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.
They're all talk and no walk. Chainswords are weak, as are the little bolt pistols. The Evicerator only gets one attack now also (still for 22 points). Considering they can only take one hit before dying, it just seems to me they're literal suicide squads; jump into the enemy, inflict a wound or two, and in turn you die. Can't use flamers after insertion... So what have these guys got going for them?
They've been a bully unit, not a CC unit, for as long as I've played. As in, you don't charge Tacs or better with ASM. You charge backfield Heavy Weapons Teams or vehicles or Rangers or Broadsides with them.
That said, VV do everything they do better for only a couple more points.
Assault Marines are there to secure objectives quickly, harrass squishy units and finish off crippled units.
VV do their job better, but have to compete with an overcrowded Elites slot while the Assault Marine only has to compete with a less crowded FA slot, the biggest competition being the Bike Marines.
ShaunyP wrote: They're all talk and no walk. Chainswords are weak, as are the little bolt pistols. The Evicerator only gets one attack now also (still for 22 points). Considering they can only take one hit before dying, it just seems to me they're literal suicide squads; jump into the enemy, inflict a wound or two, and in turn you die. Can't use flamers after insertion... So what have these guys got going for them?
Do space marines get any good hack slashy squads?
Space Marines are still primaily a mid-range shooting force so you'll never see anything 'great' at melee without a high point cost. Assault marines and reivers are a good screening force that can be dropped to snarl up an enemy's advance, but still struggle to make their points back. The best thing about them is the fact they can't be ignored. Reveiers especially will continue to screw up your opponent's plans unless dealt with after their initial drop (once they can safely walk into shock grenade range).
Both are viable *if* you are going mono-faction. If you are splashing around the greater Imperial faction pool you might as well take some catachan+bullgryn instead.
Bender wrote:* Realise that despite the way people talk, this is not a professional sport played by demi gods, but rather a game of toy soldiers played by tired, inebriated human beings.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
If you are using Slamguinius as a screen or tactical foil you are using him wrong. Besides you only get one of him and he has 100+ pts to make back so you aren't going to drop him against most troop choices.
Bender wrote:* Realise that despite the way people talk, this is not a professional sport played by demi gods, but rather a game of toy soldiers played by tired, inebriated human beings.
Bharring wrote: They've been a bully unit, not a CC unit, for as long as I've played. As in, you don't charge Tacs or better with ASM. You charge backfield Heavy Weapons Teams or vehicles or Rangers or Broadsides with them.
That said, VV do everything they do better for only a couple more points.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
2018/08/01 15:42:21
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
Sadly they have been kinda a meh unit since 5th. This edition with the changes to deep strike and an old school marine stat line being at a low point they are not very good.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/01 16:06:41
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
Once again you're using the "don't min-max" argument, which really isn't an argument.
They're not complimenting anything that Scout Bikers, Inceptors, and Vanguard aren't doing better. That doesn't exactly speak "multi-tool". Those units aren't even min-max either! That's just how bad Assault Marines are.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
Once again you're using the "don't min-max" argument, which really isn't an argument.
They're not complimenting anything that Scout Bikers, Inceptors, and Vanguard aren't doing better. That doesn't exactly speak "multi-tool". Those units aren't even min-max either! That's just how bad Assault Marines are.
I never say "don't" do anything. I said they're fine in lists that aren't min maxed, not that players should play one way or another, but rather that players who play a specific kind of 40k (namely casual pick up games with TAC style lists) the Assault Marine has a home as a support unit/distraction carnifex/objective grabber (for games you need to pop about to grab objectives at random due to card draws).
They compliment an army by always being able to provide -something- to the army be it a mop up melee, support shooting, harassing the opponent's back lines or just flushing out some guys camping on an objective. They're not the best thing ever (basically being Vanilla Marines with 12" movement and Fly), but they can do some work.
Scout bikes and Inceptors are shooting units with meh melee and Vanguard are Assault Marines +1 with a points cost to match, so you're comparing two shooting units (who don't do mop up melee worth a darn, meaning they don't fully replace everything the Assault Marines can provide), and using the buffed version of something to prove that the base version is bad is like proving vanilla ice cream is trash because you can have it with butterscotch. Yeah, sure it's better with butterscotch, but it's not the worst thing in the world on the world.
I basically feel like you can't comprehend the casual meta enough to understand that less competitive units can see some effective play in more casual games.
That said, if you're getting into Marines for the first time ever, just buy Primaris since they're likely going to replace the current Marines anyways.
