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.

 Smirrors wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Although the Tacs still kill Intercessors faster than Stalker Intercessors do, and I haven't given them a Combi Plasma yet.

What you have is two units, similar point costs, and each unit has strengths and weaknesses. That's exactly how it should be. Tacs are shorter ranged, but deal more damage against a wider array of targets. Stalkers have longer range and better defensive capability. Choose the one that you want to use, plain and simple.

Once again your theory hammer is not going to play out on the table top. You wont have a chance to shoot at the intercessors because thats not how 40k is played...wild west walking towards each other. I dont take intercessors to kill tactical marines because reality is no one players them competitively anymore. My intercessors are busy holding objectives where possible. And if we both have Thunderfire cannons, you will learn why tacticals are useless pretty quick.

Only your last line has any relevance. Play with tacticools because you like them. No point convincing people when your arguments are fundamentally flawed.

Uh...he does play using these units.
Lets make a counter argument. Why would the intercessors be around to shoot at the tac marines? I mean, that's how 40K is played...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

AngryAngel80 wrote:


I don't think anyone is saying intercessors aren't the stronger unit,

I'm saying it. I'm not saying they're weaker either though. They have a job, they do it well. Tacs have a different job. They do it as well as intercessors do theirs.

Rule 1 sure is taking a beating in this thread.

Well aside from one person no one is saying Intercessors aren't the better unit.

Hey I play tacs all the time, not every game is against top tournament players, or tournament players at all. You can theory craft all day but I can say for sure I'd love to see those two play a game and see what happens between the lists.

I have one army where I run both types of marines and they synergize well and nothing wrong with tacs can't be fixed with some point costs if their current stats all stay the same.

I honestly can't understand why people get so fired when people use inferior units or considered to be inferior units.

No idea.

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists having to choose between tacticals and primaris. Just be glad your choice isn't between csm or cultists....

I get where you're coming from, but I'd jump at Cultists as an in-faction troop selection to just camp back-field objectives and shoot for that point cost in Custodes and Slannesh Daemons. I'd probably even use them in Loyalist Marine armies occasionally.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Well aside from one person no one is saying Intercessors aren't the better unit.

Hey I play tacs all the time, not every game is against top tournament players, or tournament players at all. You can theory craft all day but I can say for sure I'd love to see those two play a game and see what happens between the lists.

I have one army where I run both types of marines and they synergize well and nothing wrong with tacs can't be fixed with some point costs if their current stats all stay the same.

I honestly can't understand why people get so fired when people use inferior units or considered to be inferior units.

It's because those same exact people are the ones that pretend the bad balance doesn't exist.

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists having to choose between tacticals and primaris. Just be glad your choice isn't between csm or cultists....

I get where you're coming from, but I'd jump at Cultists as an in-faction troop selection to just camp back-field objectives and shoot for that point cost in Custodes and Slannesh Daemons. I'd probably even use them in Loyalist Marine armies occasionally.

Yeah anything even remotely cheap would probably be welcomed by Custodes players.

Of course that would go against the entire concept of the army. Most elite of the elite and all that.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists having to choose between tacticals and primaris. Just be glad your choice isn't between csm or cultists....

I get where you're coming from, but I'd jump at Cultists as an in-faction troop selection to just camp back-field objectives and shoot for that point cost in Custodes and Slannesh Daemons. I'd probably even use them in Loyalist Marine armies occasionally.

Yeah anything even remotely cheap would probably be welcomed by Custodes players.

Of course that would go against the entire concept of the army. Most elite of the elite and all that.

Eh, there's always The Loyal 32 for Custodes. Slannesh, not so much. (Stupid question, are there actual rules for R&H floating around somewhere? I keep seeing it referenced like a thing that exists instead of something everyone wants, but I'm coming up empty looking for them.)

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists having to choose between tacticals and primaris. Just be glad your choice isn't between csm or cultists....

