the minimum squad) and an extra of either at 10.
C. Cut the crap about hand flamers and inferno pistols being Blood Angels exclusive. Give Assault Marines (And vanguard) access to them. That's more an issue with Blood Angels (And Dark Angels) needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex though.

C. I agree, it makes no sense. But at the same time, as you say in the point above, it's their 'defining feature'. I think if they're going to be divergent, then they need a better reason than arbitrary weapon restrictions. It works both ways.

It's what separates units from being shooty or choppy.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

1. It's one of the few balance points I agree with. In the same manner I would say a model can fire as many weapons as it wants of the same type. That's just me. Fire anything but pistols or just pistols works for now. Pistols already got enough of a buff being able to be fired in melee.

I'm not sure you understand what 'Buff' means. Because that's not what most pistols got - Pistols, as a concept, were heavily nerfed.
Yes, they can now be fired into Melee, but in exchange for that, they no longer count as a Close Combat weapon. (Of course, since the '+1 attack for 2 Close Combat Weapons' thing is gone, what I should really say is 'They no longer have the option to give models an extra attack.')
Chainswords got a buff which allows them to do what two close combat weapons used to do, in a limited way. (Or to provide multiple bonus attacks, if you have permission to take multiple Chainswords.)
High-strength pistols, like Plasma or Inferno pistols, got a buff since they hit harder than the average Close Combat weapon.
Pistols in general, though, took a nerf - They no longer act as Assault Weapons, since every weapon can be fired before charging and they don't get the new 'Assault' rule (That is, they can't be fired after Advancing.) Additionally, firing them in Close Combat is a rare thing to have happen on dedicated melee units - If I have a unit of, say, Assault Marines, I have to charge, fight, my opponent has to choose not to fall back, I have to survive their pistols, and then fight again. THEN, if they are still alive, and I'm still alive, and I don't want to fall back, I can fire my pistols. It's such a delayed reaction that it almost never really comes up, unless you were the person charged and you've got a unit who is bad in close combat but has good pistols. That's an *incredibly* rare set of circumstances. I've seen 'Firing pistols in a Melee' actually influence the outcome of the game... Once, maybe? Not more than once. Even then, 'Influence' might be a strong word.

2. I'd say it's one of their defining features. Chaos Marines can have either the Bolter or Chainsword (And last edition both, but they overpayed by a point, and I can argue that they should be had it built into their profile). Tactical Marines have the pistol as a sidearm but nothing else. Sisters and Skitarii just don't have pistols outside the sergeant models and such. Grey Hunters are armed to the teeth and over the top, and one of the biggest mistakes of 7th was making it optional for 2 frickin points. You know, when it was already too expensive on the CSM. FW had it right with making Carcharodons paying only 1 point last edition, but remember how bad the rest of the Tactics were...anyway that's mildly off topic. So to me, in my perfect game, it would be laid out as:
A. Tactical Marines get a Special and Heavy at 5 dudes, and an extra of either at 10
B. Chaos Marines have the option to buy the Chainsword, and get the Special and Heavy Weapon of their choice for every 5 dudes (Which is much better encouragement for large squads)
C. Grey Hunters get the Chainsword standard and continue doing their thing, so you can try and create Grey Hunters with Chaos Marines but you pay for it

As pointed out, this is incredibly arbitrary. Having access to a close combat weapon is one of the more vague, nebulous features of Grey Hunters - It was only ever required for a single codex that came out in 5th edition, (It is now optional, but 'free', (I'm aware that Grey Hunters cost 14ppm as opposed to 13ppm, but that is not technically the cost of the chainsword itself,)) and it's one of the least unique things about them.
Also: Sisters of Battle DO have pistols. They always have, for as long as they've been around. (Or at least since 5th edition, that's as far back as my personal collection of codices goes. I'm sure someone could check the Witch Hunters book to confirm this, though.)

3. Honestly, there's a couple of fixes for Assault Marines really that I can think up. These would be:
A. Cut off a point
B. The special pistols don't interfere with buying Eviscerstors (So you can theoretically get 2 of each at the minimum squad) and an extra of either at 10.
C. Cut the crap about hand flamers and inferno pistols being Blood Angels exclusive. Give Assault Marines (And vanguard) access to them. That's more an issue with Blood Angels (And Dark Angels) needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex though.

None of these would actually make Assault Marines good though, (Eviscerators are a horrible, horrible weapon on 1A models, no matter how many you can take, same with Hand Flamers except that they're horrible on everyone, and Inferno Pistols aren't explicitly bad, but they're far too expensive - They should cost like 12pts, not 20,) and the 'A' option is just going to cause more power creep, which should be avoided at all costs. I want Assault Marines that are worth 13ppm, not cheaper Assault Marines.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:It's what separates units from being shooty or choppy.