Marine melee is, in general, very poor. If assault squads came stock with power fists that might be more suited to their role in the game, which is to tie up vehicles, as they won't win a flat out fight with any other unit.
This idea that marines are a 'jack of all trades' is kind of silly considering they are flat garbage at melee.
Although i do maintain that all marine problems could be fixed with better stratagems, better tactics (complete redesign), and better HQ to infantry synergy. Imagine if a captain within 12" gave +1 attacks to assault squads. Then, imagine if White Scars Chapter Tactics, in addition to a base army-wide buff, gave bike squads and assault squads +1 attack and +1 attack on the charge. Suddenly White Scars assault squads are super unique and pump out 5 attacks per marine on the charge.
None of that is game breaking, and would add a layer of depth to marines that isn't there. But GW would have to embrace this idea of units receiving different buffs based on their role.
Each squad would have to have a passive ability that says if they're within x" of a captain, they get this bonus, rather than the captain having the special rule. It would also help eliminate rerolls from the game, which (imho) is the way to go.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/01 16:24:11
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
To start. In other words, almost all non-CC infantry.
They won't beat Zerkers or most dedicated CC unit in CC (Storm Guardians and Striking Scorpions, for example, are CC units that still lose to ASM). They *shouldn't* beat most dedicated CC units in CC, because they aren't dedicated CC - they're dedicated skirmishers (who use CC not guns).
Automatically Appended Next Post: (for clarity, I agree that ASM need a buff. Just correcting a particular claim.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/01 16:46:39
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
Once again you're using the "don't min-max" argument, which really isn't an argument.
They're not complimenting anything that Scout Bikers, Inceptors, and Vanguard aren't doing better. That doesn't exactly speak "multi-tool". Those units aren't even min-max either! That's just how bad Assault Marines are.
I never say "don't" do anything. I said they're fine in lists that aren't min maxed, not that players should play one way or another, but rather that players who play a specific kind of 40k (namely casual pick up games with TAC style lists) the Assault Marine has a home as a support unit/distraction carnifex/objective grabber (for games you need to pop about to grab objectives at random due to card draws).
They compliment an army by always being able to provide -something- to the army be it a mop up melee, support shooting, harassing the opponent's back lines or just flushing out some guys camping on an objective. They're not the best thing ever (basically being Vanilla Marines with 12" movement and Fly), but they can do some work.
Scout bikes and Inceptors are shooting units with meh melee and Vanguard are Assault Marines +1 with a points cost to match, so you're comparing two shooting units (who don't do mop up melee worth a darn, meaning they don't fully replace everything the Assault Marines can provide), and using the buffed version of something to prove that the base version is bad is like proving vanilla ice cream is trash because you can have it with butterscotch. Yeah, sure it's better with butterscotch, but it's not the worst thing in the world on the world.
I basically feel like you can't comprehend the casual meta enough to understand that less competitive units can see some effective play in more casual games.
That said, if you're getting into Marines for the first time ever, just buy Primaris since they're likely going to replace the current Marines anyways.
You're...not serious are you?
They're not fine in ANY list. Vanguard, for 2 points more, have an extra attack and +1LD (or two extra attacks if you're going the double Chainsword route). That isn't just a "points cost to match". That's flat out making a unit irrelevant when at the same time that unit isn't even super good in the first place. What you SHOULD be saying is that Vanguard do well in lists that aren't min-maxed and to ignore the Assault Marine profile altogether. It's literally that pointless as is.
Once again, 11 attacks isn't gonna mop up anything. 21 attacks might do that though for only a 10 point increase. Nobody is being flushed out by either the 80 point unit or the 90 point unit, except one is at least gonna hit harder.
Scout Bikers have 2 attacks each, it's only 7 attacks vs 11 attacks for several more shots. 3 Scout Bikers with an extra Storm Bolter is only 77 points to the 80 points in the Assault Marines. For being a "shooting unit", you're sure not losing a lot of attacks are you?
So what I can't comprehend is you justifying the Assault Marine profile just by constantly shouting "don't min-max". If Vanguard are THAT much better for the price but aren't the greatest unit exactly, how are you gonna defend the significantly worse unit?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also the vanilla ice cream argument is bad. Vanguard are already the Vanilla ice cream. Assault Marines are just an empty bowl.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bharring wrote: There are plenty of units that Assault Marines win a flat out fight against:
To start. In other words, almost all non-CC infantry.