I get where you're coming from, but I'd jump at Cultists as an in-faction troop selection to just camp back-field objectives and shoot for that point cost in Custodes and Slannesh Daemons. I'd probably even use them in Loyalist Marine armies occasionally.

Yeah anything even remotely cheap would probably be welcomed by Custodes players.

Of course that would go against the entire concept of the army. Most elite of the elite and all that.

Ah there's always The Loyal 32 for Custodes. Slannesh, not so much. (Stupid question, are there actual rules for R&H floating around somewhere? I keep seeing it referenced like a thing that exists instead of something everyone wants, but I'm coming up empty looking for them.)

They're in a FW Index.

And they suck.

 JNAProductions wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Poor loyalists having to choose between tacticals and primaris. Just be glad your choice isn't between csm or cultists....

I get where you're coming from, but I'd jump at Cultists as an in-faction troop selection to just camp back-field objectives and shoot for that point cost in Custodes and Slannesh Daemons. I'd probably even use them in Loyalist Marine armies occasionally.

Yeah anything even remotely cheap would probably be welcomed by Custodes players.

Of course that would go against the entire concept of the army. Most elite of the elite and all that.

Ah there's always The Loyal 32 for Custodes. Slannesh, not so much. (Stupid question, are there actual rules for R&H floating around somewhere? I keep seeing it referenced like a thing that exists instead of something everyone wants, but I'm coming up empty looking for them.)

They're in a FW Index.

And they suck.

They have their good points. Marauders are the only game in town for sniper rifles if you roll chaos. Fairly resilient if you run them as stalkers as well. R&h are also the cheapest cp battery in the game last I checked although that could have changed since ca.

 JNAProductions wrote:

The Newman wrote:
...(Stupid question, are there actual rules for R&H floating around somewhere? I keep seeing it referenced like a thing that exists instead of something everyone wants, but I'm coming up empty looking for them.)

They're in a FW Index.

And they suck.

...wow, that's kind of atrocious. 4 ppm for a model that hits on 5s, and 5 ppm for a Guardsman with no orders available. No wonder they generate so much salt.

Probably a more appropriate cost for guardsmen, marines notwithstanding.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Well aside from one person no one is saying Intercessors aren't the better unit.

Hey I play tacs all the time, not every game is against top tournament players, or tournament players at all. You can theory craft all day but I can say for sure I'd love to see those two play a game and see what happens between the lists.

I have one army where I run both types of marines and they synergize well and nothing wrong with tacs can't be fixed with some point costs if their current stats all stay the same.

I honestly can't understand why people get so fired when people use inferior units or considered to be inferior units.

It's because those same exact people are the ones that pretend the bad balance doesn't exist.

Untrue, I often rail about GWs gak balance and even the other staunch tac supporter has spoken to the faults of balance this game has. I don't think any old marine lover wouldn't like better parity with the options. There is a difference though between understanding stuff isn't balanced and never running the worse option because you either like it, favor the role or still win just fine with it. For me, this game is way too borked to take it so seriously for large tournaments. It's good as a fun waste of your time and some extra money. I wish it was more but I doubt I'll ever see that day at this point. Tacs though are capable in some opinions even if intercessors are better in almost every other way. Which like I said, could be fixed with points and make tacs more a flexible glass cannon, as opposed to intercessors mono focus with more wounds and CC capability.

AngryAngel80 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Well aside from one person no one is saying Intercessors aren't the better unit.

Hey I play tacs all the time, not every game is against top tournament players, or tournament players at all. You can theory craft all day but I can say for sure I'd love to see those two play a game and see what happens between the lists.

I have one army where I run both types of marines and they synergize well and nothing wrong with tacs can't be fixed with some point costs if their current stats all stay the same.

I honestly can't understand why people get so fired when people use inferior units or considered to be inferior units.

It's because those same exact people are the ones that pretend the bad balance doesn't exist.