It's an 'elite' unit, being choppy and shooty is acceptable. Especially considering there are pure choppy and pure shooty versions of this unit available. For the points cost and what it can take - it's neither shooty or choppy atm, just horribly overpriced for what it can actually do.

Waaaghpower wrote:
As pointed out, this is incredibly arbitrary. Having access to a close combat weapon is one of the more vague, nebulous features of Grey Hunters - It was only ever required for a single codex that came out in 5th edition, (It is now optional, but 'free', (I'm aware that Grey Hunters cost 14ppm as opposed to 13ppm, but that is not technically the cost of the chainsword itself,)) and it's one of the least unique things about them.
Also: Sisters of Battle DO have pistols. They always have, for as long as they've been around. (Or at least since 5th edition, that's as far back as my personal collection of codices goes. I'm sure someone could check the Witch Hunters book to confirm this, though.)

From memory (i used to have the witch hunters codex), sisters/witch hunters had flamer/melta pistols as far back as 3rd (can't speak for 2nd). The range is really old, and they haven't really changed much since they were released. I guess it depends when you really started playing as to what you associate with a particular unit. As i've said before, in 2nd tactical marines came with a bolt rifle, bolt pistol and ccw and these were represented on the starter models. In 3rd, when everything was utterly gutted, they only got a bolt rifle. But then the pistol part of their equipment made it's way back (4th dark angels iirc). The precedent is there, and it's not like tactical marines with essentially 2 attacks in melee would be overpowered in melee.

Waaaghpower wrote:
None of these would actually make Assault Marines good though, (Eviscerators are a horrible, horrible weapon on 1A models, no matter how many you can take, same with Hand Flamers except that they're horrible on everyone, and Inferno Pistols aren't explicitly bad, but they're far too expensive - They should cost like 12pts, not 20,) and the 'A' option is just going to cause more power creep, which should be avoided at all costs. I want Assault Marines that are worth 13ppm, not cheaper Assault Marines.

The problem is, it's still a shooting-focused edition. The core rule interactions don't really incentivize melee. Short of fixing that, a price drop (amongst other things) really is the easiest way to fix them. But i agree, i'd rather have assault marines that are worth 13 points.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

1. It's one of the few balance points I agree with. In the same manner I would say a model can fire as many weapons as it wants of the same type. That's just me. Fire anything but pistols or just pistols works for now. Pistols already got enough of a buff being able to be fired in melee.

I'm not sure you understand what 'Buff' means. Because that's not what most pistols got - Pistols, as a concept, were heavily nerfed.
Yes, they can now be fired into Melee, but in exchange for that, they no longer count as a Close Combat weapon. (Of course, since the '+1 attack for 2 Close Combat Weapons' thing is gone, what I should really say is 'They no longer have the option to give models an extra attack.')
Chainswords got a buff which allows them to do what two close combat weapons used to do, in a limited way. (Or to provide multiple bonus attacks, if you have permission to take multiple Chainswords.)
High-strength pistols, like Plasma or Inferno pistols, got a buff since they hit harder than the average Close Combat weapon.
Pistols in general, though, took a nerf - They no longer act as Assault Weapons, since every weapon can be fired before charging and they don't get the new 'Assault' rule (That is, they can't be fired after Advancing.) Additionally, firing them in Close Combat is a rare thing to have happen on dedicated melee units - If I have a unit of, say, Assault Marines, I have to charge, fight, my opponent has to choose not to fall back, I have to survive their pistols, and then fight again. THEN, if they are still alive, and I'm still alive, and I don't want to fall back, I can fire my pistols. It's such a delayed reaction that it almost never really comes up, unless you were the person charged and you've got a unit who is bad in close combat but has good pistols. That's an *incredibly* rare set of circumstances. I've seen 'Firing pistols in a Melee' actually influence the outcome of the game... Once, maybe? Not more than once. Even then, 'Influence' might be a strong word.

2. I'd say it's one of their defining features. Chaos Marines can have either the Bolter or Chainsword (And last edition both, but they overpayed by a point, and I can argue that they should be had it built into their profile). Tactical Marines have the pistol as a sidearm but nothing else. Sisters and Skitarii just don't have pistols outside the sergeant models and such. Grey Hunters are armed to the teeth and over the top, and one of the biggest mistakes of 7th was making it optional for 2 frickin points. You know, when it was already too expensive on the CSM. FW had it right with making Carcharodons paying only 1 point last edition, but remember how bad the rest of the Tactics were...anyway that's mildly off topic. So to me, in my perfect game, it would be laid out as:
A. Tactical Marines get a Special and Heavy at 5 dudes, and an extra of either at 10
B. Chaos Marines have the option to buy the Chainsword, and get the Special and Heavy Weapon of their choice for every 5 dudes (Which is much better encouragement for large squads)
C. Grey Hunters get the Chainsword standard and continue doing their thing, so you can try and create Grey Hunters with Chaos Marines but you pay for it

As pointed out, this is incredibly arbitrary. Having access to a close combat weapon is one of the more vague, nebulous features of Grey Hunters - It was only ever required for a single codex that came out in 5th edition, (It is now optional, but 'free', (I'm aware that Grey Hunters cost 14ppm as opposed to 13ppm, but that is not technically the cost of the chainsword itself,)) and it's one of the least unique things about them.
Also: Sisters of Battle DO have pistols. They always have, for as long as they've been around. (Or at least since 5th edition, that's as far back as my personal collection of codices goes. I'm sure someone could check the Witch Hunters book to confirm this, though.)