They won't beat Zerkers or most dedicated CC unit in CC (Storm Guardians and Striking Scorpions, for example, are CC units that still lose to ASM). They *shouldn't* beat most dedicated CC units in CC, because they aren't dedicated CC - they're dedicated skirmishers (who use CC not guns).
Automatically Appended Next Post: (for clarity, I agree that ASM need a buff. Just correcting a particular claim.)
And for the points that's over how many turns?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/08/01 16:49:33
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2018/08/01 16:49:41
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
Assult marines can take melta bombs. That together with their jump pack makes them unique. Everything else they do is done better than other units because of internal balance of marines codex.
Brutal, but kunning!
2018/08/01 16:50:55
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
Gitdakka wrote: Assult marines can take melta bombs. That together with their jump pack makes them unique. Everything else they do is done better than other units because of internal balance of marines codex.
Melta Bombs are already bad in the first place. How is that an argument for Assault Marines?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
Once again you're using the "don't min-max" argument, which really isn't an argument.
They're not complimenting anything that Scout Bikers, Inceptors, and Vanguard aren't doing better. That doesn't exactly speak "multi-tool". Those units aren't even min-max either! That's just how bad Assault Marines are.
I never say "don't" do anything. I said they're fine in lists that aren't min maxed, not that players should play one way or another, but rather that players who play a specific kind of 40k (namely casual pick up games with TAC style lists) the Assault Marine has a home as a support unit/distraction carnifex/objective grabber (for games you need to pop about to grab objectives at random due to card draws).
They compliment an army by always being able to provide -something- to the army be it a mop up melee, support shooting, harassing the opponent's back lines or just flushing out some guys camping on an objective. They're not the best thing ever (basically being Vanilla Marines with 12" movement and Fly), but they can do some work.
Scout bikes and Inceptors are shooting units with meh melee and Vanguard are Assault Marines +1 with a points cost to match, so you're comparing two shooting units (who don't do mop up melee worth a darn, meaning they don't fully replace everything the Assault Marines can provide), and using the buffed version of something to prove that the base version is bad is like proving vanilla ice cream is trash because you can have it with butterscotch. Yeah, sure it's better with butterscotch, but it's not the worst thing in the world on the world.
I basically feel like you can't comprehend the casual meta enough to understand that less competitive units can see some effective play in more casual games.
That said, if you're getting into Marines for the first time ever, just buy Primaris since they're likely going to replace the current Marines anyways.
You're...not serious are you?
They're not fine in ANY list. Vanguard, for 2 points more, have an extra attack and +1LD (or two extra attacks if you're going the double Chainsword route). That isn't just a "points cost to match". That's flat out making a unit irrelevant when at the same time that unit isn't even super good in the first place. What you SHOULD be saying is that Vanguard do well in lists that aren't min-maxed and to ignore the Assault Marine profile altogether. It's literally that pointless as is.
Once again, 11 attacks isn't gonna mop up anything. 21 attacks might do that though for only a 10 point increase. Nobody is being flushed out by either the 80 point unit or the 90 point unit, except one is at least gonna hit harder.
Scout Bikers have 2 attacks each, it's only 7 attacks vs 11 attacks for several more shots. 3 Scout Bikers with an extra Storm Bolter is only 77 points to the 80 points in the Assault Marines. For being a "shooting unit", you're sure not losing a lot of attacks are you?
So what I can't comprehend is you justifying the Assault Marine profile just by constantly shouting "don't min-max". If Vanguard are THAT much better for the price but aren't the greatest unit exactly, how are you gonna defend the significantly worse unit?
Maybe if you stop building a strawman out of my posts by changing "for those who don't min max" by turning it into "don't min max ever" we'd actually come to an understanding in where the unit has some utility instead of forcefully changing an arguement in order to defeat it.
I've only said Assault Marines have a home in casual TAC lists where they can do some work. I never said they were the optimal choice, I never said not to min-max and I never said you can't pick other things, I just said they can work in a certain kind of meta for those who want to play them.
Seriously, stop trying to twist my posts in order to be right just because you can't accept that a unit that isn't good in a competitive setting can see the table and be okay in less min-maxed metas.
2018/08/01 17:07:03
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
Gitdakka wrote: Assult marines can take melta bombs. That together with their jump pack makes them unique. Everything else they do is done better than other units because of internal balance of marines codex.
Melta Bombs are already bad in the first place. How is that an argument for Assault Marines?
Exactly. I said it makes them unique, not necessarily good.