Untrue, I often rail about GWs gak balance and even the other staunch tac supporter has spoken to the faults of balance this game has. I don't think any old marine lover wouldn't like better parity with the options. There is a difference though between understanding stuff isn't balanced and never running the worse option because you either like it, favor the role or still win just fine with it. For me, this game is way too borked to take it so seriously for large tournaments. It's good as a fun waste of your time and some extra money. I wish it was more but I doubt I'll ever see that day at this point. Tacs though are capable in some opinions even if intercessors are better in almost every other way. Which like I said, could be fixed with points and make tacs more a flexible glass cannon, as opposed to intercessors mono focus with more wounds and CC capability.

Funny thing for an old player like me is that GW did show restraint in the roll out of the primaris. At first they were worse, from a point efficiency standpoint. Very quickly that changed, but I am sure that allowed them to introduce them without as much opposition. Looks more like a PR move than anything else, but it is clever.

Well the new GW is same as the old just with better PR and deeper lies.

technicly speaking if you don't say anything, you aint lieing. Specially if you never get caught.

Karol wrote:
technicly speaking if you don't say anything, you aint lieing. Specially if you never get caught.

They do get caught, though.

Apparently primaris were supposed to be the new official line (much like they squatted things in fantasy) under Kirby, and the more gradual phasing out we are seeing is just a softening of the initially planned punch to the face. Those things get out; even if they don't, people start putting the story together quite effectily on their own.

Grey40k wrote:
They do get caught, though.

Apparently primaris were supposed to be the new official line (much like they squatted things in fantasy) under Kirby, and the more gradual phasing out we are seeing is just a softening of the initially planned punch to the face. Those things get out; even if they don't, people start putting the story together quite effectily on their own.

Source on the apparently? Because I hear a lot of people say what GW "plan" to do, but it's never really been backed up.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Source on the apparently? Because I hear a lot of people say what GW "plan" to do, but it's never really been backed up.

I would never be able to back it up in a way that is fully satisfactory given the nature of the thing. Get an employee on the record to get them fired?

As someone who recently came back, this made sense to me given the other decisions by the company. I had no stake on this, nor bad feelings accumulated throughout my absence.

Hence, I trusted the information and my guts. But I can understand if you don't.

Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated. And that is all. Any use from stuff like classic marines HQs, would evaporate if primaris HQs had a high mobility option. And RG technicly have one already, so it is more the case of we don't have a model right now, then there won't be a thunder hammer primaris chapter master with some sort of jet pack.

Karol wrote:
Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated. And that is all. Any use from stuff like classic marines HQs, would evaporate if primaris HQs had a high mobility option. And RG technicly have one already, so it is more the case of we don't have a model right now, then there won't be a thunder hammer primaris chapter master with some sort of jet pack.

Nefarious? It’s just the current business strategy. Does anyone honestly believe this is not a strategic plan carefully thought out?

I just hope they revert to the previous style after they get it out of their system. I hope these are just remaining effects of Kirby s decisions.

Karol wrote:
Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated.

Weren't nearly all of the old Marine core sculpts (Tacticals, Devastators, Assault Marines, etc) updated in like 2014/2015? That's pretty recent, in GW terms.

The kits don't *need* remaking. Why would they need updating?

I don't understand the logic of remaking kits for the sake of it. There's definitely SM kits that could do with a recut (Command Squad, Bikes, Scouts, maybe Terminators), but even they're not archaic looking. Arguably, CWE, Orks and Guardsmen need new kits far more than any power armoured force.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Karol wrote:
Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated.

Weren't nearly all of the old Marine core sculpts (Tacticals, Devastators, Assault Marines, etc) updated in like 2014/2015? That's pretty recent, in GW terms.

The kits don't *need* remaking. Why would they need updating?

I don't understand the logic of remaking kits for the sake of it. There's definitely SM kits that could do with a recut (Command Squad, Bikes, Scouts, maybe Terminators), but even they're not archaic looking. Arguably, CWE, Orks and Guardsmen need new kits far more than any power armoured force.