3. Honestly, there's a couple of fixes for Assault Marines really that I can think up. These would be:
A. Cut off a point
B. The special pistols don't interfere with buying Eviscerstors (So you can theoretically get 2 of each at the minimum squad) and an extra of either at 10.
C. Cut the crap about hand flamers and inferno pistols being Blood Angels exclusive. Give Assault Marines (And vanguard) access to them. That's more an issue with Blood Angels (And Dark Angels) needing to be rolled into the Vanilla codex though.

None of these would actually make Assault Marines good though, (Eviscerators are a horrible, horrible weapon on 1A models, no matter how many you can take, same with Hand Flamers except that they're horrible on everyone, and Inferno Pistols aren't explicitly bad, but they're far too expensive - They should cost like 12pts, not 20,) and the 'A' option is just going to cause more power creep, which should be avoided at all costs. I want Assault Marines that are worth 13ppm, not cheaper Assault Marines.

1. They no longer count as a melee weapon doesn't really matter, because everywhere you really used it they gave the companion weapon that bonus attack (so basically any Chainsword equivalent). So shooting in melee with it is as comparable to getting that extra attack, if not better in most situations (a potential shot at killing people during the shooting phase is pretty good, even with crummy Bolt Pistols), and the only real "nerf" that happened was with Power Weapon Vanguard that were holding Bolt Pistols. I dont see this really being an issue. After all, when you equipping old school characters, you sprang for the Plasma Pistol with your Power Weapon/Fist.

2. I didn't think Battle Sisters had Bolt Pistols my bad. They're always ran as 5 gal squads so I've never seen them survive in melee to use them, nor have I seen them actually being fired because they basically never charged in any previous edition.
That said, I know it's arbitrary almost, but we are keeping options unique. If you want your Tactical Marines to be better at melee, maybe CSM or SW is the proper choice. If you're preferring shooty, do the Tactical Marine or CSM without the CCW. If you give the Tactical Marine an extra weapon though, why would we ever care about Assault Marines? It's about differing roles. Assault Marines in a Rhino or Tactical Marines in a Rhino? You give the latter an extra weapon on top of their range choices in this edition and that choice is made FOR you. Space Wolves don't have an Assault Marine equivalent. They have a Jump unit or two, but not an Assault Marine, if that makes sense. I can elaborate further if needed. I'm trying to make them feel like separate armies.

3. Are Assault Marines without Jump Packs worth 13 a model though? Consider the CCW Scout. For 2 less points, you lose a point in your Save but get better deployment options, filling your obligatory troop choice, getting a Combi-Weapon on the Sergeant and a Heavy Weapon choice (though to be fair you're probably never gonna do that on a CCW Scout squad so I'm not sure why I brought it up). Nobody would say Scouts are broken, and are easily our best Troop choice.
I agree the Eviscerator is too expensive though by maybe 5-10 points for sure, but I disagree on Hand Flamers being bad on everyone, and I do agree Infenro Pistols are a little too expensive. That's more pricing on weapons being an issue, but opening them up at least gives them a unique role.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

And Tactical Marines don't have an ability to Alpha Strike.

Depends on what you're doing with them, how you deploy them, and in what numbers.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Please stop posting on this thread. We clearly understand there's an issue with Tactical Marines (And SEVERAL people do) and you're one of the ONLY people defending them to the death.

Oh yeah, telling me to leave will certainly work.

The people who want tactical squad improvement range from 'minor buff' to 'fantasy land', and I'm sure you'll agree that not all of that is legitimate.

Deciding on buffs for Tacticals is tricky because so many of the other marine units are simple deviations from them. Make them shootier and you step on the toes of Devs, Sternguard and Command Squads. Make them Assaultier and they step on the toes of Assault Squads, Vanguard plus units of other books like Grey Hunters and CSMs. So do you want to buff just Tacticals, or buff PA space Marines in general?

And if you look back through my postings, you'll find that I'm not completely against an improvement. I'm just going to be picky about it. For example, I wouldn't change their gear at all. But they do come with lots of it when compared to many other troops, Primary weapon, secondary weapon, and two grenade types. This gives a lot of opportunity to improve the unit without changing their legacy loadout.