Jump Packs in general feel a little lost in purpose. This isn't really anything new, but I find it interesting that the Primaris versions seem to have been designed largely around not assaulting.
To start. In other words, almost all non-CC infantry.
They won't beat Zerkers or most dedicated CC unit in CC (Storm Guardians and Striking Scorpions, for example, are CC units that still lose to ASM). They *shouldn't* beat most dedicated CC units in CC, because they aren't dedicated CC - they're dedicated skirmishers (who use CC not guns).
Automatically Appended Next Post: (for clarity, I agree that ASM need a buff. Just correcting a particular claim.)
I would disagree with most of that list if anyone is paying attention with tau your assualt marines will die to overwatch. Most of the eldar stuff has some strategums to make your assualt marines whiff. And they realy lack in punch to compete with rubrics, plague marines etc.
They were supposed to be what you described but currently they lack in attacks and cost to much to even chew through screening units.
2018/08/01 17:28:17
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
They are a bad unit. This is a game were i have finite points and choices that correspond with those points. Practically every FA choice is better than them, so why would I ever take them outside of I like the models.
2018/08/01 17:31:45
Subject: Re:Is there any point in Assault Marines?
Problem with assault marines is that they have lost their flexibility. In past editions I played them with flamers and melta bomb. (never used them for dedicated cc, assault marines in my eyes are and always where a harassment unit) They would either torch some light infantry or try to explode a vehicle. Or tie up a unit. Now I only use them for one thing: to get 3 plasma pistols where I want them. (and I only have them in list because I need 3 FA for 12 command points). But its much more boring to use them like that. Tying up is not as good as it used to be, melta bomb cant one shot a vehicle, flamers are to weak to do anything. I cant even try a suicidal deep strike any more
BaconCatBug wrote: Assault Marines have no use while Vanguard Vets or Slamguinius exist.
Unless you're already overloaded on Elites as is and want to save points, and aren't playing Blood Angels....
You have up to three detachments. That's not a valid argument. At all.
And said detachments come with taxes which can eat into your budget for other toys in a list, and not everyone wants to run soup armies to bring ol' Slammy. Heck, I've been spending a couple days now on building a TS army using just the TS codex and a single detachment that can play pick up games reasonably well. Problem is fitting in all the toys I want to bring into the list.
Fact is not everyone builds LVO style max optimization lists that only work in that meta.
Those "taxes" are stuff you're bringing anyway like Scouts and such. Then only a few elites are actually worth it.
The Elite slot isn't crammed and limited in number like you believe it is. If anything, Assault Marines need to fight against better units like Inceptors and Scout Bikers.
Also are you REALLY going with the "not everyone min-maxes" lazy argument? If a unit is bad, it's bad. That statement doesn't change that.
Again, not everyone is running armies of scouts like they're playing the a 10th company army. Or did you just ignore that not everyone plays those kinds of armies for the sake of being right?
Assault Marines aren't stellar, but they're a decent multi-tool style unit that can handle a number of roles easilly in a TAC list in less minmaxed settings.
I'm not advocating running 30+ of them or anything, but rather saying a single unit on the table (maybe two) can be used. There are units that are better at melee, and units better at shooting, but not many units can do both and be great at both so Assault Marines are a reasonable compromise for filling roles when you just run a premade list for pick up games instead of tooling your army for your opponent's faction all the time.
Basically, they're not great, but they're not horrible. They can be used for a few different roles and that's their niche: they're a flexible addition to an army for those who need it. They don't replace other options but rather compliment them.
Once again you're using the "don't min-max" argument, which really isn't an argument.
They're not complimenting anything that Scout Bikers, Inceptors, and Vanguard aren't doing better. That doesn't exactly speak "multi-tool". Those units aren't even min-max either! That's just how bad Assault Marines are.
I never say "don't" do anything. I said they're fine in lists that aren't min maxed, not that players should play one way or another, but rather that players who play a specific kind of 40k (namely casual pick up games with TAC style lists) the Assault Marine has a home as a support unit/distraction carnifex/objective grabber (for games you need to pop about to grab objectives at random due to card draws).
They compliment an army by always being able to provide -something- to the army be it a mop up melee, support shooting, harassing the opponent's back lines or just flushing out some guys camping on an objective. They're not the best thing ever (basically being Vanilla Marines with 12" movement and Fly), but they can do some work.