This, basically.

The current Tacticals are light years ahead of say the Cadian Infantry box... oof, that kit has aged.

 Stux wrote:

The current Tacticals are light years ahead of say the Cadian Infantry box... oof, that kit has aged.

Maybe it is because of nostalgia, but I just bought some Valhallan units precisely because I think they have the "old look" appeal.

But, to be frank, guard units have always look much better than classic marines in my eyes.

The classic ultramarine stuff has never been my taste; I need more flavor!

That's why I liked the non-perfect chapters such as DA or SW; they almost don't look like marines. GK also look quite different, sad I came back to them dated.

That's also why I dislike primaris, since they are fluff and rules wise "perfect" and just better.

In fact, I am looking for ways to role some SM marine detachments without standard primaris marines in them (nor old marines, don't want to be squatted).

Suggestions welcome, but I shouldn't derail the thread.

The Valhallans have probably aged better than the plastic Cadians in all honesty. That kit is horrible, the way the pieces go together, the mold lines etc.

Karol wrote:
Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated. And that is all. Any use from stuff like classic marines HQs, would evaporate if primaris HQs had a high mobility option. And RG technicly have one already, so it is more the case of we don't have a model right now, then there won't be a thunder hammer primaris chapter master with some sort of jet pack.

I do find myself wanting to defend the Primaris release occasionally because it looks like GW deliberately tried to not invalidate classic Marines, but it's also not hard to see it as GW just not being able to cover all the bases quickly enough. Classic Marines are still relevant because they have tools that Primaris don't have yet.

Primaris don't have anything that directly competes with Whirlwinds, Stalkers, Vindicators, Bikes, Vanguard Vets, or Capt. Smash, Esq. (or his associates Capt. Wheels and Lt. J. Pack.) It wouldn't take very many releases to change that. Especially since the only thing keeping the Classic range transports relevant is that Repulsors/Impulsors can't carry Centurions/Company Veterans.

Do you really count the vehicles in this case though? For intents and purposes, those don't have Manlet Marines poking out of them unless you're trying to model one firing a pintle weapon, which with just a little work can be done with a Primaris.

The Newman wrote:

Karol wrote:
Does it matter if there is some neferious GW plan, or if they just don't think about it, in the end? What matters is that non primaris stuff does not get updated. And that is all. Any use from stuff like classic marines HQs, would evaporate if primaris HQs had a high mobility option. And RG technicly have one already, so it is more the case of we don't have a model right now, then there won't be a thunder hammer primaris chapter master with some sort of jet pack.

I do find myself wanting to defend the Primaris release occasionally because it looks like GW deliberately tried to not invalidate classic Marines, but it's also not hard to see it as GW just not being able to cover all the bases quickly enough. Classic Marines are still relevant because they have tools that Primaris don't have yet.

Primaris don't have anything that directly competes with Whirlwinds, Stalkers, Vindicators, Bikes, Vanguard Vets, or Capt. Smash, Esq. (or his associates Capt. Wheels and Lt. J. Pack.) It wouldn't take very many releases to change that. Especially since the only thing keeping the Classic range transports relevant is that Repulsors/Impulsors can't carry Centurions/Company Veterans.

primaris have 3 hulls to mount turrets on. to me this is more then enough to cover any type of vehicle normal marines have. rocket aritlery can be mounted on a repulsor just as well as it can be mounted on a rhino. but I guess GW likes to do the slow drip, so recasters and 3ed party companies can just specilised in the most used units or weapon load outs. Although even that ain't true, because the kromlech thunder cannons are selling real well.

Heck, you could just use the FW Rapiers as a TFC. I've got one in storage for that exact purpose.

I don't have the sm codex or supplements, so I have a question. All those apothecaries and techmarines upgrades, like being a master or operating thunderfire cannons etc, are they non primaris versions only, ?