Allowing ALL Space Marines to use more grenades, thrown or CC, is an improvement. Just giving them all an extra shot with their bolter (harking back to their 2nd edition days) would be pretty sweet too. Those are the sorts of things I would advocate, if anything.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

1. They no longer count as a melee weapon doesn't really matter, because everywhere you really used it they gave the companion weapon that bonus attack (so basically any Chainsword equivalent). So shooting in melee with it is as comparable to getting that extra attack, if not better in most situations (a potential shot at killing people during the shooting phase is pretty good, even with crummy Bolt Pistols), and the only real "nerf" that happened was with Power Weapon Vanguard that were holding Bolt Pistols. I dont see this really being an issue. After all, when you equipping old school characters, you sprang for the Plasma Pistol with your Power Weapon/Fist.

A - Nobody in any sort of competitive, or even slightly optimized but still fluffy, scene took Plasma Pistols.
B - No, firing that pistol is not better in most situations. This is for two reasons:
One, especially on characters, getting an extra attack with the Close Combat Weapon is generally better than getting an extra attack with a pistol. (Assault units generally have buffs in assault, but not in shooting. Buffed Strength, re-rolls to hit in CC, etc, will only apply to the CCW. This isn't even including the many, many models that get a better-than-bolt-pistol CCW, like a Power Maul or Sword.)
Two, you only get to fire that pistol half as often as you get to fight in close combat, and if you're an assault unit who charged, you have to make it through two rounds of the Fight Phase before you get to fire your pistols ONCE. You literally halve the benefit. That is, obviously, a nerf.

2. I didn't think Battle Sisters had Bolt Pistols my bad. They're always ran as 5 gal squads so I've never seen them survive in melee to use them, nor have I seen them actually being fired because they basically never charged in any previous edition.
That said, I know it's arbitrary almost, but we are keeping options unique. If you want your Tactical Marines to be better at melee, maybe CSM or SW is the proper choice. If you're preferring shooty, do the Tactical Marine or CSM without the CCW. If you give the Tactical Marine an extra weapon though, why would we ever care about Assault Marines? It's about differing roles. Assault Marines in a Rhino or Tactical Marines in a Rhino? You give the latter an extra weapon on top of their range choices in this edition and that choice is made FOR you. Space Wolves don't have an Assault Marine equivalent. They have a Jump unit or two, but not an Assault Marine, if that makes sense. I can elaborate further if needed. I'm trying to make them feel like separate armies.

Hahahahahahaha.
Space Wolves do have an Assault option. They're called 'Blood Claws'.
You know what they get to distinguish them from Grey Hunters and make them better in close combat? +1 Attack on the turn that they charge. Because that's what makes sense if you want an Assault unit to work as a middle-ground between standard Marines who have a CCW and Veterans. (Blood Claws are actually reasonably good this edition, too, at least internally - Space Wolves are sucky because they cost as much as Marines but don't get any Chapter Tactics buffs, but as far as an internal choice for an assault unit, Blood Claws are not bad at all.)
(Also: CSM can't take a CCW/Boltgun/Bolt Pistol combo anymore. That was removed in 8th edition. They can either take a 'Tactical Marine' loadout with Boltgun/Bolt Pistol, or they can take an 'Assault' loadout, with a Chainsword/Pistol. Their version of Tactical Marines aren't better at melee.)

You are repeatedly citing armies that you do not understand or know the options of in order to defend your points, and it's making me think that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

3. Are Assault Marines without Jump Packs worth 13 a model though? Consider the CCW Scout. For 2 less points, you lose a point in your Save but get better deployment options, filling your obligatory troop choice, getting a Combi-Weapon on the Sergeant and a Heavy Weapon choice (though to be fair you're probably never gonna do that on a CCW Scout squad so I'm not sure why I brought it up). Nobody would say Scouts are broken, and are easily our best Troop choice.
I agree the Eviscerator is too expensive though by maybe 5-10 points for sure, but I disagree on Hand Flamers being bad on everyone, and I do agree Infenro Pistols are a little too expensive. That's more pricing on weapons being an issue, but opening them up at least gives them a unique role.

No, Assault Marines without Jump Packs are not worth 13 a model.
That is why we are talking in a thread determining the best way to buff Assault Marines.

Hand Flamers have an abysmally short range, and incredibly low damage. If you do manage to actually get into range with your Hand Flamer, you're going to get .66 wounds against a Guardsmen equivalent, compared to the .3 that you'll get with a Bolt Pistol - You're spending a bunch of points to halve your range and barely increase your damage.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:2. I didn't think Battle Sisters had Bolt Pistols my bad.

I may have misinterpreted the question. I meant that thing like flame pistols and inferno pistols existed for them (as evidenced by seraphim), not that they necessarily got bolt pistols as sidearms.