Scout bikes and Inceptors are shooting units with meh melee and Vanguard are Assault Marines +1 with a points cost to match, so you're comparing two shooting units (who don't do mop up melee worth a darn, meaning they don't fully replace everything the Assault Marines can provide), and using the buffed version of something to prove that the base version is bad is like proving vanilla ice cream is trash because you can have it with butterscotch. Yeah, sure it's better with butterscotch, but it's not the worst thing in the world on the world.
I basically feel like you can't comprehend the casual meta enough to understand that less competitive units can see some effective play in more casual games.
That said, if you're getting into Marines for the first time ever, just buy Primaris since they're likely going to replace the current Marines anyways.
You're...not serious are you?
They're not fine in ANY list. Vanguard, for 2 points more, have an extra attack and +1LD (or two extra attacks if you're going the double Chainsword route). That isn't just a "points cost to match". That's flat out making a unit irrelevant when at the same time that unit isn't even super good in the first place. What you SHOULD be saying is that Vanguard do well in lists that aren't min-maxed and to ignore the Assault Marine profile altogether. It's literally that pointless as is.
Once again, 11 attacks isn't gonna mop up anything. 21 attacks might do that though for only a 10 point increase. Nobody is being flushed out by either the 80 point unit or the 90 point unit, except one is at least gonna hit harder.
Scout Bikers have 2 attacks each, it's only 7 attacks vs 11 attacks for several more shots. 3 Scout Bikers with an extra Storm Bolter is only 77 points to the 80 points in the Assault Marines. For being a "shooting unit", you're sure not losing a lot of attacks are you?
So what I can't comprehend is you justifying the Assault Marine profile just by constantly shouting "don't min-max". If Vanguard are THAT much better for the price but aren't the greatest unit exactly, how are you gonna defend the significantly worse unit?
Maybe if you stop building a strawman out of my posts by changing "for those who don't min max" by turning it into "don't min max ever" we'd actually come to an understanding in where the unit has some utility instead of forcefully changing an arguement in order to defeat it.
I've only said Assault Marines have a home in casual TAC lists where they can do some work. I never said they were the optimal choice, I never said not to min-max and I never said you can't pick other things, I just said they can work in a certain kind of meta for those who want to play them.
Seriously, stop trying to twist my posts in order to be right just because you can't accept that a unit that isn't good in a competitive setting can see the table and be okay in less min-maxed metas.
They aren't okay in a different setting, because Vanguard are only good in that setting, and they're a strictly worse version of Vanguard.
Seriously people like you would defend Cultists if they were 10 points a pop by saying "It's how you use them" and "They can work in friendly games!!!1!"
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
That list of units ASM beat in CC was by points, not by model.
"I would disagree with most of that list if anyone is paying attention with tau your assualt marines will die to overwatch."
Typically. That's why ASM aren't good. But if they do get into CC with those Tau, they will kick their asses easily (per point).
"Most of the eldar stuff has some strategums to make your assualt marines whiff"
They have a -1-to-hit stratagem for one unit. So you're hitting on 4s, while wounding on 3s. The Eldar are hitting you, in turn, on 3s, but wounding you on 5s (with the exception of Scorpions). And they're saving on 5+ or 4+, or sometimes on 3+. ASM are saving on 3+. So, even if the stratagem were "free", the ASM are still beating those CWE units on points in CC, with only Scorpions getting close to even. So ASM still clearly win in CC against the listed CWE units.
"And they realy lack in punch to compete with rubrics, plague marines etc."
True. You tie them up, but may lose CC to some of the more tanky infantry. I should amend the "win CC against" statement from to "most ranged infantry".
Now, don't misunderstand me. I wholeheartedly agree with "They were supposed to be [your impression of my description] but currently they lack in attacks and cost to much to even chew through screening units."
They certainly need help to fill the role they are intended for. VV are usually a fairly direct upgrade - for only a few points more, you get more attacks and options. But to claim they can't beat anything in CC is just plain wrong.
For some more fun facts, consider 10 ASM charging 5 Shining Spears:
10 ASM vs Shining Spear:
10x2x(2/3)(1/2)(1/3) = 20x(1/9) kills
Shining Spear vs ASM:
5x2x(2/3)(1/3)(1) = 10x(2/9) kills
Considering you strike first, so only 4 are hitting back, and 10 ASM are cheaper than 5 Shining Spears, you're complaining about a unit being unable to beat anything in CC that, if it gets the charge, can actually outperform one of the stronger CC units in the game. Granted, getting the charge will be really hard before Spears drop their first target, and CWE have a bunch of other buffs, but the idea that ASM can't beat anything in CC is rediculous.