 Torga_DW wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:2. I didn't think Battle Sisters had Bolt Pistols my bad.

I may have misinterpreted the question. I meant that thing like flame pistols and inferno pistols existed for them (as evidenced by seraphim), not that they necessarily got bolt pistols as sidearms.

They do have Bolt Pistols as sidearms, though.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Tau, outside of commanders, drones, crisis suits, y'vhara, and a couple other things, need a buff. And with those buffs, commanders should be toned down a tiny bit.

Not gonna argue with that, because I know it to be true.

THAT BEING SAID! Would you suggest giving these upgrades to Marines without any increased cost? Also, what would you do for the rest of their weapons?

No increased cost. Power armored marines are straight up TERRIBLE right now.

I'm more interested in the base kit right now.

As far as guns go, i'd probably change as follows:

Heavy Bolter - 6 shots, strength 6, Ap-2; 1 damage.

Grav cannon & Grav amp - 6 shots, strength *, AP-3, wounds vehicles & MCs on a 4+, wounds everything else on a 6+. 2 damage.

the special weapons are in a sorry state. I'm not sure how exactly to make them not suck awful.

And with a 6 shot S 6 AP -2, what do you propose for the Assault Cannon?

*snicker snicker*

Lol right?
Just make the heavy bolter rapid fire 3 like grand papa Smurf


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Am I the only one that thinks wizards of the coast should be the ones writing the rules for this game?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Please stop posting on this thread.

Of course, right away, guy. I don't like reading people having to talk back to and around the stuff you say.

Waaaghpower wrote:

I'm not sure you understand what 'Buff' means.

After all, when you equipping old school characters, you sprang for the Plasma Pistol with your Power Weapon/Fist.

A - Nobody in any sort of competitive, or even slightly optimized but still fluffy, scene took Plasma Pistols.
B - No, firing that pistol is not better in most situations. This is for two reasons

You are repeatedly citing armies that you do not understand or know the options of in order to defend your points, and it's making me think that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

Insectum7 wrote:Allowing ALL Space Marines to use more grenades, thrown or CC, is an improvement. Just giving them all an extra shot with their bolter (harking back to their 2nd edition days) would be pretty sweet too. Those are the sorts of things I would advocate, if anything.

This is really nice because you could try to make a marine army that is centered around marines in power armor with bolters, instead of thunder wolves, centurion suits, or ICs.

While it does have a bit of pop against hordes, it might not be enough to get the point across. What do you think about getting a whole second round of shooting at bs4+?

I feel like one of the big issues in their costing is that GW VASTLY overestimated the value of ATSKNF. I've seen it save like A marine since the edition started.

I can agree that fixes would be tricky indeed. The game needs to make generalists better across the board. Specialists are crushing them even harder.

Waaaghpower wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

1. They no longer count as a melee weapon doesn't really matter, because everywhere you really used it they gave the companion weapon that bonus attack (so basically any Chainsword equivalent). So shooting in melee with it is as comparable to getting that extra attack, if not better in most situations (a potential shot at killing people during the shooting phase is pretty good, even with crummy Bolt Pistols), and the only real "nerf" that happened was with Power Weapon Vanguard that were holding Bolt Pistols. I dont see this really being an issue. After all, when you equipping old school characters, you sprang for the Plasma Pistol with your Power Weapon/Fist.

A - Nobody in any sort of competitive, or even slightly optimized but still fluffy, scene took Plasma Pistols.
B - No, firing that pistol is not better in most situations. This is for two reasons:
One, especially on characters, getting an extra attack with the Close Combat Weapon is generally better than getting an extra attack with a pistol. (Assault units generally have buffs in assault, but not in shooting. Buffed Strength, re-rolls to hit in CC, etc, will only apply to the CCW. This isn't even including the many, many models that get a better-than-bolt-pistol CCW, like a Power Maul or Sword.)
Two, you only get to fire that pistol half as often as you get to fight in close combat, and if you're an assault unit who charged, you have to make it through two rounds of the Fight Phase before you get to fire your pistols ONCE. You literally halve the benefit. That is, obviously, a nerf.

2. I didn't think Battle Sisters had Bolt Pistols my bad. They're always ran as 5 gal squads so I've never seen them survive in melee to use them, nor have I seen them actually being fired because they basically never charged in any previous edition.
That said, I know it's arbitrary almost, but we are keeping options unique. If you want your Tactical Marines to be better at melee, maybe CSM or SW is the proper choice. If you're preferring shooty, do the Tactical Marine or CSM without the CCW. If you give the Tactical Marine an extra weapon though, why would we ever care about Assault Marines? It's about differing roles. Assault Marines in a Rhino or Tactical Marines in a Rhino? You give the latter an extra weapon on top of their range choices in this edition and that choice is made FOR you. Space Wolves don't have an Assault Marine equivalent. They have a Jump unit or two, but not an Assault Marine, if that makes sense. I can elaborate further if needed. I'm trying to make them feel like separate armies.

Hahahahahahaha.
Space Wolves do have an Assault option. They're called 'Blood Claws'.
You know what they get to distinguish them from Grey Hunters and make them better in close combat? +1 Attack on the turn that they charge. Because that's what makes sense if you want an Assault unit to work as a middle-ground between standard Marines who have a CCW and Veterans. (Blood Claws are actually reasonably good this edition, too, at least internally - Space Wolves are sucky because they cost as much as Marines but don't get any Chapter Tactics buffs, but as far as an internal choice for an assault unit, Blood Claws are not bad at all.)
(Also: CSM can't take a CCW/Boltgun/Bolt Pistol combo anymore. That was removed in 8th edition. They can either take a 'Tactical Marine' loadout with Boltgun/Bolt Pistol, or they can take an 'Assault' loadout, with a Chainsword/Pistol. Their version of Tactical Marines aren't better at melee.)

You are repeatedly citing armies that you do not understand or know the options of in order to defend your points, and it's making me think that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

3. Are Assault Marines without Jump Packs worth 13 a model though? Consider the CCW Scout. For 2 less points, you lose a point in your Save but get better deployment options, filling your obligatory troop choice, getting a Combi-Weapon on the Sergeant and a Heavy Weapon choice (though to be fair you're probably never gonna do that on a CCW Scout squad so I'm not sure why I brought it up). Nobody would say Scouts are broken, and are easily our best Troop choice.
I agree the Eviscerator is too expensive though by maybe 5-10 points for sure, but I disagree on Hand Flamers being bad on everyone, and I do agree Infenro Pistols are a little too expensive. That's more pricing on weapons being an issue, but opening them up at least gives them a unique role.

No, Assault Marines without Jump Packs are not worth 13 a model.
That is why we are talking in a thread determining the best way to buff Assault Marines.

Hand Flamers have an abysmally short range, and incredibly low damage. If you do manage to actually get into range with your Hand Flamer, you're going to get .66 wounds against a Guardsmen equivalent, compared to the .3 that you'll get with a Bolt Pistol - You're spending a bunch of points to halve your range and barely increase your damage.

1. Nobody was taking Bolt Pistols either. With your Captain you had either the Power Weapon for quick clearing or the Power Fist for larger targets. The Pistol + Weapon didn't happen. If you were a modeler though, you were taking the Plasma Pistol simply because it looked better. The whole Specialist Weapon threw everything out the window with that when introduced though.
You're also ALWAYS assuming buffs for the Assault unit. Your Chaplain isn't going to be near the squad the whole time and it is silly to think that. So if you have dozens of Characters near the unit, sure the Bolt Pistol isn't as good. You're assuming a lot though. I'm saying for the regular unit, the Pistol buff is better in a vacuum thanks to shooting in melee. If you want to assume buffs, you're going to need to add that cost to the unit for fair MathHammer. You can't just magically add points to the unit to try and prove yourself right.
You're also make two assumptions with Point 2 that are opposite in nature:
A. If you're wanting to wipe a unit, you're charging with the unit with the best mathematical chance anyway. You would've shot it a good amount and then charged.
B. You want to be stuck in combat so that they're either forced to fall back so other units can shoot at them, or they get mopped up because the initial charge already does enough.
You can't have it both ways at once with your assumption. It's going to be either Scenario A or B.
Plus in all honesty a Pistol counting as a melee weapon was stupid and never made sense crunch-wise. The new system is better.

2. I said they had a Jump Unit, not an Assault Marine equivalent. If you look at fluff and crunch, you'd probably had gotten the point immediately instead of going straight for Skyclaws = Assault Marines. The Claw units are reckless and not well trained and aggressive, hence the special rules and stats they have. Assault Marines are more disciplined hence why they're at a 3+ to hit and don't get the bonus attack when charging. Plus, for the record, until the 7th edition codex came out, Grey Hunters were still better than Claw units at melee for the price. Giving a Tactical Marine a CCW still makes them better than an Assault Marine getting an extra attack on the charge, because Special and Heavy Weapons + Bolters for hitting a unit before charging and Overwatch (as little as a difference it makes) is simply flatout better. You're not understanding the balance here. At that point, you could give an Assault Marine TWO attacks on the charge, and the Assault Marine would still only be MAYBE equal to a Tactical Marine with a Bolter, Bolt Pistol, and CCW. Remember: no restrictions on firing and charging now with any weapon.
Also I've already made mention that Chaos Marines lost that option and I'm saying they need it back like a post or two back, and for this post I was making the hypothetical scenario that my proposed idea went through, and you know that's what it was. SO that's dishonest of you for purposely forgetting the dialogue we had going.
And for the record I've been playing since 4th edition. I know a little bit of what I'm talking about.

3. There's nothing you CAN do to the Assault Marine because open up more weapons options and cut the price a little. The only thing that would be a saving grace would be a way to turn them into troops on top of those fixes (but that's a lost cause now because whiners about Biker troops got their way). Otherwise, you have NO reason to take them over Vanguard.
Also you can easily decrease the Hand Flamers price. They're worth maybe 3-4 points and regular Flamers 5. They also need to go back to ignoring cover out of principle but that's a different topic.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pelicaniforce wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Please stop posting on this thread.

Of course, right away, guy. I don't like reading people having to talk back to and around the stuff you say.

They're one of the lone people that thinks Tactical Marines are worth anything, and I told them to go away because they weren't being helpful on top of their VERY first post in this thread.

Martel732 wrote:
I can agree that fixes would be tricky indeed. The game needs to make generalists better across the board. Specialists are crushing them even harder.

It's not just the specialist vs generalist that's the problem though, it's also the points. Everyone (barring certain exceptions) seems to agree that tactical and assault marines need to be improved, but then you get camps of people who want them to be better but don't want to actually improve them. My favourite justification so far is that you can't improve a unit because it makes the other units in the army look bad in comparison. There's a reason they look bad - they are. That's not a valid reason to avoid fixing a unit, though. Fix one and then daisy chain through the rest till they're all worth their points.


I said it beforet, and i'll say it again:
For their points, tactical marines get a chainsword sidearm as standard, all marines get special issue ammo for all bolt weapons in the list (add +/- 1 to a weapon stat or +6" range when shooting), look at melee options as well as ranged for the 'specials', and look at price drops for their 'specials' (say 5 point reduction for special weapons, 10 for heavies (also look at balancing comparative weapon costs)).
Ignoring the rest of the marine army and just looking at tacticals - with this improvement, would you consider them worth taking as troops? Would you consider taking more than a minimum number of them? And then, would you consider taking them compared to the other troop choice, scouts?

edit: clarification

I played a couple games against DE recent and I could barely kill anything cause I was in the mind set that my Tacticals could topple the kabalites. Nope it was a pretty boring exchange

So I am for these changes.

 niv-mizzet wrote:
I feel like one of the big issues in their costing is that GW VASTLY overestimated the value of ATSKNF. I've seen it save like A marine since the edition started.

Space Marine versus guardsman:

+1 S, +1 T, +1 WS, +1 BS, +2 sv, +1 ld, ATSKNF, bolter (+1 s over lasgun), bolt pistol, krak grenade

For that a marine cost an extra 9 points. I don't think marines can really get much cheaper than what they are, they have too many upgrades over the lower units below them. What if all marines just got chainswords standard? That screws over assault marines, but would make tacticals more likely to use their +1 S and +1 WS in normal games. Assault Marines would just need some other buffs, maybe permit inclusion of two power weapons per 5 marines.

I also think upgrading boltguns across the board with an additional -1 AP to whatever they have would be a good idea that wouldn't break the game. But that's just my opinion.

And Necron Warriors, with -1 AP Bolters get... What?

And don't say Reanimation Protocols. As-is, those SUCK right now.

 JNAProductions wrote:
And Necron Warriors, with -1 AP Bolters get... What?

And don't say Reanimation Protocols. As-is, those SUCK right now.

I already brought this up and was ignored.

 JNAProductions wrote:
And Necron Warriors, with -1 AP Bolters get... What?

And don't say Reanimation Protocols. As-is, those SUCK right now.

Yep. As i understand it, necrons need fixing as well. Badly. Still not a reason not to fix marines, though.

edit: necrons unlike marines, have as an elite army traditionally focusing on pure shooting (with some exceptions) and durability. The problem as i understand it is that necrons pay a lot for durability with low firepower. Without wanting to get too off topic here (this is about marines, specifically tactical and assault), but spitballing an idea what if necron gauss weaponry (on top of as it is now) on a 6 to wound caused a mortal wound? That buffs firepower *and* fits the fluff of their weapons. Again, fixing units shouldn't come down to: other units are worse, so we won't attempt to balance them all. Other units are better too (and guard here are the shining example). Drag them all up or down to approximately the same level. Right now, PA units are bad (and necrons are essentially PA units).

pelicaniforce wrote:

Insectum7 wrote:Allowing ALL Space Marines to use more grenades, thrown or CC, is an improvement. Just giving them all an extra shot with their bolter (harking back to their 2nd edition days) would be pretty sweet too. Those are the sorts of things I would advocate, if anything.

This is really nice because you could try to make a marine army that is centered around marines in power armor with bolters, instead of thunder wolves, centurion suits, or ICs.

While it does have a bit of pop against hordes, it might not be enough to get the point across. What do you think about getting a whole second round of shooting at bs4+?

Maybe, but then you're rolling two sets of dice and taking more time, while an extra shot you just roll everything together. A second round of shooting at a -1 would be slightly worse than an extra shot at 12+", but better than the extra shot at under 12". Its close enough that I'd just go for the one thats quicker to resolve.

A problem with either solution is that it leaves no reason to ever throw a frag grenade, as 3 or 4 bolter shots is better than (I think) anything but a 6 on the frag. Right now a frag is statistically better against GEQ than a bolter, so its worth something. If you could fire an extra shot with the bolter AND toss a frag or two though, your numbers start to go up much faster.

I think a more appropriate thing to do against hordes specifically is to improve the flamer, honestly. Of all weapons in the edition change, flame weapons got hit the hardest. It feels very unsatisfying to use atm. I want to want to take them, but i dont. I dont think it would take much. Adding +1 or 2 to the roll for number of hits would help.

Flame weapons should +1 to hit for every 10 targets in the unit.

Martel732 wrote:
Flame weapons should +1 to hit for every 10 targets in the unit.

Not +1 to hit but +1d6 hits for every 10 models after the first 10 could be very handy. (So, 3d6 agaisnt a 30 man conscript squad)

I think 1 is sufficient. Against 30 models you are getting D6+3 hits, which is nearly double.

A second round of shooting at a -1 would be slightly worse than an extra shot at 12+", but better than the extra shot at under 12". Its close enough that I'd just go for the one thats quicker to resolve.

Right now a frag is statistically better against GEQ than a bolter, so its worth something. If you could fire an extra shot with the bolter AND toss a frag or two though, your numbers start to go up much faster.

Anything to make it faster and simpler is good yes.

Do you think it is more important to buff the unupgraded bolter marine or the squad? For example in 5th edition I thought that +1 bolter shot was a good way to make a marine better, but it was a vehicle dominated edition and it wasn't impressive. I meant a whole new round of shooting, so bolters yes, but also plasma gun and then plasma gun -1, as well as grenade + bolter -1.

+1 for only bolters, whatever the details, benefits intercessors etc. more than tacticals, on the assumption this is a power armor rule and not a tactical squad rule.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
My solution to this has always been to upgrade the basic bolter to something that doesn't suck so that your ablative wounds don't feel like a complete waste. That is how you fix tacticals - give the bolter the intercessors bolt rifle profile with -1 ap - upgrade the intercessors to ap-2 - upgrade the stalker bolter rifle to ap-3. That is how you fix the troop selections - obviously by upping their damage (it's clear they don't do enough damage). no increased cost.

For Devs - Move and shoot with no penalty. No increased cost.
For Assault marines - Chainswords +1 attack and -2 ap. Make jetpacks give you +1 attack on the charge. no additional cost.

It's stuff like this that will help out marine infantry.

I'm not a fan of this because you're trying to make Necrons worse at what they do. Give Bolters a special rule instead.

Ehh - they should have gone for any 6 to hit procs 2 more auto hits for Gauss weapons. It would have been more fun. I always liked the idea of bolters having shred - but that is too strong I guess.

Well bolters shoot little missiles. I think they should be at least-1 ap.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
My solution to this has always been to upgrade the basic bolter to something that doesn't suck so that your ablative wounds don't feel like a complete waste. That is how you fix tacticals - give the bolter the intercessors bolt rifle profile with -1 ap - upgrade the intercessors to ap-2 - upgrade the stalker bolter rifle to ap-3. That is how you fix the troop selections - obviously by upping their damage (it's clear they don't do enough damage). no increased cost.

For Devs - Move and shoot with no penalty. No increased cost.
For Assault marines - Chainswords +1 attack and -2 ap. Make jetpacks give you +1 attack on the charge. no additional cost.

It's stuff like this that will help out marine infantry.

I'm not a fan of this because you're trying to make Necrons worse at what they do. Give Bolters a special rule instead.

Ehh - they should have gone for any 6 to hit procs 2 more auto hits for Gauss weapons. It would have been more fun. I always liked the idea of bolters having shred - but that is too strong I guess.

Yeah that would not be a bad idea had Tesla not existed. In the meantime I think my idea of a wound of 6+ causes the model to need to reroll successful saves would at least be unique.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah that would not be a bad idea had Tesla not existed. In the meantime I think my idea of a wound of 6+ causes the model to need to reroll successful saves would at least be unique.

I'm not denying that, it certainly would be unique. I'm just saying that it wouldn't fix the problem with marine infantry. A 10-man tactical squad would statistically cause 1 rerolled save at 24" range and 3 at 12" range. I'd still be looking at scouts at that point (who would presumably get the rule as well, having bolt weapons).

Could change give them a special rule that boltguns used by tac marines get ap -2 for any target with 5+ armor (or worse). I know its not particularly fluffy but it makes them more effective versus GEQs then intercessors.

They are already more effective than intercessors vs geq.